Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. Polls were pretty accurate in 2016, and they've been pretty accurate in every recent presidential election:
RCP Final Average/Final Popular Vote Count
2016: Clinton + 3.2% / Clinton + 2.1% (within 1.2%)
2012: Obama + .7% / Obama + 3.9% (within 3.2%)
2008: Obama + 7.6% / Obama + 7.3% (within .3%)
2004: Bush + 1.5% / Bush + 2.4% (within .9%)
Conclusion: Major pollsters are pretty good at their job, and that includes 2016. 2012 was actually off by more than 2016 was, but even in 2012, which was the biggest polling error in modern history, the difference was nowhere close to the margin of advantage that Biden currently has.
2. Swing state polls in 2016 were wrong, but those were conducted by small, local pollsters. This time around, states like Michigan and Pennsylvania are being polled by better, much larger pollsters.
2016 Pollsters in Michigan: Fox 2 Detroit, Gravis, Detroit Free Press, Trafalgar
2020 Pollsters in Michigan: CBS News, The Hill, Reuters, Trafalgar, NY Times, Epic
Conclusion: The only polls that were meaningfully wrong in 2016 were polls in specific swing states, but those polls were conducted by local pollsters that simply aren't as good at polling. This was a well-known issue going into the election, and Nate Silver discussed it several times. This time around is a totally different story. Major pollsters that have a track record of much better success (see point #1) are working these states. The idea that "These same polls said X in 2016..." is simply wrong. They aren't the same polls.
3. You can win the electoral college if you lose the popular vote by 2-3%. You probably can't do that if you lose the popular vote by 8+%.
A lot of people somehow believe that the general election result and the electoral college have nothing to do with each other. That's not correct. The greater the margin of victory in the popular vote, the lower the likelihood that a candidate will lose the electoral college. Trump won the EC despite losing the popular vote by 2.1%. However, had that margin of loss in the popular vote been any bigger, he wouldn't have won states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, and that would have prevented him from winning the EC.
Bottom line: Anything can happen, and that means that even candidates who have a 12% (1 in 8) chance of winning can win. But it isn't very likely, and there's no good reason to believe that the polls that are giving Biden such an enormous advantage can't be trusted because "they were wrong last time."
Last edited by Wittgenstein's Ghost; 10-19-2020 at 10:13 AM..
1. Polls were pretty accurate in 2016, and they've been pretty accurate in every recent presidential election:
RCP Final Average/Final Popular Vote Count
2016: Clinton + 3.2% / Clinton + 2.1% (within 1.2%)
2012: Obama + .7% / Obama + 3.9% (within 3.2%)
2008: Obama + 7.6% / Obama + 7.3% (within .3%)
2004: Bush + 1.5% / Bush + 2.4% (within .9%)
Conclusion: Major pollsters are pretty good at their job, and that includes 2016. 2012 was actually off by more than 2016 was, but even in 2012, which was the biggest polling error in modern history, the difference was nowhere close to the margin of advantage that Biden currently has.
2. Swing state polls in 2016 were wrong, but those were conducted by small, local pollsters. This time around, states like Michigan and Pennsylvania are being polled by better, much larger pollsters.
2016 Pollsters in Michigan: Fox 2 Detroit, Gravis, Detroit Free Press, Trafalgar
2020 Pollsters in Michigan: CBS News, The Hill, Reuters, Trafalgar, NY Times, Epic
Conclusion: The only polls that were meaningfully wrong in 2016 were polls in specific swing states, but those polls were conducted by local pollsters that simply aren't as good at polling. This was a well-known issue going into the election, and Nate Silver discussed it several times. This time around is a totally different story. Major pollsters that have a track record of much better success (see point #1) are working these states. The idea that "These same polls said X in 2016..." is simply wrong. They aren't the same polls.
3. You can win the electoral college if you lose the popular vote by 2-3%. You probably can't do that if you lose the popular vote by 8+%.
A lot of people somehow believe that the general election result and the electoral college have nothing to do with each other. That's not correct. The greater the margin of victory in the popular vote, the lower the likelihood that a candidate will lose the electoral college. Trump won the EC despite losing the popular vote by 2.1%. However, had that margin of loss in the popular vote been any bigger, he wouldn't have won states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, and that would have prevented him from winning the EC.
