Cook political report has an interesting tool where you can adjust turnout by demographic and see how that impacts electoral college.
It’s starts with trumps best demo, non college whites at 55% (Biden win w 307 electoral votes). Increasing that demo to 60% gets trump a win with about 280 EVs. 59% turnout, reduces it to 230 EVs
I cant imagine a 1% turnout difference in trumps base nets a 50 EV difference, but it underscores how difficult a job pollsters have to get the polls accurate and account for even a tiny increase in trump base turnout. It ain’t helping my confidence with pollsters and if it’s this much of a difference 538 is really off their rockers w .77
HOW IT WORKS: Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted fordemographic change since 2016. Then, adjust the sliders below to see how shifts inturnout and support among five demographic groups could swing the Electoral College
Sorry but this is damn interesting, as is the Supreme Court vs House analysis to decide contested elections. Clearly I’m in the wrong place.
The issue I have is you calling 538's math foolish. You seem to want to say that 538 should be calling this more 50/50, when the math actually calls for around 75/25. What you don't seem to understand is that in 4 simulated coin flips Biden would win 3 times while Trump wins once. Nobody here is excited about those odds, of course we want Biden winning 4 of those coin flips but the math doesn't show Trump winning 2 of those coin flips either. Biden is still the odds on favourite.
This election isn't another 2016, way too many variables have changed.
This is exactly correct. Somehow people (particularly Trump supporters) think something less than 100% is equal to 101%.
Not foolish, just underestimating the trump effect on elections.
Most significantly, elections are not about flipping a coin. According to Cook, Trumps 2016 performance at getting NCWs is about 4% from a huge statistical advantage, where one percent of this demo can net trump 50 EVs.
He was at .55 NCW 2016 turnout. At .59 Biden still wins with @ 280 EVs. Thats great, we can all exhale. At .60 turnout, it goes to 230 and trump wins. THATS the tipping point here, this potential wave trump has access too. Being by far The largest demo (by far can not be emphasized enough), it is foolish to discount this phenomenon. That’s not even close to flipping a coin. It’s extraordinarily biased and a weighted coin.
I’m hoping trump never gets there, but I am not shutting my eyes about it either. He proved in 2016 he knows how to get new voters from this demo to vote. No reason he can not find new voters there again. That’s why 77% is way off.
Dude.. sorry, you don't have the background or analysis in this topic to declare that Silver's 75 or 77% is way off. Your assumption also discounts the massive move of suburbanites toward the D. That was clear in the analysis post 2018 and the numbers are bearing out the same this time. Trump won the suburbs in 16 and he is losing them today. They are not exactly chock full of NCWs. Women have also jettisoned the R party dramatically since 16 as well. So the statement that NCW's moving from 55 to 60% turnout wins the election for Trump ignores every other demographic move.
Dude, the mistake Silver is making is this is not statistics, it’s political science. Trump has tapped into something pollsters did not identify last time. There is a better than 23% chance he can do it again.
lets fire up that time machine...again,
....
Politics
Clinton Dominates in Key Philadelphia Suburbs, Bloomberg Poll Finds
Losing Pennsylvania’s 20 Electoral College votes would sharply curtail Trump’s paths to the White House.
Great... there's better than a 23% chance. So what is it, 24%? 88%? The beauty of your argument i suppose is that you can't be wrong even if you're not using math, only old articles. If Trump wins, you say...I was right! Same thing if he loses. Neither would be empirically true.
The funny thing is I’d estimate Biden at .63, maybe .14 lower than 538, based on tipping point states. I think Biden is the favorite, but there is a stronger chance pollsters are making the same mistake again than .23; my main concern is trump is looking much stronger lately in these states, NC FL AZ PA. With these states within or near the moe, if having trouble believing .77 is accurate. If there is an “unpolled white vote” as there was in 2016 trump could be tied or ahead in those states.
the 2 main tipping point states, 538 has Biden at .77 in PA and .64 in AZ. The two closest tipping point states have a .13 spread. I find that debatable.
Its interesting that gauging demographic accuracy in polling is part of 538s process, but if we look at PA, they actually give biden better rating on that category (Biden 53/ trump 46). That just seems wrong, but I can not prove it, except to point out this is where pollsters got trump wrong in the past.
“ Average with demographics-based vote share projection”
lol
At least you've moved on to PA from WI after we told you that was the bigger concern. Remember how you were telling us WI was in danger a few weeks ago? You've barely mentioned that state lately...
What I said was WI polling looks almost exactly like it did four years ago with respect to the democratic lead
We disagreed on the impact the solid 3rd party candidates had in 2016 on the candidates ability to hit the magic 50% support level.
