Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This map is useless. It is just an wishful opinion. Don't even know the methodology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This map is useless. It is just an wishful opinion. Don't even know the methodology.

+1 Georgia will not be blue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nationally in 2016 the polls were "off" by one point (Clinton won popular vote by 2 points, the polling average was Clinton +3). Very little evidence if shy Trump supporters there.

State polls were off, but they weren't many if them in 2016, especially high quality polls right before the election. What made them off?
1. They didn't weight for education
2. Undecideds swung towards Trump after the Comey letter

This year many are weighting for education, there are more high quality polls, and there are few undecideds. Very different from 2016.

You think so? Convince me.

Of what? All I did was state the facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This map is useless. It is just an wishful opinion. Don't even know the methodology.

You can’t read the tweet instead of just looking at the picture?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This map is useless. It is just an wishful opinion. Don't even know the methodology.

+1 Georgia will not be blue.

Nor Florida, Texas or Arizona.

[Anonymous]

+1 Georgia will not be blue.

Nor Florida, Texas or Arizona.

On what data are you two basing your predictions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1 Georgia will not be blue.

Nor Florida, Texas or Arizona.

On what data are you two basing your predictions?

I don’t know about the Georgia PP but I’m just basing it on my very nervous gut.

[Anonymous]

538:

Biden's chance of winning AZ 70%

Biden's chance of winning FL 67%

Biden's chance of winning GA 58%

Biden's chance of winning TX 36% (aka greater than 1/3)

Say what you will about Nate Silver, but he shows how he uses actual data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:538:

Biden's chance of winning AZ 70%

Biden's chance of winning FL 67%

Biden's chance of winning GA 58%

Biden's chance of winning TX 36% (aka greater than 1/3)

Say what you will about Nate Silver, but he shows how he uses actual data.

His data is only as good as the polls he gets, so let’s hope those are right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:538:

Biden's chance of winning AZ 70%

Biden's chance of winning FL 67%

Biden's chance of winning GA 58%

Biden's chance of winning TX 36% (aka greater than 1/3)

Say what you will about Nate Silver, but he shows how he uses actual data.

His data is only as good as the polls he gets, so let’s hope those are right.

You realize there are a LOT of public pollsters, right? And that many of them are often very good?

[Anonymous]

NYT:

EV counting only states in which candidates are up by 3+

291 for Biden, 125 for Trump



If polls are currently as off as they were in 2016:
335 EV for Biden

[Anonymous]

Final Civiqs polls for Iowa, Ohio and Wisconsin:

[Anonymous]

are you less or more worreied than you were in 2016?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:are you less or more worreied than you were in 2016?

More. How is this even a question? Many people were pretty confident that HRC would win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:are you less or more worreied than you were in 2016?

More. How is this even a question? Many people were pretty confident that HRC would win.

+1

But I understand polling about ten times better.