ADVERTISEMENT

Oh no Joe slipping in poles

Trump train building up steam
Nolte: Post-Debate Polls Show Donald Trump Leading in MI, AZ, and FL
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-elec...ost-debate-polls-show-trump-leading-mi-az-fl/

Per that article:

Trafalgar’s number are currently something close to outliers compared to other pollsters looking at those same states.

In Florida, the RealClearPolitics poll of polls shows Biden up 1.5 points.

In Michigan, the average shows Biden winning by 7.8 points. A Fox News poll released just five days ago has Biden winning by 12 points, 52 to 40 percent.

In Arizona, Biden is up 2.4 points in the average.
 
Per that article:

Trafalgar’s number are currently something close to outliers compared to other pollsters looking at those same states.

In Florida, the RealClearPolitics poll of polls shows Biden up 1.5 points.

In Michigan, the average shows Biden winning by 7.8 points. A Fox News poll released just five days ago has Biden winning by 12 points, 52 to 40 percent.

In Arizona, Biden is up 2.4 points in the average.
You must have skipped over the beginning:
In Michigan, the Trafalgar Group, one of the most accurate swing state pollsters in 2016 and 2018, shows Trump leading former Vice President Joe Biden by two points, 49 to 47 percent,

looking like a repeat of 2016. Trump has the momentum. Even in California there has been parades of Trump supporters.
 
Last edited:
Per that article:

Trafalgar’s number are currently something close to outliers compared to other pollsters looking at those same states.

In Florida, the RealClearPolitics poll of polls shows Biden up 1.5 points.

In Michigan, the average shows Biden winning by 7.8 points. A Fox News poll released just five days ago has Biden winning by 12 points, 52 to 40 percent.

In Arizona, Biden is up 2.4 points in the average.

Trafalgar is the only poll that got 2016 right, so maybe there is some credibility there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BSIT
The same 538 that said Hillary was a 67% favorite to win?
538 accumulates a bunch of polls (including those that skew right and left) and yes, they actually were one of the few that thought Trump had a legit chance in 2016 and a path to win.

That 67% was way more optimistic for Trump than most any other projections that year.
 
The same 538 that said Hillary was a 67% favorite to win?
Do you get how probabilities work? Trump drew an inside straight in the 2016 election with a bunch of stuff that isn't repeatable. He ended up winning with 46.1% of the vote, Romney lost the 2012 election pretty handily with 47.2% of the vote.
Michigan margin was 10,704, Wisconsin margin was 27,257, and Pennsylvania margin was 44,292.
 
538 accumulates a bunch of polls (including those that skew right and left) and yes, they actually were one of the few that thought Trump had a legit chance in 2016 and a path to win.

That 67% was way more optimistic for Trump than most any other projections that year.
Certainly aware of what happened in 2016 and how 538 got it wrong. Just found it odd that Droid was using 538 as some sort of gold standard when it comes to Presidential prognosticating. They were wrong.
 
hey comrade! I went off the grid this summer. Really trying to avoid the Internet, people and news as much as I could. Hope all is good!
Glad you are well! Yep, hanging in there. I have been tempted to do what you did. Some of us (Beth and me) were wondering about you. Glad you're back
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monkey Pox
Certainly aware of what happened in 2016 and how 538 got it wrong. Just found it odd that Droid was using 538 as some sort of gold standard when it comes to Presidential prognosticating. They were wrong.

Please elaborate further on how forecasting a 3 in 10 chance translates to 538 being "wrong."

This should be good.
 
Do you get how probabilities work? Trump drew an inside straight in the 2016 election with a bunch of stuff that isn't repeatable. He ended up winning with 46.1% of the vote, Romney lost the 2012 election pretty handily with 47.2% of the vote.
Michigan margin was 10,704, Wisconsin margin was 27,257, and Pennsylvania margin was 44,292.

Dave Wasserman (House Editor from Cook Political Report) was briefly featured on "The Circus" edition from last night, discussing exactly how much of an inside straight Trump lucked into in 2016. He sat down with Mark Mckinnon, who is one of the featured correspondents on The Show. Mckinnon is a long-time GOP political operative, who worked on McCain's 2008 campaign, and Wasserman detailed why 2020 is NOT 2016...

A little context, as House editor of the non-partisan Cook Political Report Wasserman, is privy to private, internal polling that is rarely, if ever released to the public. That allowed Wasserman to post these tweets a week prior to the 2016 election based on his exposure to poll data based on Congressional districts...





Wasserman sees a far different landscape a week out from 2020. He told Mckinnon that overall, with the exception of some heavily Hispanic districts, Trump is underperforming between 8-10% on his 2016 numbers. Trump won in 2016 based on about 77,000 votes in MI, WI, and PA combined. But Wasserman points out that it is even more acute, and that if you eliminated the vote from one county in each of those states Clinton would be POTUS. He cited Macomb (MI), Wakashaw (WI), and Westmoreland (PA).

This is an example of exactly what Wasserman is seeing, and gives a prime example of Trump underperforming in places he desperately has to have. In 2016, Trump won Northampton Co (PA) by 4 pts, and yet he is currently trailing there by 12 pts to Biden. Matt Dowd (another long-time Republican who led both of Bush's Campaigns 2000 and 2004) pointed out that a week out Biden has a better shot of winning TEXAS than Trump has of again winning MI, WI, and PA.