I am still not convinced WI is solidly Biden. But I moved on to PA and AZ simply because I am following 538s tipping point analysis. If he takes WI, Biden still needs PA. If he misses on PA, the next state up is AZ. Thats a state Dems haven’t had in a while. Trump has momentum in PA - 3 enthusiastic rallies in Sept. PA is the tipping point state per 538 and the aggregate polling is just outside MoE
Anyone thinking this election is solid, take a look at today’s Monmouth poll, an A+ lean democrat pollster. Biden up 50-45. That’s close enough for trump to take 270 EVs.
also take a look at the generic congress polling aggregate. It’s Dems +6. Much closer than 2018 polling.
Cook political report has an interesting tool where you can adjust turnout by demographic and see how that impacts electoral college.
It’s starts with trumps best demo, non college whites at 55% (Biden win w 307 electoral votes). Increasing that demo to 60% gets trump a win with about 280 EVs. 59% turnout, reduces it to 230 EVs
I cant imagine a 1% turnout difference in trumps base nets a 50 EV difference, but it underscores how difficult a job pollsters have to get the polls accurate and account for even a tiny increase in trump base turnout. It ain’t helping my confidence with pollsters and if it’s this much of a difference 538 is really off their rockers w .77
HOW IT WORKS: Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted fordemographic change since 2016. Then, adjust the sliders below to see how shifts inturnout and support among five demographic groups could swing the Electoral College
Sorry but this is damn interesting, as is the Supreme Court vs House analysis to decide contested elections. Clearly I’m in the wrong place.
The issue I have is you calling 538's math foolish. You seem to want to say that 538 should be calling this more 50/50, when the math actually calls for around 75/25. What you don't seem to understand is that in 4 simulated coin flips Biden would win 3 times while Trump wins once. Nobody here is excited about those odds, of course we want Biden winning 4 of those coin flips but the math doesn't show Trump winning 2 of those coin flips either. Biden is still the odds on favourite.
This election isn't another 2016, way too many variables have changed.
This is exactly correct. Somehow people (particularly Trump supporters) think something less than 100% is equal to 101%.
Not foolish, just underestimating the trump effect on elections.
Most significantly, elections are not about flipping a coin. According to Cook, Trumps 2016 performance at getting NCWs is about 4% from a huge statistical advantage, where one percent of this demo can net trump 50 EVs.
He was at .55 NCW 2016 turnout. At .59 Biden still wins with @ 280 EVs. Thats great, we can all exhale. At .60 turnout, it goes to 230 and trump wins. THATS the tipping point here, this potential wave trump has access too. Being by far The largest demo (by far can not be emphasized enough), it is foolish to discount this phenomenon. That’s not even close to flipping a coin. It’s extraordinarily biased and a weighted coin.
I’m hoping trump never gets there, but I am not shutting my eyes about it either. He proved in 2016 he knows how to get new voters from this demo to vote. No reason he can not find new voters there again. That’s why 77% is way off.
Dude.. sorry, you don't have the background or analysis in this topic to declare that Silver's 75 or 77% is way off. Your assumption also discounts the massive move of suburbanites toward the D. That was clear in the analysis post 2018 and the numbers are bearing out the same this time. Trump won the suburbs in 16 and he is losing them today. They are not exactly chock full of NCWs. Women have also jettisoned the R party dramatically since 16 as well. So the statement that NCW's moving from 55 to 60% turnout wins the election for Trump ignores every other demographic move.
Dude, the mistake Silver is making is this is not statistics, it’s political science. Trump has tapped into something pollsters did not identify last time. There is a better than 23% chance he can do it again.
lets fire up that time machine...again,
....
Politics
Clinton Dominates in Key Philadelphia Suburbs, Bloomberg Poll Finds
Losing Pennsylvania’s 20 Electoral College votes would sharply curtail Trump’s paths to the White House.
Great... there's better than a 23% chance. So what is it, 24%? 88%? The beauty of your argument i suppose is that you can't be wrong even if you're not using math, only old articles. If Trump wins, you say...I was right! Same thing if he loses. Neither would be empirically true.
The funny thing is I’d estimate Biden at .63, maybe .14 lower than 538, based on tipping point states. I think Biden is the favorite, but there is a stronger chance pollsters are making the same mistake again than .23; my main concern is trump is looking much stronger lately in these states, NC FL AZ PA. With these states within or near the moe, if having trouble believing .77 is accurate. If there is an “unpolled white vote” as there was in 2016 trump could be tied or ahead in those states.
the 2 main tipping point states, 538 has Biden at .77 in PA and .64 in AZ. The two closest tipping point states have a .13 spread. I find that debatable.
Its interesting that gauging demographic accuracy in polling is part of 538s process, but if we look at PA, they actually give biden better rating on that category (Biden 53/ trump 46). That just seems wrong, but I can not prove it, except to point out this is where pollsters got trump wrong in the past.
