2024 POTUS - polling only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

I tend to agree but it is over 50%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reality I wonder what this means for polling. Does that mean that Harris is blowing Trump out of the water in multiple states but the GOP really doesn’t want to see it (all the better for legal shenanigans post November, “the polls said!”) or what?

I think it means that Harris is up (but likely within or close to the margin of error) in the high quality swing state polls with less/little bias (vs Rasmussen and 2 HS kids doing a politics project, which both amount to the same thing). And if you had to guess a winner based on information available today, Harris wins.

I do think *high quality* *unbiased* pollsters learned from the mistakes of 2016. And are better. But polling is a statistically weighted guess, not a crystal ball. I also think the great pollsters, fairly or not, got beaten up, after 2016 and have a small red bias as a result. If the err, they don’t want it to be on the side of missing a red wave.

That said, Trump was bright, shiny and new in 2016 and polling models didn’t capture him well. 8 years later, we know exactly who will vote for him and where. And there is nothing new or special that polling should miss. If polling misses anything, it will be the size of the Dobbs wave.

I also think debates only help Harris. You can call her stupid all you want. She is, in fact, very articulate. And Trump is..not. Also, the Vance-Walz debate only helps Harris because Trump is so old. And Vance is such a train wreck/ joke, I think it draws a large audience. And, at some point, Rs have to own the fact that Trump isn’t immortal, and if Trump doesn’t make it 4 years, Vance is who we are stuck with. And Vance is incredibly weird, off putting, unlikable, etc.

So, I like Harris’s headwinds. But, in a 65% vs 35% chance of winning way. Which is good. But not rest on your laurels or stop pushing good. After the HRC had a 70% chance of winning, what went wrong thing, all I could do was think was nothing— race was within the margin of error in the 3 states that decided the results. The polls were okay. People just can’t read polls. Plus, would I get on a plane with a 30% chance of crashing? Of course not. So, not taking a victory lap at, say, a 65% chance of winning/ 35% chance of crashing. Every door knocked on. Every voter registered. Leave it all on the field and celebrate (hopefully) after Trump loses his 9,000th lawsuit contesting the election January.

I tend to agree. I think Harris slightly ahead in polling, but within the margin of error. Definitely not close to comfortable or complacent. She needs to continue to drive forward, and push hard in battleground states. She has a lot more money in her coffers than Trump, so she needs to flood the markets with messaging and show up and work the crowds up. In addition to the swing states, she needs to push hard in Georgia and Florida and make sure that Trump has to use his limited funds to protect supposedly red states, which leaves him less money to deal with the battleground states and definitely doesn't allow him any room to attack her safe states. Which is why Trump is abandoning the blue states of NH and MN. He's stripped his coffers bare with his legal expenses, that he is barely able to tread water in the battleground states.

[Anonymous]

The aggregators/betting sites put their own thumbs on the scale by weighing some polls better/more than others. What their methodology for this is is deliberately opaque. High quality polling of swing/close states from major media outlets, YouGov, Ipsos, and various colleges and universities, is only just now starting to pick up after the conventions and Labor Day.

As has been noted a lot in other threads, the media has a vested interest in making everything a close race because that brings rating$ and click$. They have to downplay Trump’s mental decline because they want a long, close race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

I posted this tweet - and yes, exactly what you're saying. This is VERY close in Florida. I think there is little chance Harris actually wins Florida - but if I were Trump (gd forbid) I would not want to see things this close in what should be a safe state. Yes, esp with abortion - and legal weed - on the ballot. And esp when DeSantis's bloom is fading, too - not that there's love lost between DeSantis and Trump, but I think you can reasonably say Republicans are losing a bit of their sheen right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reality I wonder what this means for polling. Does that mean that Harris is blowing Trump out of the water in multiple states but the GOP really doesn’t want to see it (all the better for legal shenanigans post November, “the polls said!”) or what?

I think it means that Harris is up (but likely within or close to the margin of error) in the high quality swing state polls with less/little bias (vs Rasmussen and 2 HS kids doing a politics project, which both amount to the same thing). And if you had to guess a winner based on information available today, Harris wins.

I do think *high quality* *unbiased* pollsters learned from the mistakes of 2016. And are better. But polling is a statistically weighted guess, not a crystal ball. I also think the great pollsters, fairly or not, got beaten up, after 2016 and have a small red bias as a result. If the err, they don’t want it to be on the side of missing a red wave.

That said, Trump was bright, shiny and new in 2016 and polling models didn’t capture him well. 8 years later, we know exactly who will vote for him and where. And there is nothing new or special that polling should miss. If polling misses anything, it will be the size of the Dobbs wave.

I also think debates only help Harris. You can call her stupid all you want. She is, in fact, very articulate. And Trump is..not. Also, the Vance-Walz debate only helps Harris because Trump is so old. And Vance is such a train wreck/ joke, I think it draws a large audience. And, at some point, Rs have to own the fact that Trump isn’t immortal, and if Trump doesn’t make it 4 years, Vance is who we are stuck with. And Vance is incredibly weird, off putting, unlikable, etc.

So, I like Harris’s headwinds. But, in a 65% vs 35% chance of winning way. Which is good. But not rest on your laurels or stop pushing good. After the HRC had a 70% chance of winning, what went wrong thing, all I could do was think was nothing— race was within the margin of error in the 3 states that decided the results. The polls were okay. People just can’t read polls. Plus, would I get on a plane with a 30% chance of crashing? Of course not. So, not taking a victory lap at, say, a 65% chance of winning/ 35% chance of crashing. Every door knocked on. Every voter registered. Leave it all on the field and celebrate (hopefully) after Trump loses his 9,000th lawsuit contesting the election January.

