'Yikes': Shock as new poll shows Dems with 'largest lead for either party' since 2018

Not true at all. Every well-conducted and reliable poll matters, because it determines where campaign money will be spent, where volunteers will be directed, what stops candidates make, and what issues to press on and which to pivot back to stump on.

Pretty dumb myopic take you have there, actually.

It is so much easier and so much more profitable to be the minority party of opposition to evil. You don't need exciting new ideas, just exciting "back to normal" ideas. ...and even "normal" can be made progressively shittier every cycle.

The rich and powerful can handpick their favorite candidates, negotiate a few table scraps in the direction of normal that they're willing to accept, and call it a win. The campaign industrial complex gets to make a shit load of money.

Most importantly, their ultimate campaign slogan is "Vote for me, or else evil wins." Easy money all around.

Then when nothing good happens during a Democrats's turn, they can blame Democrats and then the Republicans they handpick get to ratchet things back in the rich's direction again.

Or they’ll make some catastrophic legislative or otherwise strategic error on purpose to make sure the Republicans are on even ground. There’s always a Parliamentarian or a “Blue Slip Rule” to help the Democrats steal defeat from the jaws of victory!

So fucking tired of people blaming the "establishment".

The "establishment" didn't give us Trump 2. Short-sighted, immature potential Democratic voters did.

8 years… ha ha ha!!! I know you said at least but I'm not sure will ever truly know how much they’ve fucked things up. I’m 55 and I doubt it will be fixed before I die.

And if they don’t put some guardrails with some serious teeth and consequences to fix all of things most politicians generally followed in good faith it’s just gonna happen again. I’m seriously starting to believe the American experiment is over. Late stage capitalism, tribalism, and any appearance of empathy have killed it.

Seems unlikely but goddamn do I hope fukkin so

100+ seat loss isn’t possible in the US. City/Suburban ideology is the polar opposite of the rural one. Our system gives disproportionate voices to people who live in rural areas. Young people today have left their rural communities for the cities because it’s not possible to lead a comfortable working life in rural America anymore. The Carter flip was only possible because the democratic base was diffused across many rural counties; that’s not the case anymore.

How many places besides NYC do you think a candidate like Mamdani can win? And I guess I'm asking for even a single point of data that backs this idea up, vs just a hunch that America secretly wants to get far-left.

We can't wish a revolution into being, what are the first steps to getting there? How do we unite the people, stop fighting the culture wars so we can fight the class war?

I think a large proportion of Americans make hate and cruelty a primary consideration of their voting proclivities. It's less about how bad the Democrats have fucked up and more about how they haven't fucked up enough to get voters.

they’re the ones that have passed campaign finance regulations, though. You don’t see any Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders on the other side

Until Citizens United is overturned and campaign finance is heavily restricted by Congress, another Democrat administration will simply ratchet themselves further to the right and serve the same oligarchs the Republicans do. Very little will change to improve the lives of ordinary people, and once again the Republicans will use that to take full control in the following cycle.

These type of comments remind me how useless progressives are.

There's another article about 6 in 10 saying the country is seriously off track. It's hard to figure out the voter that says this and then is unsure who to vote for, but somehow that ends up with 8% saying "I don't know".

Americans aren’t sane

I'm reminded of a recent debate about fixing ICE, where someone said "What do you mean, fix them? They're working as intended."

To me, the Democratic party evokes a similar problem: I believe their goal is to maintain between 40-60% popularity. So, the champagne is uncorked at 40, not 50; because they don't care about winning. They just care about people being scared of a loss, and viewing them as a strong-enough alternative to send them massive numbers of donations. If they were below 40, then people might lose hope in them or form an alternative. If they were above 60, then they could stand to cozy up to some corrupt billionaires, get away with some horrible legislative corruption for profit, and stand to drop a few points.

But the key here is, all of this only works because of fear of a far, far worse alternative. I've voted in elections where I had reasonable faith that every candidate on the ballet wanted the best for their constituents, and voted based on policy improvement and experience. As long as one party is so far below the basic standards that a corrupt career politician seems better if he can promise "No secret police", then the Democrats' way of maintaining 40-60 is easy.