“ Average with demographics-based vote share projection”
My real question is how do you poll the people that are trying desperately to hold on to the white privilege system and will say all day that they aren’t voting for trump,especially to pollsters, but still check his name in the privacy of the voting booth. I think Trump has a much better chance than anyone thinks based on passive white supremacy, but since it can’t be easily quantifiable and put down in numbers it’s something that could prove to be the ultimate November surprise.
ohmygod
Groundhog Day. All of these threads. lol
There is no evidence of this happening. There have been hardly any difference in the live phone polling and online polling this year. Both are anonymous, by the way. But for the people who seem convinced that Trump supporters are lying to pollsters over the phone for fear of being shamed or something (I don't know), how do you explain that Biden's doing just as well with the even more anonymous online polling?
This theory makes zero sense.
Folks---it's okay to be scared. But my god, it's not all doom and gloom. Biden's in very good shape with just over a month to go. That point cannot be disputed.
This is the only election I have ever felt this level of insecurity around since I turned 18 and could start participating. Hopefully I am wrong and this election can be measured using the same metrics as previous elections and there is nothing to worry about.
You were not worried four years ago??
No I knew trump was gonna win because of the closet white supremacists in 2016 and because of Hillary’s poor campaign. I don’t think this is a repeat of 2016. I think it is a different animal altogether that we are viewing through the 2016 lens and saying wow look how much better we are doing compared to 2016, rather than focusing on what unique unknowns exist in 2020.
i mean I’ve already seen and heard coworkers talk about how the $750 tax is no big deal because rich people make their money in a different way and it gets taxed differently.
There are a lot of things going on with framing the election in a way that Don can challenge the results in a close election. So the polling may well be right on and Don still “wins” I’m hoping for a high turnout to offset this.
This is the primary concern we should all have. Definitely agree with that.
Not a chance in hell trump gets away with that if the aggregate polling is correct and does not change. If the polls are off again that’s when this becomes a problem.
There is no shy trump voter or a mysterious threat making pollsters look bad. What does exist are new voters in rural areas of swing states who never voted before, and trump is like Vedder and McCready out there (Yes, combined). Have you seen his rallies during a pandemic.? He has them all convinced in these vast regions. He gets new voters in key areas to vote, and it’s challenging for pollsters to find these voters. (The Rs are also excellent at getting urban Ds off the voting rolls, but that’s a different analysis altogether)
If Biden wins the popular vote by 7, WI by 8, PA and MI by 5 and FL and AZ by 1, trump will not have a leg to stand on. It would be a rout and I am hoping against hope the polls are correct.If he wins those states by those amounts, He will be toast, out the door and history. The bigger threat is the Polls are actually about 2% off (Or more in swing states) and momentum is shifting and pollsters will catch it as well as they always have with trump.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,307
Cook political report has an interesting tool where you can adjust turnout by demographic and see how that impacts electoral college.
It’s starts with trumps best demo, non college whites at 55% (Biden win w 307 electoral votes). Increasing that demo to 60% gets trump a win with about 280 EVs. 59% turnout, reduces it to 230 EVs
I cant imagine a 1% turnout difference in trumps base nets a 50 EV difference, but it underscores how difficult a job pollsters have to get the polls accurate and account for even a tiny increase in trump base turnout. It ain’t helping my confidence with pollsters and if it’s this much of a difference 538 is really off their rockers w .77
HOW IT WORKS: Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted fordemographic change since 2016. Then, adjust the sliders below to see how shifts inturnout and support among five demographic groups could swing the Electoral College
Sorry but this is damn interesting, as is the Supreme Court vs House analysis to decide contested elections. Clearly I’m in the wrong place.
The issue I have is you calling 538's math foolish. You seem to want to say that 538 should be calling this more 50/50, when the math actually calls for around 75/25. What you don't seem to understand is that in 4 simulated coin flips Biden would win 3 times while Trump wins once. Nobody here is excited about those odds, of course we want Biden winning 4 of those coin flips but the math doesn't show Trump winning 2 of those coin flips either. Biden is still the odds on favourite.
This election isn't another 2016, way too many variables have changed.
This is exactly correct. Somehow people (particularly Trump supporters) think something less than 100% is equal to 101%.
Not foolish, just underestimating the trump effect on elections.
Most significantly, elections are not about flipping a coin. According to Cook, Trumps 2016 performance at getting NCWs is about 4% from a huge statistical advantage, where one percent of this demo can net trump 50 EVs.
He was at .55 NCW 2016 turnout. At .59 Biden still wins with @ 280 EVs. Thats great, we can all exhale. At .60 turnout, it goes to 230 and trump wins. THATS the tipping point here, this potential wave trump has access too. Being by far The largest demo (by far can not be emphasized enough), it is foolish to discount this phenomenon. That’s not even close to flipping a coin. It’s extraordinarily biased and a weighted coin.
