2024 Presidential Election thread

[chasfh]

9 hours ago, mtutiger said:

It is not acting like and does not look like a winning campaign. Obviously we heard similar things during 2016, but he actually was seen as *losing* then... fast forward to today, and they are, at least by most election models and polling, considered slight *favorites* right now. Yet they don't look like a campaign that is trying to win.

I wonder if the stuff they have internally is as rosy as the public stuff we see. We'll find out in 9 days or so.

Or 19 days. Or 90 days. Something like that.

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

NE-1 is pretty close too. 

 

Everything is close. Yawn.

[Edman85]

It seems like the Barstool Bros are the target audience of this whole deal. I'm worried about how activated that type is.

[mtutiger]

47 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

I didn't realize until just hearing it on the WaPo 7 podcast that Pennsylvania has a significant Puerto Rican population.

For a little perspective, this is close to twice the percentage of Arab Americans in Michigan (another group we have heard a ton about this election)

[Motor City Sonics]

9 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Everything is close. Yawn.

I don't believe polls at all.   First of all, they don't really have a feel for young voters AT ALL.  

Remember they all predicted a Red Wave in 2022.    All of them.  

Nate Silver's gut tells him Trump will win.    Well, he missed wildly in 2022.   He has PTSD from 2016.   Plus, I think he might be scared of retaliation (I don't think Bezos is scared of retaliation, I think he made a backroom deal for billions).    I honestly don't know how Silver even remains in the game at this point.   He hems and haws like a weatherman saying 30% chance of rain (that means they don't know and 30% covers their ass both ways).     All those polls in the news are designed for one thing - to generate clicks.     They're designed to scare one side or the other.          

The youth vote will be much stronger this time around than in 2020. 

Plus I really don't see a lot of people who voted for Biden flipping to Trump, but I get a sense it's a far different story for Trump voters flipping to Harris. 

Let them have their little Klan rallies.  That's got Corey Lewindowski's fingerprints all over it.      Let the comedian (nobody has heard of) say that stuff so Trump doesn't have to.    They probably loved it on Staten Island, but look at Staten Island's record on race relations.  Oh wait, there is none.    Staten Island voted for Curtis Sliwa for crying out loud, they would vote for disgraced Rudy if he could run for Mayor again.  They'd vote for David Duke.    

[Motown Bombers]

23 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Everything is close. Yawn.

Except, it’s not supposed to be close. Trump won it by 15 in 2020. 

[romad1]

2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Except, it’s not supposed to be close. Trump won it by 15 in 2020. 

 

4 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I don't believe polls at all.   First of all, they don't really have a feel for young voters AT ALL.  

Remember they all predicted a Red Wave in 2022.    All of them.  

Nate Silver's gut tells him Trump will win.    Well, he missed wildly in 2022.   He has PTSD from 2016.   Plus, I think he might be scared of retaliation (I don't think Bezos is scared of retaliation, I think he made a backroom deal for billions).    I honestly don't know how Silver even remains in the game at this point.   He hems and haws like a weatherman saying 30% chance of rain (that means they don't know and 30% covers their ass both ways).     All those polls in the news are designed for one thing - to generate clicks.     They're designed to scare one side or the other.          

The youth vote will be much stronger this time around than in 2020. 

Plus I really don't see a lot of people who voted for Biden flipping to Trump, but I get a sense it's a far different story for Trump voters flipping to Harris. 

Let them have their little Klan rallies.  That's got Corey Lewindowski's fingerprints all over it.      Let the comedian (nobody has heard of) say that stuff so Trump doesn't have to.    They probably loved it on Staten Island, but look at Staten Island's record on race relations.  Oh wait, there is none.    Staten Island voted for Curtis Sliwa for crying out loud, they would vote for disgraced Rudy if he could run for Mayor again.  They'd vote for David Duke.    

I am feeling this.  The amount of benefit to media from a close, nervous race outweighs the public good from a tranquil and non-violent election and post-election.  Plus polls are not capturing angry women.  

[Tiger337]

1 minute ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Nate Silver's gut tells him Trump will win.    Well, he missed wildly in 2022.   He has PTSD from 2016.... I honestly don't know how Silver even remains in the game at this point.   He hems and haws like a weatherman saying 30% chance of rain (that means they don't know and 30% covers their ass both ways).   

Silver actually had Trump with a higher probability of winning in 2016 than any other serious poll aggregator.  They all underestimatd the probability of Trump winning including Silver.  Maybe polls don't work anymore or maybe they need to be adjusted, but he was singled out because he had the biggest name, not because he was more off than anyone else.

Statisticians are supposed to say things with uncertainty.  They would be lying and not doing their job otherwise. 

