US Presidential Election 2020

DK224 · 05-10-2020 8:20am

Foxtrol wrote: »

Very different race this time. In 2016 there were:
- a lot more undecideds
- people weren't as set in their choice
- Clinton had much higher negatives
- poll models have been changed
- there is a decent chance of these polls are even undercounting Biden support (under representing youth vote due to their normal low rates that might change)

Polls aren't guarantees, they currently give Trump around a 20% chance which is still pretty likely. The polls were nearly spot on regarding the national vote in 2016 and there were only outside the margin of error in a handful of states.

The premise behind a lot of these polls are for a huge voter turnout (especially youth) for Biden. That has been touted by many commentators and polls but if you throw into the mix that a huge number of colleges are closed and that a smaller number of students are on campus to vote (mostly democrat), which could be big in some close states.

Also, if you drill down to the crosstabs there is a few things that are showing up consistently the past few weeks. There is a 20-30 point voter enthusiasm gap between likely Biden & Trump voters. It is not the same electorate this year Trump is gaining close to 5% & 10% of the Afro American and Hispanic vote compared to 2016. If these figures come close to holding on election day then even with the loss of a large % of Suburban White Women the Dems are in trouble.

Brian? · 05-10-2020 8:57am

DK224 wrote: »

The premise behind a lot of these polls are for a huge voter turnout (especially youth) for Biden. That has been touted by many commentators and polls but if you throw into the mix that a huge number of colleges are closed and that a smaller number of students are on campus to vote (mostly democrat), which could be big in some close states.

Also, if you drill down to the crosstabs there is a few things that are showing up consistently the past few weeks. There is a 20-30 point voter enthusiasm gap between likely Biden & Trump voters. It is not the same electorate this year Trump is gaining close to 5% & 10% of the Afro American and Hispanic vote compared to 2016. If these figures come close to holding on election day then even with the loss of a large % of Suburban White Women the Dems are in trouble.

All of the above us factored in to this model:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

Which gives Trump a 19% chance of winning. It’ll be an upset if he wins, but not a massive one.

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 10:02am

DK224 wrote: »

The premise behind a lot of these polls are for a huge voter turnout (especially youth) for Biden. That has been touted by many commentators and polls but if you throw into the mix that a huge number of colleges are closed and that a smaller number of students are on campus to vote (mostly democrat), which could be big in some close states.

Also, if you drill down to the crosstabs there is a few things that are showing up consistently the past few weeks. There is a 20-30 point voter enthusiasm gap between likely Biden & Trump voters. It is not the same electorate this year Trump is gaining close to 5% & 10% of the Afro American and Hispanic vote compared to 2016. If these figures come close to holding on election day then even with the loss of a large % of Suburban White Women the Dems are in trouble.

Does that not just mean that they'll vote in their home location?

Unless all students live in California or some other Hard Blue state I don't see how this is necessarily a negative - In fact it might tighten some of the more rural area if the (typically) more liberal youth vote is there rather than in the blue cities where Colleges are.

breezy1985 · 05-10-2020 10:55am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Does that not just mean that they'll vote in their home location?

Unless all students live in California or some other Hard Blue state I don't see how this is necessarily a negative - In fact it might tighten some of the more rural area if the (typically) more liberal youth vote is there rather than in the blue cities where Colleges are.

I don't know about the US but in Ireland don't most students tend to vote in their home county rather than their college one. In the UK kids in London seem to be pretty savvy about where to vote depending on where it's needed more

DK224 · 05-10-2020 11:23am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Does that not just mean that they'll vote in their home location?

Unless all students live in California or some other Hard Blue state I don't see how this is necessarily a negative - In fact it might tighten some of the more rural area if the (typically) more liberal youth vote is there rather than in the blue cities where Colleges are.

I was reading an article last week on the Oregon 4th Congressional District race where Peter DeFazio the democratic candidates team were lamenting that they expect a huge drop off of the college vote.

They predicted that half of the college vote that they received in 2016 at Oregon and Oregon St off the table due to closed campuses.

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 12:14pm

DK224 wrote: »

I was reading an article last week on the Oregon 4th Congressional District race where Peter DeFazio the democratic candidates team were lamenting that they expect a huge drop off of the college vote.

They predicted that half of the college vote that they received in 2016 at Oregon and Oregon St off the table due to closed campuses.

