I wish that that signaled better numbers than 70 / 30 for Trump on the 538 scoreboard at the moment. I’m afraid this is going to end up being like Beto / Cruz where I got my hopes up for nothing.
I don’t think this is really a significant input to the 538 model. They don’t really have solid priors to draw from (there’s never been a US election with this much advance voting), so they don’t really know how to predict how much the advance voting is going to subtract from election-day voting versus being incremental to it, nor do they have any kind of model for how to estimate how much of that vote has gone to each candidate.
And this -
in 2016, exit polls found that voters in key states who made up their minds at the last minute broke heavily for Trump, who was running to topple the status quo. But this year, it’s Biden who is the “change” candidate.
The link on the site says it was 17% in Pennsylvania who in the last week decided to vote for Trump.
A great short film for Michigan voters, narrated by Jeff Daniels, who grew up and still lives there.
Wish they’d do a similar one for Ohio - maybe with Halle Berry, George Clooney, Allison Janney or Clancy Brown narrating?
I’m no expert, but I also believe there is a trend for late deciders to go for the apparent leader. Fingers crossed. Man, I’d like to go to sleep and wake up next Wed.
Jeff Daniels has remained in Michigan since growing up there. He has established himself, to some degree, as a “favorite son”. Do those other names you mentioned have a similar presence in Ohio?
I don’t know about those others, but I have received e-mails from Mike Holmgreen, former coach of the Green Bay Packers, to go out and vote for Biden. He may be having some effect in Wisconsin. Willie Nelson has made phone calls in support of Biden here in Texas. I like the idea that Willie’s efforts could tip Texas into Biden’s column. The more favorite sons / favorite daughters for battleground states that help out, the better.
If we assume there are states which are changing parties over time in either direction, waiting until after the first election where the switch occurred to begin counting them in the other party’s camp guarantees you’ll miscount them in the election where the switch occurs.
To be sure, it’s easy for partisans to get eager and assume they’ll pull off major gains this time when the results on the ground turn out to be more minor, year after year after year.
That’s why smart pollsters don’t start out partisan and don’t listen to partisan predictions.
As to this specific election:
If e.g. Romney had won the nomination in 2016 and was the sitting President, and he was going up against Biden, there’s be little reason, besides demographics, to expect any shift in red/blue states. Those are both very conventional candidates.
In an election where the candidates are very atypical (or at least one is), if there was ever a time for a surprise good showing for the blue team this is it. It’d be Blue-partisan to assume that will shift 50 states. But IMO it’s Red-partisan to assume it’ll shift zero when so many are knife-edge to begin with.
Tl; dr: By waiting until states actually shift to count them for the other guys next time, you’re hitching your predictions to a guaranteed lagging indicator. Predictions are supposed to be leading indicators; that’s why they’re about the (near) future. They’re most valuable when they’re not focused excessively in the rear view mirror.
Agreed. I suspect that’s why a couple of my state-level predictions will be wrong, as they were in 2016. IIRC I predicted Ohio for Trump, but that was the only one of the swing states I got right, lol.
Mark Mothersbaugh and Chrissie Hynde?
Could be. I suspect my suggested four Ohioans would bring some star power rather than because they are particularly regarded as “favorite sons” (or daughters).
For what it’s worth, Cook Political Report now moves Texas to “toss up.”
And 538 have now nudged Biden’s chances to 89%, with Georgia and Iowa into the blue by very slender margins. Yowza.
It’s tough to understate how valuable each additional swing state that falls into Biden’s column is for safeguarding the result. If Trump only needs to disqualify a few thousand late-arriving absentee ballots in Pennsylvania to steal the election, there’s a good chance he can pull that off with the help of his new Supreme Court justice. But if he needs to find a different excuse to overturn results in each of Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Texas, etc. it becomes much more difficult for him to pull that off.
Thanks for that. Spot on!
Just heard David Plough say that more votes have been cast in Harris County, TX than in 2016. Not more early votes, the early vote is greater than the total 2016 count. I don’t begin the hope Biden wins TX, but maybe this is indicative of, for lack of a better term, shy Biden voters.
David Plouffe, maybe?
And see: