2024 Current State-By-State Ratings: 30 Days Out

Today marks 30 days until Election Day, and taking into careful consideration the trends, demographics and key fundamentals in the states, my view is that Kamala Harris holds a slight edge over Donald Trump in the Electoral College, but is not yet a clear favorite.

At this time, I believe Harris has an edge in enough states to put her at 266 electoral votes, just four short of the 270 necessary to win, and that Donald Trump has an edge in enough states to put him at 236 electoral votes. I consider three states true tossups at this time: North Carolina, with 15 electoral votes; Arizona, with 11; and Wisconsin, with 10.

Crucially, at this time, I am characterizing Pennsylvania, Michigan and Nevada as “Leans D.” I believe that when all is said and done, the demographics in those states point to narrow Harris victories. I also characterize Georgia as “Leans R,” but this is largely due to the machinations of the Trumpist-controlled Georgia Elections Board. To put it plainly, I do not think Harris is going to be allowed to win Georgia. The actions taken by the board–particularly requiring a hand count of all ballots–virtually guarantee a chaotic, drawn-out post-election count, and this provides ample opportunity for bad actors to manipulate the counts.

If my characterizations are correct, that would mean Harris needs to win just one of North Carolina, Arizona or Wisconsin to win the election, while Trump would need to win all three.

I believe Harris’s likeliest win of the three is in Wisconsin, which is a closely divided state but also has a very strong, well-organized state-level Democratic Party. I also tend to think she likely has slightly better than a 50% chance to win in Arizona, where demographic trends are moving leftward. North Carolina will be the toughest of the three to win, but I expect that Harris has close to a 50/50 shot in the Tar Heel State.

However, even the slightest movement in one direction or the other could vastly change the picture. If Harris outperforms expectations–and heavy registration among younger voters, who tend to be less likely to show up in likely voter polling screens, could point in that direction–then wins in all seven of the swing states, perhaps even Florida, would not be off the table. But if Trump continues his trend of overperforming his polling, particularly in the “Rust Belt” states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, a Trump sweep of the seven crucial states is entirely possible.

In the Senate, I have consistently said that I considered Republicans to be heavy favorites to flip the chamber this year, regardless of the outcome of the presidential election, due to the brutal Senate map Democrats face this cycle. My view remains unchanged. At this time, I consider Republican Jim Justice an absolute lock to flip the open seat in West Virginia, currently held by Democratic-caucusing independent Joe Manchin, and I also consider Republican challenger Tim Sheehy a prohibitive favorite in Montana over Democratic Sen. Jon Tester. This has nothing to do with Tester himself, but rather of his state’s strong Republican edge and the unmistakeable decline over the last two decades in ticket-splitting for Congressional races when they happen in a presidential year. Of the last 69 Senate races held during presidential elections (2016 and 2020), only one race has produced a split result, and that was in Maine in 2020, when Republican Susan Collins held her seat despite Democrat Joe Biden winning her state.

There are key reasons why I think Collins prevailed that do not apply inversely to Montana, not the least of which is that Republican voters in Montana are less likely to ticket-split in 2024 than Democratic voters in Maine were in 2020. Collins, late in the 2020 election race, voted against Trump Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, and enough Maine Democrats naively chose to “reward” Collins for that action to save her seat. Tester has no such dynamics playing in his favor in Montana, where Trump is likely to win by at least 14-15 points. It is hard to imagine upwards of 1 out of 7 Trump voters in Montana voting to keep Democrats in control of the U.S. Senate.

At this time, I consider Republicans clear favorites to win at least 51 of the 100 Senate seats, which would give them the majority. The only Senate race I consider a toss-up is Ohio, where Democratic incumbent Sherrod Brown faces a difficult but possibly winnable race against Republican challenger Bernie Moreno. Like Tester, Brown represents a state that has lurched heavily to the right in recent years, but there are two key differences between Tester’s situation and Brown’s that lead me to believe Brown still has a good chance to prevail.

  1. First of all, Ohio is not nearly as heavily Republican as Montana is. Trump won Ohio by 8% in 2016 and 2020, while he won Montana by 20% and 15%. Brown doesn’t have as heavy of an anchor around his neck as Tester has.
  2. Brown also has a very strong relationship with working-class laborers in his state, and it is not inconceivable that just enough white, working-class voters who will vote for Trump will stick with Brown. Organized labor is much stronger in heavily industrialized Ohio than it is in largely rural Montana. This will not be an easy race for Brown, but if Harris outperforms expectations, she could help him by shaving two or three points off of Biden’s 8% loss margin in the Buckeye State in 2020.