I can see an impact at a local vote level , but most Students attend college in their home state due to the massive difference in cost between the two options , so while there might be an impact for a few house districts I can't see it having an impact at State/National level.

But look - Lots of things about this election are going to be massively different to any previous one , so who knows?

DK224 · 05-10-2020 12:41pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I can see an impact at a local vote level , but most Students attend college in their home state due to the massive difference in cost between the two options , so while there might be an impact for a few house districts I can't see it having an impact at State/National level.

But look - Lots of things about this election are going to be massively different to any previous one , so who knows?

I think the fact colleges are closed could mean they may not vote in the huge numbers that are being predicted because of the grassroot motivation there would be on campus to get out the vote.

But as you say there is so many variables that this is an extremely difficult to predict with confidence

Zubeneschamali · 05-10-2020 2:13pm

Brian? wrote: »

Which gives Trump a 19% chance of winning.

Yes, about the same odds as dying of Covid19.

Foxtrol · 05-10-2020 2:27pm

DK224 wrote: »

The premise behind a lot of these polls are for a huge voter turnout (especially youth) for Biden. That has been touted by many commentators and polls but if you throw into the mix that a huge number of colleges are closed and that a smaller number of students are on campus to vote (mostly democrat), which could be big in some close states.

Most colleges in red/purple states haven't been closed. It is in heavily blue states that they're closed.

In general campus voting is a disaster in those states, with lines nearly as bad as minority areas. The opening up of mail voting could help even more with turnout.

Also, if you drill down to the crosstabs there is a few things that are showing up consistently the past few weeks. There is a 20-30 point voter enthusiasm gap between likely Biden & Trump voters.

Can you point to the 20 - 30 point difference in voter enthusiasm? Are you quoting the 'enthusiasm for candidate x' numbers, as if so I think that is a poor one to base your opinion on. When I've dug into polls it generally shows Trump far ahead in that number but those for 'how enthusiastic are you to vote' and 'likelihood to vote' are much closer between both groups of voters.

It is not the same electorate this year Trump is gaining close to 5% & 10% of the Afro American and Hispanic vote compared to 2016. If these figures come close to holding on election day then even with the loss of a large % of Suburban White Women the Dems are in trouble.

What about the large % of over 65's that look to have left Trump? They make up a sizeable element of 2 swings states and tend to vote in high numbers.

As you said in a later post it is still very hard to predict with any confidence, giving Trump a ~20% chance of winning like he has now isn't predicting with confidence, it is just pointing to what is likely. It is about as likely as Biden blowing Trump out of the water with near historic numbers

DK224 · 05-10-2020 2:47pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

Most colleges in red/purple states haven't been closed. It is in heavily blue states that they're closed.

In general campus voting is a disaster in those states, with lines nearly as bad as minority areas. The opening up of mail voting could help even more with turnout.

Can you point to the 20 - 30 point difference in voter enthusiasm? Are you quoting the 'enthusiasm for candidate x' numbers, as if so I think that is a poor one to base your opinion on. When I've dug into polls it generally shows Trump far ahead in that number but those for 'how enthusiastic are you to vote' and 'likelihood to vote' are much closer between both groups of voters.

What about the large % of over 65's that look to have left Trump? They make up a sizeable element of 2 swings states and tend to vote in high numbers.

As you said in a later post it is still very hard to predict with any confidence, giving Trump a ~20% chance of winning like he has now isn't predicting with confidence, it is just pointing to what is likely. It is about as likely as Biden blowing Trump out of the water with near historic numbers

Instead of getting a fine tooth comb out and disagreeing with your opinions one by one, i'll save us some time and ask for your prediction of Electoral College, Senate, House and popular vote?

I'll go Trump 320
Reps hold the Senate 52- 48
Dems holding the House by 10-15 seats
Biden winning the popular by 2-3million votes

We can come back on November 4th or more likely a week later and figure out which one of us was wrong!

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 2:59pm

DK224 wrote: »

Instead of getting a fine tooth comb out and disagreeing with your opinions one by one, i'll save us some time and ask for your prediction of Electoral College, Senate, House and popular vote?

I'll go Trump 320
Reps hold the Senate 52- 48
Dems holding the House by 10-15 seats
Biden winning the popular by 2-3million votes

We can come back on November 4th or more likely a week later and figure out which one of us was wrong!

