Biden is unambiguously ahead in the polls. The Normal-Polling-Error Zone is a place we talked about in 2016, when we told you that Trump was only a normal-sized polling error away from beating Hillary Clinton.... The Zone of Plausibility...is where we are this year. I think of the Zone of Plausibility as extending out to reflect an error of up to two standard deviations — so, it’s a race where the favorite has somewhere from an 84 percent to 98 percent chance of winning. You wouldn’t consider the underdog winning in an election like this to be a routine occurrence. But, well, it’s plausible, and it isn’t that hard to find precedents for it.... At the same time, though, a 2016-style polling error wouldn’t be enough for Trump to win.... A Trump win remains plausible.... Polls can be wrong — indeed, the whole point of our probabilistic forecast is to tell you the chances of that — but they’re more likely to be wrong when a candidate’s lead is narrower....
Unless I missed something buried in all that statistical wonkery, Silver doesn't talk about why the polls might be more wrong in 2020 than they were in 2016. Here's what I'd say about that.
First, there might be more reason this time around for Trump supporters to avoid talking to pollsters or to give dishonest answers to pollsters. Not only is there fear of economic and social consequences for supporting Trump, there's open advocacy of the practice of lying to pollsters. I don't think there's anything like that on the Biden side.
Second, if pollsters are at all inclined to skew their numbers to manipulate opinion, they may have been more motivated to do so in 2020. What Trump did in 2016 was a massive surprise, and the defenses against him were lower. There was complacency at the time. Smug confidence. In 2020, there has been endless anxiety and hyper-alertness. I think that may have led pollsters to provide better numbers.
Third, if pollsters plumped up the numbers for Biden to feed the emotional and political needs of Democrats, then that may backfire as confidence based on polls leads some Democrats not to bother to vote, especially if they don't feel too great about Biden.
Fourth, we've got coronavirus this time, and anti-Trumpsters seem to be way more worried about it than Trumpsters. So more Trumpsters will show up in person to vote. More anti-Trumpsters have turned to mail-in voting, but who knows how well they've filled out the forms and whether they've put their envelopes into mailboxes in time to get counted?
पोस्ट्स
१३५ टिप्पण्या:
Remember also the pollsters are all based in big liberal cities. Hence, they daily drink the kool-aid with their friends.
Looks like the pundits are hedging their bets.
Nate can’t discuss those things because if the underlying data are wrong all the probabilistic pronouncements built from the data are bullshit.
And he’s selling probabilistic pronouncements.
My take is desperation. You know that there are problems with polling, when they are increasing the D bias in polls at the time when Rs are showing great gains in party registrations. And Silver seems to be accepting these polls as golden, and factoring them into his projections. But, like Climate Change, GIGO. Garbage In, Garbage Out. There are few places in the country, where the Dems are acting confident right now. Which campaign is acting like it expects to win? And which one seems to be filled with doom and gloom, knowing in their hearts that they are going to lose? And, yet, some polls, at this late date, are actually showing Biden pulling away fro Trump!
On the flip side, maybe these biased polls have factored in the level of voter fraud they expect on the part of the Dems. So, sure, the Rs May have picked up a couple hundred thousand new voters in Florida. But the Ds already have even more fraudulent ballots ready to go.
Biden is unambiguously ahead in the polls declares the Silver Delphic Oracle.
Maybe, but then, maybe not. Since early-to-mid October Biden’s been running TV ads out here in Western MA, area code 413, situs of Northhampton which is basically Cambridge-of-the-Berkshires. Leftism infects the Conn. River valley; loony populations dot both banks. Examples include Amherst (home of Zoo-Mass), Hampshire College and of course the ultra-feminist-screeching Smith College.
Here in W.Mass we’re surrounded by the leftist states of CT, NY, VT. All solid Democrat blue.
So why is Biden spending money out here? Does he not believe the Silver Oracle?
"I think that may have led pollsters to provide BETTER numbers".
-AA
As usual, good analysis from the esteemed Blog leader. But I wonder if the use of "better" numbers rather than "faked" numbers reveals some wish thinking on AA part.
What say you Commenters? Let the meaningless onsession with how Althouse will vote commence! ; )
Two more days until Four More Years. I'll be here when the election is called for Trump, waiting for the celebration and the unhinged reaction of the Leftists on this site.
THEOLDMAN
Biden may well win.
But I can't think of a recent election where they weren't under-valuing the more conservative candidate. Here, in Israel, in the UK. How many years did polls show us the UK didn't want Brexit? How many pundits told us the Brits were sorry they had voted for it.
And then pow! Given a chance to vote, the voted more and more for Johnson and Brexit.
(I do think getting the left thinking Trump stole the election if he wins would just be an added bonus for these pollsters)
And this verbiage..."Trump can still win". Of course he can *still* win. It isn't even Election Day yet!
remember 2016?
a month before the election, the polls were saying that Hilary! would win by 90%, or More!
a week before the election, the polls were saying that Texas (TEXAS!) was in play!
a DAY before the election, polls said that Hilary would win by 6% (with a +-5% margin of error)
the day AFTER the election, Our Poor Chuck starting 'reminding' us, that...
The Polls WERE Correct! Their predictions were 'within their margin of error!'
So, when Nate Silver says polls 'would have to be off by Way more that in 2016"...
i ask, WHICH POLLS? WHEN IN 2016?
REMEMBER! according to Our Poor Chuck,
the (final) 2016 polls were NOT OFF! they were within their margin of error
It is simpler than any if that and Nate knows it. Every poll makes assumptions about the electorate on election day. When those assumptions are just flat out wrong, ignoring facts like voter registration...
There are two, nay three parts:
- Undecided to vote have decided to vote, maybe a breaking group for Trump
- Decided votes deciding note to vote, almost certainly breaking (net gain) for Trump
- Previously closeted voters letting their freak flag fly (less shy Trump voters)
If the minority returns/ engagement freak out is accurate, I assume all three are factors.
Biden is unambiguously ahead in the polls
yep! he WAS UNAMBIGUOUSLY in iowa
President Donald Trump took the lead over (D) former Vice President Joe Bien. The poll shows Trump at 48% and Biden at 41%
it's WEIRD! how EVERY YEAR, the polls show the democrat Landslide! evaporating about now
...and have you seen the pictures of those crowds at Trump rallies vs. the morgue like quiet of Biden events? The enthusiasm gap is yuge!
And how do bad numbers for a candidate affect fundraising? Who would waste money on somebody down 12 points?
What happens to my polling outfit if I release "outlier" data showing Trump even or ahead? Ignored? Attacked? Nothing good for my business anyway.
