Rasmussen was caught explicitly helping the Trump campaign, others simply refuse to share their methodology. Something legit pollsters have no problems with. This is not a wild conspiracy theory, it is fact and it is acknowledge by polling aggregators by weighting the polls.
Yes, yes, and yes.
While I’d love to have a blowout even there, I’ll settle for three states over the line in the electoral college again just fine.
(I was singing:
Three states over the line, sweet Biden,
Three states over the line!
Look at the man from the railway station,.
Three states over the line!
Exactly. There are GOP skewed polls and they have no significant impact on the polling aggregations. The belief “that Trump is losing in the polls, and badly”; that the aggregates are only saying otherwise because of those GOP partisan polls, is simply delusional. The polls may be wrong. I think they are off myself. But that untethered from reality belief is not why.
Depends on what we’re calling significant. Possibly also on what we’re calling impacts.
Scroll down to Red Waving And Hacking The Polling Averages (Hopium Chronicles 10/18/2024)
Gawd no. Hopium has so proven itself completely full of shit.
(Checks thread we are in. We’ve gone over this ad nauseum in the thread this discussion likely belongs in. Shout me out there if you want to revisit it yet again.)
No doubt Rosenberg’s a deep-blue partisan, but I think you’ve laid it on a bit thick here. I’ll take it up in the polling thread.
If polling error is like '22, Harris is comfortably ahead. If it’s like '20, Trump is.
Yup, good summary. This is why either Trump or Harris winning six or seven swing states (and thus giving the false appearance, to some who don’t get it, of an Electoral College “blowout”) is probably more likely than this ending up very close in the EC count (though that could happen, for sure).
Exactly. “Toss up” forecast does not necessarily mean a “close” election, nor does it rule it out.
But. Trump is currently running 48% in the NYT national aggregation. That’s his historic top. He’s both won and lost with under 47%. Him getting more than 48%? Even 48%? Not likely. Third party has run 1 to 4%, and this time is just Stein and Oliver. Each might pick up 1?
So there is little room for a significant systemic error in favor of Trump. Oh virtually none and he wins, but he is at his ceiling.
Harris has room for there to be a major systemic error on her side. Trump could easily actually be at 45, just under where he won against Clinton, 2 for third party, and Harris at 53. More realistically he could be 46 again, and she could be 52.
Just not in the right places.
I’ve been canvassing in Arizona, and I’ve run into a significant minority of people who are afraid to say out loud that they support Harris. People who literally lower their voice and look around before saying that. That gives me a little hope as to the direction of the bias.
Also, young men like Trump. All of us are a little anxious when the next door is a young male independent, because they are the mostly likely (on our lists, we aren’t knocking on Republican doors) to favor Trump. The most likely to actually be hostile are older men, though.
Pennsylvania appears to be the state where her outreach to Republican voters is working best, according to recent surveys from two major pollsters.
A New York Times/Siena College/Philadelphia Inquirer poll found Harris winning 12 percent of Republicans in the state. It surveyed 857 likely voters from October 7 to 10 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
(my emphases)
The Loach is a Light Observation Helicopter. We must observe, collect data, and make up our minds. I think perhaps that @Loach , you flew them. I have a friend who did (it was called a ‘Little Bird’) and flew above the Hueys. To observe.
We must observe and make the correct choices.
Curmudgeons of the world unite! But behind our own closed doors. If someone knocks on my door and annoys my senior dog I’m not going to be happy. I won’t be hostile but you will know I’m not happy. And I certainly won’t give you the satisfaction of knowing who I’m voting for even if it’s your candidate. I don’t want to talk to uninvited people at my door.
I got some of those. One was in a heavily canvassed neighborhood, and i took him off the list. I also was assigned a door that had a sign saying, “delivery people: please don’t ring bell, a person living here works the graveyard shift and needs his sleep”. I didn’t ring the bell, i marked him, “not home”.
I knocked on a bunch of doors that said “no soliciting”. Soliciting is legally distinct from political canvassing. And rather to my surprise, most of those people talked to me. (If they answered the door at all.)
Hint: if you want to get fewer visits, calls, and texts, vote as early as you can. All the competent groups update that information fairly quickly, and don’t reach out to people who have already voted. I saw my app update in the middle of the day, once, showing a guy at a house i was about to approach as “voted”.
I feel for you.
I was a census taker in 2010, going to houses that never sent back the form. One was a quite elderly guy who gave me his name but refused to give me his birth date. “I’m 81 years old, and I hate the government!” A quick calculation gave me his birth year, which is all we really needed.
I did it in 2000, though I was a manager over a group of enumerators.
-
We ran into families that had way overcrowded the government subsidized apartments(people laying on cots everywhere, etc.).
-
Old folks that, well, probably should be in a nursing home, but weren’t.
-
Yes, people who refused all information. Bare minimum, we just wanted “the number of people living there”
In 2000, we were told if we had no success, we could ask the mail-deliverer how many people lived in a home and see if they knew. The mail worker could flip through the mail being delivered that day or just tell us the number based on what they know.
Even then, it felt partly pointless. The IRS has detailed records on where almost everyone is.
About not panicking -
I’m okay with some panic on the D side. Voting being done while the perception is that Trump is on the verge of being in power again. It motivates better than being in the lead.
Personally though I remain exactly as nervous as I have been all along. Trump 49%? That what the 538 aggregate is. 2% more than he’s ever gotten before? I just don’t think so. I strongly expect he’ll be 47% or under, again. She’ll be 51% or higher. I don’t know it so I remain nervous but some statistical noise in the polls is not enough to convince me that Trump’s ceiling is actually over 47%.
The Harris team is this close to the two-minute warning and running Trump out of timeouts. Once that’s done, it’s time to take three kneeldowns for the win.
Football analogies don’t really work for elections.
Imagine what a football game would be like if all the scoring was done in private and you didn’t get to see the score until after the time expires, and then you had to wait for the officials to tally up all the points, which could take days or even weeks.
When would you kneeldown with those rules?