My current Prediction?

Biden - 291, Clintons 232 from 2016 plus AZ , PA , WI and MI
Senate 51-49 Democrat
House - Dems to hold with a small increase , maybe 5 seats or so

droidus · 05-10-2020 3:17pm

DK224 wrote: »

Instead of getting a fine tooth comb out and disagreeing with your opinions one by one, i'll save us some time and ask for your prediction of Electoral College, Senate, House and popular vote?

I'll go Trump 320
Reps hold the Senate 52- 48
Dems holding the House by 10-15 seats
Biden winning the popular by 2-3million votes

We can come back on November 4th or more likely a week later and figure out which one of us was wrong!

Id be curious to see the work behind this. It would require trump to win all of the current toss up and lean GOP states, which brings him up to (a generous) 260. To get 320 he'd have to take PA, MN, MI, WN, NH/NV as well... you're basically predicting a big improvement on 2016 when pretty much all the polling, fundamentals and circumstances point to the opposite result.

DK224 · 05-10-2020 3:32pm

droidus wrote: »

Id be curious to see the work behind this. It would require trump to win all of the current toss up and lean GOP states, which brings him up to (a generous) 260. To get 320 he'd have to take PA, MN, MI, WN, NH/NV as well... you're basically predicting a big improvement on 2016 when pretty much all the polling, fundamentals and circumstances point to the opposite result.

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 3:43pm

DK224 wrote: »

Not sure I can see that scenario playing out.

That requires him to take NV and NH as well as Maine from the Clinton column from 2016. I just do not see him doing better than he did last time out.

If he wins, it will be by the narrowest of margins.

I can see a scenario where he holds on to AZ and one of MI/WI/PA.

Depending on which of the Rustbelts he holds that would put him at between 270(holding WI) to a max of 280 (Holding PA).

I just don't see a path above 300 for him.

Water John · 05-10-2020 3:43pm

Picking Nevada and Pennsylvania, Biden V Trump is rated at over 80 against less than 20 in both states. You may wish it to be otherwise but the odds are against it and unlike 2016 there are very few undecideds to be picked up.

droidus · 05-10-2020 4:04pm

Yeah, given current polling and all the variables, this is far more likely, and also quite generous to Trump. I think its very possible Biden will hit 340+

DK224 · 05-10-2020 4:14pm

Water John wrote: »

Picking Nevada and Pennsylvania, Biden V Trump is rated at over 80 against less than 20 in both states. You may wish it to be otherwise but the odds are against it and unlike 2016 there are very few undecideds to be picked up.

I don't have a dog in this hunt so "wishing" Trump will win states isn't my angle here, as I said on this topic a few months back my angle has always been that the polls are going to fall short again.

I think there is a lack of enthusiasm for Biden, a shy Trump voter effect and I think a 10% rise in Hispanic, 5% rise in Afro Americans for Trump will offset losses and bring a lot of toss up states into play. The Trump ground game is far more efficient than 2016 and if you study individual states their voter registration figures are outpacing Dems

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 4:25pm

DK224 wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this hunt so "wishing" Trump will win states isn't my angle here, as I said on this topic a few months back my angle has always been that the polls are going to fall short again.

I think there is a lack of enthusiasm for Biden, a shy Trump voter effect and I think a 10% rise in Hispanic, 5% rise in Afro Americans for Trump will offset losses and bring a lot of toss up states into play. The Trump ground game is far more efficient than 2016 and if you study individual states their voter registration figures are outpacing Dems

Perhaps - The NYT covered this in a recent article

And the basic message was - If the polls were as wrong as they were in 2016 on a percentage swing basis , Biden still wins.

TOTALS BASED ON CURRENT POLLS* IF POLLS ARE AS OFF AS THEY WERE IN 2016
Electoral coll. 390 310
CURRENT POLLS IF POLLS ARE AS OFF AS THEY WERE IN 2016
Arizona Biden +3 Biden <1
Florida Biden +6 Biden +3
Michigan Biden +10 Biden +5
North Carolina Biden +3 Trump +1
Pennsylvania Biden +7 Biden +2
Wisconsin Biden +8 Biden <1
U.S. avg. Biden +9 Biden +7

Basically, in a "No-Toss ups" scenario , Biden is on 390 today , but if you shift the polls by the same percentages that they were off in 2016 to the final result , that still leaves Biden on 310.