Of the 11 Republican Senate seats that are on the ballot this year, Republicans are locks to win nine of them and favorites to hold their seats in Texas and Florida. I continue to believe Democrats have made a massive strategic error by essentially giving up on Florida, which I believe will be much closer this year than anybody expects, and if Harris and/or Democratic Senate nominee Debbie Mucarsel-Powell come up short, the Democratic Party will look back on Florida as a huge missed opportunity. I do not believe that Texas is close enough yet for either Harris or Democratic Senate nominee Colin Allred to prevail.

As to the House, at this time, I expect Democrats to net nine seats to take a narrow 223-212 majority. However, this is entirely dependent on Harris winning the election. If Trump wins, I expect Republicans to hold the House and perhaps slightly increase their current 221-214 majority.

In recent years, the correlation between presidential and House races has roughly mirrored the correlation between presidential and Senate races. In 2020, only 16 seats out of 435 had split results, with nine Biden-won districts electing Republicans, and seven Trump-won districts electing Democrats. The deviation, effectively, was only two seats. Whoever wins the presidency will almost certainly win a majority of House districts, and the number of House districts the president-elect wins will very closely mirror the number of House seats the president-elect’s party will win.

For a full breakdown of my characterizations of the presidential and Senate races in every state, as well as the priority that I think should be assigned to each state for the last 30 days, click here.

You will note that I assign the highest priority to Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, all of which are crucial to the presidential race and all of which also have Senate races. I have also assigned “top priority” status to Arizona and Nevada, which have Senate races, and to North Carolina, which does not have a Senate race.

States I have characterized as being of “secondary priority” are Georgia, due to the closeness of the presidential race; and Texas, Florida, Ohio and Montana due to competitive Senate races.

I have characterized several states, including Minnesota, Maine and New Hampshire, as well as the Second Congressional district in Nebraska, as “watch closely.” While I believe these constituencies are all highly likely to vote for Harris, they should be watched for any late movement toward Trump.

The remaining 37 states, and the District of Columbia, I characterize as “Do Not Contest.” However, that label does not necessarily apply to every House race in those states, as a number of red states have at least one House district where Democrats can compete.

I will review these ratings at 15 days out and make final characterizations, without toss-ups, on Monday, November 4, 2024.

Thoughts on Jimmy Carter

Today, Jimmy Carter, who served a single term as the nation’s 39th president from 1977-81, turned 100 years old.

It has been said of President Carter that he was the best ex-president in U.S. history, and that is probably quite true. He is the first president of whom I have any memories, and I am sad to say that my impressions of him as a young child were the negative impressions that were passed on to me by my mother and stepfather and many of the people in our neighborhood.

By the time I was in first and second grade, Carter had become an object of national derision and ridicule, such that schoolkids were singing mocking jingles about him on the playground. (They sang, to the tune of the “Oscar Mayer” wiener song: “‘Cause Jimmy Carter has a way of screwing up the U.S.A.”) It should be noted that I grew up in a solidly Democratic, labor-union dominated corner of Indiana bordering on Chicago, and that Carter narrowly missed losing Lake County, Indiana in his 1980 reelection campaign. Only two Democrats–Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and George McGovern in 1972–have lost Lake County since 1928.

It would be fair to say that Carter’s presidency was largely unsuccessful, although it would also be fair to note that he had some key successes. The Camp David Accords, resulting in peace between Egypt and Israel, represented one of the finest diplomatic accomplishments of any president in U.S. history–right up there with Richard Nixon’s opening to China in 1972 and Theodore Roosevelt’s mediation of the Portsmouth, N.H. peace settlement between Japan and Russia in 1905. He also successfully negotiated the second round of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks with the Soviet Union and made the courageous, and morally correct, move of pardoning all Vietnam War draft evaders on his second day in office.

Sadly, Carter’s successes were few, and he fell victim to a number of events which he either mishandled or could not control. The Iran Hostage Crisis, in which 53 American citizens were held in captivity for more than 14 months, and the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan, both coming in 1979, reinforced the popular impression that Carter was weak. His tireless work to solve the crisis was undermined by the Ronald Reagan campaign’s secret promises to Iran that if the Iranians kept the crisis going through the 1980 election, ensuring Carter’s defeat, the Iranian theocratic regime would get a better deal from Reagan than it would from Carter. Although Carter ultimately secured the hostages’ freedom on his last day in office, he never really got the credit for it from the public. I remember Reagan supporters claiming that Iran freed the hostages on the day Reagan was inaugurated because they were afraid Reagan would “get tough” with them.