[CMRivdogs]

All that was missing at MSG was the white sheets. They told us exactly who they were and anyone who votes for them are exactly the same

 

[romad1]

My response to playing Dixie at a Trump rally

 

[romad1]

and

 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

42 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

I don't believe polls at all.   First of all, they don't really have a feel for young voters AT ALL.  

Remember they all predicted a Red Wave in 2022.    All of them.    

Did non-Republican/MAGA aligned polls really predict a red wave though in 2022?  I don't think they did. Many of the polls in fact, like Morning Consult and Big Village, had Democrats in the lead on the generic congressional ballot. There were media outlets that were calling for a red wave, but mainstream polling didn't exactly indicate one.

[romad1]

Per Ron Brownstein, if Harris wins Women voters as much as Trump wins Men, she wins because there will be 53-47 difference in women to men voters. 

 

[Motown Bombers]

A lot of these polls that show it is tied have women’s vote share lower than we have seen in decades. It’s how they are cooking the polls. 

[CMRivdogs]

24 minutes ago, romad1 said:

My response to playing Dixie at a Trump rally

 

I'm old enough to have have played Dixie in high school. It was the unofficial fight song way back in the late '60s. We changed it to Peter Gunn.

I learned at age 15 how offensive the song is. I'm 72 now. It's not "woke" it's enlightenment.  

[Edman85]

50 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Silver actually had Trump with a higher probability of winning in 2016 than any other serious poll aggregator.  They all underestimatd the probability of Trump winning including Silver.  Maybe polls don't work anymore or maybe they need to be adjusted, but he was singled out because he had the biggest name, not because he was more off than anyone else.

Statisticians are supposed to say things with uncertainty.  They would be lying and not doing their job otherwise. 

If a statistician says x has a 75% chance of happening four times, is he more correct if it happens three times or four times?

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

Silver actually had Trump with a higher probability of winning in 2016 than any other serious poll aggregator.  They all underestimatd the probability of Trump winning including Silver.  Maybe polls don't work anymore or maybe they need to be adjusted, but he was singled out because he had the biggest name, not because he was more off than anyone else.

Statisticians are supposed to say things with uncertainty.  They would be lying and not doing their job otherwise. 

Uncertainty is one thing, fudging about their MOE is another. When you are making sample bias adjustments that are purely speculative that swing your results by as much as 5-10% (as Cohn has reported they do) you should be publishing your poll results with a disclaimer that the MOE is more  like 8-10% in reality. But if they admitted that, no-one would care about their results, but that is more like where things actually stand for this cycle.

The polls I think are most likely to be close this cycle are the single district Congressional polls because you are sampling a more homogeneous population in a single district and sample bias issues become a smaller source of error even given that district polls are usually smaller samples.

Edited October 28, 2024 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Edman85 said:

It seems like the Barstool Bros are the target audience of this whole deal. I'm worried about how activated that type is.

As I said earlier today, turning out those guys is really the only way Trump can win, because that's how he won in 2016, and that's also why I'm not popping champagne corks over super high early voter turnouts, because a big chunk of that is probably those guys.

Come on, young women, we need you more than ever.

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

Except, it’s not supposed to be close. Trump won it by 15 in 2020. 

You trust polls. How adorable.

[chasfh]

26 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

I'm old enough to have have played Dixie in high school. It was the unofficial fight song way back in the late '60s. We changed it to Peter Gunn.

I learned at age 15 how offensive the song is. I'm 72 now. It's not "woke" it's enlightenment.  

It actually is woke, before we let right wingers make "woke" a dirty word.

[LaceyLou]

To all Republicans who are condemning the rhetoric from the MSG rally: are you really only noticing that Drumpf is a racist now? Where exactly have you been for the past 40-50 years?

This is who he is. This is who he will always be. 

[gehringer_2]

20 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

If a statistician says x has a 75% chance of happening four times, is he more correct if it happens three times or four times?

I don't think that is proper formulation of the statistical conclusion. If you are looking at categorical outcomes in series, you should properly say that the outcomes distribute with a mean frequency of X out of Y total events observed. And X is a distributed variable whose variance depends on the sample size Y.

[mtutiger]

8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

As I said earlier today, turning out those guys is really the only way Trump can win, because that's how he won in 2016, and that's also why I'm not popping champagne corks over super high early voter turnouts, because a big chunk of that is probably those guys.

For what it's worth, David Plouffe has suggested a couple of times that they aren't seeing a ton of intensity with low-propensity voters like this in their early vote data thus far.

[Motown Bombers]

8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

You trust polls. How adorable.

I’ve literally been called a fanatic on here because I’ve explicitly called out polls. 

[Motown Bombers]

Just now, mtutiger said:

For what it's worth, David Plouffe has suggested a couple of times that they aren't seeing a ton of intensity with low-propensity voters like this in their early vote data thus far.

If you look at Wisconsin early voting, the counties Haley won are turning out and the Trump counties are lagging behind.