2024 POTUS - polling only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

These are wrong?

His own average shows Harris is ahead both national and enough battleground states to pass 270. Not sure what his model is based on.

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

At least we should thank him for keeping democrats on our toes.

[Anonymous]

I guess Virginia was always a pipe dream for Trump:

WAPO poll today has Harris up 51 to 43 against Trump and 50 to 42 in a multi-candidate poll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess Virginia was always a pipe dream for Trump:

WAPO poll today has Harris up 51 to 43 against Trump and 50 to 42 in a multi-candidate poll.

I remember when MAGAs were crowing that Trump would win NY and NJ.

[Anonymous]

Milestone from Nate Silver's polling average:

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

Aug 23, RFK Jr's last day in the polling average:
Total: 95.6%
Harris: 48.0 %
Trump: 43.7 %
RFK Jr: 3.9 %


Today, Harris + Trump finally reached Harris + Trump + RFKJR:
Total: 95.6 %
Harris: 48.9 %
Trump: 46.7 %

Trump got 3.0pp of RFK Jr's 3.9%
Harris got 0.9pp of RFK Jr's 3.9%

Trump got almost 75% of RFK JR's vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

These are wrong?

Likely they are weighted incorrectly.

Nate Silver works for Polymarket which is owned and controlled by Peter Thiel, the same man who brought Vance up and groomed him. Peter Thiel is a billionaire who strongly supports Republicans and Trump. He is forcing Polymarket and Silver to bias their polls and reports.

So, Silver has started to weight poorly rated polls that have huge problems with their accuracy and avoidance of bias. There is one poll that is run by some students and he weighted that more strongly than some of the mainstream and respected pollsters.

At this point Nate Silver's unbiased review is highly in question.

People should stop posting Nate Silver posts because there is no evidence that he is nonpartisan any longer.

This ignorant comment aged like milk.

Silver weights recent polls more heavily, and fades them over time.

0/3 - 9/6 1,078 LV YouGov 50% 50% Even 1.10
9/1 - 9/3 857 RV Patriot Polling 48% 49% R+ 1.1 0.63 [the "students" poll]
8/23 - 9/3 940 LV YouGov 48% 46% D+ 2 0.42

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model "Polls included in our model"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, if the polls show a tie in any particular swing state, my assumption is that the party that has a recent history of winning senate and presidential races (but not governor) is likely to win again. So a tie in NC means Trump is likely to win. And a tie in GA means Harris is likely to win. But like continents shifting one centimeter a year, states obviously do change over time. So you can’t be certain if this is the election cycle that finally sees a switch in party control.

NC is a special case. Their Lt Governor is running for Governor and is full on MAGA nutcase— who among other absurdities is calling for abortion bans at zero weeks (two weeks BEFOE the sex that leads to the pregnancy, in case you were wondering whether Rs understand female reproductive issues)— no exceptions. Really, really out there. And on everything, not just abortion. And there may not be an abortion referendum. But NC may be the most gerrymandered state in the nation and there is a supermajority R legislature— he wins, NC gets the toughest abortion ban in the nation. Roy Cooper is the only thing stopping it now.

NC is purple and doesn’t want this cr#p or this guy to become Governor with no legislative checks and judges in NC elected, not appointed.

I would not use conventional wisdom to predict NC this cycle. The Governors race and Dobbs make it a very atypical race in NC. Putting aside Harris. Dem turnout will be huge to defeat the Lt Governor and not become Gilliad. The momentum is there for Dems to take NC. Which does elect Dems like Roy Cooper in state wide races— just not ones dependent on their awful congressional map gerrymandering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

These are wrong?

No one knows. I think he’s been a joke since the 2016 polls and has missed a lot more than he’s gotten right. And that he should stick to playing poker. I specifically disagree with how he aggregates polls—. He’s giving a lot of weight to some really crappy, obviously biased polls. It’s like citing Rasmussen and call it a day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

These are wrong?

No one knows. I think he’s been a joke since the 2016 polls and has missed a lot more than he’s gotten right. And that he should stick to playing poker. I specifically disagree with how he aggregates polls—. He’s giving a lot of weight to some really crappy, obviously biased polls. It’s like citing Rasmussen and call it a day.

I think he's a gambling addict and has gotten into some trouble.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump already beat a President's second fiddle once, so it wasn't and isn't at all obvious that Harris could win.

Biden was a bad choice in 2020 and a harbinger of Democratic Party collapse by die-out of old age (Feinstein, Pelosi, Clinton). But he squeaked by. So Biden on the way down vs no one on the way up was a difficult call and the dynamic changed daily as he decayed further.

Trump beat Hillary Clinton, who was never VP. She was first lady, Senator and Secretary of State. She had many accomplishments (and many controversies), but she was never second in charge, VP.

When Trump finally came up against Obama's second in charge, Biden, he lost in a landslide.

No, he has never beaten anyone as high as the second fiddle.

That's certainly an alternative fact.

Why? Trump called his 304-227 EC win over Clinton a landslide. He also lost that popular vote by 2.1% (46.1% to Clinton's 48.2%).
Biden beat Trump 306-232 EC. And Biden won the popular vote by 4.5% (51.3% to 46.8%)

If Trump is going to call his 2016 win a landslide, then, by definition, Biden won in a landslide.

[Anonymous]

Forget polls, the stock market is the most accurate predictor of presidential elections --

"the S&P 500’s performance between August and October has accurately predicted the winner of every presidential election since 1984. In the years when the blue-chip index rises between August and October, the incumbent party has won every time, but when the S&P 500 has fallen over that period, it’s always signaled an impending victory for the challenger."

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/forget-polls-stock-market-most-171701198.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Just so hard to believe it’s this close. Other countries can’t believe he’s even on the ballot

Same poll at this point in 2020 had Biden up 5.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At this point, Nate Silver has lost all credibility. He can just go and exit gracefully.

These are wrong?

No one knows. I think he’s been a joke since the 2016 polls and has missed a lot more than he’s gotten right. And that he should stick to playing poker. I specifically disagree with how he aggregates polls—. He’s giving a lot of weight to some really crappy, obviously biased polls. It’s like citing Rasmussen and call it a day.

I don't know why people keep saying this. He gave Trump a 30% chance of winning, more than most major media outlets. That's not a small probability.

Silver is kind of a dick. Today he claimed that per capita GDP in the UK has stagnated due to wage equity laws. Number one his numbers are off and confuse exchange rates with purchasing power and number two he pretends austerity and Brexit had no impact. GTFOOH.

But with regards to his polling aggregation model, he's fairly transparent about what it includes and what factors he considers. Certainly better than WaPo which still includes ancient Trump-Biden polls in its averages and that's why it thinks Harris is up by 2 points in Pennsylvania. I truly wish she was, but she is not.