Carter was also beset by an energy crisis that he did not cause but was unable to solve. His appearance on television wearing a sweater and urging Americans to conserve energy was at odds with the national mood; he was seen as weak and pessimistic, and the country went through a period of psychological “malaise.” The sunny, optimistic pronouncements of Reagan captured the nation’s imagination, and Carter lost all but six states when he failed to win a second term.

The night he conceded the 1980 election, Carter reminded Americans that he had promised, in his successful 1976 campaign, that he would never lie to them. In that spirit, he admitted he could not say that his landslide defeat that day didn’t hurt.

But Carter bounced back from the agony of his defeat and took on the rest of his life with gusto, earning well-deserved plaudits and praise from even his biggest political detractors for the work he did after leaving the White House. He established the Carter Center to fight for human rights around the globe and worked tirelessly around the world, conducting peace negotiations, monitoring elections, helping to fight devastating diseases. He also worked nonstop with Habitat For Humanity, helping build countless homes for the needy with his own hands. He refused to lay down and die after losing the presidency and spent more than 40 years simply doing good for his fellow human beings–all while living humbly in his tiny hometown of Plains, Georgia, where he taught Sunday School at his church until his health made it impossible for him to continue.

Perhaps Carter was not the most effective president, but we would be so much better off if all of our leaders cared about people as much as he does. And even if his message on energy conservation was not one that Americans wanted to hear, it was the truth. He was right.

Carter’s grandson said a few weeks ago that the former president said he is trying to hold on and live long enough to cast an absentee ballot for Kamala Harris for president. It is typical of Jimmy Carter that even as the end of his life draws near, he continues to live for his country and his fellow human beings.

We may have better presidents in the years to come, but we will never have a better human being as our president than Jimmy Carter.

Happy birthday, Mr. President.

Democrats Must Make Plays in Florida, Texas and Ohio to Save the Senate

I was heartened to read in The Hill today that the Biden campaign is going to be sending surrogates to Florida, Texas and Ohio, among other states, in the wake of his triumphant, “Trumanesque” State of the Union speech.

Last night, after the president’s speech, I posted on Twitter (I refuse to call it anything else) that I thought President Biden should campaign in Ohio. I felt that his pro-union message, his fighting demeanor, and his status as the only sitting president to walk a picket line offered the potential to shrink his margin of defeat in the Buckeye State from the 8% rout he suffered at the hands of Donald Trump there in 2020.

I don’t have very high hopes for Biden actually contending in Ohio, but I think shrinking Trump’s margin might give Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) a puncher’s chance to survive this fall.

As I have noted, both on this site and on Twitter, ticket-splitting in presidential years between presidential and Senate candidates is at an all-time low. Voters have become highly polarized, and they have also come to understand that it makes no sense to vote for one party’s candidate for president, and then simultaneously vote for a Senate (or House) candidate who is going to block virtually everything that president wants to do.

The statistics bear this out. In 2016, every state that had a Senate race voted for the same party’s candidates for president and Senate. In 2020, there was only one exception to this trend, with Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) prevailing despite Joe Biden winning her state. Even in that case, Collins had her closest race since she was first elected in 1996. That means 68 of the last 69 Senate races held during presidential election years have resulted in the same party winning both the presidential and Senate races in those states (a 1.4% split rate over the last two cycles). Statistically, the likelihood of Brown holding his seat while Biden loses Ohio is very low, and the larger Biden’s margin of defeat, the likelihood of Brown surviving gets even lower.

If Biden can shrink his margin of defeat in Ohio, Brown might be able to hold on to his Senate seat. But even then, Democrats are likely looking at losing the Senate by a seat, and that’s where Florida and Texas come into the picture.

I know that it is fashionable among Democrats these days to suggest that Democrats should forget Florida, but Florida, rich with electoral votes and House seats, remains one of the closest states in the country and one of its biggest electoral prizes. Conceding Florida is a mistake, especially with the Sunshine State having a Senate race on the ballot this year. Everyone understands that North Carolina is a better bet for the president than Florida is, but North Carolina has no Senate race on the ballot this year. It would be great for Biden to win North Carolina, but if he wins there, he almost certainly already has the election won irrespective of the results in that state. There’s really no benefit or added value to winning North Carolina in 2024. But winning Florida, or at least making it close, could help Democrats defeat Senator Rick Scott (R-Florida) and get back to 50 seats in the Senate, if Sherrod Brown also wins.

Texas is also a state which I believe is not especially promising for Biden this fall, but again, if he can cut his margin in the Lone Star State, he could help Democratic Senate candidate Colin Allred in his race against the unpopular Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Remember that Cruz only won his last race by about 2.5%, and while that was a midterm election in which Democrats overperformed nationally, Cruz clearly does have some electoral and political weaknesses.