Most people I’ve seen defend the polls, their reasoning is built around the pollster’s financial interest in being good at their core business. It would hurt them to be wrong so they will be careful to make the adjustments they need to make to get it right. They may not be perfect, but they’re not dumb and they won’t miss anything obvious. But that assumes that getting it right IS their core business. There are clearly reasons to believe that’s not their core business.
Biden can still win.
As long as you are part of the ‘rich’ Working class (no debts and ability to move money around) you will be able to take advantage of the fact that the poor working class will be screwed over under Biden. Just as under Obama.
This time around, though, the dot gov doesn’t have any free cash (sic) to create a trillion dollar stimulus to placate the proletariat who voted for him. We have a very serious debt problem, that will only be solved by getting people back to work.
The mail-in factor is the truly unprecedented bug in the system, and I wonder if Silver knows of polling that takes account of partisan motivation and follow-through on this front. My impression is that conservatives would be more likely to see the process through, and there seems to be some indication that this is happening. I still think it will most likely be Biden, but if it goes the other way, I suspect the (non-conspiratorial) retrospective accounts will focus on polls not being sensitized to accurately measure disparate mail-in voter behavior.
Other non polling reasons to suspect a Trump victory:
Enthusiasm Gap
Democrats relatively underperforming in urban early voting
“Can I change my vote” trending on Google after last debate
Visible black support for Trump
Even old time rock stars can't fill a parking lot for Obama. Forget about what it would take to get a 7-11 parking lot full for Biden. The Biden team can't announce its "rally" locations ahead of time because if they do, they get more Trump supporters there to heckle than Biden supporters. There are more Democrats at a Trump rally wearing MAGA hats and dancing to YMCA than show up for Biden. The Biden campaign bus gets followed around by the Trump hearse, and Biden's supporters call the police to "make them stop, Mom!" The only way Biden wins is if he cheats, and we know he's not a stranger to that idea. Hopefully, Trump and the Republicans have lawyers at least as accomplished as Bush's were.
Agree with Ann.
But the all important question we want to know is who will/did Althouse vote for? Meade is a solid Trump vote.
Yesterday in Omaha there was a Trump truck and car parade with big flags. I’ve never seen anything like it. That I can tell you!
Nate, put that into your probabilistic equation!
Silver can't come out and admit he thinks Trump will win, because he'll never get another cocktail party invitation ever again if he does. So, instead he says: "Trump can't win, cuz he's a total poopy-head, so there! (But if he does win, I'll be sure to stitch up the numbers so I can take credit for it, like last time!)"
If Trump were to win California by a million votes, who doesn't think that the left would not yell "fraudulent voting/voters!"
"Not only is there fear of economic and social consequences for supporting Trump"
So, Althouse, do you think those fears are justified? If you do, as I think you do, and if you think of yourself as caring about the health of the polity, as I think you do, isn't that a good reason to vote for Trump?
Nate Silver's forecasts will be proven utterly worthless, once again.
But you can bet that in about three 1/2 years, the media will be trotting him out anew, like some kind of infallible oracle.
SAD!!
It Won't Be Close.
Bank it.
The two biggest casualties in the past 10 years? Journalists and pollsters.
In my experience, the future is one of the hardest things to predict.
Silver schmilver. I want to know what Mick thinks.
If Trump wins again, Nate Silver will have to hang up his togs. But all this talk of shy Trump voters ignores the shy Biden voters. In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump. If all your neighbors have Trump signs in their yard, if your boss is a big Trump supporter, If your spouse won’t shut up about Trump, are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?
Look at the attendance at the rallies, especially those that are not attended by the president, and the ongoing efforts of the media to ignore, indeed deny them. Trump supporters caravans in Beverly Hills. The msm propaganda isn't working.
Try to picture Nate Silver predicting a Trump win.
It's unthinkable. What would that look like for him? The guy would be declared an enemy. His numbers wouldn't be published by many major media outlets. They'd shun him going forward. He'd be finished, even if he was right. Especially if he was right.
I'm not saying he's lying. I'm just saying, try to picture it.
In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump.
You don't live in an area like that, do you? I do and Dems are loud and and proud.
" are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?" Those neighbors won't come to your home and burn it down with you in it. Unlike biden supporters who will. Ask the folks whose businesses were again destroyed in Philadelphia.
"But I wonder if the use of "better" numbers rather than "faked" numbers reveals some wish thinking on AA part."
That's a good question, but in the context of the whole paragraph, there's something that just assumed, and I could have been explicit, which is that the pollsters are trying to support the Democrats. If that's not the case, the whole paragraph — the reason why the polls could be more off than in 2016 — is wrong.
Left Bank of the Charles said... In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump.
Do you have first-hand knowledge of this phenomenon? Because it contradicts my life experience with partisans, which is that conservatives are much more tolerant of dissenting views than liberals are.
Wrong LB Trump supporters are gonna laugh at you, but not even to your face. They’re not assholes like you and your ilk.
Re push to mail voting, either by mailing a ballot to everyone or even just an application for absentee ballot
They are reducing the cost for Jacksonian voters who often don’t care to vote to vote. And, in fact, may be daring them to vote.
Those Americans are contrary at best. Their voting is unlikely to be well modeled.
It’s gonna be a wild ride.
Some of the savvier pundits have pointed out that 2016 Brexit and the election of PM Theresa May were made possible because the politicization of the BBC and british culture made it socially unacceptable to vote for anything but Labor and to remain in the EU. I think Trump's re-election will mirror that.
The quiet Trump supporters are real and number in the millions. The popular culture, universities, democratic ideologues have heaped nothing but ridicule on anyone who thinks Trump is doing something positive. Of course people are going to 'go grey', nod and smile then pull the lever for Trump.
These little essays from Nate are like those tell tail hairline cracks in a dam about to give way. They have perverted the use of polls to the point they don't even believe them.
"Try to picture Nate Silver predicting a Trump win."
Exactly. I do remember distinctly Nate being pilloried by NY Times readers and even getting internal criticism when in 2016 he gave Trump a 32% chance of winning in the closing weeks of that campaign. He had to quickly walk it back with number crunching bullshit about "however unlikely, Trump could win Florida or even Ohio which would increase his chances"
Nate learned a valuable lesson in giving his readers what they wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear.
They haven't figured out how to poll people in this age, and it's getting worse. No one answers, and the people who do answer hang up, especially if they're Republicans. Someone will figure out how to poll again and make a lot of money.
Nate Silver is irresponsible for pushing a Biden or the fix is in narrative. It's a narrative that could get people killed by promoting more unrest if Trump wins.
Ditto above. I miss Mick.
I don't dare predict anything myself, but Mick...
He was absolutely certain from the beginning, all in for a year at least, and he was right.
I hope this seems like a fair question for Nate: On what date did you forecast the outcome of the 2020 Democratic Primary in favor of Biden, and with what confidence?