There's also another article that I can't find right now that posited the same question against the polls vs. Final tallies for the last 3 Elections and in the case of 2008 and 2012 there would appear to have been a load of "shy Obama" voters as in both cases they understated the Democrat tallies.

Polls are always off by a little bit (but very rarely outside MoE) but they aren't consistently donwplaying one side or the other , they swing back and forth.

Given the methodology over-correction that a lot of pollsters did in the aftermath of 2016 there's about as much chance of them understating the Biden support levels as there is for Trump.

Igotadose · 05-10-2020 4:25pm

DK224 wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this hunt so "wishing" Trump will win states isn't my angle here, as I said on this topic a few months back my angle has always been that the polls are going to fall short again.

I think there is a lack of enthusiasm for Biden, a shy Trump voter effect and I think a 10% rise in Hispanic, 5% rise in Afro Americans for Trump will offset losses and bring a lot of toss up states into play. The Trump ground game is far more efficient than 2016 and if you study individual states their voter registration figures are outpacing Dems

I'm interested in why you think the ground game is more efficient in 2020 than 2016? Enthusiasm and ratings are record lows for the #IMPOTUS. As Steve "Lincoln Project" Schmidt pointed out last week, Biden has historic leads at this point, bigger than Clinton v. Dole in 1996. So, I don't see how, having spent nearly $1bn (probably at $1bn now as that reports a bit old), for a huge poll deficit when the #IMPOTUS has the huge advantage of the Presidential megaphone, that they're more efficient. Feels like lazier and more inept, keeping the #IMPOTUS happy by putting him in front of crowds (some of which are hired to stand behind him).

Also, I think "Afro American" is dated usage. African Americans is current. Afro Americans is out of the '60s.

DK224 · 05-10-2020 4:37pm

Igotadose wrote: »

I'm interested in why you think the ground game is more efficient in 2020 than 2016? Enthusiasm and ratings are record lows for the #IMPOTUS. As Steve "Lincoln Project" Schmidt pointed out last week, Biden has historic leads at this point, bigger than Clinton v. Dole in 1996. So, I don't see how, having spent nearly $1bn (probably at $1bn now as that reports a bit old), for a huge poll deficit when the #IMPOTUS has the huge advantage of the Presidential megaphone, that they're more efficient. Feels like lazier and more inept, keeping the #IMPOTUS happy by putting him in front of crowds (some of which are hired to stand behind him).

Also, I think "Afro American" is dated usage. African Americans is current. Afro Americans is out of the '60s.

I apologise if I offended anybody with that was certainly not intended.

droidus · 05-10-2020 4:37pm

DK224 wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this hunt so "wishing" Trump will win states isn't my angle here, as I said on this topic a few months back my angle has always been that the polls are going to fall short again.

I think there is a lack of enthusiasm for Biden, a shy Trump voter effect and I think a 10% rise in Hispanic, 5% rise in Afro Americans for Trump will offset losses and bring a lot of toss up states into play. The Trump ground game is far more efficient than 2016 and if you study individual states their voter registration figures are outpacing Dems

These are at least semi-valid points, but I think almost all of it is over egged. Its also missing out the senior swing to Biden, the independent swing to Biden, the much lower number of undecideds, campaign funding disparities, the changes in polling since 2016, the lack of third party candidates etc... plus the voter registration situation is far more nuanced than you suggest https://www.cbsnews.com/news/voter-registration-republicans-swing-states-narrow-gap/

Your scenario assumes that Trump will essentially get a series of unlikely outcomes all in his favour, when virtually all of the data points towards the opposite conclusion. It is of course possible that Trump will scrape it, but I think that would be more down to voter suppression and the courts as opposed to demographic and campaign factors.

Data isnt everything of course, but my gut feeling is that this will be a blowout for Biden (barring unforeseen events ofc).

DK224 · 05-10-2020 4:40pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Perhaps - The NYT covered this in a recent article

And the basic message was - If the polls were as wrong as they were in 2016 on a percentage swing basis , Biden still wins.

TOTALS BASED ON CURRENT POLLS* IF POLLS ARE AS OFF AS THEY WERE IN 2016
Electoral coll. 390 310
CURRENT POLLS IF POLLS ARE AS OFF AS THEY WERE IN 2016
Arizona Biden +3 Biden <1
Florida Biden +6 Biden +3
Michigan Biden +10 Biden +5
North Carolina Biden +3 Trump +1
Pennsylvania Biden +7 Biden +2
Wisconsin Biden +8 Biden <1
U.S. avg. Biden +9 Biden +7

Basically, in a "No-Toss ups" scenario , Biden is on 390 today , but if you shift the polls by the same percentages that they were off in 2016 to the final result , that still leaves Biden on 310.

There's also another article that I can't find right now that posited the same question against the polls vs. Final tallies for the last 3 Elections and in the case of 2008 and 2012 there would appear to have been a load of "shy Obama" voters as in both cases they understated the Democrat tallies.

Polls are always off by a little bit (but very rarely outside MoE) but they aren't consistently donwplaying one side or the other , they swing back and forth.

Given the methodology over-correction that a lot of pollsters did in the aftermath of 2016 there's about as much chance of them understating the Biden support levels as there is for Trump.

If you can find me a single poll in either 2016 or this years election that finds Trump with anywhere near the kind of leads that Clinton or Biden had I'd agree with you.

The polls have ALWAYS skewed far heavier in favour of both Clinton & Biden and have universally over estimated their lead.

marno21 · 05-10-2020 5:09pm

Prediction:

Biden 335-Trump 203 (2016 Dems + MI/WI/PA/AZ/FL/NC + NE-02 and ME-02)

Senate Dems 51-49 (Dems lose Arizona but pick up Maine, NC, Arizona, Colorado and Iowa, and one of Montana/SC/Georgia (Perdue)).

House Dems 242-193 (+7 on 2018 result for Dems)

droidus · 05-10-2020 5:10pm

marno21 wrote: »

Prediction:

Biden 335-Trump 203 (2016 Dems + MI/WI/PA/AZ/FL/NC + NE-02 and ME-02)

Senate Dems 51-49 (Dems lose Arizona but pick up Maine, NC, Arizona, Colorado and Iowa, and one of Montana/SC/Georgia (Perdue)).

House Dems 242-193 (+7 on 2018 result for Dems)

Yeah, thats inline with the economist model, which I think looks quite good.

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 5:11pm

DK224 wrote: »

If you can find me a single poll in either 2016 or this years election that finds Trump with anywhere near the kind of leads that Clinton or Biden had I'd agree with you.

The polls have ALWAYS skewed far heavier in favour of both Clinton & Biden and have universally over estimated their lead.

In 2016 , yes they did , however in both 2012 and 2008 the polling gave more to Romney/McCain than Obama in both cases,

Obama won by a larger margin then the polls predicted.

So the point is that just because the polls favoured Clinton over Trump in 2016 does not necessarily mean that they will automatically favour Biden over Trump in 2020.

Also , they really didn't "over-estimate" the Clinton lead , all the results were within the MoE for the polling , in fact in a lot of cases , Clinton did better than the polling suggested. What they got wrong was the distribution of the "undecided" bucket.

Take Michigan for example - The RCP Average had Clinton at 45.4% just prior to the Election Trump on 42% , Johnson on 4.8% and Stein on 2.3%.

It ended up with Clinton on 47% ,Trump on 47.3 , Johnson on 3.6 and Stein on 1.1.

So they didn't over-estimate Clinton , they over estimated the 3rd party candidates and how the undecided buckets shake out.

Clinton outperformed the poll by 3.5% , Trump by 12.6%

Compare that to today in Michigan

Biden is on 49.2% and Trump is on 44.

If the same Under/Over gets applied this time around , Biden gets to just shy of 51% and Trump closes the gap to 49.5% , but he still loses.

At this same stage in 2016 , Clinton had a larger lead than Biden (+7 compared to 5.2) however she was at 44.7% compared to Bidens 49.2.

Trump closed the gap in the last month , going from 37.3% to 42% in the final polling , but at no point in that whole time did Clintons numbers decline in fact she increased her numbers, closing at 45.4% in the polling.

Trumps gain was at the expense of 3rd party and by taking the undecided votes - Neither of which exist in sufficient numbers this time around.

To win this time Trump has to do something that he did not do in any Swing state the last time (with the exception of WI) which is to take vote share away from the Democratic candidate between now and Election day.

droidus · 05-10-2020 5:13pm

Yep. its entirely understandable to assume the worst given the shock of 2016, but the numbers dont support it.

