Nate Silver 538

Hi! said:

static111 said:

Hi! said:

Yeah, I’ve noticed a lot more Biden signs this last 10 days or so. Especially in Northern Michigan, which I guess could be considered Trump country, it seems to be trending Biden as far as signage. At this point in 2016, I’m willing to bet, the sign game was not as strong for Hillary as it is for Biden right now. I know it’s stupid to base anything off of signage but it is a measure IMO. 

The Trumpers are cheaters anyway. 8 fucking signs and ten flags in one yard? When they take down the Stars and Stripes and put up a Trump flag, they fucking mean it. Bunch a fucking traitors.

Originally from The Straights Area, last time I was home some of the people that were very pro trump seemed to have come to their senses...I only hope they don’t get reduped before Election Day.

Yeah, I’m cautiously optimistic about Michigan.  Straights area? Is that Cheboygan area?

We went to cheboygan to get our groceries at the B&C if you remember that?  My first good pizza was at Papa J’s...as for Michigan.  I think welcoming that Rick Snyder endorsement didn’t help his support in some places

Hi! said:

Hmmm Bryant street bridge? I really don’t remember all the street names in town as I was out in the sticks.  Northern Michigan in summer is hard to beat

Lerxst1992 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Biden has been favored 72/28 or 73/27 for a week or so....today it dropped slightly

Biden's at 76 now (at 9/15)

Is that a good thing or is this starting to smell like 2016?

I think if you factor in what you are hearing locally with neighbors, co-workers and friends and these polls, it is the reverse this time. While the odds of Trump getting re-elected are close to what 538 gave him last time, his +/- 30% of winning is less likely to be the outcome. I mean, the same crazy people I know who voted for Trump last time haven't wavered, but I have heard waaaaay more positive vocal support for Biden and barely any talk of voting 3rd party or picking the lesser of two evils bullshit we heard last time. Based on all of that information, I am not overly concerned. It is just hard to fathom that there is still so much support for this idiot.

tbergs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Biden has been favored 72/28 or 73/27 for a week or so....today it dropped slightly

Biden's at 76 now (at 9/15)

Is that a good thing or is this starting to smell like 2016?

I think if you factor in what you are hearing locally with neighbors, co-workers and friends and these polls, it is the reverse this time. While the odds of Trump getting re-elected are close to what 538 gave him last time, his +/- 30% of winning is less likely to be the outcome. I mean, the same crazy people I know who voted for Trump last time haven't wavered, but I have heard waaaaay more positive vocal support for Biden and barely any talk of voting 3rd party or picking the lesser of two evils bullshit we heard last time. Based on all of that information, I am not overly concerned. It is just hard to fathom that there is still so much support for this idiot.

My concern is that FL AZ NC WI is enough to get trump reelected. Its very easy to see trump taking those 4 states. 

And if trump does that, Bidens only path may be one of the red CDs in ME or NE. Or IA, which seems a long shot.

Yeah, he's right.  This looks like 2016 all over again. Trum

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Biden has been favored 72/28 or 73/27 for a week or so....today it dropped slightly

Biden's at 76 now (at 9/15)

Is that a good thing or is this starting to smell like 2016?

As long as people vote we are good.  The virus doesn't help but I would assume that GOP votes would be influenced worse than Dems.  The tRumpsters in my area are VERY confident of a tRump win.  They do not seem to have any worry or concern whatsoever.

Trumpsters have unprecedented devotion; they think it's an honor to vote for him.  They'll be voting.  And they also think the virus is a hoax.  I'd say the worse impact is on less-than-enthused Biden voters.

mrussel1 said:

DM656970 said:

Natalie Jackson, a data scientist at the Huffington Post, had given Clinton a 98% chance of winning

Nate Silver has Hilary at a 71.4% chance of winning the day of the election

And had Hillary winning with 302 electoral votes

Maybe you need to take your blue glasses off

Anyone that works for Huffington is going to skew far to the left.  It's just like listening to a 'data scientist' at Brietbart.  71% is not exactly 100% and 302 EV is not a landslide either.  538 did a good job overall.  The gap was insufficient state polling, not the national data. How are those 'blue glasses'?

Gern Blansten said:

Hot damn! 

I was just coming here to post that. "Law and Order" my ass....