I’m hoping trump never gets there, but I am not shutting my eyes about it either. He proved in 2016 he knows how to get new voters from this demo to vote. No reason he can not find new voters there again. That’s why 77% is way off.
Dude.. sorry, you don't have the background or analysis in this topic to declare that Silver's 75 or 77% is way off. Your assumption also discounts the massive move of suburbanites toward the D. That was clear in the analysis post 2018 and the numbers are bearing out the same this time. Trump won the suburbs in 16 and he is losing them today. They are not exactly chock full of NCWs. Women have also jettisoned the R party dramatically since 16 as well. So the statement that NCW's moving from 55 to 60% turnout wins the election for Trump ignores every other demographic move.
Dude, the mistake Silver is making is this is not statistics, it’s political science. Trump has tapped into something pollsters did not identify last time. There is a better than 23% chance he can do it again.
lets fire up that time machine...again,
....
Politics
Clinton Dominates in Key Philadelphia Suburbs, Bloomberg Poll Finds
Losing Pennsylvania’s 20 Electoral College votes would sharply curtail Trump’s paths to the White House.
Great... there's better than a 23% chance. So what is it, 24%? 88%? The beauty of your argument i suppose is that you can't be wrong even if you're not using math, only old articles. If Trump wins, you say...I was right! Same thing if he loses. Neither would be empirically true.
The funny thing is I’d estimate Biden at .63, maybe .14 lower than 538, based on tipping point states. I think Biden is the favorite, but there is a stronger chance pollsters are making the same mistake again than .23; my main concern is trump is looking much stronger lately in these states, NC FL AZ PA. With these states within or near the moe, if having trouble believing .77 is accurate. If there is an “unpolled white vote” as there was in 2016 trump could be tied or ahead in those states.
the 2 main tipping point states, 538 has Biden at .77 in PA and .64 in AZ. The two closest tipping point states have a .13 spread. I find that debatable.
Its interesting that gauging demographic accuracy in polling is part of 538s process, but if we look at PA, they actually give biden better rating on that category (Biden 53/ trump 46). That just seems wrong, but I can not prove it, except to point out this is where pollsters got trump wrong in the past.
“ Average with demographics-based vote share projection”
My real question is how do you poll the people that are trying desperately to hold on to the white privilege system and will say all day that they aren’t voting for trump,especially to pollsters, but still check his name in the privacy of the voting booth. I think Trump has a much better chance than anyone thinks based on passive white supremacy, but since it can’t be easily quantifiable and put down in numbers it’s something that could prove to be the ultimate November surprise.
ohmygod
Groundhog Day. All of these threads. lol
There is no evidence of this happening. There have been hardly any difference in the live phone polling and online polling this year. Both are anonymous, by the way. But for the people who seem convinced that Trump supporters are lying to pollsters over the phone for fear of being shamed or something (I don't know), how do you explain that Biden's doing just as well with the even more anonymous online polling?
This theory makes zero sense.
Folks---it's okay to be scared. But my god, it's not all doom and gloom. Biden's in very good shape with just over a month to go. That point cannot be disputed.
This is the only election I have ever felt this level of insecurity around since I turned 18 and could start participating. Hopefully I am wrong and this election can be measured using the same metrics as previous elections and there is nothing to worry about.
You were not worried four years ago??
No I knew trump was gonna win because of the closet white supremacists in 2016 and because of Hillary’s poor campaign. I don’t think this is a repeat of 2016. I think it is a different animal altogether that we are viewing through the 2016 lens and saying wow look how much better we are doing compared to 2016, rather than focusing on what unique unknowns exist in 2020.
i mean I’ve already seen and heard coworkers talk about how the $750 tax is no big deal because rich people make their money in a different way and it gets taxed differently.
There are a lot of things going on with framing the election in a way that Don can challenge the results in a close election. So the polling may well be right on and Don still “wins” I’m hoping for a high turnout to offset this.
This is the primary concern we should all have. Definitely agree with that.
Not a chance in hell trump gets away with that if the aggregate polling is correct and does not change. If the polls are off again that’s when this becomes a problem.
There is no shy trump voter or a mysterious threat making pollsters look bad. What does exist are new voters in rural areas of swing states who never voted before, and trump is like Vedder and McCready out there (Yes, combined). Have you seen his rallies during a pandemic.? He has them all convinced in these vast regions. He gets new voters in key areas to vote, and it’s challenging for pollsters to find these voters. (The Rs are also excellent at getting urban Ds off the voting rolls, but that’s a different analysis altogether)
If Biden wins the popular vote by 7, WI by 8, PA and MI by 5 and FL and AZ by 1, trump will not have a leg to stand on. It would be a rout and I am hoping against hope the polls are correct.If he wins those states by those amounts, He will be toast, out the door and history. The bigger threat is the Polls are actually about 2% off (Or more in swing states) and momentum is shifting and pollsters will catch it as well as they always have with trump.