Foxtrol · 05-10-2020 5:28pm

DK224 wrote: »

Instead of getting a fine tooth comb out and disagreeing with your opinions one by one, i'll save us some time and ask for your prediction of Electoral College, Senate, House and popular vote?

I'll go Trump 320
Reps hold the Senate 52- 48
Dems holding the House by 10-15 seats
Biden winning the popular by 2-3million votes

We can come back on November 4th or more likely a week later and figure out which one of us was wrong!

I find it much more interesting to have a discussion regarding how someone comes to their opinion rather than just throwing out what we think the result will be a month in advance.

Sure a person can pick the right horse to win a race but it isn't interesting to have a discussion with them about it in advance if they picked the horse because they liked the colour the jockey was wearing.

I believe the evidence you've cited for the likelihood of Trump winning at all, especially by the margins noted above, is at best flawed.

Tell me how · 05-10-2020 5:59pm

DK224 wrote: »

Instead of getting a fine tooth comb out and disagreeing with your opinions one by one, i'll save us some time and ask for your prediction of Electoral College, Senate, House and popular vote?

I'll go Trump 320
Reps hold the Senate 52- 48
Dems holding the House by 10-15 seats
Biden winning the popular by 2-3million votes

We can come back on November 4th or more likely a week later and figure out which one of us was wrong!

So, you essentially think that the same number of people are going to vote for Trump after seeing him in action for 4 years.

Having seen the lies.
Having seen no wall being built.
Having seen no alternative to Obamacare.
Having seen the US pulled out of the Paris Agreement.
Having seen Kim Jong Un toy with Donald.
Having seen Trump undermine efforts to restrict Iran accessing Nuclear Power.
Having seen Trump allow Saudi Arabia to murder and dismember a US citizen.
Having seen Trump show scant regard for the ultimate sacrifice paid by US soldiers.
Having seen Trump sow division between races in his own country.
Having seen Trump roll back on environmental protection measures in the US.
Having seen China gain an advantage in trade negotiations.
Having seen Russia offer bounties to Afghan militants to kill American Soldiers.
Having seen him impeached for offering a quid pro quo to impact a rival.
Having seen that he has only paid $1,500 in federal taxes while President.
Having seen him downplay a pandemic which has killed over 200K US citizens.

Do I understand you correctly?

DK224 · 05-10-2020 6:10pm

Tell me how wrote: »

So, you essentially think that the same number of people are going to vote for Trump after seeing him in action for 4 years.

Having seen the lies.
Having seen no wall being built.
Having seen no alternative to Obamacare.
Having seen the US pulled out of the Paris Agreement.
Having seen Kim Jong Un toy with Donald.
Having seen Trump undermine efforts to restrict Iran accessing Nuclear Power.
Having seen Trump allow Saudi Arabia to murder and dismember a US citizen.
Having seen Trump show scant regard for the ultimate sacrifice paid by US soldiers.
Having seen Trump sow division between races in his own country.
Having seen Trump roll back on environmental protection measures in the US.
Having seen China gain an advantage in trade negotiations.
Having seen Russia offer bounties to Afghan militants to kill American Soldiers.
Having seen him impeached for offering a quid pro quo to impact a rival.
Having seen that he has only paid $1,500 in federal taxes while President.
Having seen him downplay a pandemic which has killed over 200K US citizens.

Do I understand you correctly?

I think that cut and paste job should be aimed at the American voter and not me!

I'm purely saying how I think they will vote not how they should.

Foxtrol · 05-10-2020 6:55pm

DK224 wrote: »

I think that cut and paste job should be aimed at the American voter and not me!

I'm purely saying how I think they will vote not how they should.

Then just admit that you're pulling how you think they will vote out of your ass. You initially posted rationale which others have since poked holes in but you're doubling down.

You might end up guessing right but at this stage it seems like your opinion isn't based on anything of substance.

Water John · 05-10-2020 6:55pm

In Arizona the latest poll puts Biden 8% ahead with 6% undecided.

DK224 · 05-10-2020 7:06pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

Then just admit that you're pulling how you think they will vote out of your ass. You initially posted rationale which others have since poked holes in but you're doubling down.

You might end up guessing right but at this stage it seems like your opinion isn't based on anything of substance.

My basis for what I have said can be found above there's no need for the disrespectful post because you disagree with it.