Bottom line: Anything can happen, and that means that even candidates who have a 12% (1 in 8) chance of winning can win. But it isn't very likely, and there's no good reason to believe that the polls that are giving Biden such an enormous advantage can't be trusted because "they were wrong last time."
You keep right on thinking how accurate they were and you keep right on think Biden will win: some of us are not so sure. The polls are leaning more and more toward Trump:that 15 point lead Biden had is shrinking every day or didn't you realize that?
You keep right on thinking how accurate they were and you keep right on think Biden will win: some of us are not so sure. The polls are leaning more and more toward Trump:that 15 point lead Biden had is shrinking every day or didn't you realize that?
1. The polls were pretty accurate in 2016, and I laid out the actual data in my post. This is an objective question, not a matter of opinion.
2. Here is the RCP average for 2020 over time. How can you look at this and think there is a meaningful trend of Trump closing the gap? Biden's lead over the last week is bigger than it has been in all of 2020.
1. Polls were pretty accurate in 2016, and they've been pretty accurate in every recent presidential election:
RCP Final Average/Final Popular Vote Count
2016: Clinton + 3.2% / Clinton + 2.1% (within 1.2%)
2012: Obama + .7% / Obama + 3.9% (within 3.2%)
2008: Obama + 7.6% / Obama + 7.3% (within .3%)
2004: Bush + 1.5% / Bush + 2.4% (within .9%)
Conclusion: Major pollsters are pretty good at their job, and that includes 2016. 2012 was actually off by more than 2016 was, but even in 2012, which was the biggest polling error in modern history, the difference was nowhere close to the margin of advantage that Biden currently has.
2. Swing state polls in 2016 were wrong, but those were conducted by small, local pollsters. This time around, states like Michigan and Pennsylvania are being polled by better, much larger pollsters.
2016 Pollsters in Michigan: Fox 2 Detroit, Gravis, Detroit Free Press, Trafalgar
2020 Pollsters in Michigan: CBS News, The Hill, Reuters, Trafalgar, NY Times, Epic
Conclusion: The only polls that were meaningfully wrong in 2016 were polls in specific swing states, but those polls were conducted by local pollsters that simply aren't as good at polling. This was a well-known issue going into the election, and Nate Silver discussed it several times. This time around is a totally different story. Major pollsters that have a track record of much better success (see point #1) are working these states. The idea that "These same polls said X in 2016..." is simply wrong. They aren't the same polls.
3. You can win the electoral college if you lose the popular vote by 2-3%. You probably can't do that if you lose the popular vote by 8+%.
A lot of people somehow believe that the general election result and the electoral college have nothing to do with each other. That's not correct. The greater the margin of victory in the popular vote, the lower the likelihood that a candidate will lose the electoral college. Trump won the EC despite losing the popular vote by 2.1%. However, had that margin of loss in the popular vote been any bigger, he wouldn't have won states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, and that would have prevented him from winning the EC.
Bottom line: Anything can happen, and that means that even candidates who have a 12% (1 in 8) chance of winning can win. But it isn't very likely, and there's no good reason to believe that the polls that are giving Biden such an enormous advantage can't be trusted because "they were wrong last time."
Yep. This pretty much sums it up for a snapshot on 10/19/2020. If you were putting money on the table at this point, you sure would not be putting it on Trump to win this election.
The other factor that must be considered is the volatility, this was "huge" to use a Trumpism, back in 2016. Trump bounced all over the place, and in the last few weeks, he was trending up. It was at the peak of that bounce where he managed to squeak by with 17,000 votes in three key states to win the electoral college.
In 2020 the trends are fairly flat for both the battleground states and the popular vote which is more typical of a second term election in any case. This more than anything else has to be very worrying for Trump's campaign managers. Except for Florida, he does not seem to be able to move the needle.
Check post #3 right above this one to see this with crystal clarity.
Last edited by GearHeadDave; 10-19-2020 at 10:42 AM..
Yep. This pretty much sums it up for a snapshot on 10/19/2020. If you were putting money on the table at this point, you sure would not be putting it on Trump to win this election.
The other factor that must be considered is the volatility, this was "huge" to use a Trumpism, back in 2016. Trump bounced all over the place, and in the last few weeks, he was trending up. It was at the peak of that bounce where he managed to squeak by with 17,000 votes in three key states to win the electoral college.
