2020 Presidential Election: let the jockeying commence

[mchammer]

On a separate note, Biden composite lead in battleground states is 3.8%, which is the same as in 2016 for same day out from Election Day

 

[Mr. Deez]

And Obama won FL, OH, PA, MI, IA, and WI twice and now Trump is winning them.

He'll probably won't win them all.

 

[Joe Fan]

Seems like many of the same people are saying the same things they said back in 2016.
Perhaps we could save some typing by just republishing that thread?

 

[Horns11]

Seems like many of the same people are saying the same things they said back in 2016.
Perhaps we could save some typing by just republishing that thread?

Today would mark the same amount of days before the election that the Comey Letter came out in 2016. Unless this Hunter laptop stuff gets picked up by non-Murdoch properties and depresses turnout in the Rust Belt, then any polling comparisons to 2016 really aren't going to fly during this home stretch.

Anyone who thinks Trump will get a clean sweep of swing states this go-around is reading a lot of Trafalgar group and Bradley Effect pontifications.

 

[4th_floor]

This one is James Biden to (Robert) Hunter Biden

Gee, I wonder who the Big O could be?

Oscar Robertson?

 

[Joe Fan]

Today would mark the same amount of days before the election that the Comey Letter came out in 2016.....

You still think Hillary lost bc of that?
I think it was near mid-Oct when the "Access Hollywood tape" came out. Many (including some in here) said that was the end of Trump too

 

[mchammer]

Trump is on a mission from God, you guys.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Joe Fan]

Who can prove them wrong?

 

[mchammer]

 

[Horns11]

You still think Hillary lost bc of that?
I think it was near mid-Oct when the "Access Hollywood tape" came out. Many (including some in here) said that was the end of Trump too

That was the first weekend in October, and the "her emails" news definitely outweighed the "locker room talk" stories in MSM for the following weeks. I think Vox did a comparison about how whenever the Access Hollywood tape was mentioned in a news article, Hillary's emails were mentioned in about 75 percent of the same article as well.

I think the Comey Letter was a factor. Not the only factor, obviously, but it was close enough to cost her, say, 11K votes in Michigan. Not necessarily because of people switching to Trump, but because of the turnout it potentially stifled with the "here we go again."

If you think Trump will win all of the swing states he won in 2016, let me know. Democrats only won Nevada, Virginia, and NH last go-around.

 

[mchammer]

 

[Garmel]

Anyone who thinks Trump will get a clean sweep of swing states this go-around is reading a lot of Trafalgar group and Bradley Effect pontifications.

Trafalgar isn't saying that. They think the only Rust Belt state he will get is Michigan.

 

[mchammer]

If you think Trump will win all of the swing states he won in 2016, let me know. Democrats only won Nevada, Virginia, and NH last go-around.

You forgot MN and CO.

 

[Joe Fan]

That was the first weekend in October, and the "her emails" news definitely outweighed the "locker room talk" stories in MSM for the following weeks. ...

I think it was the 2nd week. In any event, I wholly disagree with your analysis. But I also accept, as I must, that it is impossible to fully prove or disprove either position.

 

[4th_floor]

Today would mark the same amount of days before the election that the Comey Letter came out in 2016. Unless this Hunter laptop stuff gets picked up by non-Murdoch properties and depresses turnout in the Rust Belt, then any polling comparisons to 2016 really aren't going to fly during this home stretch.

Anyone who thinks Trump will get a clean sweep of swing states this go-around is reading a lot of Trafalgar group and Bradley Effect pontifications.

There are already some cracks in the media. Even CNN had to kind of explain Trump's accusations in the debate. Plus the new Trump ad, which is running everywhere, shows the emails and texts. I can't see the media wall holding up much longer, despite their extreme TDS.

Plus, Biden's gaffe about fracking and the energy industry probably cost him PA. Things look pretty bad for Joe Dementia.

 

[Joe Fan]

See if you can spot the difference

 

[Joe Fan]

Survey Monkey, which I believe was more accurate than Nate Sliver in 2016, has Trump up by 2 in both Florida and Ohio

This is consistent with the recent national trend
For example, in Georgia, Landmark now has --

Trump up 4 (from +2)
and
Purdue (Sen) up 5 (from +1)​

 

[Horns11]

You forgot MN and CO.

Minnesota hasn't really been "in play" since Nixon. Colorado has pretty much finished their blue shift, going back to Bush v. Kerry and the mini blue wave that hit in 2006 as backlash from that era.

I'm talking more about the double-digit EV ones, of which Trump had the clean sweep in 2016. If Trump gets all of those again (NC, AZ, FL, PA, MI, WI), it's obviously over for Democrats, but the chance of him pulling off all 6 is somewhere between 0.005% and 0.2%, depending on whether you look at the aggregates from RCP or something similar.

 

[mchammer]

I'm talking more about the double-digit EV ones, of which Trump had the clean sweep in 2016. If Trump gets all of those again (NC, AZ, FL, PA, MI, WI), it's obviously over for Democrats, but the chance of him pulling off all 6 is somewhere between 0.005% and 0.2%, depending on whether you look at the aggregates from RCP or something similar.

That is not remotely true. A shift of 4-5% points (due to polling error or otherwise) means Trump wins them all. This is because the states are auto-correlated (that is, they move in tandem).

 

[Horns11]

I think it was the 2nd week. In any event, I wholly disagree with your analysis. But I also accept, as I must, that it is impossible to fully prove or disprove either position.

It was October 6 when outlets started to reveal what was coming on Twitter and October 7 when WaPo published. Based on polling at that moment, she gained about 6% nationally from where she had been the week before, which signaled to the non-committals (and mouthy libs alike) that they should pack it in.

Trump's non-apology, with the famous "Bill has said worse to me on the golf course" right before the 3rd debate, actually gave him a little bump.

From the Comey Letter to November 4 (4 days before the general), Hillary had -18% on the aggregate polling average. One could argue it was because Trump was campaigning so well from 10/28 to 11/4, but that seems a tad wishful.

Like I said, I don't think the Comey Letter was the only factor, but it's definitely "a" factor, and hurt her more than the Access Hollywood tape hurt him. It's kind of the same as losing a late November college football game hurting you more in the polls than a nonconference game in September.

 

[Horns11]

That is not remotely true. A shift of 4-5% points (due to polling error or otherwise) means Trump wins them all. This is because the states are auto-correlated (that is, they move in tandem).

I'm using the existing data and you're using the 4-to-5-point error data, which is what we ended up with in 2016. The only times in recent history in which there has been state-level 4-to-5-point state data variance have been 2000 and 2016, both of which ended up being pop. vote losses and EC wins for the GOP. Every other election going back to 1992 has had 2-to-3-point state data variance.

The 2018 midterms were only 1 point off the data from polling... but that was actually 1 point off from being less blue instead of more (where it ended up).

Many polls have also changed for how they account for education level, demographic biases, etc. In fact, some of those conservative-leaning ones (I mentioned Trafalgar before) had been doing that "in reverse" for a while, but others like TIPP and Marist have come around to change their formulas to be more reflective and try to eliminate that variance as well.

Do I actually think Trump only has a 0.005% chance of winning all 6 of those states? No. But that's what the minimum of the aggregate shows today. I think he has more like a 10% chance of winning all 6 of those this time around.

 

[Joe Fan]

....From the Comey Letter to November 4 (4 days before the general), Hillary had -18% on the aggregate polling average.....

The Comey theory is an excuse. It's like a warm blankey Democrats wrap themselves up in to feel better. But, of course, it's not reality. It's a way to avoid reality. You will note that no Democrat in history, especially Hillary, ever does any introspection upon facing defeat. It is just not part of the mindset. It is always someone else's fault. If it's not Comey, it's Putin, or sexism, or Bernie, or BHO, or Jill Stein, or Anthony Weiner, or self-hating women, or the media, or voter suppression, or Citizens United, or the Electoral College, or deplorable people.