Water John · 05-10-2020 7:10pm

You'd get good odds on that outcome, at this point.

Quin_Dub · 05-10-2020 7:14pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

Then just admit that you're pulling how you think they will vote out of your ass. You initially posted rationale which others have since poked holes in but you're doubling down.

You might end up guessing right but at this stage it seems like your opinion isn't based on anything of substance.

##Mod Note##

Dial it back please.

Play the ball , not the man.

Thanks

Foxtrol · 05-10-2020 7:31pm

DK224 wrote: »

My basis for what I have said can be found above there's no need for the disrespectful post because you disagree with it.

I meant that term in a cordial way, apologies if it came across differently.

You gave your basis but when I poked holes in it you refused to discuss the issues I raised with it. Several other posters have since then highlighted elements you appear you have ignored in your opinion but again you've refuse to engage them.

As I said already, I'd love to have discussion with someone who can support an opinion that Trump is more likely to win in a month's time, especially if like you they believe he will make gains on 2016. All I've seen so far on boards, including yourself, are people who throw out that opinion and refuse to justify it.

An Ciarraioch · 05-10-2020 8:30pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

I meant that term in a cordial way, apologies if it came across differently.

You gave your basis but when I poked holes in it you refused to discuss the issues I raised with it. Several other posters have since then highlighted elements you appear you have ignored in your opinion but again you've refuse to engage them.

As I said already, I'd love to have discussion with someone who can support an opinion that Trump is more likely to win in a month's time, especially if like you they believe he will make gains on 2016. All I've seen so far on boards, including yourself, are people who throw out that opinion and refuse to justify it.

Particularly when you look at the swing state polls in Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, where Trump has rarely, if ever, actually led in 2020. Even Georgia and Arizona, which were firmly in the Trump camp in 2016 have now consistently swung toward Biden.

Podge_irl · 05-10-2020 9:10pm

DK224 wrote: »

You think Biden is going to lose Minnesota while winning Nebraska?

That is quite obviously not going to happen.

dark crystal · 06-10-2020 12:59am

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1313162516072198154

Arizona looking good.

Biden also currently ahead in Florida and tied in Texas. Even a minute chance he could win either of those states?

Water John · 06-10-2020 1:02am

There are only 6% undecided in Arizona.

06-10-2020 1:13am

dark crystal wrote: »

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1313162516072198154

Arizona looking good.

Biden also currently ahead in Florida and tied in Texas. Even a minute chance he could win either of those states?

Minute, yeah it's always a possibility.
One thing I don't think the polls account for is voting a straight-party ticket. So someone might have no intention of voting for someone for president but will vote for that party for other offices. Wouldn't surprise me if once in the booth their convictions fade slightly when faced with ticking dozens of boxes.
All things being fair (IMO) Biden would win Florida but the state is too messed up for a clear win. He might squeak it but the state GOP will do all they can to stop it.
It's still a few years too early for Texas to flip. It'll be closer than usual this time but the Dems shouldn't expect to improve again in 4 years. For talks' sake if it's a 5 point gap this time it'd take an outstanding candidate for the democrats to improve on that in 2024.

Quin_Dub · 06-10-2020 9:34am

The Economist Model has move Biden out to "Very Likely" to win the Electoral College.

They have him at 90% likely to win and he's at "very likely" (which is above 85%) in all the key swing states too.

Really hard to see the road back for Trump now.

Nothing is impossible , but time and momentum are just not on his side.

Deleted User wrote: »

Minute, yeah it's always a possibility.
One thing I don't think the polls account for is voting a straight-party ticket. So someone might have no intention of voting for someone for president but will vote for that party for other offices. Wouldn't surprise me if once in the booth their convictions fade slightly when faced with ticking dozens of boxes.
All things being fair (IMO) Biden would win Florida but the state is too messed up for a clear win. He might squeak it but the state GOP will do all they can to stop it.
It's still a few years too early for Texas to flip. It'll be closer than usual this time but the Dems shouldn't expect to improve again in 4 years. For talks' sake if it's a 5 point gap this time it'd take an outstanding candidate for the democrats to improve on that in 2024.

On Straight ticket voting - Very few states allow it anymore

Only Alabama, Indiana, Michigan, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and South Carolina still allow it.

Texas still has it for now , but that is subject to a court case shortly driven by the GOP looking to remove it.