If a sample polling process worked in spring in may work in the fall. If it * fAILeD * in spring it is likely to fail again in the fall. The VP candidate this year, unlike in many prior years in the history of both parties, is the LEAST popular challenger to the standard bearer. Tulsi Gabbard of all people got more votes than Kamala Harris. MaryAnn Whatsit the psychic got at least as much. Somehow the desires of the voters as expressed at the actual polls has differed, this year, from the outcomes of the pre-election sample polling process. Why is that? And again, at what point does Nate expect the two processes to converge?
Or shall we expect them to remain out-of-synch?
The only polls to believe are the Rallies. Trump gets tens of thousands at every one, and Senile Biden draws flies, even with the Usurper Hussein Obama. You all need to see with your eyes not your ears. #Trump2020Landslide. Trump will win Dade Co. Florida, and then it will be over. Even California will flip.
LOVE, Mick
Why should we assume that pollsters follow their economic interests to produce accurate polls when the news media clearly doesn't?
Just wondering.
Also, does the NYT still publish their probability numbers like last time? The ones that gave Hillary a 95% chance of winning?
And further, from what I understand, only about 2% of those contacted participate in a poll. So we start with a biased sample. What makes that 2% different, and why should we believe that they represent the population as a whole?
Biden announced his run right after the "perfect call" with the Ukrainian President, and Hunter resigned from Burisma the same day... hmmm
It's over for the present iteration of the Democrat Party and the "resistance" led by the shadow POTUS Usurper Hussein Obama. Trump broke them all. #MAGA!!!!
Landslide! Trump takes California!, but all he needs is Fla., PA., OH. and TX (DONE)
330-350 Electoral votes.
Did you guys miss me?
Remember I was the only one here who called it against Crooked Hillary in 2016, and I called it early!! Landslide Trump 2020 #MAGA
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are more shy Trump voters or shy Biden voters in Texas?
Taken at his word, Silver is that dangerous creature, a "scientist" or at least a statistician, a modeler, who believes his own model. He casually forgets it is at best a limited and broken view of the world, and having satisfied himself with the technical manipulations and expert tuning he and his team has applied, believes it is the closest mirror possible to reality. This is a dangerous mistake. He believes in his model and more surprisingly, he still believes in polls. Deep inside, he still believes Hillary had a very high chance of winning, and that something incredibly unlikely happened in 2016, rather than questioning the polls or his models.
My theory - and I'm not alone - and this is not new -
The left want to skew the polls so they have plausible deniability when they use vote fraud to cheat to win.
In the last three elections there have been a total of about 130 million votes for President. As of today, 92 million have already voted and estimates on total votes run between 150 and 160 million. While the polling folks may have a reasonable handle on the usual 130 million votes, I don’t think anyone knows where the additional 20 to 30 million votes will go.
What Trump did in 2016 was a massive surprise, and the defenses against him were lower.
I think that is the primary reason for faulty polls. The goal is to discourage Republican expectations and fund raising while encouraging the same among Democrats. Many independents also go with the expected winner.
Remember that Democrats are always leading Republicans in the polls until the "surprise" tightening at the end. Wasn't Dukakis 17 points ahead of GHWB in the late summer of 1988?
"Not only is there fear of economic and social consequences for supporting Trump, there's open advocacy of the practice of lying to pollsters. I don't think there's anything like that on the Biden side."
You are wrong on the last sentence in the sense of writing there is no reason for Biden supporters to lie to pollsters- there is a reason, but it isn't motivated by fear.
Here is how each political party would lie about their intentions to pollsters this year:
(1) A true Trump supporter who is going to lie would say he is voting for Biden. He would also, if he thought about it deeply enough, take it to the next level and tell the truth that he is a Republican voting for Biden- this has a double error effect on the poll itself. This is exactly the lie I told to the one political poll I responded to back in August, I think it was.
(2) A true Democrat Biden supporter, to lie to fluff up Biden's numbers, would lie and say he is a Republican, but otherwise admit he is voting for Biden.
I think both lies are getting told to the pollsters. Most of the lies are of the kind where a Trump supporter lies about voting for Biden, but a small number are those who lie about party affiliation, too. The main point is that it doesn't take many such people to fluff up a 7 point poll lead- just 1 in a hundred on both sides are enough to skew the results that much, and there is no statistical fix for these kinds of liars. Republicans are harder to sample, and when you get one who responds says he is voting for Biden, but really isn't- that data is almost surely going into the poll. When you get a Democrat who lies about being a Republican voting for Biden, that is exactly the same thing as the previous sentence- it goes into the poll unfixed by modelling on past elections.
Are the polls wrong? I am all but certain of it. It doesn't mean Trump will win, but it does mean to me that Biden ain't going to win by no 7.5% margin in the popular vote- he will likely win by less than 3% if he wins at all. I just want to point out once again- Silver is lying about the national polls in 2016- they were all wrong because none of them showing Clinton winning by 3%+ picked up on the fact that all of her margin was contained in just the state of California- an important detail that would have been mentioned had any of them actually had a valid sample and result. The national poll average was an accident- a result I could have given you without polling a single fucking person.
The big unknown to me is cheating. The Democrats are good at vote fraud. In 2018, I think the Arizona Senate race was decided by fraud, as were a number of Orange County House races. Those were mostly ballot harvesting. The "mail in" ballots are an even better method of vote fraud. State supreme courts, similar to the FL court in 2000, have enabled "late" voting.
I just hope Trump wins by enough to make fraud obvious.
It’s fucking amazing that the commentators here are still worried that AA May vote for Biden. What does she have to do to convince you other than almost always posting trump positive stuff and always take his side when he makes an arguably ambiguous statement - or even a statement not ambiguous at all such as accusing doctors of fraud? Dye her face orange and get a MAGA tatoo on her chest?
"Not only is there fear of economic and social consequences for supporting Trump..."
I find that fear to be a rational one. Reason #4,926 to reject cruel neutrality.
The left has embraced the cruel part. But neutrality? Not even close.
I follow the early voting details pretty relentlessly, and here are my thoughts about it:
(1) Polls asking what method of voting voters were going to use this year showed an overwhelming edge to Democrats voting by mail. However, where it is possible to do so, that polling edge in mail-in vote isn't seen for the Democrats in ballots returned- they have an edge in margin, but according the polls on voting method, it should have been at least 2 times larger. In other words, Republican voters have used mail in votes at a much higher rate than expected.
(2) Where it is possible to measure, Republicans are dominating in-person early voting, like here in TN, FL, and TX. This will probably also be the case on election day itself, but with almost 93 million people already voting, there will probably not be more than 50 million still to vote on Tuesday- probably a good deal less, but they will skew heavily Republican pretty much everywhere.