None of these three states are especially good bets for Biden, but conceding them also means conceding the Senate. The likelihood of Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) overcoming a double-digit Biden loss in his state is very, very low. Don’t kid yourselves about that. Tester has never faced a race with these kinds of headwinds. Of his three previous races, two were in midterm elections, with no presidential race on the ballot to weigh him down, and the one time he won during a presidential election, in 2012, was when Barack Obama only lost Montana by about 10%. Biden lost Montana in 2020 by 16%. Tester has never won by a large margin, and if Biden loses Montana by double digits again–especially now, in a more polarized environment that 2012, with presidential/Senate ticket-splitting all but dead now–Tester is probably doomed. With the West Virginia Senate seat being vacated by Senator Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), that seat is certain to flip Republican. Democrats have to hold Brown’s seat and, let’s be honest, find another seat to flip to guard against the likelihood that Tester will lose.

Besides Florida and Texas, there are no other Republican-held seats on the ballot this fall where Democrats have any chance to win. The other nine Republican Senate seats up in this year’s election are in Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming and Nebraska (where both seats are on the ballot due to a special election). Unless something extremely weird happens (like a Roy Moore situation), Democrats don’t have a prayer in a single one of those nine races.

In short, if Democrats want to hold the Senate, they have to win two out of four seats in Florida, Montana, Ohio, and Texas, and despite Tester’s incumbency and unusual strength for a Democrat in his state, his prospects are by far the worst.

That is why I wrote, over a year ago, that Biden needs to devote significant resources to these four states even if it appears unlikely that he can actually win them.

So I’m heartened by the fact that the campaign is clearly targeting three of those states–the three where Democrats have the best chance to win. If Democrats don’t win two of those seats, the Senate is all but gone. That means even if a Supreme Court seat comes open, Biden likely won’t get to fill it, even if he himself is reelected.

It’s not just the right move–it’s the only move.

30 Scenarios For The 2023 College Football Playoff

SCENARIO 1: All four undefeated teams win.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Florida State (13-0)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Washington (13-0)

SCENARIO 2: Three unbeatens win, Washington loses to Oregon.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Oregon (12-1)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Florida State (13-0)

SCENARIO 3: Three unbeatens win, Florida State loses to Louisville, Texas wins.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Texas (12-1)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Washington (13-0)

SCENARIO 4: Three unbeatens win, Michigan loses to Iowa, Texas wins.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Texas (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Florida State (13-0)

SCENARIO 5: Three unbeatens win, Georgia loses to Alabama, Texas wins.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Texas (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Florida State (13-0)

SCENARIO 6: Georgia and Michigan win, Texas wins, Washington and Florida State lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Texas (12-1)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 7: Georgia and Florida State win, Texas wins, Michigan and Washington lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Texas (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 8: Georgia and Washington win, Texas wins, Michigan and Florida State lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Michigan (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Texas (12-1)

SCENARIO 9: Michigan and Washington win, Texas wins, Georgia and Florida State lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Texas (12-1)

SCENARIO 10: Michigan and Florida State win, Texas wins, Georgia and Washington lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Texas (12-1)

SCENARIO 11: Florida State and Washington win, Texas wins, Georgia and Michigan lose.

  1. Washington (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Texas (12-1)

SCENARIO 12: Georgia wins, Texas wins, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Michigan (12-1)
  2. Texas (12-1) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 13: Michigan wins, Texas wins, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Oregon (12-1)
  2. Texas (12-1) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 14: Washington wins, Texas wins, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Washington (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Texas (12-1) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 15: Florida State wins, Texas wins, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Florida State (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Texas (12-1) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 16: All four unbeatens lose, Texas wins.

  1. Texas (12-1) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Alabama (12-1) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 17: Three unbeatens win, Florida State loses to Louisville, Texas loses.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Ohio State (11-1)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Washington (13-0)

SCENARIO 18: Three unbeatens win, Michigan loses to Iowa, Texas loses.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Michigan (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Florida State (13-0)

SCENARIO 19: Three unbeatens win, Georgia loses to Alabama, Texas loses.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Florida State (13-0)

SCENARIO 20: Georgia and Michigan win, Texas loses, Washington and Florida State lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Ohio State (11-1)
  2. Michigan (13-0) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 21: Georgia and Florida State win, Texas loses, Michigan and Washington lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Michigan (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 22: Georgia and Washington win, Texas loses, Michigan and Florida State lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Ohio State (11-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Michigan (12-1)

SCENARIO 23: Michigan and Washington win, Texas loses, Georgia and Florida State lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Washington (13-0) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 24: Michigan and Florida State win, Texas loses, Georgia and Washington lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 25: Florida State and Washington win, Texas loses, Georgia and Michigan lose.

