Name: 【2024美國大選】爆炸新聞：民意調查結果震驚全國？！ (BREAKING: BOMBSHELL poll result SHOCKS THE NATION)
Uploaded: 2024-11-04T04:13:41.000Z
Duration: 9 min 58 s

Okay, let me first set the stage for what I'm about to say.

好吧，讓我先為下面要說的話做個鋪墊。

First of all, my rule of thumb is to ignore the polls.

首先，我的經驗法則是忽略民意調查。

If we're down, let that motivate you to work harder, and if we're up, pretend that we're down and keep working harder.

如果我們處於下風，那就讓它激勵你更加努力地工作；如果我們處於上升趨勢，那就假裝我們處於下風，繼續努力工作。

Second, a lot of pollsters aren't accurate.

其次，很多民調機構並不準確。

In fact, most pollsters have missed the mark pretty extensively, especially over the last few years.

事實上，大多數民調機構的失誤都非常嚴重，尤其是在過去幾年裡。

Ann Seltzer in Iowa is the best pollster in America.

愛荷華州的安-塞爾特是美國最好的民調專家。

To call her polling the gold standard is probably an understatement.

稱她的民意調查為 "黃金標準 "可能是輕描淡寫。

Put simply, I would not be making a video about a single poll unless the pollster was that good.

簡單地說，除非民調機構真的那麼厲害，否則我是不會就一項民調製作視頻的。

And she just came out with a poll that straight up shocked me, and changed the momentum of the entire election cycle as we know it.

她剛剛公佈的一項民意調查直接震驚了我，改變了我們所知的整個選舉週期的勢頭。

According to the final Iowa poll from Ann Seltzer, Kamala Harris is leading Trump 47-44 in Iowa.

根據安-塞爾澤（Ann Seltzer）的艾奧瓦州最終民調，卡馬拉-哈里斯在艾奧瓦州以 47-44 領先特朗普。

The second, I want to give you a rundown of just how accurate her polls have been in the past.

其次，我想給大家介紹一下她過去的民調有多準確。

First, this is courtesy of Kyle Kondik at Crystal Ball.

首先，這是水晶球網站凱爾-孔迪克（Kyle Kondik）提供的資訊。

In 2012, the final poll showed Obama up 5, Obama won by 6.

2012年，最終民調顯示奧巴馬領先5分，奧巴馬以6分獲勝。

In 2014, the final poll showed Joni Ernst up by 7, and she won by 8.

2014年，最終民調顯示喬妮-恩斯特（Joni Ernst）領先7票，她以8票獲勝。

In 2016, the final poll showed Trump up by 7, and he won by a little under 10.

2016 年，最終民調顯示特朗普領先 7 分，他以略低於 10 分的優勢獲勝。

In 2018, the final poll showed Kim Reynolds down by 2, while Reynolds actually outperformed the poll and won by a little under 3 points, so that one was a miss.

2018 年，最終民調顯示金-雷諾茲以 2 分之差落敗，而實際上雷諾茲的表現超過了民調，以略低於 3 分的優勢獲勝，所以那一次是失誤。

In 2020, the final poll had Trump leading by 7 points, extremely close to his 8 point victory.

2020 年，最終民調顯示特朗普領先 7 個百分點，與他 8 個百分點的勝利極為接近。

In the Senate race that same year, the final poll had Senator Joni Ernst up by 4, and she won by about 6 and a half.

在同年的參議院競選中，參議員喬妮-恩斯特（Joni Ernst）的最終民調結果是領先 4 票，她以大約 6 票半的優勢獲勝。

In 2022, the final poll had Chuck Grassley up by 12, nailing the final margin exactly.

2022 年的最終民調顯示，查克-格拉斯利（Chuck Grassley）領先 12 票，準確地鎖定了最終票數差距。

The final poll showed Reynolds leading in HER re-election bid by 17 points, and she won by 18 and a half.

最終民調顯示，雷諾茲在競選連任時領先 17 個百分點，她以 18.5 個百分點的優勢獲勝。

In other words, except for one small miss in 2018, which still was only a few points off, she's generally within 1-2 points of nailing it, and in some cases, actually gets the margin exactly, which is to say, a final poll showing Kamala up by 3 in IOWA is a blinking red light for Trump, and a major boon for Kamala Harris.

換句話說，除了2018年有一次小失誤，但仍然只差幾個百分點之外，她一般都能在1-2個百分點之內準確命中，有些時候甚至能準確命中，也就是說，最終民調顯示卡馬拉在愛荷華州領先3個百分點，這對特朗普來說是一盞閃爍的紅燈，對卡馬拉-哈里斯來說則是一大利好。

It was also clearly unexpected by Republicans.

這顯然也出乎共和黨人的意料。

Earlier today, the Iowa GOP chair tweeted, I'm excited for Ann Seltzer to say President Trump is on track to beat Harris by at least 8 points in Iowa so they can protect their reputation right before election day.

今天早些時候，愛荷華州共和黨主席在推特上寫道：我很高興安-塞爾特澤說，特朗普總統有望在愛荷華州以至少8個百分點的優勢擊敗哈里斯，這樣他們就可以在選舉日前保護自己的聲譽了。

This happens every cycle, and this time will be no different, everyone knew the 4-point margin was nonsense.

這種情況每個週期都會發生，這次也不會例外，每個人都知道 4 分的差距是無稽之談。

Oh what they would do for a 4-point margin in Trump's favor after THIS poll.

哦，在這次民調之後，他們會做什麼來換取對特朗普有利的 4 個百分點。

So yeah, that take by the Iowa GOP chair, pretty much aged like milk in the sun.

是的，愛荷華州共和黨主席的觀點就像陽光下的牛奶一樣陳舊。

首先，愛荷華州不是密西西比州。

Obama won Iowa in 2008 by 9 and a half points, and Obama won Iowa in 2012 by almost 6 points, so it's not pure fantasy to think that a Democrat is capable of winning Iowa because it happened not too long ago.

奧巴馬在2008年以9.5個百分點的優勢贏得了艾奧瓦州，奧巴馬在2012年以近6個百分點的優勢贏得了艾奧瓦州，是以，認為民主黨人有能力贏得艾奧瓦州並不是純粹的幻想，因為這種情況不久前才發生過。

Second, Trump won Iowa in 2016 by about 9 and a half points, and he won Iowa in 2020 by about 8 points, so already his margin shrank from one election cycle to the next.

其次，特朗普在 2016 年以約 9.5 個百分點的優勢贏得艾奧瓦州，在 2020 年以約 8 個百分點的優勢贏得艾奧瓦州，是以他的優勢已經從一個選舉週期縮小到下一個選舉週期。

But if the Seltzer poll is accurate, then this would signify an 11 point swing to the left.

但如果 Seltzer 的民調準確無誤，那麼這將標誌著 11 個百分點的左搖右擺。

In an environment where Kamala Harris is swinging 11 points to the left in Iowa, it is not illogical to presume that she's looking quite good in the actual battleground states nearby, like Wisconsin and Michigan, for example, and that something bigger is happening across the country.

卡瑪拉-哈里斯在愛荷華州向左搖擺了11個百分點，在這種情況下，我們不難推測，她在附近的實際戰場州，如威斯康星州和密歇根州的表現相當不錯，全國各地正在發生更大的變化。

And if you dig into the reason why, well, there might be some clues.

如果你深究其中的原因，也許會發現一些線索。

The first is that Iowa, again, a state that voted for Obama not too long ago by nearly 10 points, now has one of the strictest abortion bans in the entire country, banning abortion in almost all cases after 6 weeks.

首先是艾奧瓦州，這個不久前還以近 10 個百分點的優勢投票給奧巴馬的州，現在已經成為全美最嚴格的墮胎禁令之一，幾乎禁止所有 6 周後的墮胎。

And I'm not sure if you all realize how unpopular these laws are, but they've contributed to Republican losses even in states like Ohio and Kentucky and Kansas and Alabama.

我不知道你們是否都意識到這些法律有多麼不受歡迎，但它們甚至在俄亥俄州、肯塔基州、堪薩斯州和阿拉巴馬州都造成了共和黨的失利。

One might think that their insistence on imposing their unpopular theocratic edicts onto the population might yield to their desire to, oh I don't know, win elections, but apparently not.

人們可能會認為，他們堅持將不受歡迎的神權法令強加給民眾的做法可能會屈服於他們的願望，哦，我不知道，贏得選舉，但顯然不會。

Apparently, they're just that committed to the bit of dismantling our rights so that they can watch Republicans lose in some of the reddest states in the entire country and think to themselves, no no, what we're doing must be good.

很顯然，他們就是這麼執著於破壞我們的權利，這樣他們就可以看著共和黨人在全國最紅的幾個州輸掉選舉，然後心想，不不，我們正在做的一定是好事。

I don't know what's worse, the delusion or the desire to control us, but either way, neither seems to be acceptable among Americans.

我不知道哪種情況更糟糕，是妄想還是想控制我們，但無論哪種情況，美國人似乎都無法接受。

Now with all of that said, here is the most important message of this entire video.

說了這麼多，下面是整段視頻最重要的資訊。

Let it light a fire under your asses to make this thing a reality.

讓它點燃你們的鬥志，讓這一切成為現實。

You don't win elections with polls, you win them with votes.

贏得選舉靠的不是民意調查，而是選票。

So remember the feeling that you have right now, hearing the news about this poll.

所以，請記住你們現在聽到有關這次民意調查的消息時的感受。

You know what will make it feel even better?

The poll showed us that that is within reach, but it's not going to happen in a vacuum.

民調結果表明，實現這一目標指日可待，但並非憑空而來。

It's going to take us putting in the work.

So right now, take out your phone and find one or two or three people in your circles who aren't engaged in this election.

所以現在，拿出你的手機，在你的圈子裡找出一兩個或兩三個沒有參與這次選舉的人。

Maybe they're politically apathetic, maybe they're disaffected, maybe they've aged just into the process, maybe they voted for Trump before but have soured on him since, or maybe they're just not that interested in politics.

也許他們對政治麻木不仁，也許他們心懷不滿，也許他們剛剛步入老年，也許他們之前投票支持特朗普，但之後又對他反感，也許他們只是對政治不那麼感興趣。

Do your part and make those people your responsibility.

儘自己的一份力量，讓這些人成為你的責任。

We're not asking you to reach out to 10,000 people, just a few.

我們不是要你去聯繫一萬人，只是幾個人。

And if that feels like it won't really matter, consider the fact that in 2020 in Wisconsin, the tipping point state, Biden beat Trump by just two votes per precinct.

如果您覺得這並不重要，那麼請考慮這樣一個事實：2020 年，在威斯康星州這個臨界點上，拜登在每個選區僅以兩票之差擊敗了特朗普。

Just two votes separated a Biden win from a Trump win in that key battleground state.

在這個關鍵的戰場州，拜登獲勝與特朗普獲勝之間僅相差兩票。

Just two votes could flip a precinct, which could flip a state, which could flip a country.

只要兩張選票，就能改變一個選區，改變一個州，改變一個國家。

And by the way, if you do doubt it, remember how hard Republicans are trying to take your votes away.

順便說一句，如果你真的懷疑，請記住共和黨人是多麼努力地想要奪走你的選票。

They wouldn't do that if that power wasn't immense.

如果力量不是巨大的，他們不會這麼做。

The fact is that Trump and his team are counting on making you feel like this election is already in the bag for him.

事實上，特朗普和他的團隊正指望讓你們覺得這次選舉已經是他的囊中之物。

They want you to feel like your vote won't matter.

他們想讓你覺得你的投票無關緊要。

They want you to feel like he's already won.

So that they can depress turnout on the left.

這樣他們就能壓低左翼的投票率。

That's in part why he's holding rallies in California and New York and New Mexico and Colorado to give the impression that even in deep blue states, they're in play for Trump.

這也是他在加利福尼亞州、紐約州、新墨西哥州和科羅拉多州舉行集會的部分原因，給人的印象是，即使是深藍州，特朗普也有機會。

And then of course he'll use that mistaken notion as a predicate to try and cry fraud when he inevitably loses the election, but that's an entirely different video altogether.

當然，當他不可避免地輸掉大選時，他還會以這種錯誤的觀念為前提，試圖哭訴自己有欺詐行為，但那完全是另一段視頻了。

But the fact is that the optics of an inevitable Trump win are actually a boon to his campaign, because it may very well dissuade some folks from turning out.

但事實上，特朗普必勝的前景對他的競選實際上是有利的，因為這很可能會勸阻一些人不要參加投票。

This poll pokes a big hole in that narrative, meaning we absolutely CAN win.

這次民調戳穿了這一說法，意味著我們絕對能贏。

Trump's victory is not inevitable, but again, it is not automatic.

特朗普的勝利並非不可避免，但同樣也不是自動取得的。

只有我們投票，民意調查才有意義。

We've clearly got the numbers, let's make sure that those numbers translate to ballots.