Of the above only Michigan is a Swing state but Biden has a large and consistent lead there so do think it'll be a problem.

06-10-2020 11:03am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

On Straight ticket voting - Very few states allow it anymore

Only Alabama, Indiana, Michigan, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and South Carolina still allow it.

Texas still has it for now , but that is subject to a court case shortly driven by the GOP looking to remove it.

Of the above only Michigan is a Swing state but Biden has a large and consistent lead there so do think it'll be a problem.

Is right, I was thinking of Texas but got it the wrong way round. The Republican seem to be fearing something along the lines of Tullymandering, straight-ticket voting might usually help but they're concerned anti-Trump sentiment could cost them bigly at the local and congressional level.

everlast75 · 06-10-2020 11:29am

Interesting polling.

https://twitter.com/AllisonLHedges/status/1313419495373975555?s=19

Doesn't seem to be much of a sympathy bump for him?

Brussels Sprout · 06-10-2020 11:32am

I often heard the term "Straight ticket voting" but just assumed it meant manually voting for one party in each individual race that you could potentially vote on. I did not realise you could just vote once for all races at one time.

Not sure if people are really going to vote for Trump or Biden as a time saver using that option if they had planned on voting for their party in all of the other races but didn't really like them. The Presidential race doesn't strike me as an afterthought in that way, especially not this year.

seamus · 06-10-2020 11:48am

everlast75 wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be much of a sympathy bump for him?

I wonder how much of his behaviour with the virus is having the opposite effect and driving people away from him?

ancapailldorcha · 06-10-2020 12:00pm

everlast75 wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be much of a sympathy bump for him?

I think that's down to how utterly and completely polarised the US is.

The best comparison would be Boris Johnson who got it after boasting about shaking patients' hands. He did get a temporary fillip in the polls only to lose it down the line.

salmocab · 06-10-2020 12:06pm

everlast75 wrote: »

Interesting polling.

https://twitter.com/AllisonLHedges/status/1313419495373975555?s=19

Doesn't seem to be much of a sympathy bump for him?

That might take a while to filter through though. It’s hard to know how people will react because it’s never really happened before, it would probably very much matter what your thoughts of the covid handling were pre him getting it. If you thought it was handled badly and then he got it I’d doubt you’d have much sympathy for him. If you thought he was doing a good job and now see he’s doing well you may be very sympathetic to him, however I’d say both these subsets of people already know how they are voting.

Quin_Dub · 06-10-2020 12:30pm

seamus wrote: »

I wonder how much of his behaviour with the virus is having the opposite effect and driving people away from him?

I don't think it's going to have a massive impact either way to be honest.

All but a tiny percentage of voters are pretty much locked in at this stage.

His base will see his behaviour as validation of the line he's held all along - "This virus is nothing to be worried about let's just all get on with it and ignore what's happening"

Equally, those opposed to him will feel equally validated by his behaviour and view this as yet more evidence of his unsuitability for Office.

And it not having any impact is a disaster for Trump - If he can't get the polls back into the ~3% range he is done.

At a ~3% national level level Biden would still only have about a ~65% on winning the Electoral college just as Clinton did and Trump would fancy those odds.

The Swing States generally vote about 2-3 points more GOP than the National average which is how he won in 2016.

That's why the Biden National lead is still a useful measure - The more of a buffer he has above that ~3% level the greater his chances of securing the overall victory and if he holds above 6% as he is right now , it's getting close to a certainty.

droidus · 06-10-2020 12:59pm

Thats predicated on the idea that this is over... I don't think it is, there's every chance he will become seriously ill again in the next week.

Quin_Dub · 06-10-2020 1:12pm

droidus wrote: »

Thats predicated on the idea that this is over... I don't think it is, there's every chance he will become seriously ill again in the next week.

I agree , there's a significant chance that his condition worsens again over the next few weeks.

I hope it doesn't but there's absolutely no guarantee that it won't.

I'm not sure that changes the dynamics of the Election all that much either way though.

If he were to have to step down and have Pence run instead I don't see that having a huge impact to be honest. It might narrow it up a little but Pence isn't a guy that's suddenly going to make ~5 Million voters change their minds.

It makes the VP debate interesting - Pence might actually try to paint himself as a potential leader rather than just running blocking for Trump as you might have expected

Watching how he performs will be interesting.

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments