Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

bennyineire

Trump is toast, there is no chance he is winning this election. It will be interesting to see what "tricks" he has up his sleeve though but at this stage they will most likely backfire

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/politics/donald-trump-joe-biden-cnn-poll/index.html

Deebles McBeebles

Quin_Dub wrote: »

We'll never get the full picture , they are refusing to let the CDC do contact tracing from the Rose Garden SCOTUS event and generally being economical with the information.

For each one of the people that have tested positive they in turn will probably have infected 2 or 3 more and so on.

At this stage there are probably the guts of a hundred cases that can be linked back to the White House.

He will be allowed to continue spreading it too, regardless of press coverage. Hey, why change the habits of his presidency and start being honest now?

eire4

bennyineire wrote: »

Trump is toast, there is no chance he is winning this election. It will be interesting to see what "tricks" he has up his sleeve though but at this stage they will most likely backfire

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/politics/donald-trump-joe-biden-cnn-poll/index.html

Think your right. I just do not see any way he wins now and in fact a heavy defeat is now looking a very real possibility. As you say as well this will mean if he is not already the dirty tricks, skulduggery whatever words you want to use will all be going up several notches over the next few weeks.

TexasTornado

bennyineire wrote: »

Trump is toast, there is no chance he is winning this election. It will be interesting to see what "tricks" he has up his sleeve though but at this stage they will most likely backfire

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/politics/donald-trump-joe-biden-cnn-poll/index.html

CNN poll?

Tell me how

TexasTornado wrote: »

CNN poll?

Alternative?

Quin_Dub

TexasTornado wrote: »

CNN poll?

Tell me how wrote: »

Alternative?

How about Rasmussen , Trump favourite pollster?

The latest national telephone and online survey finds Biden leading President Trump 51% to 43% among Likely U.S. Voters. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate. Another three percent (3%) are undecided.

8 point lead to Biden with only 3% undecided.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

eire4 wrote: »

This is a total canard that the polls got things wrong in 2016. Entering the final week of the 2016 election of the final 13 national polls they had Clinton in the lead by an average of 3.1%. The final result Clinton won the vote by 2.1% a difference well within the margin of error. Since of course the American system does not let the voters decide who their president is she of course lost in the electoral college. But the polls themselves were not off by any significant margin at all.

Okay, we'll see...

dark crystal

TexasTornado wrote: »

CNN poll?

Here's a Fox News poll for ya:

https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-biden-tops-trump-among-likely-voters-in-key-states

MeMen2_MoRi_

The death knell for Donnie.. no more money for Americans full steam ahead with the SCOTUS pick...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313551794623127552?s=19

froog

it's a massive lead. almost every poll agrees. in contrast, hilary was just about 5 point ahead throughout october. and she actually won the popular vote.

Kidchameleon

Billy Mays wrote: »

The Transmitter-in-Chief

What a disaster he is

Who this poor guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States

On January 20, the first report of a COVID-19 case in the U.S. came in a man who returned on January 15 from visiting family in Wuhan, China, to his home in Snohomish County, Washington.

Quantum Erasure

eire4 wrote: »

...Since of course the American system does not let the voters decide who their president is ...

The voters decide, through their states, who becomes president. That's as bad as saying Sinn Fein 'won' the general election...

mcmoustache

eire4 wrote: »

This is a total canard that the polls got things wrong in 2016. Entering the final week of the 2016 election of the final 13 national polls they had Clinton in the lead by an average of 3.1%. The final result Clinton won the vote by 2.1% a difference well within the margin of error. Since of course the American system does not let the voters decide who their president is she of course lost in the electoral college. But the polls themselves were not off by any significant margin at all.

We need a bot for every time someone repeats the whole "The polls were wrong in 2016" nonsense. It's been debunked countless times and yet it's stated as fact almost daily and often by the posters to whom it's been pointed out before. You have to wonder what kind of "information" they're consuming that would be pushing out facts and replacing them with alternative facts.

Brian?

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The polls were shown to be heavily biased against trump in 2016, there's no reason to expect that won't be the case again this time around.

Polls tend to include far more people who are politically engaged than not, which when you're talking about populist type movements like trump/brexit etc... this can lead to very misleading results.