Cook political report has an interesting tool where you can adjust turnout by demographic and see how that impacts electoral college.
It’s starts with trumps best demo, non college whites at 55% (Biden win w 307 electoral votes). Increasing that demo to 60% gets trump a win with about 280 EVs. 59% turnout, reduces it to 230 EVs
I cant imagine a 1% turnout difference in trumps base nets a 50 EV difference, but it underscores how difficult a job pollsters have to get the polls accurate and account for even a tiny increase in trump base turnout. It ain’t helping my confidence with pollsters and if it’s this much of a difference 538 is really off their rockers w .77
HOW IT WORKS: Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted fordemographic change since 2016. Then, adjust the sliders below to see how shifts inturnout and support among five demographic groups could swing the Electoral College
Sorry but this is damn interesting, as is the Supreme Court vs House analysis to decide contested elections. Clearly I’m in the wrong place.
The issue I have is you calling 538's math foolish. You seem to want to say that 538 should be calling this more 50/50, when the math actually calls for around 75/25. What you don't seem to understand is that in 4 simulated coin flips Biden would win 3 times while Trump wins once. Nobody here is excited about those odds, of course we want Biden winning 4 of those coin flips but the math doesn't show Trump winning 2 of those coin flips either. Biden is still the odds on favourite.
This election isn't another 2016, way too many variables have changed.
This is exactly correct. Somehow people (particularly Trump supporters) think something less than 100% is equal to 101%.
Not foolish, just underestimating the trump effect on elections.
Most significantly, elections are not about flipping a coin. According to Cook, Trumps 2016 performance at getting NCWs is about 4% from a huge statistical advantage, where one percent of this demo can net trump 50 EVs.
He was at .55 NCW 2016 turnout. At .59 Biden still wins with @ 280 EVs. Thats great, we can all exhale. At .60 turnout, it goes to 230 and trump wins. THATS the tipping point here, this potential wave trump has access too. Being by far The largest demo (by far can not be emphasized enough), it is foolish to discount this phenomenon. That’s not even close to flipping a coin. It’s extraordinarily biased and a weighted coin.
I’m hoping trump never gets there, but I am not shutting my eyes about it either. He proved in 2016 he knows how to get new voters from this demo to vote. No reason he can not find new voters there again. That’s why 77% is way off.
Dude.. sorry, you don't have the background or analysis in this topic to declare that Silver's 75 or 77% is way off. Your assumption also discounts the massive move of suburbanites toward the D. That was clear in the analysis post 2018 and the numbers are bearing out the same this time. Trump won the suburbs in 16 and he is losing them today. They are not exactly chock full of NCWs. Women have also jettisoned the R party dramatically since 16 as well. So the statement that NCW's moving from 55 to 60% turnout wins the election for Trump ignores every other demographic move.
Dude, the mistake Silver is making is this is not statistics, it’s political science. Trump has tapped into something pollsters did not identify last time. There is a better than 23% chance he can do it again.
lets fire up that time machine...again,
....
Politics
Clinton Dominates in Key Philadelphia Suburbs, Bloomberg Poll Finds
Losing Pennsylvania’s 20 Electoral College votes would sharply curtail Trump’s paths to the White House.
Great... there's better than a 23% chance. So what is it, 24%? 88%? The beauty of your argument i suppose is that you can't be wrong even if you're not using math, only old articles. If Trump wins, you say...I was right! Same thing if he loses. Neither would be empirically true.
The funny thing is I’d estimate Biden at .63, maybe .14 lower than 538, based on tipping point states. I think Biden is the favorite, but there is a stronger chance pollsters are making the same mistake again than .23; my main concern is trump is looking much stronger lately in these states, NC FL AZ PA. With these states within or near the moe, if having trouble believing .77 is accurate. If there is an “unpolled white vote” as there was in 2016 trump could be tied or ahead in those states.
the 2 main tipping point states, 538 has Biden at .77 in PA and .64 in AZ. The two closest tipping point states have a .13 spread. I find that debatable.
Its interesting that gauging demographic accuracy in polling is part of 538s process, but if we look at PA, they actually give biden better rating on that category (Biden 53/ trump 46). That just seems wrong, but I can not prove it, except to point out this is where pollsters got trump wrong in the past.