(3) The biggest missing piece of the early vote analysis is how non-party affiliated voters are voting in the early vote- we know their percentages, but he don't know if they are breaking to Biden or to Trump. Some people do try to model such voters by looking at where they live, but even that is fraught with error. Historically, fewer Republicans cross over to vote for Democrats than the reverse- Democrats always in my life have had registration edges over Republicans and do today.
The key thing about polls isn't so much what people on the phone tell you, it's how well the pollsters get their sample mix of voters rights. "Likely voters" are not "actual voters."
This entire year is a "black swan event." Key cities in swing states are on fire. There are tons of ballots that will get thrown out because it's easier to spoil (and harder to correct) a mail in ballot than an in person ballot. Etc. Etc.
My hunch is that trying to use old models to predict who will actually, successfully vote will not be accurate to predict voting patterns this year. And, if the sample is screwed up, then the polls are worthless.
"If Trump wins again, Nate Silver will have to hang up his togs. But all this talk of shy Trump voters ignores the shy Biden voters. In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump. If all your neighbors have Trump signs in their yard, if your boss is a big Trump supporter, If your spouse won’t shut up about Trump, are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?"
Left Bank, you are just full of shit. I live in Trumpland- no Democrat has ever felt inhibited about displaying their support for Clinton or Biden here. Here in Anderson County Tennessee, which Trump won with 64% of the vote in 2016, higher than for the entire state of Tennessee itself, Clinton and Biden signs and bumper stickers outnumbered Trump's by 100 to 1. Democrats are are like vegans in an Outback (I know, I repeat myself)- they will tell you about their preferences no matter where they are.
The term 'Trumpster' seems a bit rude and dismissive.
You're a stickler for words...is their an analogous term for Biden supporters?
You may want to try 'President Trump supporters.'
The shy Democrat was Dorothy Rodham, Hillary Clinton's mother, who sat through all her husband's Republican rants and pulled the lever for Stevenson when she was alone in the voting booth. I'm not sure how many of them are left. Feminism means that fewer women are stuck in such relationships. If they are in such relationships, they may be more vocal about their own views. Plus, there are fewer people in rural Republican areas than there are in urban Democrat and suburban mixed areas, so it stands to reason that shy Biden voters of that sort - Democrats and Never Trumpers who are afraid to say who they are voting for - aren't that common.
There may be some "shy" Biden voters in the sense that they don't know if they are going to vote until they do, but I would suppose that they are outnumbered by shy Trump voters. Women in Dorothy's situation may still be around, but they are outnumbered by people who are afraid to say they are voting for Trump because of their neighbors', coworkers' and family's disapproval. Sorry to say it, but militant Democrats in most of the country are more likely to hassle people they know who disagree with them politically than Trumpites are.
Polls routinely underrate conservative support for the reasons already discussed by others here. I'd also point out that the election will come down to a few states -- maybe three, maybe more. If Biden has an edge in the polls solely because of the vote in California, Trump could still win. I suspect, though, that Trump may do better in California, New York and Illinois than last time -- not win them, but cut into Biden's margin of victory.
It's not socially acceptable to be a Biden supporter in rural Trump areas?
You don't live in, nor have you been to one, I'd guess.
I live in the reddest of red areas. Trump flags, banners, signs and American flags everywhere. But there are a few scattered Biden signs and flags too. Why? Because you can live in a majority Trump area and not have your property damaged and your life threatened if you show Biden support.
In fact, I have not had anyone at work ask me about who I am going to vote for EXCEPT Biden folks who seem to have no problem getting in my face and hysterical.
They seem very disturbed but certainly not shy.
Strewn across the crowded landscape of punditry this past week have been various articles that boast about how much more money Biden is spending vis a vis Trump. I'm not sure why that is important enough to mention....Trump's opponents have been giving him copious amounts of free publicity/campaign help for his entire first term. Not all good mind you, but the old saying that there is no bad publicity may have a bit of truth in it.
Which got me to thinking. What is an effective use of campaign funding in 2020? TV ads? Who watches anymore? Junk mail? Even worse. Caller ID screens out most of the robo calls and push polls. So what's left? Yard signs I guess. They at least get noticed.
All the rest of the money is just slops thrown out to the trough, where consultant piggies of both persuasions snuffle it up.
Pachydermis
Consider Texas, where the tolerant Trump supporters harassed a Biden bus on the interstate. And trump gave them a thumbs up. Gee, I always though that only the Dems tried to prevent the other side from speaking
“The best thing about a Trump win would be we'd never hear from Nate Silver again.”
Not true alas, talking heads never go away, but's it’s a nice hope.
Left Bank, the difference is that Trump voters don't yell, scream, riot, or fire you for saying you're voting Biden. Democrats do all of those things. The evidence is what we already saw in 2016 with the "shy voter" effect, and it's only gotten worse. It is a one-way road, there is no shy biden voter.
There is also a consistent under sampling of rural voters. This is coupled with early returns showing a good rural turnout in some key states: WI, NV, MN. At the same time there is a significant turnout problem for Biden in urban areas. Milwaukee's 4th Congressional district (D+25, nearly all black north side district) mail in votes are lagging the state average by ... 9 percentage points. If the 4th district doesn't turn out on Tuesday, Biden is toast in Wisconsin, unless Trump is getting smoked beyond all pollsters imaginations in the 'burbs. That's possible but again, there's no "shy" biden vote so I think it's pretty well estimated in the burbs.
I'm making the same argument at the moment for NV.
Clark County is underperforming the turnout needed for Biden. Rural is outperforming. Hilary won by just 27k votes, and that was dependent on an 85k margin in Vegas...
Trump gets 276 - 296 EV (depending on PA) and wins.
American polling is corrupt. All public polls are juiced.
I now live in Bucks County, PA. I have seen my county mentioned as critical literally dozens of times in the news in the last 2 weeks alone. After decades of my vote not mattering at all (New Jersey), the wife and I now get to cast the most valuable votes in the country.
Bucks used to he reliably blue. If the signs I see mean anything at all, Bucks is going at least 65-35 for Trump this year. The enthusiasm for him around here is massive. Gov. Wolf and his fascist trannie Sec. of Health pissed so many people off over COVID, he pretty much guaranteed a Dem slaughter.
I don't think PA is the only place we'll see this dynamic. I think in an honest vote, we'd see a Nixon-Reagan level landslide. The only hitch is that it won't be an honest vote. Hasn't been honest anywhere near Philly in decades. But that fraud was always focused on black districts, so if they were caught, it would enjoy 100% protection with cries of "Racism!" But the odds of there being black people being unwilling to go along with that old game has risen exponentially this year. I think. And that's where the battle over the next few weeks will be. I really think only pro-Trump blacks in Philly districts who protest their votes being stolen can potentially get us through this without bloodshed.