  1. Washington (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Florida State (13-0) vs. 3) Alabama (12-1)

SCENARIO 26: Georgia wins, Texas loses, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Georgia (13-0) vs. 4) Ohio State (11-1)
  2. Oregon (12-1) vs. 3) Michigan (12-1)

SCENARIO 27: Michigan wins, Texas loses, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Michigan (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Alabama (12-1) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 28: Washington wins, Texas loses, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Washington (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Alabama (12-1) vs. 3) Michigan (12-1)

SCENARIO 29: Florida State wins, Texas loses, three other unbeatens lose.

  1. Florida State (13-0) vs. 4) Georgia (12-1)
  2. Alabama (12-1) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

SCENARIO 30: All four unbeatens lose, Texas loses.

  1. Alabama (12-1) vs. 4) Michigan (12-1)
  2. Georgia (12-1) vs. 3) Oregon (12-1)

Keep Calm And Stop Paying Attention To Polls

The recent set of swing state polls by the New York Times—the world’s most overrated media company and one of the world’s most overrated institutions, period—have cued up a whole line of Democratic bedwetters to scream and cry and shout that the sky is falling. Despite the fact that the poll results are so laughably off-base (Trump +11 in Nevada and winning Las Vegas?) that anybody who takes them seriously clearly knows nothing about politics, that hasn’t stopped a cavalcade of panicky Democrats from seriously suggesting that Joe Biden ought to forego another run.

Folks, the first thing you need to do is grab a paper bag and breathe into it until you stop hyperventilating. Then you need to sit down with a stiff drink, or some weed if that’s your thing, and let Uncle Cliston tell you a bedtime story.

In a land called America a long time ago, there was a fellow named Michael Dukakis. I’m told some of his friends called him Mike. He came out of the Democratic convention less than four months before the 1988 election leading George Bush by 17 percentage points. But when November came, Mike lost 40 states to George, who then became America’s president.

George eventually took America into a war and saw his approval ratings reach 91%. The Democrats were terrified, and almost no leading Democrat chose to run against him in 1992 because he clearly could not be beaten. But a brave, if unknown, soul from Arkansas named Bill Clinton took a gamble, and a year and a half later, Bill won big and became the next president.

Things went sour for Bill quickly, and his party was crushed in the 1994 midterm elections. It was obvious that there would be no second term for Billy Boy, whose polling was in the toilet. Yet, in 1996, he won in a landslide that surpassed his 1992 election. Nobody has won by as large of a margin since!

Then, along came a man named Barack Obama, who fell behind John McCain in the polls in 2008 with less than two months to go before the election. Yet he somehow won a landslide that carried in crushing majorities for his party in Congress.

Much like Bill, Barack had a short honeymoon after becoming president. His party was creamed in the midterm elections, and his approval ratings almost never even sniffed 50%. Many polls said a man named Mitt Romney would defeat him in 2012. The leading pollster of them all had Mitt ahead all the way up to election day! And yet, Barack beat Mitt like a drum in almost every swing state and even won Florida, which it was believed was too Republican for him to win a second time.

Four years later, Bill’s wife Hillary ran for president, and her prospects were so certain that nobody believed she could lose to her opponent, an orange-haired clown named Bozo. She was so far ahead in the crucial state of Wisconsin that it clearly made no sense at all for her to waste precious time and money visiting that state. And yet, when the circus ended, Bozo had won, and the clowns were now running the circus.

Look, I get it, folks. You’re scared. Because Democrats are ALWAYS scared, and it’s annoying and completely not a good look, but it is what it is. But one of the reasons you’re scared is because you lack perspective—especially if you’re in your 20s and you haven’t seen 35 years of embarrassing polling mistakes or quick, crazy shifts in the electorate the way Uncle Cliston has.

Now, kiddos, I’m not going to promise you that Story Time with Uncle Cliston is going to have a happy ending. There’s no way in hell Joe Biden is losing all these states, and certainly not by the margins these ridiculous polls say he is, but it is absolutely possible that he could lose several of them and Bozo could become president again. We have to be honest with ourselves about that.

But freaking out and flailing around like unhinged lunatics every time a poll comes out doesn’t do any of us any good. The upcoming election is going to be close. It could go either way. What we need to do right now is to get ahold of ourselves, stay steady and courageous, and see this thing through.

And with any luck, we’ll all live happily ever after.

The End.