- This topic has 12 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
I don’t quite understand this. 538 covers major national polls between the presidential candidates. In all of the polls that they cover, Trump is ahead. Not only is he ahead with the voters, but Trump has a built-in advantage when it comes to the Electoral College. And Biden’s performances (understandably) keep getting worse and worse.
So…why does 538 project, based upon 1,000 simulations, that Biden wins 51% of the time and Trump wins 49% of the time?
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/
Nate Silver says just a 27% chance that Biden wins.
Today's forecast update is out.
More of the same — though, if you squint, Biden is at his lowest number yet, at a 27% chance of winning the Electoral College vs. 35% pre-debate.https://t.co/vsGVG18HHI pic.twitter.com/p4pIARNFaz
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) July 12, 2024
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
There are two things going on here. One is the 538 simulation, which uses Prof. Lichtman’s factors for re-election (including incumbency bonus, and economic bonuses for if you believe the official Bureau of Labor Statistics figures). By the way, Prof. Lichtman also predicts a Biden win. Then there’s the polling average prediction, which is the 27% chance figure using only polling averages.
-
https://x.com/Politics_Polls/status/1813358076868653239
Updated. Biden now w/ a 53% chance of winning. A reminder:
538’s forecast is based on a combination of polls and campaign “fundamentals,” such as economic conditions, state partisanship and incumbency. It’s not meant to “call” a winner, but rather to give you a sense of how likely each candidate is to win. Check out our methodology to learn exactly how we calculate these probabilities.
-
-
A substantive number of polls are out comparing Harris and Trump. The numbers are not good, in most cases, for Harris.
Trump, overall, has a two-point lead over Harris nationally, but with Kennedy / Stein / West it widens to four points. Not surprisingly, Kennedy/Stein/West siphons votes from Harris.
Harris has significant net negative approval ratings, -17 and -16 net disapproval in two Forbes polls. Trump’s net unfavorable ratings are much narrower, in the +1 to -8 range, depending on the poll.
Trump has big leads in battleground states including NC (+4), AZ (+6), MI (+5), PA (+2), GA (+5), and in FL (+7), TX (+8). Trump led Biden in WI (+3).
Harris is ahead of Trump in MA and NY. Not surprisingly.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
https://x.com/Politics_Polls/status/1815804888422703461
So long as polls make victory plausible, any amount of *ahem* irregularities will be swept under the rug / there will be a lack of standing to challenge anything.
-
It doesn’t make any difference. If Trump loses he will fire up the conspiracy theories and lawsuits regardless of any validity. If he loses a by a little, his people will assume it was “rigged”. If he loses by a lot his people will definitely think it was rigged. He will never admit defeat. And he (and many of his supporters) will believe any dumb conspiracy, as we saw in 2020.
It doesn’t matter who he was running against, what the polls said, what the evidence is. As you may recall, in 2016, during the Republican primary, he claimed the outcome in some states and the process and was rigged. Everything in his life, if it doesn’t favor him, is rigged.
Heads he wins; tails it was rigged.
NO MALARKEY
-
-
Steve Bannon admitting Trump is just going to say he won
NO MALARKEY
-
-
-
-
Post-Kamala candidate announcements show that Trump is still in the lead for all the battleground states except one…and this is most likely her high point. Feeling very good about her failure in the Prez race.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
[quote quote=8679]It doesn’t make any difference. If Trump loses he will fire up the conspiracy theories and lawsuits regardless of any validity. If he loses a by a little, his people will assume it was “rigged”. If he loses by a lot his people will definitely think it was rigged. He will never admit defeat. And he (and many of his supporters) will believe any dumb conspiracy, as we saw in 2020. It doesn’t matter who he was running against, what the polls said, what the evidence is. As you may recall, in 2016, during the Republican primary, he claimed the outcome in some states and the process and was rigged. Everything in his life, if it doesn’t favor him, is rigged. Heads he wins; tails it was rigged.[/quote]
You post as if Dems have never claimed an election was rigged. HRC still claims the 2016 was manipulated.
-
And along those lines, Harris last year clocked the worst net-negative rating (-17) of any veep in NBC’s polling history. And she’s going to have to justify a series of failures; border control (e.g., “you had one job…”), inflation catastrophe, crime, global unrest, disaster pullout of Afghanistan, not to mention her tacit collaboration as ringleader in propping up senescent Joe Biden.
And let’s throw in the fact that Harris has never been anything but a San Francisco Progressive. In 2019, she was awarded the “Most Liberal Senator” award, which was just taken down last week. She supported the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, open borders, repeal of Trump tax cuts, an “end” to “mass incarceration”, gun bans, student loan debt forgiveness, price controls for drugs and union payoffs.
Young voter support for Harris is not there.
Personal style, she’s bumbling, halting, incoherent. She’s prone to ridiculous gaffes. Virtually all of her senior staff quit. She’s tied to a teleprompter and can’t think on her feet. She bragged about her tough-on-crime positions. And the Left is furious with Biden/Harris’ position supporting Israel vs. the terrorists. She dodged the Netanyahu presentation to Congress. She’s supposed to sit next to the House speaker, and has literally never missed a joint session, yet there was a sudden “conflict” so she couldn’t attend the Israel speech. She’s been very vocal about calls for a ceasefire, but doesn’t have the fortitude to show basic respect to an ally’s address to Congress.
And let’s not leave out the wee fact that 14 million primary votes have officially been cancelled.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
Steve Bannon admitting Trump is just going to say he won
It’s interesting to me to hear the audacity of Democrats talk about Trump jailing his political opponents.
Steve Bannon served a four-year prison sentence. Know the actual crime? Contempt of Congress.
Eric Holder, Obama’s Attorney General, was also found in Contempt of Congress. It was never litigated, there was no court case, he wasn’t put in jail.
Merrick Garland directed the FBI to go after regular parents who attended school board meetings and treat them as domestic terrorists using the Patriot Act.
Yeah. It’s Trump that jails his political opponents.
Incidentally, if you get a chance, you might want to listen to the closing arguments of the prosecutors in New York case against Trump brought by Letitia James. They begged the five judge panel not to sanction them for bringing the case in the first place. Each of the five judges cast doubt on the case; e.g., (1) it was a private transaction between sophisticated entities (2) no one was hurt, the loan was paid off, (3) other commercial developers do the same thing and you’ve never prosecuted them, (4) no impact on the public marketplace, (5) mission creep (clear overcharging with state law being used for an unintended purpose), (6) the valuations were entirely subjective, (7) neither party complained about the other party’s valuations, (8) the supposed wrongdoer advised the supposed victim to do their own due diligence, (9) the supposed victim did their own due diligence, (10) the loan was made based upon the supposed victim’s valuation, and (11) the judges demanded to see cases of equal nature from the prosecutors which they were unable to supply.
Sounds like the Democrats weaponizing the courts against political opponents. Of course, it ticks off Republicans. But it ticks off Independents, too. The courts aren’t supposed to work like that.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.