The wife and I will be poll watching in our neighborhood anyway.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are more shy Trump voters or shy Biden voters in Texas?
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are people in Texas that would answer their phone to a number they don't know>
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are people in Texas that would Answer a pollster's questions?
Polls do NOT work any more; only a few people (like my bleeding heart liberal mom) are willing to take them
Who HERE has participated in a poll?
Freeman Hunt:” It's a narrative that could get people killed by promoting more unrest if Trump wins.”
The whipping up has already begun.
I have already seen “the polls cannot be wrong so if he wins the fix was in” tweets. I have seen that “anonymous sources tell the Atlantic “ that the Trump campaign is going to get state legislatures to override their own elections and appoint Trump electors.
Freeman, has Birkel called you a “cvnt” yet today? Patience.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are more shy Trump voters or shy Biden voters in Texas?
Shy Trump voters. Or, as Scott Adams calls them, the dad joke voters. Some people lie to pollsters because they don’t feel safe saying what they think (the shy voter), but others lie to pollsters because they think it’s fun to lie to pollsters (the dad joke voter). I think most Biden voters would be proud to do their little bit for Biden poll domination. I don't think there is such a thing as a shy Biden voter. Even in Texas.
Eleanor - Very good point, IMO. Recall in 2000 the Jim Baker press conference vs. Warren Christopher press conference. Christopher looked corpulent! Baker was a boss in public and a boss behind the scenes. Baker immediately choose to go the federal route as he felt the FL SC was a D stacked deck.
I wonder who the R Jim Baker will be in 2020?
Look at the People's Pundit Youtube from Oct. 29, wherein Robert Barnes lays out the case that Silver and many other pollsters are purposefully (and fraudulently) cooking the books to make Biden look to be far ahead, setting the stage for, if Trump wins, claims that he stole the election.
Before 4 years ago I would have filed thats under "conspiracy theory." After the events of the last 4 years, it is "probably true."
There is no vote for Biden. Hardly anyone thinks that this corrupt, senile, way past his sell-by date, old fool would’ve even a capable President, much less a good one. There are voters for Donald Trump, and there are anti-Trump voters, who has to vote for Biden to say “no”
to Trump. Anti-Trump is a coalition of people (1) were part of the huge Deep State corruption machine and are angry that they may find their access to the feed trough cut off; (2) hard core “Progressives” who want to burn the country down and start over from scratch, this time without that pesky Constitution and Free Speech, shit; (3) people who let the news media make up their minds for them; (4) people who have been voting Democrat all their lives and by God they always will; and (5) people who have made it financially and don’t give a damn about people below them on the economic ladder, and they are turned off by Trump’s personality. Here and there you will find a couple more Biden voters who don’t fit in any of those five categories, but I think I have 97% - 99% of them.
Pro-Trump includes (1) people who benefitted economically from Trump’s policies, and even if they are currently in economic pain due to COVID-19 overreaction they trust him to lead the eventual recovery; (2) people who are appalled by what Democrats have done and are doing to encourage rioting and looting and other forms of violence; (3) people who are relieved that Trump is ending the perpetual wars and inducing concrete steps towards peace in the world; and (4) people who genuinely like Donald Trump. Needless to say, the categories in the Trump coalition have non-null intersections.
So which coalition is bigger? I know which one is the most enthusiastic. But is it bigger?
Did you guys miss me?
Is that really you, Mick?
What's with the "V"?
@Mick, well speak of the devil!
Did you guys miss me?
Not all of us, no.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
Consider Texas. Is it likely there are more shy Trump voters or shy Biden voters in Texas?
ANSWER; More shy Trump voters, without a doubt. People do not get beaten up or fired or ostracized for saying they will vote for Biden, no matter how many trump supporters are around. Whereas that is typical for people who say they are for Tump. And, while TX as a whole leans Red, the big cities (Houston, Dallas, Austin) are VERY blue.
I knew I remembered this:
From the NYTimes..sound familiar?
In early September, Mr. Bush led Mr. Kerry among women, 48 percent to 43 percent in the CBS News poll. As of Sunday, in The New York Times/CBS News poll, Mr. Kerry was leading among women who are registered voters, 50 percent to 40 percent. Other polls show Mr. Kerry with a smaller lead among women, but a lead nonetheless.
The Times/CBS poll showed Mr. Kerry solidifying an already strong lead among single women.
I think that Trump can still win if he gets more votes in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.
Whoever wins, it's doubtful that the correct message will be read from the result.
AA - pretty good analysis! But you're analyzing junk data. Just look at this statement: "... I think that may have led pollsters to provide better numbers..."? AA - do you really believe this? My knowledge of polls is strictly from the commercial side. Every poll published is paid for by someone. This business is heavily correlated to politics - I have yet to meet someone in this industry which does polls for altruistic reasons. I remember a business associate of mine once state: "...In the polling business - Angels need not apply..."
Left Bank of the Charles said...Consider Texas. Is it likely there are more shy Trump voters or shy Biden voters in Texas?
It depends on what part of Texas you are talking about. Austin is a bit to the left of NYC. Any Trump supporters there would be really shy.
But all this talk of shy Trump voters ignores the shy Biden voters. In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump. If all your neighbors have Trump signs in their yard, if your boss is a big Trump supporter, If your spouse won’t shut up about Trump, are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?
You don't know your own country.
I grew up in one of the most conservative towns in a predominantly rural Rocky Mountain state. Gun ownership is nearly universal. There are zillions of ranchers, miners, and retirees, and they routinely vote 80 percent Republican. But the other 20 percent is unabashedly vocal. Signs for Democrat candidates are fairly common, and are never stolen or defaced. The local college students demonstrate downtown for every left-wing cause, and are never subjected to any more intimidation than the occasional raised middle finger from a passing driver. Democrats are welcome in the service clubs and churches and other civic organizations, and not shy about voicing their opinions.
Republicans are to Democrats as Christians are to Muslims. There are crazies at the fringes of both parties, but the craziness and intolerance seeps WAY farther into the mainstream of one party than the other.
I don't really care what Silver thinks. This was always going to be a Turnout election. You have a zillion Yellow-dog Dumbshit Democrats in the USA, and if enough of them turnout, Trump will lose. If enough of them stay home because they don't care, and if enough Trumpsters vote, then he will win.
Plus, Biden isn't ahead in a lot of key swing states. How good are THOSE polls? Who knows. Anywyay, that Biden is ahead, and that Hillary almost won in 2016, shows the USA is headed for the dumpster. Its only when the Soccer Moms and dumb "Swing voters" feel some personal pain is it going to change. Look at Oregon, they're A-OK with Antifa rioting and burning and looting, as long as it doesn't affect them. These people will keep on voting Left until they PERSONALLY are hurt by it.
I've never been polled, but yes, I would lie to them.
IMO, the problem is that polling has replaced good, old-fashioned political analysis and horse sense. Political people, especially those on the left, have become so focused on polls that they never, ever seem to stand back and try to form reasoned judgments about what's going on in the electorate. There used to be just a couple of polling companies (Gallup, Harris) that would go to great lengths to conduct accurate surveys; but political reporters didn't rely on polls like they do now. Instead, they would talk to cab drivers and barbers, local precinct officials, or whomever they could to get feel for the ebbs and flows of public opinion. I don't trust the polls for a number of reasons, but mainly because I don't see evidence that the majority of the public has suddenly decided to embrace socialism, political violence, the politicization of sports and entertainment, remote schooling as the norm, higher taxes, etc.
That Bernie Bro Hodgkinson shooting up the Congress baseball team probably has as much to do with “polling errors” as anything. Some total stranger calls you from somewhere and you are going to tell them who you are voting for?
I am encouraged as one of the neighbors who had a Tump sign his front lawn took it down yesterday. I asked why and he said the comments on doctors and other exaggerations have turned him off. I a Biden voter, look forward to seeing more reasonable Republicans who have seen the light show up to vote.
Don't worry. The smart people are ON it!
https://twitter.com/i/status/1322766009376378881
The only poll that mattered was the one (Gallup) two weeks ago that said Amy Coney Barrett should be confirmed BEFORE the election. There's your "shy" voter - and not necessarily strong pro trump. But that 52% sure as he'll ain't voting for Biden. On that day (the day the poll was released) I could feel the shift.
With all the Trump parades & rallies in areas where he is most likely to lose makes me think there is an attempt to also win the popular vote.
With all the Biden ads in areas where he is most likely to win makes me think there is a possibility Biden could win the EC but not the popular vote.
Our polls can't be wrong because of REASONS. Blah, blah, blah...
We are God's gift to pollsters. People would never lie to us, they trust us implicity. Oh, and there's no such thing as voter fraud. Democrats register only eligible voters and would never, never register the dead, illegal aliens or felons.
Left Bank of the Charles: "If Trump wins again, Nate Silver will have to hang up his togs. But all this talk of shy Trump voters ignores the shy Biden voters. In rural America where Republican support is strongest, it is not socially acceptable in many circles to be against Trump."
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Just cut it out. You are approaching stevie uhr and readering territory with that nonsense.
Today, Sunday, the local daily rag, The Detroit Free Press, gave its final poll showing Biden up by eight. Yet, Trump was in the state Friday. Biden (and Obama!) had two Michigan rallies yesterday. Trump will be back today. Thus, one can only conclude the race is a toss up in Michigan and the poll is very inaccurate.
Silver is no better than that beleaguered Goldman Sachs economist and TV commentator on CNBC back in 2008 talking about how we’re seeing 6-sigma events weekly, maybe even daily, with a pained face. He seemed sincere. If Silver is sincere, it’s a damning indication of his intellectual limitations.
steve uhr said...It’s fucking amazing that the commentators here are still worried that AA May vote for Biden. What does she have to do to convince you other than almost always posting trump positive stuff and always take his side when he makes an arguably ambiguous statement - or even a statement not ambiguous at all such as accusing doctors of fraud? Dye her face orange and get a MAGA tatoo on her chest?
You might want to ask Meade about the location of that MAGA tattoo.
Li'l stevie uhr: "What does she have to do to convince you other than almost always posting trump positive stuff and always take his side when he makes an arguably ambiguous statement - or even a statement not ambiguous at all such as accusing doctors of fraud?"
The government, in writing, incentivized ChiCom flu "fraud" by offering increased payments for ChiCom flu diagnoses. Doctors have provided public commentary on just that.
Suicides are being listed as ChiCom flu. Car accident deaths are being counted as ChiCom flu deaths. Heart attacks are ChiCom flu. End stage cancer is counted as ChiCom flu.
As others have mentioned, the only numbers to really pay attention to are ChiCom flu listed death rates and overall excess death rates for the nation.
Spoiler: There will be zero or near zero excess death rates by the end of the year.
And that tells you everything you know.
Dr Fauci, bless his little globalist, Gates-funded, ChiCom supporting heart, is doing everything he can with his last minute politicking.....but it will have zero impact.
Not to worry. After Trump fires his rear end, along with Redfield, after re-election, both of those guys can look forward to joining the Gates Foundation and hanging with the Soros boys. So cash won't be a problem for them and they'll get to spend even more time on private jets to Davos and elsewhere.
Really, it will be a win-win for everyone involved.
Here's where I think the polls are wrong.
1) If attendance at a Trump rally is a true indication, a lot of Democrats are voting for Trump. Pollsters seem to think that a large Democrat early vote is good for Biden, when it just might be good for Trump.
2) Pollsters are underestimating the black vote for Trump, which might be as high as 30%.
3) There seems to be an extremely large Trump vote coming from people who have not voted in recent elections.
4) This one is just my personal opinion, but why would any rational human being vote for a Party that condones rioting, arson, looting, violence, intimidation, and threats?
“are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?”
When the popular culture and the media, old and new, overwhelmingly supports your worldview? Of course you are.
Plus, let’s be honest. Despite cries of “Boogie Boyz!”, even the most rabid Prog knows that the threat of political violence comes almost exclusively from the Left. That’s why they feel free to pull the shit that they do.
I live in Trumplandia and my closest, and best, neighbor is a Biden supporter (elderly people that watch CNN). I doubt that it would even occur to them that they have anything to fear from their neighbors. Because they don’t.
PA: Philly/Philly adjacent running 25-27% ballots returned, compared to state average of 37%. Nearly all black, all Dem districts.
Who's turning out on Tuesday? So far turnout is not what Biden needs.
We'll see if the turnout is enough for Trump.
@ Yancy - I live in Trumpland- no Democrat has ever felt inhibited about displaying their support for Clinton or Biden here.
I also live in a WI county that was 67% Trump in 2016 (27% Clinton). Seeing lots of Biden signs this year - one busy street it seems like it is every 3rd house. But it is the usual peoples - active in the county Dem party for many years, employees of the school district.
But looking at the spring election, the primary was 35% Dem & 65% Rep. There was a state Supreme Court race that was 32% for the liberal (who won statewide) & 68% for the conservative. Despite the noticeable increase in signs for Biden, I don't expect to see that big a difference this fall from 2016 or Spring 2020.
What is noticeable is that there are also a lot of Black Lives Matter signs posted alongside. I attribute that to some group that was holding marches in Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Kenosha and other counties. Mostly young white girls that feel compelled to "do something for the Blacks." I think it was called "Break the Silence in the Burbs." The organizer is from Pewaukee or Mequon. She has been an organizer for the Democrat party and part of the campaign for Emily Siegrist for WI Assembly (D). From the onset I assumed that all this "BLM/Break the Silence in the Burbs" was just a Get Out the Vote initiative for the Dems. I think my assumption is right.