A lot of the people who will vote trump, are not political... they are mostly people who are often completely disenfranchised from the system. They are essentially ghosts when it comes to many of these polls... but they'll emerge from the shadows on voting day. And that is ultimately when it matters the most to get involved in the process. Particularly if they see trump trailing in the polls - that will be extra motivation to vote!

It happened in brexit, it happened in the uk elections, it even happened in our own elections too.

Like I said, if you rely too heavily on those polls... you will very likely be setting yourselves up for a big shock. They are nowhere near as reliable as some of you seem to think they are!

The polls weren't biased against Trump in 2016. Every state result was in the margin for error.

Most pollsters have adjusted their methodology from 2016 to take in those results. Fivethirtyeight have calculated it into their model. Trump is in serious electoral trouble.

It won't be a complete shock if he wins, he has a 1 in 5 chance. It'll be a surprise though.

mcmoustache

Brian? wrote: »

Get away with what exactly???

That's just the daily ladlad chopped video post. You won't get a response. He just posts a shíte video and legs it.

relax carry on

Sorolla wrote: »

Let us get this thread back on track again

I think he will win in a landslide.
It will be a very special victory - a most beautiful thing.

He will win because he did make America great again.

Let us not underestimate what he has achieved.

Much better trade deals with the EU, Japan and yes also China.

Obama and Bush always complained about the unfavorable trade deals but never did anything to change the conditions because they believed it was not possible to change the conditions.

With these improved trade deals, Trump has significantly reduced the trade deficits with the trading partners of the US.

Trump has brought employment back into the most poorest areas of America.

Hundreds of thousands of coal miners lost their jobs when Obama signed up to the Paris climate deal.

Trump tore up this agreement and the miners are back at work again.
These guys used to vote Democrat before switching to Trump and he delivered on his promise to bring back the jobs.

They will all vote Trump.

During Trumps time in office he created more jobs than any President before him - under his watch unemployment dropped to 3%

The stock markets hit record highs

Ask anyone if they have more money in their pockets during Trumps presidency and they will all answer yes (Democrats included)

The Covid-19 virus was unexpected and destroyed a lot of these good things.

America will once again be great.
Only Trump has the vision and determination to make this happen

He is the most brave president of all time.

I'm guessing you are being sarcastic? It's so hard to tell with Trump supporters what bits of the con they believe.

Quin_Dub

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Okay, we'll see...

Fundamentally , if the National polls are 3% or less in Bidens favour , Trump is absolutely in the hunt to win the Electoral college.

See below from this article

POPULAR VOTE MARGIN SCENARIOS BIDEN’S CHANCES OF WINNING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

Biden +6 to Biden +7 >99%
Biden +5 to Biden +6 98%
Biden +4 to Biden +5 93%
Biden +3 to Biden +4 77%
Biden +2 to Biden +3 54%
Biden +1 to Biden +2 29%
TIE to Biden +1 11%
Trump +1 to TIE 3%
Trump +2 to Trump +1 <1%

So , any margin of victory below about 3% for Biden , Trump is 50:50 or better to win overall.

Which explains his win in 2016 , Clinton won the national vote by 2.1% , giving her only a ~35% chance of winning the ball game , even at the 3% level from the polling , she still only had somewhere around a 60% chance of winning.

However , with the polls where they are now , with Biden leading by an average of 8.7% , a Biden win is essentially a lock , a greater than 99% probability.

Even if the polls are wrong by 50% and Biden is really only leading by a little over 4% or so , he still has a ~93% chance of winning the Electoral college.

The data is clear - unless he gets to 2%-3% Nationally , Trump is likely to lose and the further above 5% it remains, the earlier the fat lady will break into song.

mcmoustache

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Who this poor guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States

On January 20, the first report of a COVID-19 case in the U.S. came in a man who returned on January 15 from visiting family in Wuhan, China, to his home in Snohomish County, Washington.

No. The one who knows he that he has it, refuses to take basic precautions to stop its spread and has now put staff staffers and military leadership into quarantine. He's got the White House riddled with it. All of this when he has all the information resources at his disposal that some gobshíte traveling back from Wuhan did not.

MeMen2_MoRi_

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

The death knell for Donnie.. no more money for Americans full steam ahead with the SCOTUS pick...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313551794623127552?s=19

Just to add..

