And, it seems like 538 uses 70% as the dividing line between the two characterizations.
I anticipate those two Fox News polls in Wisconsin of likely voters AND registered voters showing Biden ahead by 8% will trigger a Twitter fit overnight.
Every morning, I click on that link and silently pray “Please be favored…please be favored…”
I’ll be glad when this year is over.
I noticed right wing pundits crowing about one poll showing Biden and Trump in a statistical tie in Pennsylvania. Never mind that Texas has been in a very similar statistical tie for more than a month now when looking at the aggregate polls from Five Thirty Eight.
The other important state that’s looking up for Biden recently is Wisconsin.
On the other hand, Georgia is looking more and more out of reach. It was always a long shot. I’d say the Biden campaign shouldn’t throw away resources there — but the Senate races there are a factor. Maybe it should be one of the states Harris focuses on (visits?).
(ETA: I see Kolak of Twilo mentioned the Wisconsin uptick).
My abiding fear is that Biden will really screw up in the debates and Trump will then eke out a victory on Nov. 3. I’m not sure American democracy could withstand another four years of him in the White House.
I don’t worry about the debates. Biden will probably not dazzle, but compared to Trump, who is middling-to-poor in a debate setting, he’ll do fine. I worry about voter suppression and intimidation, and delayed returns allowing Trump to cast doubts on the process and/or prematurely declare victory.
Nah - I don’t see the debates being any sort of an issue. Think how he did against Hillary, yet they didn’t move the needle meaningfully. Do debates really persuade much of anyone?
Yeah, I imagine Biden will make some misstatement or another which will be trumpeted as a sign of his senility, whereas the gross inappropriateness of Trump’s entire performance will be waved away as Trump being Trump.
A few debates have stand out moments, but they rarely change the course of an election, unless it’s close. In 2012, Obama’s numbers dropped due to a poor first debate performance, but they rose again during the election.
The Dems need to just get Stacey out there in GA, just enuf so that the GOP cant take it for granted.
Fortunately, declarations of victory and concessions of defeat by the candidates have zero effect on who actually wins an election. Trump can spout off about winning all he wants based on early vote totals and it should make no difference. Not saying that it won’t, but it shouldn’t.
Because of the large numbers of absentee voting in this election, it may be weeks before all states count them. Most states do not have procedures in place to count huge numbers of mailed in ballots efficiently. Certainly NY doesn’t; they seem to treat absentee ballots as an after thought. So don’t be surprised if we don’t know the result for a few days. In fact, I expect that.
I don’t know about that. 538 has Trump at a 25% chance at winning Minnesota. I wouldn’t be overconfident about it. On the other hand, they also give Biden about the same chance of winning Texas as Trump has of winning Minnesota. Strange times.
538 gives Trump a better-than-even chance of taking OH again. That leaves the other three as must-win, with odds ranging from 18% to 25%. As I say, it’s not impossible. But if I’m a Trump supporter and FL gets called for Biden (assuming it actually gets called on Election Night), I’m pretty much thinking my guy’s fucked.
This, again, assumes PA stays safely blue. We got some good news out of there today. They’ve got 60 days (and more money than any candidate has ever raised in a single month) to protect and build on that lead.
Not impossible in particular because they are not independent rolls of the dice.
Things continue to look up in Wisconsin (though far from certain), and that bit of improvement in Pennsylvania is welcome (but even farther from certain).
The good news overall is that unrest in Portland and elsewhere has, so far, not really hurt Biden - more folks trust him to help calm things down and to tackle the underlying issues.
The bad news is, somehow, Trump’s aggregate approval rating has crept up in the past week or two — now it’s close to 44%.
The mind boggles.
Trump up by 2 in Texas in a new Dallas Morning News poll. Same poll shows Cornyn up by 11 in the Senate race (which is actually a drop of a couple points for him).
Not undoable, and Biden’s campaign is still talking up investing heavily in Texas, but I just can’t imagine that they will. It’s so expensive to campaign there: 254 counties, over a dozen media markets. The state party is starting to get its act together, but is still wobbly (just two years ago they let the Republican win a state Senate special election in a district H. Clinton carried by 12 points). And he doesn’t need Texas – every dollar spent there is a dollar that could be spent shoring up leads in the Rust Belt and playing in states that have shown they can swing like FL and NC.
In an ideal world I’d like to see Biden make a play here because of the knock-on effect for down ballot races, but the Presidential race is too important to be pissing away resources. To borrow an old saying, “Texas is the swing state of tomorrow – and always will be.”
Assuming a return to normalcy post-Trump, I think Texas will be solidly purple, maybe even bluish leaning purple, by 2032 at the latest.
I completely agree about the need to be SURE about the states you need before spending too much on Texas, which only goes Biden in a landslide.
But issue of campaign pocketbook size makes wonder what Bloomberg is or is not going to do, independent of the Biden campaign, and above beyond what he’s already donated to the House races and Abrams’ Fair Vote.
Where, precisely, will he conclude his treasure chest is best leveraged for maximal impacts? He will be looking at it in a very granular manner, not just battleground states but key districts … Or does he end up doing little?
He’d better not.
And I hope this nice lady spends some of her barrelsful of cash in the campaign against the guy who insulted her.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-attacks-steve-jobs-widow-after-the-atlantic-article/ar-BB18LLX6