In 2020 the trends are fairly flat for both the battleground states and the popular vote which is more typical of a second term election in any case. This more than anything else has to be very worrying for Trump's campaign managers. Except for Florida, he does not seem to be able to move the needle.
Check post #3 right above this one to see this with crystal clarity.
Yep, good points. A big reason for the lack of volatility this year is the lack of undecideds. In 2016, there were way more undecideds than there are now. That makes sense -- after all, who hasn't made their mind up about Trump at this point? The pool of people who don't yet know who they will vote for is very small, and it doesn't appear that Trump is trying to win them over. Instead, his approach right now is to simply fire his base up to get as much turnout as possible.
The way I was taught, it looks to me like on the graph, Biden is dropping and Trump is rising.
Trump just got 2 more votes coming from our household this morning! That was me cheering "Go Trump! Go Trump! Go Trump"!
Clinton was said to have a 90% chance of winning in 2016 even up to Election Day, and the only President Clinton I remember (whom I voted for twice), was Bill, not Hillary.
I did not think that Trump was going to win the election, and wouldn't even turn on the radio because I did not want to hear that Hillary Clinton had won. My husband told me Trump had won, but even then, I'm "Are you sure you heard that right."
The way I was taught, it looks to me like on the graph, Biden is dropping and Trump is rising.
Trump just got 2 more votes coming from our household this morning! That was me cheering "Go Trump! Go Trump! Go Trump"!
Clinton was said to have a 90% chance of winning in 2016 even up to Election Day, and the only President Clinton I remember (whom I voted for twice), was Bill, not Hillary.
I did not think that Trump was going to win the election, and wouldn't even turn on the radio because I did not want to hear that Hillary Clinton had won. My husband told me Trump had won, but even then, I'm "Are you sure you heard that right."
Taking President Trump for the win OP!
Then you were taught wrong. The only shift in Trump's favor is that minor blip over the last few days, and as you can see on the graph, those sorts of blips occur with regularity -- they coincide with new polls being released, thus affecting the overall average.
If you can look at that graph and somehow conclude that Trump is genuinely closing the gap in a real way, you have the most rose-tinted glasses in the world on.
1) The media is killing right of center fake news more than left of center fake news.
2) The media is not even bothering to in hiding left of center bias.
3) Social media is not hiding left of center bias.
4) Trump seems less focused.
5) Biden is not a demon child. Hillary was. Not a fan of Biden but Hillary truly is one of the most vile humans on the planet.
6) Dems are actually paying attention to PA MI WI.
7) Dems are being less inept.
8) Biden just does not cause as much bile inducing hate of himself.
9) October surprises seem to center around Biden's son, not himself.
10) Peoples lack of anger over left of center riots is perplexing to me but seems to be a thing.
Could be wrong. 2020 is odd and unusual to say the least.
1) The media is killing right of center fake news more than left of center fake news.
2) The media is not even bothering to in hiding left of center bias.
3) Social media is not hiding left of center bias.
4) Trump seems less focused.
5) Biden is not a demon child. Hillary was. Not a fan of Biden but Hillary truly is one of the most vile humans on the planet.
6) Dems are actually paying attention to PA MI WI.
7) Dems are being less inept.
8) Biden just does not cause as much bile inducing hate of himself.
9) October surprises seem to center around Biden's son, not himself.
10) Peoples lack of anger over left of center riots is perplexing to me but seems to be a thing.
Could be wrong. 2020 is odd and unusual to say the least.
Honestly, not a terrible analysis, lol. But I will add to your last point:
10) Peoples lack of anger over left of center riots seems to be caused by right of center counter violence.
The way I was taught, it looks to me like on the graph, Biden is dropping and Trump is rising.
Trump just got 2 more votes coming from our household this morning! That was me cheering "Go Trump! Go Trump! Go Trump"!
Clinton was said to have a 90% chance of winning in 2016 even up to Election Day, and the only President Clinton I remember (whom I voted for twice), was Bill, not Hillary.
I did not think that Trump was going to win the election, and wouldn't even turn on the radio because I did not want to hear that Hillary Clinton had won. My husband told me Trump had won, but even then, I'm "Are you sure you heard that right."
Taking President Trump for the win OP!
Biden will lose because he is an awful candidate, a career politician past his waning years who doesn't know where he is, what he is running for, or what his positions are. He is totally beholden to radical lunatics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