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/1313558875132571653?s=19

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1313559273310388226?s=19

But, yeah the SCOTUS.. they need to get that to "own" the libs..

Tell me how

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

"These beautiful young ladies, I wanna see you dancin when you're 4 years old (or 2?)"

Creepy joe strikes again!

I'm sorry, but where is this man's self awareness of what is coming out of his own mouth? His mind is not sharp enough, people can clearly see he is slipping mentally.

Anyone who thinks this man might have a questionable character around young children, is simply going to hear those words... and see a creepy old man drooling over little children.

Whether you like it or not, that's exactly how this will come across to many voters!

HUGE foot in mouth moment from Biden!

'.......four years older.......'

It's plain to hear in the video. Suggest you delete/edit your post as it reflects poorly on you.

eire4

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

The voters decide, through their states, who becomes president. That's as bad as saying Sinn Fein 'won' the general election...

Stop it now you know what I was saying is that the American voters do not directly elect their president that the electoral college does that instead and as we have seen twice in recent history the electoral college overturned the decision of the voters nationally.

Quin_Dub

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

"These beautiful young ladies, I wanna see you dancin when you're 4 years old (or 2?)"

Creepy joe strikes again!

I'm sorry, but where is this man's self awareness of what is coming out of his own mouth? His mind is not sharp enough, people can clearly see he is slipping mentally.

Anyone who thinks this man might have a questionable character around young children, is simply going to hear those words... and see a creepy old man drooling over little children.

Whether you like it or not, that's exactly how this will come across to many voters!

HUGE foot in mouth moment from Biden!

The "girls" in question are all College age if you actually watch the video and as I point out , the context of the comment is , "Thanks for dancing , I'll see you again in 4 years for the next Election"

A sneakily edited 16 second clip is just that , sneaky.

Not denying it's smart (but utterly without conscience or morals) Social Media manipulation , but that's all it is - Manipulation and the text book definition of "Fake News".

I recommend people watch "The Social Dilemma" on Netflix if you can. Really gives insight into how this stuff gets amplified into peoples Social Media consumption.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The "girls" in question are all College age if you actually watch the video and as I point out , the context of the comment is , "Thanks for dancing , I'll see you again in 4 years for the next Election"

A sneakily edited 16 second clip is just that , sneaky.

Not denying it's smart (but utterly without conscience or morals) Social Media manipulation , but that's all it is - Manipulation and the text book definition of "Fake News".

I recommend people watch "The Social Dilemma" on Netflix if you can. Really gives insight into how this stuff gets amplified into peoples Social Media consumption.

Really, college age?

That is pretty sneaky alright.

I'll delete my comment so. Genuinely thought he said 4 years old initially tbh.

My bad.

Quin_Dub

Trump now claiming to be "Symptom Free"

President Donald Trump reported no symptoms of the coronavirus Tuesday following his first night out of the hospital, the White House physician said.

“This morning the President’s team of physicians met with him in the Residence,” Dr. Sean Conley said in a brief, nonspecific memo, the latest report on Trump’s progress battling Covid-19.

“He had a restful first night at home, and today he reports no symptoms,” Conley wrote.

Some sharp ass-covering wordsmithing there from Conley.

HE Reported no Symptoms , not the Doctors?

As we'd say round here - He did , yeah.

MeMen2_MoRi_

The stock market after the deal fell through..

https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1313570159051911169?s=19

Will he see this as a bad thing, or meh the stocks will recover in a week..

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Brian? wrote: »

The polls weren't biased against Trump in 2016. Every state result was in the margin for error.

Most pollsters have adjusted their methodology from 2016 to take in those results. Fivethirtyeight have calculated it into their model. Trump is in serious electoral trouble.

It won't be a complete shock if he wins, he has a 1 in 5 chance. It'll be a surprise though.

Hmmm, I bet they have... :rolleyes:

The pollsters always think they've got their angles covered, then everyone acts in complete dismay when the results don't go how they thought.

Pollsters are human. And they can interpret the numbers in more than one way, without their analyses necessarily being "wrong" per se. But it might very well still be biased.

But I still maintain that they do not give a completely accurate picture of things in these particular type of populist movements. They target mostly people who are politically engaged.

You can't engage with people who do not want to be engaged with... disenfranchised citizens that live on the fringes. Trump pulls in far more of these ghosts than you would ever get in normal run of the mill elections.

That's why we keep getting these "shock" results... these polling methods are designed for your bog standard run of the mill type votes. Trump has introduced chaos into the mix.

But like I said, we'll see what happens... I think some people are in for another shock in a few weeks.

bennyineire

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Hmmm, I bet they have... :rolleyes:

The pollsters always think they've got their angles covered, then everyone acts in complete dismay when the results don't go how they thought.

Pollsters are human. And they can interpret the numbers in more than one way, without their analyses necessarily being "wrong" per se. But it might very well still be biased.

But I still maintain that they do not give a completely accurate picture of things in these particular type of populist movements. They target mostly people who are politically engaged.

You can't engaged with people who do not want to be engaged with... disenfranchised citizens that live on the fringes. Trump pulls in far more of these ghosts than you would ever get in normal run of the mill elections.

That's why we keep getting these "shock" results... these polling methods are designed for your bog standard run of the mill type votes. Trump has introduced chaos into the mix.

But like I said, we'll see what happens... I think some people are in for another shock in a few weeks.

I think some people can't accept reality even when it's slapping them in the face

Kermit.de.frog

Trump's time is up anyway - he knows it. It's all about dragging as many people down with him now - hence the crazier than usual.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Hmmm, I bet they have... :rolleyes:

The pollsters always think they've got their angles covered, then everyone acts in complete dismay when the results don't go how they thought.

Pollsters are human. And they can interpret the numbers in more than one way, without their analyses necessarily being "wrong" per se. But it might very well still be biased.

But I still maintain that they do not give a completely accurate picture of things in these particular type of populist movements. They target mostly people who are politically engaged.

You can't engaged with people who do not want to be engaged with... disenfranchised citizens that live on the fringes. Trump pulls in far more of these ghosts than you would ever get in normal run of the mill elections.

That's why we keep getting these "shock" results... these polling methods are designed for your bog standard run of the mill type votes. Trump has introduced chaos into the mix.

But like I said, we'll see what happens... I think some people are in for another shock in a few weeks.

You are seriously missing a lot of context with regards 2020 Vs 2016..

He isn't the new guy on the block, he isn't against Hillary, he has refilled the swamp, no Mexico didn't pay for the wall and never will, the Billions in tariffs, yeah China also didn't pay them, Americans paid for them, some with the loss of jobs, covid19 wasn't in the picture, he and the GOP have just pulled out of the stimulus 2.0 weeks out from election day, loss of jobs on the horizon..

The list is bigger..

Quin_Dub

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Hmmm, I bet they have... :rolleyes:

The pollsters always think they've got their angles covered, then everyone acts in complete dismay when the results don't go how they thought.

Pollsters are human. And they can interpret the numbers in more than one way, without their analyses necessarily being "wrong" per se. But it might very well still be biased.

But I still maintain that they do not give a completely accurate picture of things in these particular type of populist movements. They target mostly people who are politically engaged.

You can't engaged with people who do not want to be engaged with... disenfranchised citizens that live on the fringes. Trump pulls in far more of these ghosts than you would ever get in normal run of the mill elections.

That's why we keep getting these "shock" results... these polling methods are designed for your bog standard run of the mill type votes. Trump has introduced chaos into the mix.

But like I said, we'll see what happens... I think some people are in for another shock in a few weeks.

Jesus F**king Christ - For the umteenth time - Trump winning WAS NOT A SHOCK.

Yes , The Media were shocked , Yes , a lot of voters were shocked.

But the Statisticians that work for the pollsters were absolutely categorically NOT SHOCKED.

Trumps win was absolutely within the parameters of the data - As I said in my earlier post , they had Clinton winning the popular vote by ~3% which gave her about a 60% chance of winning , meaning Trump had about a 40% chance of winning . She actually won by 2.1% , within the Margin of Error and that gave Trump a ~70% chance of winning.. And guess what , he did

A Horse winning at better than 1:2 odds isn't exactly a shock now is it??

Right now , Trumps odds are about 33:1 , still possible but it's a serious outside bet.

He could of course still win - What odds would you have gotten on Sunday Morning on the actual final results for the Liverpool and Man U games for example?