Anonymous
11/01/2020 20:19
Subject: Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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.
Anonymous
11/01/2020 20:18
Subject: Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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
11/01/2020 20:12
Subject: Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
are you less or more worreied than you were in 2016?
Anonymous
Anonymous
11/01/2020 20:02
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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
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
11/01/2020 20:00
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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
11/01/2020 19:48
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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
11/01/2020 19:44
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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.
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
11/01/2020 19:38
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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
11/01/2020 19:30
Subject: Re:Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
+1 Georgia will not be blue.
Nor Florida, Texas or Arizona.
On what data are you two basing your predictions?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
11/01/2020 19:00
Subject: Polls and Lols: A 2020 Master Thread
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