So, next time they run a candidate that gets a "failure" of 45% of the vote, remember, they're not your friends and they don't care; they hit their goal. It's still a failure of people that voted for a wolf in wolf's clothing.

Schumer and Jeffries are doing a very, very lame and cringe dance around their office right now, as dreams of status-quo and elderly, out-of-touch representatives preserving wealth inequality dance in their heads.

"This means we can run Harris again, right?"

"Of course, and we will make Liz Cheney her running mate this time around, it's assured to succeed, it checks all the boxes, diversity! bipartisanship! Women in power! The people will love it!"

They’ll use it as a sign from Israel that we don’t need a primary and they’ll throw Kamala at us again. I swear to god I will vote for JD if they don’t have a primary again.

The problem with 2016 was that the polls accurately predicted who would win the popular vote, because that's what they measure. The 270toWin poll based outcome showed Trump's chance of victory LINK HERE, and so did 538 which is no longer available as it was purchased by ABC News and taken offline.

Trump's loss in 2020 and victory again in 2024 were also predicted by both aggregate polls and online betting platforms.

The problem with poll inaccuracy is solved by two methods: increased sample size and giving priority based on perceived bias (gaining back points for having clear and accurate data available to the public).

Maybe?

I don't have the time or energy to dive into the methodology to figure out if any poll is conducted scientifically. What I do know is that it's way easier to build a bad poll, and easier still to hit the bricks and generate heaps of bad data.

What I really wish these would ask are things like: "if you had the only vote and could write-in anyone that is eligable, even if they're not on the ballot, who would you choose?"... or: "Who is your favorite person in politics right now?" Disregarding of all the nonsense answers, you'd probably find out a lot more about hearts and minds versus whatever controlled choices major parties are propping up.

Since only 2016?

Anyone who uses the phrase "purity test" has completely failed to grasp the situation. It has nothing to do with purity tests, and the phrase is itself a cultural smear used by establishment Democrats against progressives.

There is no minor nitpicking going on of one issue here or there. There is a gaping divide in the party between the corporate establishment and the vast majority of the Democratic base.

The Democratic establishment has still failed to line up and support Mamdani in NY, so there isn't going to be much patience on the left for hearing about what Democratic "voters" don't get. The voters aren't the source of the problem.

Yes lmao, but also democrat leaders need to be better at messaging then just "at least were not Trump." Trump is a populist leader, the only one speaking for the far right and democrats are just ... centre right. Clearly going left moderate like Mamdani is the way to get the votes.

cool just let the fascists carry on then

Did you mean defeat from the jaws of victory?

Thats a very dodgy assumption.

pools always matter! You can cool down, get some exercise, maybe even play some Marco Polo.

there’s the targeted message of the month

You are acting like this was a plan. It wasnt a plan. It was a natural consequence of what happens when everyone is corrupt. Youre basically saying "vote for A, because it will be worse with B". And no one votes for that. NO ONE! You cant shame people who didnt vote into voting. But you know what you can do? You can stop voting for prick in the Dems who 100% are corrupt as fuck, just because they are dems.

The party will only listen, once YOU and all those like YOU stop voting them in to power. The likes of Nancy fucking Pelosi, who suckering you all over 38 years. Feinstein, over 32 years. Schumer, over 26 years. The list goes on and on. Corrupt people, who put party and donor interests before the people. And you all keep voting them in.

You want things to change? Thats how you do it. Let them know that no one is safe.

If you don’t see the difference between the two parties, you’ve been blinded

The liberals dont like being reminded they are fascist along with their red counterparts

Dems : maybe we shouldn’t wreck healthcare anymore than it already is?

Republicans : WE WILL LITERALLY SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT AND STARVE YOU TO DEATH TO PROTECT A CHILD RAPIST AND SAVE BILLIONAIRES A COUPLE MIL ON TAXES!

You : These guys are basically the same, right?