|
On November 04 2020 11:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or performed well in the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. Models assign probability, they don’t pick winners. You can’t say that the statistical model was wrong just because a coin cane up heads twice in a row.
The models were 90% Hillary in 2016 and 90% Biden in 2020. You can't keep parroting this BS. Putting any weight to polls with MOE +4.5% is hilarious. No one should even look at the polls because they're unreliable and wrong wrong wrong by so much.
|
First meaningful Senate flip, Democrats pick up a seat in Colorado (Hickenlooper > Gardner). Very much an expected result.
|
On November 04 2020 11:47 LegalLord wrote:
First meaningful Senate flip, Democrats pick up a seat in Colorado (Hickenlooper > Gardner). Very much an expected result.
Was it expected? I was looking at the most likely flips to win the senate and I missed this one
|
I'm honestly not worried until we lose Pennsylvania
|
On November 04 2020 11:46 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:42 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or performed well in the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. Models assign probability, they don’t pick winners. You can’t say that the statistical model was wrong just because a coin cane up heads twice in a row. The models were 90% Hillary in 2016 and 90% Biden in 2020. You can't keep parroting this BS. Putting any weight to polls with MOE +4.5% is hilarious. No one should even look at the polls because they're unreliable and wrong wrong wrong by so much.
They were not, unless you're cherry-picking one outlier. They were closer to 75% iirc. And either way, neither of those numbers are a guarantee.
|
On November 04 2020 11:47 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:47 LegalLord wrote:
First meaningful Senate flip, Democrats pick up a seat in Colorado (Hickenlooper > Gardner). Very much an expected result. Was it expected? I was looking at the most likely flips to win the senate and I missed this one
after Doug jones, this was THE most likely flip.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On November 04 2020 11:47 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:47 LegalLord wrote:
First meaningful Senate flip, Democrats pick up a seat in Colorado (Hickenlooper > Gardner). Very much an expected result. Was it expected? I was looking at the most likely flips to win the senate and I missed this one
Yeah, it was likely D iirc.
|
Colorado was probably a fair bet to flip, they're not a super R state or anything
|
On November 04 2020 11:44 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or predicted the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. The polls should be disgraced, ironically, Trafalgar and the like are once again right. 538 should be totally dumped on by everyone. What a joke these people are.
Trafalgar wasn't "once again right".
538 has also been one of the most conservative models state-by-state.
The models were 90% Hillary in 2016 and 90% Biden in 2020. You can't keep parroting this BS. Putting any weight to polls with MOE +4.5% is hilarious. No one should even look at the polls because they're unreliable and wrong wrong wrong by so much.
This is objectively and verifiably wrong.
Stop embarrassing yourself.
|
On November 04 2020 11:46 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:42 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or performed well in the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. Models assign probability, they don’t pick winners. You can’t say that the statistical model was wrong just because a coin cane up heads twice in a row. The models were 90% Hillary in 2016 and 90% Biden in 2020. You can't keep parroting this BS. Putting any weight to polls with MOE +4.5% is hilarious. No one should even look at the polls because they're unreliable and wrong wrong wrong by so much.
Things with a 10% chance happen frequently.
|
On November 04 2020 11:40 Nevuk wrote:
Basically he has done more poorly with Hispanics than Hillary, but especially poorly among Cubans.
Kind of amazing to see democrats nominate a centrist back to back in a row, chasing the non existent moderate republican.
Michigan has me freaking out the most.
I think Biden still takes Ohio, though.
11% of the votes. Don't.
|
Trump has taken the lead in Ohio.
|
|
|
On November 04 2020 11:48 Cricketer12 wrote:
I'm honestly not worried until we lose Pennsylvania
If Biden loses PA we should be terrified.
|
United States44205 Posts
On November 04 2020 11:45 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:42 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or performed well in the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. Models assign probability, they don’t pick winners. You can’t say that the statistical model was wrong just because a coin cane up heads twice in a row. More like a die landing on 6 twice in a row, really. Polls were off by too much to simply write it off as "in the margin of error" two elections in a row.
Which is why models like the 538 models gave Trump a serious chance to win, despite the polls, because they know that you can't trust polls blindly.
|
Maybe this will motivate journalists to finally stop wasting everyone's time with asking the stupid "what do you think about your poor results in the recent polls?" questions when interviewing candidates.
|
On November 04 2020 11:43 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Trump is way too competitive...
Four years of this awful administration, Biden who is not 'uniquely hated' like Clinton, a white house that infected itself with a disease just weeks ago, because of their pure cognitive ignorance, yet still we have to calculate pathways to win and Trump is over performing in several places.
It truly is outrageous.
|
On November 04 2020 11:47 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:47 LegalLord wrote:
First meaningful Senate flip, Democrats pick up a seat in Colorado (Hickenlooper > Gardner). Very much an expected result. Was it expected? I was looking at the most likely flips to win the senate and I missed this one
Yeah, Gardner isn't very popular in Colorado and won because 2014 Democrats sent a garbage candidate.
McSally (R) in Arizona and Jones (D) in Alabama are the other two very likely flips.
|
United States44205 Posts
On November 04 2020 11:46 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:42 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2020 11:41 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I don't know if pollsters and election modellers will recover from this. This is looking like a 5-6 point miss despite all their pleas that they adjusted their models weighing for education and asserted that the shy Trump supporter and social desirability effect didn't exist, or performed well in the midterms. It appears they didn't catch the significant jump in support for Trump or voting depression for Biden in black and hispanic support, and the overwhelming turnout for Trump. Democrats aren't capturing that midterm energy at all.
This is looking like a very good map for Trump right now. Biden's slipping in Ohio and that's one of his few chances at keeping his election odds from not completely collapsing. If he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania is favouring Trump. Models assign probability, they don’t pick winners. You can’t say that the statistical model was wrong just because a coin cane up heads twice in a row. The models were 90% Hillary in 2016 and 90% Biden in 2020. You can't keep parroting this BS. Putting any weight to polls with MOE +4.5% is hilarious. No one should even look at the polls because they're unreliable and wrong wrong wrong by so much.
This isn't true. You're conflating polls and models based on those polls.
|
On November 04 2020 11:50 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 11:43 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Trump is way too competitive...
Four years of this awful administration, Biden who is not 'uniquely hated' like Clinton, a white house that infected itself with a disease just weeks ago, because of their pure cognitive ignorance, yet still we have to calculate pathways to win and Trump is over performing in several places.
It truly is outrageous.
On the flipside, in Florida, 40% of people said they were better off than 4 years ago. Only 20% said they were worse off. This is despite a massive pandemic.
At the end of the day, people care if their life is better. Trump has delivered on that front.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