“ Average with demographics-based vote share projection”
My real question is how do you poll the people that are trying desperately to hold on to the white privilege system and will say all day that they aren’t voting for trump,especially to pollsters, but still check his name in the privacy of the voting booth. I think Trump has a much better chance than anyone thinks based on passive white supremacy, but since it can’t be easily quantifiable and put down in numbers it’s something that could prove to be the ultimate November surprise.
ohmygod
Groundhog Day. All of these threads. lol
There is no evidence of this happening. There have been hardly any difference in the live phone polling and online polling this year. Both are anonymous, by the way. But for the people who seem convinced that Trump supporters are lying to pollsters over the phone for fear of being shamed or something (I don't know), how do you explain that Biden's doing just as well with the even more anonymous online polling?
This theory makes zero sense.
Folks---it's okay to be scared. But my god, it's not all doom and gloom. Biden's in very good shape with just over a month to go. That point cannot be disputed.
This is the only election I have ever felt this level of insecurity around since I turned 18 and could start participating. Hopefully I am wrong and this election can be measured using the same metrics as previous elections and there is nothing to worry about.
You were not worried four years ago??
No I knew trump was gonna win because of the closet white supremacists in 2016 and because of Hillary’s poor campaign. I don’t think this is a repeat of 2016. I think it is a different animal altogether that we are viewing through the 2016 lens and saying wow look how much better we are doing compared to 2016, rather than focusing on what unique unknowns exist in 2020.
i mean I’ve already seen and heard coworkers talk about how the $750 tax is no big deal because rich people make their money in a different way and it gets taxed differently.
There are a lot of things going on with framing the election in a way that Don can challenge the results in a close election. So the polling may well be right on and Don still “wins” I’m hoping for a high turnout to offset this.
This is the primary concern we should all have. Definitely agree with that.
Not a chance in hell trump gets away with that if the aggregate polling is correct and does not change. If the polls are off again that’s when this becomes a problem.
There is no shy trump voter or a mysterious threat making pollsters look bad. What does exist are new voters in rural areas of swing states who never voted before, and trump is like Vedder and McCready out there (Yes, combined). Have you seen his rallies during a pandemic.? He has them all convinced in these vast regions. He gets new voters in key areas to vote, and it’s challenging for pollsters to find these voters. (The Rs are also excellent at getting urban Ds off the voting rolls, but that’s a different analysis altogether)
If Biden wins the popular vote by 7, WI by 8, PA and MI by 5 and FL and AZ by 1, trump will not have a leg to stand on. It would be a rout and I am hoping against hope the polls are correct.If he wins those states by those amounts, He will be toast, out the door and history. The bigger threat is the Polls are actually about 2% off (Or more in swing states) and momentum is shifting and pollsters will catch it as well as they always have with trump.
The Harris polls from today are tighter, but they’ve been right leaning compared to others.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,307
^Yeah....back up to a 5.2% lead in PA at the moment. Another poll coming out tonight.
Cook political report has an interesting tool where you can adjust turnout by demographic and see how that impacts electoral college.
It’s starts with trumps best demo, non college whites at 55% (Biden win w 307 electoral votes). Increasing that demo to 60% gets trump a win with about 280 EVs. 59% turnout, reduces it to 230 EVs
I cant imagine a 1% turnout difference in trumps base nets a 50 EV difference, but it underscores how difficult a job pollsters have to get the polls accurate and account for even a tiny increase in trump base turnout. It ain’t helping my confidence with pollsters and if it’s this much of a difference 538 is really off their rockers w .77
HOW IT WORKS: Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted fordemographic change since 2016. Then, adjust the sliders below to see how shifts inturnout and support among five demographic groups could swing the Electoral College
Sorry but this is damn interesting, as is the Supreme Court vs House analysis to decide contested elections. Clearly I’m in the wrong place.
The issue I have is you calling 538's math foolish. You seem to want to say that 538 should be calling this more 50/50, when the math actually calls for around 75/25. What you don't seem to understand is that in 4 simulated coin flips Biden would win 3 times while Trump wins once. Nobody here is excited about those odds, of course we want Biden winning 4 of those coin flips but the math doesn't show Trump winning 2 of those coin flips either. Biden is still the odds on favourite.
This election isn't another 2016, way too many variables have changed.
This is exactly correct. Somehow people (particularly Trump supporters) think something less than 100% is equal to 101%.
Not foolish, just underestimating the trump effect on elections.
Most significantly, elections are not about flipping a coin. According to Cook, Trumps 2016 performance at getting NCWs is about 4% from a huge statistical advantage, where one percent of this demo can net trump 50 EVs.
He was at .55 NCW 2016 turnout. At .59 Biden still wins with @ 280 EVs. Thats great, we can all exhale. At .60 turnout, it goes to 230 and trump wins. THATS the tipping point here, this potential wave trump has access too. Being by far The largest demo (by far can not be emphasized enough), it is foolish to discount this phenomenon. That’s not even close to flipping a coin. It’s extraordinarily biased and a weighted coin.