^ I think this is exactly right

It's so funny. We all sound like old wizened politics podcasters anymore. If this cursed decade has done anything, beyond worn us down and fired us up, it's made us may so, so much more attention to politics and become so much more attuned to everything here. My in laws - who are Trump-hating, former Republican working class white voters, who have a WHOLE lot more to do with their lives than listen to, like, 15 Bulwark podcasts every week - even sound like this when we talk now.

Anyway - I think PP has it, exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love that in this country, it all boils down to what some uninformed working class people in Pennsylvania believe

+1 million.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

Florida polls said Joe Biden was winning the state last election. How did that work out? The polling in Florida always seems to overestimate Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

Florida polls said Joe Biden was winning the state last election. How did that work out? The polling in Florida always seems to overestimate Democrats.

I would agree if Fl didn’t have a draconian abortion ban currently in place and a constitutional right to abortion on the ballot. That’s a once in a generation thing and I don’t see how anyone could accurately account for the young and female registered voters who will become likely voters for this specific election. I do think the ballot initiative creates unique circumstances that no one really knows how to accurately capture in polling— and makes FL possible for Dems. Not likely. But possible, which forces Trump to spend resources defending it. Which may be enough to tip other states that lose the resources spent in FL.

My kid was in college in Ohio when abortion was on the ballot in 2022. And wow! The energy there was off the charts among young voters, especially for a midterm election. And OH makes it hard for college students to vote there (even if they live there 8-9 months a year). You need a passport or to do early mail in voting if you live in a dorm. And all the freshmen my kid knew were changing their registration to Ohio and getting passports mailed to them or navigating early voting. They were determined to cast a vote to legalize abortion. I don’t know how you do an accurate poll in that environment, since generally these are low turnout voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure what point this tweet is trying to make, but if I were Team Trump, I’d be concerned. This has to be close to (or within) the margin of error. And that means Trump has to defend his home state. Not a good look. Especially since the constitutional right to abortion is also on the ballot in FL, which will drive youth turnout. How much is, of course, unpredictable.but any poll should be sampling more young people and women than in a year where there isn’t a Dobbs amendment. Does this one?

If I were a R, I wouldn't take a victory lap over 3% in a state where a Dobbs amendment is on the ballot. But maybe that’s the tweeter’s point?

I know OP limited us two two sentences, but would tweeting/ writing for DCUM some minimal analysis or context kill people?

Florida polls said Joe Biden was winning the state last election. How did that work out? The polling in Florida always seems to overestimate Democrats.

I would agree if Fl didn’t have a draconian abortion ban currently in place and a constitutional right to abortion on the ballot. That’s a once in a generation thing and I don’t see how anyone could accurately account for the young and female registered voters who will become likely voters for this specific election. I do think the ballot initiative creates unique circumstances that no one really knows how to accurately capture in polling— and makes FL possible for Dems. Not likely. But possible, which forces Trump to spend resources defending it. Which may be enough to tip other states that lose the resources spent in FL.

My kid was in college in Ohio when abortion was on the ballot in 2022. And wow! The energy there was off the charts among young voters, especially for a midterm election. And OH makes it hard for college students to vote there (even if they live there 8-9 months a year). You need a passport or to do early mail in voting if you live in a dorm. And all the freshmen my kid knew were changing their registration to Ohio and getting passports mailed to them or navigating early voting. They were determined to cast a vote to legalize abortion. I don’t know how you do an accurate poll in that environment, since generally these are low turnout voters.

That’s a really heartening story. Thank you!

I think many underestimate the youth vote. They are fickle but they are not stupid. They have grown up with active shooter drills and the doom of climate change. Biden was a real bummer for them and they are energized by Harris. Not sure whether the polls capture that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love that in this country, it all boils down to what some uninformed working class people in Pennsylvania believe

That's because everyone else already made their decision, and your side wasn't sufficiently convincing. l2p and get gudz scrub.

The working people of USA should be the ones deciding your leadership.

Who is the uninformed wannabe aristocrat now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nate Silver is a f*^#ing joke now.

Summary article in Salon.

A lot of smelly moves recently. Silver's new book has him starting to talk like Thiel, and ricocheting polls will juice sales for the cryptobro gambling company he works form

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nate Silver is a f*^#ing joke now.

Summary article in Salon.

A lot of smelly moves recently. Silver's new book has him starting to talk like Thiel, and ricocheting polls will juice sales for the cryptobro gambling company he works form

Oops, article here

https://www.salon.com/2024/09/06/nate-silver-faces-backlash-for-pro-model-skewing/

[Anonymous]

Nate Silver Election Model Gives Trump Highest Chance of Winning Since July
Published Sep 06, 2024

https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-donald-trump-polling-nate-silver-1949866

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nate Silver Election Model Gives Trump Highest Chance of Winning Since July
Published Sep 06, 2024

https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-donald-trump-polling-nate-silver-1949866

And he's got to be right. Who could fail to see what a great job Trump is doing making the case that he deserves this job. I know 5 women whose husbands think they are Harris supporters who think Trump is actually the one who's going to look out for them. Just look at that insightful, thoughtful, visionary answer he gave to how to fix the childcare problem in the US! And his VP - that guy inspires confidence, and not just in men who hate women either.