Maybe Mr. Silver is selling you what you want to hear........
Does anyone here believe this story:
roesch/voltaire said...
"I am encouraged as one of the neighbors who had a Tump sign his front lawn took it down yesterday. I asked why and he said the comments on doctors and other exaggerations have turned him off. I a Biden voter, look forward to seeing more reasonable Republicans who have seen the light show up to vote."
R/V, I will one up you- I was encouraged when my neighbor, who knocks on my door every election asking me if she can put a Democrat sign on my lawn, decided not to put up any Biden signs this year. Of course, maybe COVID scared her so bad she is huddled in her closet the last 8 months.
called you a “cvnt” yet today?
Ignore the 'n' and read it as "civet." That's not too bad. Kind of charming.
Media running interference on the Hunter Biden story was a major tactical error. Makes people wonder what else is hidden or fabricated. Makes people angry that other people think they get to tell them what they can watch or read. One liberal friend has been texting me about this repeatedly. Suddenly the gulf between the liberals and progressives opens wide.
It is not complicated, the polls are a form of psychological warfare until just before the election when they “tighten” to cover the pollsters’ collective asses.
I am reminded of an article I read many years ago.
It was after the fall of the Soviet Union, at a time when the old Soviet archives had been opened to westerners.
The author was a Cold-War analyst, and he said, basicaly, "We used to use the Soviet numbers in our analyses. We knew they were political and wildly exaggerated, but we figured that we could get useful information out of trends over time and comparing them with other, contemporary, wildly exaggerated numbers. When we finally got to look inside the archives, it turned out that the numbers weren't 'exaggerated' -- they had absolutely no basis with reality. In most cases the Soviet agency publishing the numbers had absolutely no idea itself what the real numbers were."
I think we are kind of in that situation..
Sally327 said...
I think that Trump can still win if he gets more votes in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.
exactly! Years ago, a press reporter asked Iowa State Coach Jim Walden . . .
...."What would it take, for The Cyclones to beat Oklahoma next weekend?"
and Jim said, without hesitation: "Score more points than them"
There is only one poll that matters; and it ends (or should end) next Tues
Fifth, Trump is turning out and registering people who haven't voted in a long time, if ever, and who are completely invisible as likely voters, even for pollsters who are trying to find out how people will vote.
The thing is, we have convinced ourselves that we can control margin of error (unknown risk). It pervades all of public life up to and including believe the science. The world is more chaotic than our experts will admit.
Pet peeve: The use of "statistics" for these discussions is highly misleading.
For example, it is extraordinarily misleading to say that "the favorite has somewhere from an 84 percent to 98 percent chance of winning."
An accurate statement would be, "My model is based on assumptions whose accuracy cannot be known before the votes are counted. If my model is correct, then it suggests that the favorite has somewhere from an 84 percent to 98 percent chance of winning, but my model may be wrong. It's really just my best guess, so it's kind of silly to get hung up on statistics in the first place."
So why is Biden spending money out here?
The question is, who is getting paid?
Why anybody continues to pay attention to Nate Silver is beyond me.
If all your neighbors have Trump signs in their yard, if your boss is a big Trump supporter, If your spouse won’t shut up about Trump, are you going to tell a stranger who calls that you’re voting for Biden?
Shy Biden voters? How precious.
It's been my experience Biden voters never STFU about who they're voting for.
Churchy La Femme said...
In Re Soviet numbers:
Now do those from China. 😐
I asked why and he said the comments on doctors and other exaggerations have turned him off. - R/V
You really need to be a better liar.
If there is a reason for discontinuing polling altogether, it is the disappearance of landline phones which means the disappearance of telephone number listings. Add to that the refusal of most cellphone users to not answer unknown callers and we get a sever decline in responses to polling calls.
The BS about Trump supporters lying to pollsters cannot be true unless pollsters are only calling those who have previously responded to poll questions - which is not outside the realm of possibility. But that assumption is damning because most of us are absolutely never called - ever.
Freeman Hunt
Ha! There is a sweet irony in a weasel calling someone a civet.
steve uhr said...
Consider Texas, where the tolerant Trump supporters harassed a Biden bus on the interstate.
Bzzt. Thank you for playing, we have a lovely parting gift for you.
The Trump supporters merely followed the Biden bus. They could have gone antifa / BLM on it, fired guns or fireworks at it, crashed into it, etc. They didn't.
They merely followed it.
So that if Biden tried to hold an unannounced "rally" anywhere, the Trump supporters could be there, too.
Republicans don't refuse to let the other side speak, we just demand that we have a right to speak, too.
It's only the Left that takes away others' right to speak
Trump wins in a walk. 400 EVs.
I haven't seen Biden's neurologic condition described anywhere other than as dementia. It's called anomic aphasia, specifically phonemic substitution anomia. Patients maintain fluent output but exhibit literal and neologistic paraphasia. Literal paraphasia is the incorrect substitution of phonemes, and neologistic paraphasia is the use of non-real words in the place of real words. Phonemes are the sounds that distinguish one word for another. Hence Biden's propensity for nonsense 6 syllable words.
All dementia patients exhibit some form of aphasia.
It is an unforgivable that the Dems are running Biden and further proof that the Dems will do anything to win.
Trump in a walk with 400 EVs. I have an abiding faith in the intelligence of Americans.
Biden has what's called anomic aphasia. Anomia is a deficit of expressive language. Anomia is a symptom of all forms of aphasia, but patients whose primary deficit is word retrieval are diagnosed with anomic aphasia. Biden specifically suffers from phonemic substitution, which result from damage to the inferior parietal area. Patients maintain fluent output but exhibit literal and neologistic paraphasia. Literal paraphasia is the incorrect substitution of phonemes, and neologistic paraphasia is the use of non-real words in the place of real words. (Phonemes are perceptually distinct of sound that distinguish one word from another.) Hence Biden's new love for 6-syllable nonsense words.
My phone doesn't even ring if the call is from a number I don't have saved.
Fact #1: Pollsters are admitting that they are currently getting only a 2% response whereas they used to get something like 50%.
Fact #2: Many polls are push polls, e.g., “Do you plan to vote for lovable Joe Biden who has worked so hard on your behalf in the Vongress and the Senate, or do you plan to vote for the slimy Donald Trump?
So when Nate Silver cranks up his mathematical model, he is charging headlong into what one of my old STAT professors called “the fallacy of the Chinese Emperor’s nose.” The idea is that you want to estimate the length of the nose of the Emperor of China. You select some number of Chinese, perhaps 40,000 - 50,000, and you ask each to estimate the length of the Emperor’s nose. You are rigorous in your analysis, iteratively discarding outliers, for instance, and confirming that the estimates are unimodal, etc. So you calculate the mean, median, mode, and standard deviation, and there you have your estimate.