我們顯然已經掌握了數字，讓我們確保這些數字轉化為選票。

我們要清楚，這不僅僅是愛荷華州的問題。

Remember, the Nebraska Senate race is now neck and neck between incumbent Republican Senator Deb Fischer and independent candidate Dan Osborne, who got his start in politics on a platform of workers' rights.

請記住，內布拉斯加州參議院競選目前在現任共和黨參議員德布-菲舍爾（Deb Fischer）和獨立候選人丹-奧斯本（Dan Osborne）之間不相上下。

I interviewed Dan just today, and here's what he had to say.

我今天剛剛採訪了丹，以下是他的發言。

But ultimately I would say it's the message.

但歸根結底，我想說的是資訊。

You know, it's my message that less than 2% of our House and Senate come from the working class.

你知道，我想告訴你的是，參眾兩院中只有不到 2% 的議員來自工人階級。

It's a complete misrepresentation of the people in my state, and certainly the country.

這完全是對我州人民的誤解，當然也是對全國人民的誤解。

You know, working people don't feel like they're getting a fair shake, they're getting abandoned by both parties.

要知道，勞動人民覺得他們沒有得到公平的待遇，他們被兩黨拋棄了。

So I think this is, I've been called a breath of fresh air, which, you know, that is what it is.

是以，我認為這是，我被稱為一股新鮮空氣，你知道，這就是它的本質。

But it's certainly, the broad stroke message is campaign finance reform, ending Citizens United, that states' corporations are people, and money is free speech, and there's so much influence on our elections from corporations.

但可以肯定的是，我們要傳達的資訊就是競選財務改革，結束 "聯合公民"，各州的公司也是人，金錢是言論自由，公司對我們的選舉有如此大的影響。

And, you know, I haven't always been a political person.

而且，你知道，我並不總是一個政治人物。

You know, it wasn't until Corporate Green came knocking on my door in the form of the Kellogg strike, you know, during COVID.

直到綠色公司以凱洛格罷工的形式來敲我的門，你知道，在COVID期間。

We were working seven days a week, 12 hours a day that whole year, no time off.

那一年，我們每週工作七天，每天工作 12 個小時，沒有休息時間。

我們為他們帶來了創紀錄的利潤。

They went from $19 billion to $21 billion, the CEO gave himself the $2 million raise, everybody enriched themselves, and then they tried to take from their workers at the same time.

他們從 190 億美元增加到 210 億美元，首席執行官給自己加薪 200 萬美元，每個人都富得流油，然後他們試圖同時從工人身上撈錢。

So we stood up, four U.S. plants went out on strike for 77 days, and we won a contract.

於是我們站了起來，美國四家工廠罷工 77 天，我們贏得了合同。

So that showed me that when we stick together behind issues and causes, we can make a difference in regular people's lives.

是以，這讓我明白，當我們團結在一起支持各種問題和事業時，我們就能改變普通人的生活。

And I think Robin Williams, the comedian, said it best when he said, our politicians should be wearing NASCAR jackets with patches of their sponsors so we know how they're going to vote.

我認為喜劇演員羅賓-威廉姆斯（Robin Williams）說得最好，他說："我們的政客應該穿上印有贊助商補丁的納斯卡夾克，這樣我們就知道他們會如何投票。

And certainly my opponent's no different.

But you know, if you're out there and you're watching this, my average donation still remains $40.

但你知道嗎，如果你正在看這個節目，我的平均捐款額仍然是 40 美元。

So this campaign truly is powered by the people, the way the framers of the Constitution intended it to be a government buying for the people.

是以，這場運動真正是由人民推動的，正如《憲法》制定者所希望的那樣，是政府為人民買單。

And by the way, if you want to donate to Dan and help him pull off the upset of the election, I'll embed the link right here on the screen and I'll also put it in the post description of this video.

順便說一下，如果您想為丹捐款，幫助他完成這次大選，我會在螢幕上嵌入鏈接，也會把鏈接放在本視頻的帖子描述中。

But what Dan Osborne's race and this new poll out of Iowa show us is clear.

但丹-奧斯本的競選和愛荷華州的最新民調都清楚地告訴我們：

Americans are waking up, we are recognizing our agency, and we are demanding our rights back.

美國人正在覺醒，我們正在認識到我們的能動性，我們正在要求拿回我們的權利。

字幕列表影片播放

【2024美國大選】爆炸新聞：民意調查結果震驚全國？！ (BREAKING: BOMBSHELL poll result SHOCKS THE NATION)

subscribe

entire

inevitable

apparently