I’m hoping trump never gets there, but I am not shutting my eyes about it either. He proved in 2016 he knows how to get new voters from this demo to vote. No reason he can not find new voters there again. That’s why 77% is way off.
Dude.. sorry, you don't have the background or analysis in this topic to declare that Silver's 75 or 77% is way off. Your assumption also discounts the massive move of suburbanites toward the D. That was clear in the analysis post 2018 and the numbers are bearing out the same this time. Trump won the suburbs in 16 and he is losing them today. They are not exactly chock full of NCWs. Women have also jettisoned the R party dramatically since 16 as well. So the statement that NCW's moving from 55 to 60% turnout wins the election for Trump ignores every other demographic move.
Dude, the mistake Silver is making is this is not statistics, it’s political science. Trump has tapped into something pollsters did not identify last time. There is a better than 23% chance he can do it again.
lets fire up that time machine...again,
....
Politics
Clinton Dominates in Key Philadelphia Suburbs, Bloomberg Poll Finds
Losing Pennsylvania’s 20 Electoral College votes would sharply curtail Trump’s paths to the White House.
Great... there's better than a 23% chance. So what is it, 24%? 88%? The beauty of your argument i suppose is that you can't be wrong even if you're not using math, only old articles. If Trump wins, you say...I was right! Same thing if he loses. Neither would be empirically true.
The funny thing is I’d estimate Biden at .63, maybe .14 lower than 538, based on tipping point states. I think Biden is the favorite, but there is a stronger chance pollsters are making the same mistake again than .23; my main concern is trump is looking much stronger lately in these states, NC FL AZ PA. With these states within or near the moe, if having trouble believing .77 is accurate. If there is an “unpolled white vote” as there was in 2016 trump could be tied or ahead in those states.
the 2 main tipping point states, 538 has Biden at .77 in PA and .64 in AZ. The two closest tipping point states have a .13 spread. I find that debatable.
Its interesting that gauging demographic accuracy in polling is part of 538s process, but if we look at PA, they actually give biden better rating on that category (Biden 53/ trump 46). That just seems wrong, but I can not prove it, except to point out this is where pollsters got trump wrong in the past.
“ Average with demographics-based vote share projection”
My real question is how do you poll the people that are trying desperately to hold on to the white privilege system and will say all day that they aren’t voting for trump,especially to pollsters, but still check his name in the privacy of the voting booth. I think Trump has a much better chance than anyone thinks based on passive white supremacy, but since it can’t be easily quantifiable and put down in numbers it’s something that could prove to be the ultimate November surprise.
ohmygod
Groundhog Day. All of these threads. lol
There is no evidence of this happening. There have been hardly any difference in the live phone polling and online polling this year. Both are anonymous, by the way. But for the people who seem convinced that Trump supporters are lying to pollsters over the phone for fear of being shamed or something (I don't know), how do you explain that Biden's doing just as well with the even more anonymous online polling?
This theory makes zero sense.
Folks---it's okay to be scared. But my god, it's not all doom and gloom. Biden's in very good shape with just over a month to go. That point cannot be disputed.
This is the only election I have ever felt this level of insecurity around since I turned 18 and could start participating. Hopefully I am wrong and this election can be measured using the same metrics as previous elections and there is nothing to worry about.
You were not worried four years ago??
No I knew trump was gonna win because of the closet white supremacists in 2016 and because of Hillary’s poor campaign. I don’t think this is a repeat of 2016. I think it is a different animal altogether that we are viewing through the 2016 lens and saying wow look how much better we are doing compared to 2016, rather than focusing on what unique unknowns exist in 2020.
i mean I’ve already seen and heard coworkers talk about how the $750 tax is no big deal because rich people make their money in a different way and it gets taxed differently.
There are a lot of things going on with framing the election in a way that Don can challenge the results in a close election. So the polling may well be right on and Don still “wins” I’m hoping for a high turnout to offset this.
This is the primary concern we should all have. Definitely agree with that.
Not a chance in hell trump gets away with that if the aggregate polling is correct and does not change. If the polls are off again that’s when this becomes a problem.
There is no shy trump voter or a mysterious threat making pollsters look bad. What does exist are new voters in rural areas of swing states who never voted before, and trump is like Vedder and McCready out there (Yes, combined). Have you seen his rallies during a pandemic.? He has them all convinced in these vast regions. He gets new voters in key areas to vote, and it’s challenging for pollsters to find these voters. (The Rs are also excellent at getting urban Ds off the voting rolls, but that’s a different analysis altogether)
If Biden wins the popular vote by 7, WI by 8, PA and MI by 5 and FL and AZ by 1, trump will not have a leg to stand on. It would be a rout and I am hoping against hope the polls are correct.If he wins those states by those amounts, He will be toast, out the door and history. The bigger threat is the Polls are actually about 2% off (Or more in swing states) and momentum is shifting and pollsters will catch it as well as they always have with trump.