But no one is allowed to look directly at the face of the Emperor, and consequently you are applying sophisticated analysis to data that has no grounding in reality. In short, GIGO.
I think Nate Solver is readying his excuse for when Trump defeats his model. Again.
The political pollsters are similar to the covid modelers earlier this year. A bunch of hubristic "scientists" who want to claim they've created a formula to predict the future.
It's just another sign of our degraded civlization...incompetence rather than avarice.
I think the far left WANTS Biden to lose. They are even helping him to lose. If Biden wins, the Democrats are going to want things to return to their "normal". Their normal is the Clinton/Obama/Bush/Biden normal. A few wars so the proper people can financially benefit there. Foreign aid so all can get their cut. More regulation so big business has to grease the right palm. The progressives do not want that. They want Trump to win so they have an excuse to riot and destroy. They want to "burn it all down" so they can take over and turn us into a communist country. Prove me wrong!
I a Biden voter, look forward to seeing more reasonable Republicans who have seen the light show up to vote.
Didn't you mean to say "reasonable deplorables?" Come on R/V. Give it up.
I'll ask you what I have asked the few Biden voters I have come across. Why are you voting for Biden other than Trump hate ?
I have not replied to any polls this election, but when I do answer polls I lie unless they pay me. This is a matter of principle. Pollsters make money selling my response. If a pollster wants my true opinion he can pay for it.
I've been a registered voter for 56 years (you used to have to be 21), and thoughout that time I have almost always had a telephone (sometimes shared with roommate(s) in my early days). Even when I started relying primarily on my cellphone several years ago, I've always had a landline as well (my wife doesn't like to use a cellphone). YET I have NEVER been polled on my preference for a candidate for ANY political office. NEVER. I have lived in Conn., Mass., NY, DC, MD, FL, and NC. I'm prepared to believe that pollsters just make their numbers up, and then, if the actual votes don't match their poll "results", they come up with some BS excuse about margins of error, etc. PROVE I'M WRONG!
To be fair to me:
I have not called Freeman Hunt a cunt or a cvnt. I think she is well-meaning, short-sighted, and overly tolerant of people who wish her violence.
I think Ken B is a cunt. I think he hopes for the deaths of millions worldwide from food shortages because his preferred policies will lead to starvation. He wants Americans impoverished from stupid, ineffectual (toward the stated purpose), and dangerous government lockdowns of the healthy and well.
Freeman Hunt supports a policy that only makes sense in a different time and a different place. She is foolish to give Danegeld to the Dane.
Ken B supports death, destruction, and subjugation. Ken B is a cunt.
"Who HERE has participated in a poll?"
I have.
However, as I am a heavily-armed pacifist, threatening me or my family would be problematic and almost certainly fatal.
Bob Boyd said...
Did you guys miss me?
Is that really you, Mick?
What's with the "V"?
'Tis I, the victorious one.
Bob Boyd said...
"In my experience, the future is one of the hardest things to predict.
Silver schmilver. I want to know what Mick thinks"
My ears were ringing. Believe your eyes, not the gas-lighting suppression polls that try to tell you that what you see with your own eyes is not what you see. In 2016 you could walk up 1 hour before a Trump rally and get in. Now you have to camp out 2 days. The enthusiasm is OFF THE CHARTS, and that's what wins.
Don't worry about cheating. They can only cheat and win if it's close, and it's not close, and Trump has long coat tails. What they are doing w/ mail in ballots is more for creating chaos and delaying the inevitable-- the last bonzai charge of the resistance. Every Acme Trump Trap has been foiled (curses!), and the Dems will be Wiley Coyote over the cliff, and landing with a "poof". You thought 2016 Resistance was a meltdown? just wait. Mail In ballots are mostly Biden votes, and 20% of them get invalidated in every election. 2 out of 3 votes on election day will be for Trump. #TrumpLandslide2020
Are people really voting for the senile pedo traitor? This run is to set up the narrative that "Trunp is attacking his political enemies" when the criminality on Hunter's laptop comes to light. That it is totally ignored is proof of their guilt, and it goes all the way to the top. Hussein Obama proved why a natural born citizen is necessary. His lack of allegiance showed every day, and still shows today. US AID money and the Billions given to Iran got kicked back to the Swamp. "We caught them all". Trump knows he already won. Does he look worried to you?
Ann Althouse said...
"But I wonder if the use of "better" numbers rather than "faked" numbers reveals some wish thinking on AA part."
"That's a good question, but in the context of the whole paragraph, there's something that just assumed, and I could have been explicit, which is that the pollsters are trying to support the Democrats. If that's not the case, the whole paragraph — the reason why the polls could be more off than in 2016 — is wrong".
It's gas-lighting "law prof". Get a clue. Neither side of the uni-party of political elite and their media/ academia protectors want Trump to win, and they are horrified that the enthusiasm for trump is off the charts despite 4 years of "resistance". You think the swamp goes down w/o a fight?
The uni-party just wants to go back to the way it was, arguing silly wedge issues over the heads of we the people while getting kickbacks from the Billions in foreign aid, and insider trading, all while the media and academia protects them. Believe Trump when he says "we caught them all". What do you think the Obama book and Netflix deals were (Money laundering)? Where do you think that house on the beach in the Hamptons came from?
Hillary was never supposed to lose, and now they all lose in Trump's second term. Can you feel the panic? When Dade Co. Fla. goes for Trump it will be the beginning of the end. 20% of Trump rally attendees are Democrats, 30% of Blacks will leave the Plantation and vote Trump. Hispanic men are 70% Trump. It's over. #TrumpLandslide2020.
buwaya said...
"Ditto above. I miss Mick.
I don't dare predict anything myself, but Mick...
He was absolutely certain from the beginning, all in for a year at least, and he was right".
My ears were ringing. You are correct. Look with your eyes, not your ears, because the polls are designed to tell you that what you see before your eyes is not what you see. Watch Dade Co. Fla. When that goes for Trump it will be the beginning of the rout. Trump has his own polls (which are correct), and he knows he already won. Does he look nervous to you?
I told Trump to stop using my song at the end of his rallies, so now he uses "Macho Man" and does that silly dance that people on Twitter are imitating. Ugh! It even got that CIA asset Anderson Pooper (who had a child by immaculate conception) to smile.
If I understand journalese correctly, the sources do not claim to have heard Trump say whatever they say he said, they've just heard about it, whether second hand or third hand or eighth hand or whatever, there's no way to know.
Or like nearly everything else over the last 4 years, just making shit up.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा