Sienna Deep Rite wrote: » All Don needs to do if focus the high energy of his Tw posting, into deep breathing, particualy at the 'Day 10' point of the CCP Virus. Not out of the woods yet, but is kicking fallen branches out of the way while heading towards a clearning.
Sienna Deep Rite wrote: » Waiting for live markets, to avail of x10 again, or for Joe to start bleeding out of the eyes again on live CNN TV, Joe had a couple of brain aneurysm in the past and will be an elderly 78 by November, a dangerous aul age, so you're deep in the elder Joe? Another market of interest is KH @120+, she's on her tippy toes waiting to take over from the stand in, could easily push him down some stairs or something, very power hungry and focused.
Deleted User wrote: » How much are you in for on Trump?
CNN)Joe Biden's advantage over President Donald Trump has expanded and the former vice president now holds his widest lead of the cycle with less than a month remaining before Election Day, according to a new nationwide CNN Poll conducted by SSRS. Among likely voters, 57% say they back Biden and 41% Trump in the poll that was conducted entirely after the first debate and mostly after the President's coronavirus infection was made public.
Democratic nominee Joe Biden leads President Trump by 12 points in a new national survey from Rasmussen, the conservative outlet that has historically found the race to be closer than other pollsters. Among likely voters, Biden takes 52 percent support in the latest Rasmussen survey, compared to 40 percent for Trump. Trump's collapse in the Rasmussen poll is significant because the president has often pointed to the survey as an example of how he was performing stronger than other polls give him credit for. Biden is bolstered in the latest survey by an 18-point advantage among independent voters.The past three Rasmussen polls have found Biden stretch his lead from 1 point to 8 points to 12 points over the course of a period that included the first presidential debate, Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, and the president falling ill with the coronavirus. In that time, Trump’s job approval rating has fallen from 53 percent to 44 percent.
The president this morning says, ‘I feel great!’ His physical exam and vital signs, including oxygen saturation and respiratory rate, all remained stable and in normal range. He’s now been fever free for more than four days, symptom free for over 24 hours, and has not needed, nor received, any supplemental oxygen since initial hospitalisation
Sienna Deep Rite wrote: » It gets better for the Donald, via his Dr. Also continues to shorten on the odds with traditional bookies, 2.6 avg, a 2.5, only the skypeople have a wider 2.88, also accessible for accas. If not mistaken, VP debate takes place in 5hrs or so, but can't see anything exciting happening nor any drama, unless KH overplays the minority cards.
greenfield21 wrote: » Looking at new voter registrations I can't see biden winning florida or NC. PA the same.
Democratic nominee Joe Biden has opened up an 11-point lead over President Trump in Florida, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday. The poll shows Biden garnering 51 percent of the vote in the Sunshine State compared to Trump’s 40 percent. That’s a remarkably wide margin for a state where elections are typically decided by only a few points. Other recent surveys out of Florida show a much tighter race. A Quinnipiac poll of the state released early last month showed Biden with only a 3-point advantage over Trump. Quinnipiac polling released Wednesday also showed Biden leading Trump 54-41 percent in Pennsylvania and 50-45 percent in Iowa."In varying degrees, three critical states in three very different parts of the country come to the same ominous conclusion. The president's hopes for reelection are growing dimmer by the day," said Tim Malloy, a polling analyst at Quinnipiac University.
Muahahaha wrote: » I wouldnt be so sure about Florida, Trump only won there by 100k votes in 2016 and his response to the virus has not gone down well with the elderly population living there.
Deleted User wrote: » Virtual debate has been proposed by commission in the interest of public safety. Trump has rejected the proposal so effectively cancelling the debate. Optically it just seems like his way of getting out of it.
greenfield21 wrote: » Yeah but the republicans have registered so many new voters in Florida- halved the Dem advantage to about 150k. This along with a high Repub turnout...looks to me like an an uphill battle for Biden.
ebbsy wrote: » A quick question for ye. The polls were completely wrong in 2016. Why should I believe them now.
ebbsy wrote: » The polls were completely wrong in 2016.
ebbsy wrote: » Why should I believe them now.
Brussels Sprout wrote: » Good question. Lets look at your post in 2 parts: Ok first off, the miss in 2016. Nationally the polls did quite well then. The Real Clear Politics overall average was Clinton + 4.5% going in to election day. When all the votes were counted she was only up by 2.1%. So they missed by 2.4% which is respectable enough. The big problem was in the state-level polls, particularly in the rust-belt "blue wall" states that were crucial in swinging the election to Trump. They all underestimated Trump's performanceWisconsin - polls off by 7.2% Iowa - polls off by 6.5% Minnesota - polls off by 4.7% Ohio - polls off by 4.6% Michigan - polls off by 3.7% Pennsylvania - polls off by 2.6% They say that election polling is as much art as science. When you take a poll ideally you would get a randomised sample that truly reflects the population that you are trying to study. In the real world, this is practically impossible to do. Some groups in society are easier to poll than others. Pollsters often find it easier to access seniors, who are more likely to answer their phones for example but have a difficult time polling young, male minorities. This means that you end up having skewed samples. In order to correct for this pollsters introduce a technique called weighting. Effectively what this is, is they dilute the results of groups who are over-represented in their samples and amplify groups who are under-represented. It seems that in 2016 in the states mentioned above they under-represented groups who turned out in force for Trump, specifically, white voters without a college degree. In fact I don't believe they even weighted for education levels in 2016. Another issue was that because the two candidates were disliked by a large number of voters polls were showing larger than normal undecided. In the end this group broke for Trump but that wasn't something that the pollsters had factored in. Pollsters are always learning from their past mistakes and correcting their methods for future polls. They're unlikely to make the same mistakes as 2016. 2 things that are different specifically:Voter's education levels are now taken as best practice and used to weight polls There are far less undecideds this year - which means far less unknown quantities that could end up breaking for one candidate or the other It is important to finish by saying that it is entirely possible that they could end up making some new mistakes. I think the cognitive error that people make though is that people think "Trump under-performed in the polls in 2016 therefore that's likely to be the case again". In reality though that's not the case since the pollsters will have learned from the errors they made 4 years ago. More realistically any errors this year could be in either direction. it's as likely that they are under-representing a Trump win as they are a Biden blow-out victory.
Atlantis50 wrote: » Could of course still lose this bet but I'm growing more confident by the day, the concern now being Biden getting over 55% :eek:
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/282101dc2976956f9dfc87f7a2ef2413.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/11f397efbb618f280f346771bb290fe0.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbba4c22aa1d352d2cdbb076e36aea8c.svg)