Fake news ;-)
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,307
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,307
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
Yes but that’s the reason I was so insistent the election in swing states was closer than the polls.
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,307
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
Yes but that’s the reason I was so insistent the election in swing states was closer than the polls.
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
All candidates do that. Difference for Trump in '16 was the assistance of Russia and the leaked DNC docs and how they targeted certain states with that material.
Two years later, when telling his supporters to vote as if he was on the ballot, he just tried to jam the Caravan down our throats. It didn't work. This year the Law and Order stuff seems like Caravan 2.0 and, so far (with 3+ months of polling data to support) it has not worked as well.
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
Yes but that’s the reason I was so insistent the election in swing states was closer than the polls.
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
All candidates do that. Difference for Trump in '16 was the assistance of Russia and the leaked DNC docs and how they targeted certain states with that material.
Two years later, when telling his supporters to vote as if he was on the ballot, he just tried to jam the Caravan down our throats. It didn't work. This year the Law and Order stuff seems like Caravan 2.0 and, so far (with 3+ months of polling data to support) it has not worked as well.
He resonated with that key demo and only that demo unlike any candidate I've seen, because it was like a dog whistle, only they were moved by him and most of us didn't see it.
Unlike a Reagan for example, where his abilities were widely viewed.
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
Yes but that’s the reason I was so insistent the election in swing states was closer than the polls.
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
All candidates do that. Difference for Trump in '16 was the assistance of Russia and the leaked DNC docs and how they targeted certain states with that material.
Two years later, when telling his supporters to vote as if he was on the ballot, he just tried to jam the Caravan down our throats. It didn't work. This year the Law and Order stuff seems like Caravan 2.0 and, so far (with 3+ months of polling data to support) it has not worked as well.
He resonated with that key demo and only that demo unlike any candidate I've seen, because it was like a dog whistle, only they were moved by him and most of us didn't see it.
Unlike a Reagan for example, where his abilities were widely viewed.
The targeting on tRump's end was done by Parscale wasn't it?
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
These new PA polls are astounding. I.hope. they. are. spot. on.
The volume and size of the polls at the state level seems to far exceed what happened in 16. Pollsters realize that Biden is 99% likely to win the popular vote, so they are training themselves on the state since that was the big miss.
Weird how it was the big miss when that's how the election is won in the first place.
Historically it was rare to win the popular but lose the electoral. It's happening more frequently now. But in the past, if you won 3MM more votes or were up by 3 or 4% points, you were locked in.
Yes but that’s the reason I was so insistent the election in swing states was closer than the polls.
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
All candidates do that. Difference for Trump in '16 was the assistance of Russia and the leaked DNC docs and how they targeted certain states with that material.
Two years later, when telling his supporters to vote as if he was on the ballot, he just tried to jam the Caravan down our throats. It didn't work. This year the Law and Order stuff seems like Caravan 2.0 and, so far (with 3+ months of polling data to support) it has not worked as well.
He resonated with that key demo and only that demo unlike any candidate I've seen, because it was like a dog whistle, only they were moved by him and most of us didn't see it.
Unlike a Reagan for example, where his abilities were widely viewed.
The targeting on tRump's end was done by Parscale wasn't it?
As someone mentioned, alot of it was assisted by Russia.
Bottom line, they are the best at it and rural and exurban America are packing rallies to be near their beloved icon
Comments
Trump has a 22 out of 100 shot in winning.
In 19 of these Scenarios he must win PA.
In 3 of the scenarios he must win Arizona.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/
We disagreed on the impact the solid 3rd party candidates had in 2016 on the candidates ability to hit the magic 50% support level.
Anyone thinking this election is solid, take a look at today’s Monmouth poll, an A+ lean democrat pollster. Biden up 50-45. That’s close enough for trump to take 270 EVs.
also take a look at the generic congress polling aggregate. It’s Dems +6. Much closer than 2018 polling.
www.headstonesband.com
Its not coincidence it’s happening more, especially with trump. He micro targets by location, by message and by key demo, all on a level that no one has done before. That’s why I am concerned about swing state polls. He is now cooking up microtargeted messaging for the big T of PA. Hopefully these new polls prove me wrong.
Two years later, when telling his supporters to vote as if he was on the ballot, he just tried to jam the Caravan down our throats. It didn't work. This year the Law and Order stuff seems like Caravan 2.0 and, so far (with 3+ months of polling data to support) it has not worked as well.
whoa...
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
He resonated with that key demo and only that demo unlike any candidate I've seen, because it was like a dog whistle, only they were moved by him and most of us didn't see it.
Unlike a Reagan for example, where his abilities were widely viewed.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Bottom line, they are the best at it and rural and exurban America are packing rallies to be near their beloved icon