Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Here’s what happens if the polls are as off as they were in 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Re: tralfagar - as I saw posted elsewhere this campaign season, even a broken clock is right two times a day.

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Here’s what happens if the polls are as off as they were in 2016.

[Anonymous]

It's actually now 335 EV for Biden if polls are as wrong as they were in 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Even a broken, dishonest clock is correct sometimes. Trafalgar and Cahaly are disgraces. He was on Hannity recently saying without evidence that there is so much fraud in PA that it could change the results by 4 points. F--k him.

Isn't he a paid pollster for the Trump campaign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

I couldn’t find Trafalgar’s poll results for 2016; where are you seeing them?

Full interview on CNN:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

I couldn’t find Trafalgar’s poll results for 2016; where are you seeing them?

Full interview on CNN:

Watch or read this, too. Shameful. https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trafalgar-pollster-robert-cahaly-makes-baseless-claim-trump-will-win-pennsylvania-but-they-will-steal-it-with-voter-fraud/

Trafalgar Pollster Robert Cahaly Makes Baseless Claim: Trump Will Win Pennsylvania, But ‘They’ Will Steal It With Voter Fraud

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Several things.


1. Most pollsters have corrected for Trump support, by adding in education as a metric. His most reliable supporters are in the 'non college' category, which they now keep tabs on and factor into their numbers. (Interestningly, Selzer does not).

2. Trafalgar missed many, many, many results both before, and since 2016. In fact, they have missed more than they have called correctly, *because* their bias is to the right, and that is the specific reason they got 2016 right. In an election with many undecideds, everyone breaking the same way yielded a 3-state, 100K win for Trump. There is not a huge pool of undecideds in this election.

2. Let's look at the cross tabs on Trafalgar's Michigan poll, which has Trump up by 2. It has Biden pulling 25% support from Republicans. And Trump pulling 30% support from Democrats. Even more interestingly, the independents are going to Trump by 32 points. If any of this sounds reasonably plausible to you, then there is nothing I can say to convince you that Trafalgar poll is an outlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Several things.


1. Most pollsters have corrected for Trump support, by adding in education as a metric. His most reliable supporters are in the 'non college' category, which they now keep tabs on and factor into their numbers. (Interestningly, Selzer does not).

2. Trafalgar missed many, many, many results both before, and since 2016. In fact, they have missed more than they have called correctly, *because* their bias is to the right, and that is the specific reason they got 2016 right. In an election with many undecideds, everyone breaking the same way yielded a 3-state, 100K win for Trump. There is not a huge pool of undecideds in this election.

2. Let's look at the cross tabs on Trafalgar's Michigan poll, which has Trump up by 2. It has Biden pulling 25% support from Republicans. And Trump pulling 30% support from Democrats. Even more interestingly, the independents are going to Trump by 32 points. If any of this sounds reasonably plausible to you, then there is nothing I can say to convince you that Trafalgar poll is an outlier.

Different pp here. That doesn't sound at all plausible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The only way Biden doesn't win PA is if the GOP is successful in getting mail-in votes tossed. There is no legal justification for it. None.

Monmouth also tweeted that 700 THOUSAND absentee ballots in PA have yet to be returned, and if they don’t arrive by Tuesday, could cost Biden 3-4 points. Absentee ballots could be the death of this election.

I think we saw photos of them sitting in bins on the floor of a post office. . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The only way Biden doesn't win PA is if the GOP is successful in getting mail-in votes tossed. There is no legal justification for it. None.

Monmouth also tweeted that 700 THOUSAND absentee ballots in PA have yet to be returned, and if they don’t arrive by Tuesday, could cost Biden 3-4 points. Absentee ballots could be the death of this election.

I think we saw photos of them sitting in bins on the floor of a post office. . .

Out of those 700k, 350k is from Dems, 200 from Reps and rest Independents.

[Anonymous]

https://www.270towin.com/maps/ZOpbJ


my final map

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Trafalgar was almost 100% right in 2016 and, called all the Rust Belt for Trump and got the electoral college numbers correct. I’ll go with them. All these other pollsters have been proven to wildly underestimate Trump support and turnout.

Look at the Wisconsin early voting numbers and tell me you’re not scared. These polls are going to be more off than they were in 2016.

Even a broken, dishonest clock is correct sometimes. Trafalgar and Cahaly are disgraces. He was on Hannity recently saying without evidence that there is so much fraud in PA that it could change the results by 4 points. F--k him.

Isn't he a paid pollster for the Trump campaign?

He is right leaning and works for Republicans, not sure if Trump specifically though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The only way Biden doesn't win PA is if the GOP is successful in getting mail-in votes tossed. There is no legal justification for it. None.

Monmouth also tweeted that 700 THOUSAND absentee ballots in PA have yet to be returned, and if they don’t arrive by Tuesday, could cost Biden 3-4 points. Absentee ballots could be the death of this election.

I think we saw photos of them sitting in bins on the floor of a post office. . .

Out of those 700k, 350k is from Dems, 200 from Reps and rest Independents.

With so many former Republicans voting for Biden, I'm wondering how telling that is. Does anyone know if there is an estimate of how many of those people actually switched their registration to D? My lifelong Republican father in the Detroit suburbs just voted a straight Democratic ticket for the first time in his life. I'm sure he's still a registered Republican, though.

[Anonymous]

I've seen enough

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've seen enough

I tell you what - I used to hate politics, and now I am glued enough to all this stuff that I know who you are referencing now, and I have a running joke with my husband about good use of polling or bad use of polling. (Usually it's about dinner = good use of pasta or bad use of pasta.)

Anyway, it's nice to have this little anonymous community to obsess with.