Trump won Ohio by 9+ in 2016 but traveled there and NC this weekend. Trump won GA by nearly 6 pts, but KH was there on Fri and Biden will be there tomorrow. Most polls show a razor-thin margin in Texas- NONE of that is in any way "good news" for the Trump "train"...
 
Please elaborate further on how forecasting a 3 in 10 chance translates to 538 being "wrong."

This should be good.
When there are only two possible outcomes and 538 says they are 70% confident that one will happen and then it doesn't...that's wrong in my book. But I guess you think as long as 538 gave Trump 1% chance of winning then they didn't get it wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03
Certainly aware of what happened in 2016 and how 538 got it wrong. Just found it odd that Droid was using 538 as some sort of gold standard when it comes to Presidential prognosticating. They were wrong.
They weren’t wrong. Why do we have to explain that 80% isn't 100% to a Purdue grad?

Great, both they and Trafalgar show Trump closing in on Biden with a little of a week left

Might want to check IBD/TIPP again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: indy35
Slipping in "poles"

Is it this or guys in Warsaw falling on Ice

02-fka-twigs-video.gif
 
You must have skipped over the beginning:
In Michigan, the Trafalgar Group, one of the most accurate swing state pollsters in 2016 and 2018, shows Trump leading former Vice President Joe Biden by two points, 49 to 47 percent,

looking like a repeat of 2016. Trump has the momentum. Even in California there has been parades of Trump supporters.
California is going to flip red and shock everyone. Just masses of Trump supporters in the streets out here, being loudly cheered by everyone.

I mean, come on man. There are 40 million people in this state, and probably 4 million people who will vote for Trump. Of course there are supporters parading a week from the election. It's not indicative of a damn thing.
 
California is going to flip red and shock everyone. Just masses of Trump supporters in the streets out here, being loudly cheered by everyone.

I mean, come on man. There are 40 million people in this state, and probably 4 million people who will vote for Trump. Of course there are supporters parading a week from the election. It's not indicative of a damn thing.
He’ll get more votes in 2020 than 2016.
 
He’ll get more votes in 2020 than 2016.
Maybe. I bet Biden gets more than Hillary did, too, because I expect voter participation rates will be up across the board... which is never good for Republicans. And either way, it's a dumb comment. Hillary won 61-31 in 2016. Biden will do at least that.
 
Maybe. I bet Biden gets more than Hillary did, too, because I expect voter participation rates will be up across the board... which is never good for Republicans. And either way, it's a dumb comment. Hillary won 61-31 in 2016. Biden will do at least that.
You better re read my post. I never said Trump would win CA but have shown there are Trump supporters and predict Trump will get more votes in 2020.
 
You better re read my post. I never said Trump would win CA but have shown there are Trump supporters and predict Trump will get more votes in 2020.
All I meant to imply was it was a stupid observation. Trump has supporters in every state. Him getting more or fewer votes in 2020 is irrelevant - as you should know - since California will go blue like always in a landslide.

So I'll be more direct: It is a stupid, pointless observation about California.

Do you think it'll be closer than 61-31 in CA? Do you think a larger portion of CA supports Trump now than in 2016 against Hillary?

Wait, I'll answer. Of course you do.
 
All I said was it was a stupid observation. Trump has supporters in every state. Him getting more or fewer votes in 2020 is irrelevant - as you should know - since California will go blue like always in a landslide.

Just a stupid, pointless observation about California.

Do you think it'll be closer than 61-31 in CA? E.g. do you think a larger portion of CA supports Trump now than in 2016 against Hillary?

Wait, I'll answer. Of course you do.
Everything you don’t agree with is stupid. It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump gets a HIGHER percentage in 2020 than 2016.
 
He’ll get more votes in 2020 than 2016.

You are correct about that- I didn’t vote in the last election because I knew my state was going red...so I didn’t carve out the time for voting. However, after listening to 4 years of “but Hillary won the popular vote”, I’m doing my part to make sure I don’t have to listen to something similar again....and I have a feeling this isn’t an original or unique thought among Republicans.
 
California is going to flip red and shock everyone. Just masses of Trump supporters in the streets out here, being loudly cheered by everyone.

I mean, come on man. There are 40 million people in this state, and probably 4 million people who will vote for Trump. Of course there are supporters parading a week from the election. It's not indicative of a damn thing.

The loud minority.
 
You are correct about that- I didn’t vote in the last election because I knew my state was going red...so I didn’t carve out the time for voting. However, after listening to 4 years of “but Hillary won the popular vote”, I’m doing my part to make sure I don’t have to listen to something similar again....and I have a feeling this isn’t an original or unique thought among Republicans.
Agree. I moved to CA from Michigan 2 years ago. Glad I helped Trump win Michigan but have been surprised with the Trump support in my area. Granted I live in a more Red part of the state (Southern Orange County) than the deep Blue part of the state but nonetheless it wouldn't surprise me if Trump gets above 35% and close to 40% of the state
 
You live in OC BSIT. It’s like saying Austin is Texas.
I never predicted a Trump win in CA but I'm predicting a higher vote total along with a higher % than 2016. Very possible. If not, I'll buy you a drink
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT