Then it’s time to pull the Lysistrata gambit.
The odds difference between a 60
and 46 forecast is insignificant. I would make different plans if tomorrow’s rain forecast was 60 vs 46%. I’m ready for rain either way but not shocked if it stays dry.
If it’s truly insignificant, then I think we can conclude that the models have no meaning whatsoever, since once a “truly significant” spread is reached, the polls are going to be so far apart that any amateur could just eyeball them and know who’s going to win.
Harris is up in a new NC poll–by 3 points!
The diarist is making fun of Nate Silver in the article:
Whatever you do, please don’t tag Nate Silver on it. His head will explode!
Da lulz.
So we were talking about “all objective measures” today, and this is an A+ poll. Is there a reason why Harris would be up in NC, which Biden lost in 2020, than in states that Biden won? Maybe! But it’s something to take into consideration. NC also has a pretty chunky number of electoral votes: 15. We make a big deal about PA, which we should, but it’s only 5 more, at 20.
Actually, it’s worse than that, since Silver had it around Clinton 75 and Trump 25 in 2016 on election day. So I guess they would be useless in all circumstances.
This again? One out of four chances is huge. Higher than Russian roulette. Silver/538 was one of the few poll aggregators or forecast modelers to get this “right” (not quite the correct word, but you know what I mean).
(I should keep this posts’ text on my laptop desktop, because I’m sure I’ll have to post it again a dozen times in the next 57 days).
No joke. It is huge. So is 1 in 10. So if Silver had said it was Clinton 90, Trump 10, that wouldn’t have falsified the model either, right? So you have non-falsifiable models that don’t actually tell us much.
Yes they are fairly useless for the job of predicting a winner for precisely the reasons you mention.
They are useful for determine trends. I don’t have any confidence of Harris winning or losing but polls verify that she is in much better shape than Biden was and that her chances have mostly plateaued. Aggregated information buried inside can inform about what issues and messaging is effective with what subgroups. There is no shortage of information that can be gleaned! But yeah not much use at predicting who is winning over what is obvious.
A small lead isn’t enough. The electoral vote favors the Republican.
You are conflating “ahead in popular vote” with likelihood to win in the above quote. Silver ALSO feels Harris is ahead in popular vote, but that is not how presidential elections are determined.
How is it ridiculous? What do you think Trump’s chances are?
Honestly, are you confusing popular vote versus probability to win, too?
In national polls yes, but he’s talking about swing state polls.
No, everyone here knows what the Electoral College is.
What do I think Trump’s chances are? I don’t know, and I wouldn’t put a number on it. I don’t think a meaningful number can be put on it. In reality, both Silver and 538 are engaging in a form of disinformation, as they are putting the veneer of science on a lot of guesswork, and even expressing it numerically (in Silver’s case, precise to one decimal place!). If they are going to engage in honest semiotics, then they should just put up on their main page, “TOSSUP.”
Note that I think Silver can’t really justify putting Trump that much higher than Harris when 538 has it reversed and new polling isn’t really that strong for Trump. Then there are the other issues with Silver that people more knowledgeable than I are pointing out.
For me, the known unknowns are whether the polls have been weighted correctly this time around and whether they are really capturing whom they need to capture. Based on the data I’ve seen and my own right-brain-based “model” (which may include some wishful thinking), I think Harris has somewhat more substantial support than the polls indicate. I also think she has upside potential in the race, whereas Trump does not (any rise he will get going forward will be from Harris losing support, not Trump gaining it). My guess at this point is that Harris will have a solid win.
Back in the Old Times, it was normal for newspapers to have distinct political alignments. But then came the age of broadcast media that until the 1980s was bound by a strict Fairness Doctrine. It became a pervasive expectation that you HAD to be “neutral” to be respected (which alas is not the same as objective).
A large fraction of humans, if you’ve looked around.
And there you have one of his great attractions to his following. Those other people who lord over you “just because” they are of a higher status than you? They are punks who’ll fold if hit in the face. You can’t do it because you’ll get arrested. But HE can humiliate them. HE can say “f— your ‘polite rules’ of politics” and cut their figurative balls off.
(And he was right. They were, are, weak. They don’t dare stand up and risk losing their preciousss so they’ll just take the abuse. Who cares if I’m publicly made his b–h, I am still a Senator/Secretary/millionaire/important influencer and you’re not.)
So a model primarily based on polling averages mean nothing, but a single state poll means a lot?
Historically, a final state polling average is off by about 4 percent, one way or the other. Any single A+ poll is likely off by more.
Trends matter, but one poll is not a trend.
Apropos of this, no one should ever go into politics unless they are fully prepared and willing to lose their job in an election. If they are not so prepared and willing then they should never go into politics. The GOP is almost fully populated by such people.
The problem is the “primarily”–there is a lot of other stuff in there.
Yes, I know it is just one poll. But people (not just here) have been wringing their hands about Harris’s poll numbers, and it is some good news that is hard to square with other, anemic numbers. Of course, any of it could be wrong.
Right. I was a teenager in the Region in the 1980s, and we got the Chicago papes. Well, the Tribune, which was supposed to be the more Republican paper, and not the Sun Times, which was supposed to be the more Democratic. IIRC.
Yes, if the small lead was just overall America. But if Harris leads in the battleground states, thay is where the EC votes come from.
Now, yeah- a small lead is not enough.
No, read what i said, I compared the battleground critical states also.
Exactly.
Harris being head nationally by 5% but behind in Penn, Wisc, Mich, Georgia, Nevada- would be bad. But Harris is ahead in every key state but Az. Now, certainly- not ahead enough. A slim lead is promising, but hardly something we should be optimistic about.
Silver is now a paid tool of the GOP. He sold out.
I am slightly guardedly optimistic. But wary.
Talk about playing the ump!
He a never-Trump centrist who does the best he can.
This reminds me of the claim that Dwight Eisenhower was a dedicated conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy.
Any concrete evidence? Though he does seem redpilled and eager to join these illustrious ones:
- Elon Musk
- Russel Brand
- RFK Jr.
- JD Vance
- Tulsi Gabbard
- Kimberly Guilfoyle
I know I’m missing about thirty major ones… But I have to wonder whether these people actually think they’re cool or not? Doesn’t Elon know he seems like the world’s biggest, dumbest cock? But I digress…
Follow the money, Before the GOP $$ came around- Silver was saying Harris was ahead. After it- now Harris is a loser. Silver is a gambler, he may need the money.
Please note the next to last. Florida. Now trump only leads by 2%. 30EC.