When. He's the worst party leader Canada has had in decades, and very popular it seems. People will vote for him because they're frustrated with the effects of their Conservative provincial governments and too ignorant to understand this.

Denier, not skeptic. Skeptics are rational and respond to evidence and argument.

Not that the media care, but they always over-dignify these fools.

Canada has one lined up too.

I'm fearful for my trans family and friends. Poilievre and Trump is a terrible combination. We are going to need real grassroots political organizing to protect each other and civil disobedience in large numbers to slow the fascists in their persecution and environmental damage. Of course this will be harder than ever but we need to stop waiting for electoral politics to fix things and take action together.

We're getting it in Canada soon. Or in what's left of Canada once fascist USA has finished with us. We have the most extreme, reactionary, hateful Conservative leader ever, who openly panders to fascists, and he's some 20 points ahead of anyone else in the polls. My worst fear was him coming to power with Trump over the border, but that looks like what's going to happen. I do not understand people.

The Democrats having the chance to learn is going to be of limited use of Republicans build the fascist autocracy they intend to build.

I’m going to be so fucking happy the day these ugly corrupt power-mad conspiracy-pushing old white men are dead.

Problem is, they always make new ones.

I second this suggestion. I have an old touchscreen PC from about 2001 with a Via Eden CPU, which is an incredibly feeble low-power processor that lacks some instructions that were common even in 32-bit days, and Antix was the only reasonably modern distro I could get to run on it.

Trump would be a disaster, but these last-minute hopeful headlines just smack of desperation. I just saw another one saying Harris had "suddenly jumped into the lead" because one model put here at 50.015% of the vote. It's nothing to be thrilled about, especially with the Republicans set to employ every underhanded tactic they can to steal the victory. In any normal country there would be no competition between these two, but this is the USA.

The headline is misleading.

Out of 80,000 simulations, Harris won in 50.015 percent of cases, while Trump won in 49.65 percent of cases, per Silver's model. Some 270 simulations resulted in a 269-269 Electoral College tie.

So a better headline would be "Simulations show Harris and Trump are equally likely to win the election." The difference between them is insignificant.

And when you factor in all the underhand cheating tactics the Republicans have up their sleeve, the Democrats' tendency to cave, and the Supreme Court's bias, Trump looks a lot more likely to win than Harris.

They're not thinking that far ahead. They're thinking "how can I make the lines go up this quarter?"

No doubt many of them understand that you need people with enough money to buy products or the economy stagnates. But they don't see it as their problem right now. Their problem right now is to make the line go up by any means they can. It's similar to how the owners must understand that climate change will fuck everyone if left unchecked, but they don't see it as their own problem right now, so none of them take any steps to avoid disaster. Capitalism doesn't contain mechanisms for coordinating actions towards the greater good. Instead it creates many "tragedy of the commons" type situations.

Yeah trump is planning on winning by getting the votes.

Did you mean to put a "not" in there?