Yes, Hillary used every single one of these excuses to try and explain away her defeat. Every one, and probably others I cant recall. But she never considered for one second that it might have been her. She never considered that possibility. She still doesn't.

This emotional makeup is consistent with registered Democrats generally. They always look for someone or something to blame. It is never them. Never their ideas, or their policies, or their positions, or their plans for the future. It is always that something is wrong with the other side -- "those people" are just too stupid and/or uneducated. Forget that Democrats already have the deck stacked with the Media, Big Tech, Hollywood, Universities, public schools, newspapers, cable television and Europe. My position is that when you have all that and you still lose, then it is probably you.

 

[mchammer]

@Joe Fan


For your excellent post above, I reward you with this.

 

[mchammer]

Georgia has swung from Biden +7 (some poll) to +4 Trump (another poll). How is that possible unless the polls are BS (regardless who wins).

 

[mchammer]

I'm using the existing data and you're using the 4-to-5-point error data, which is what we ended up with in 2016. The only times in recent history in which there has been state-level 4-to-5-point state data variance have been 2000 and 2016, both of which ended up being pop. vote losses and EC wins for the GOP. Every other election going back to 1992 has had 2-to-3-point state data variance.

The 2018 midterms were only 1 point off the data from polling... but that was actually 1 point off from being less blue instead of more (where it ended up).

Many polls have also changed for how they account for education level, demographic biases, etc. In fact, some of those conservative-leaning ones (I mentioned Trafalgar before) had been doing that "in reverse" for a while, but others like TIPP and Marist have come around to change their formulas to be more reflective and try to eliminate that variance as well.

Do I actually think Trump only has a 0.005% chance of winning all 6 of those states? No. But that's what the minimum of the aggregate shows today. I think he has more like a 10% chance of winning all 6 of those this time around.

Looking at latest RCP averages, a swing of 2.5% pts wins FL, GA, NC, IA, and AZ. If so, then Trump just needs to win one of PA, MI, MN, or WI. He is down 5-7% pts there. I expect it to get tighter. Regardless, Trump won WI in 2016 after being down 7 pts. I hear your argument about polling changes but I also hear the shy Trump vote is worse in 2020 than 2016.

 

[Garmel]

McCain won by almost 9. Bush won by about 10. It shouldn't be a battleground state.

With a growing Hispanic population and people from California moving there why is it a surprise to you that it's going more blue?

 

[Duck Dodgers]

Bahaha, Slow Joe won’t even need NC since he’s going win Texas right? What a buffoon.

 

[Garmel]

@Mr. Deez For your excellent post above, I reward you with this.

I'm in love.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

The Comey theory is an excuse. It's like a warm blankey Democrats wrap themselves up in to feel better. But, of course, it's not reality. It's a way to avoid reality. You will note that no Democrat in history, especially Hillary, ever does any introspection upon facing defeat. It is just not part of the mindset. It is always someone else's fault. If it's not Comey, it's Putin, or sexism, or Bernie, or BHO, or Jill Stein, or Anthony Weiner, or self-hating women, or the media, or voter suppression, or Citizens United, or the Electoral College, or deplorable people.

Yes, Hillary used every single one of these excuses to try and explain away her defeat. Every one, and probably others I cant recall. But she never considered for one second that it might have been her. She never considered that possibility. She still doesn't.

This emotional makeup is consistent with registered Democrats generally. They always look for someone or something to blame. It is never them. Never their ideas, or their policies, or their positions, or their plans for the future. It is always that something is wrong with the other side -- "those people" are just too stupid and/or uneducated. Forget that Democrats already have the deck stacked with the Media, Big Tech, Hollywood, Universities, public schools, newspapers, cable television and Europe. My position is that when you have all that and you still lose, then it is probably you.

Well said. If you remember, Comey was the villain from November until about March when the stooge was fired. That douche Steve Colbert told his audience of trained clapping seals that Comey got fired and they clapped, until he had to tell it was bad and they booed.

After March it was all Russia all the time. Till that fell apart like the fake, ginned up story created by the Clinton gang that it was. Now it’s back to Comey to explain why the same polls that miserably failed in 16 are to be believed today.