texaglurkerguy said:

---

I have considered it, but I think generally this board is overrating the impact of the oil and gas comment because 1) they want to think it's a big deal and 2) bias considering a large contingent of this board went to A&M/spent time in Houston area and thus has an inflated perspective of the industry's scope outside of Texas (I had a poster earlier argue that the oil comment would hurt him in WI - a state that doesn't produce oil and gas).

I won't say polling in PA hasn't tightened since the debate because clearly it has, but we'll get some higher quality polls from PA in the next couple days to know for sure.

---

Do they not burn gas diesel and propane in WI?

USMCA is a much bigger deal in Wisconsin by a many multiples than fracking.

Components of that agreement were specifically fought for to improve the dairy industry. Now are they in place, and the benefits of the agreement are left to the producers to decide if they are an improvement.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

You're preaching to the choir, I work in O&G. I'm just saying his stance on the industry probably doesn't move the needle in PA as much as people here think, especially considering O&G is a comparatively small part of PA's economy (#10 industry per the link below).

https://www.statista.com/statistics/304930/pennsylvania-real-gdp-by-industry/

---

It's not as much about the percentage of the state's overall economy, but the geography and history of the state. The Northern and Western parts of PA experienced decades of rust belt economic decline as coal, steel, and heavy manufacturing industries contracted. PA's O&G activity is in these same parts of the state, and its growth has been one of the few economic bright spots those parts of the state seen over the last few decades, including the Pittsburgh area.

Threatening O&G isn't going to hurt Biden at all in Philly which accounts for a huge chunk of the state's GDP and has little interest in O&G, but it is absolutely going to hurt him in Pittsburgh and in a whole lot of blue collar towns in Western and Northern PA. Will it matter enough to overcome Philly and swing the state Red? I don't know, but I think it's a lot more likely now than before his comments at the last debate.

Now Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, I agree with you. Not enough O&G activity to move the needle much. Maybe Ohio, but O&G activity in Ohio doesn't have a big enough impact on a big population center like PA has with Pittsburgh. Columbus, Cleveland, Dayton, and Cincinnati don't have much direct economic connection to O&G and there just aren't enough voters in the O&G rich parts of the state to move the election needle much.

It isn't.

Jobs.

Count the oil and gas jobs.

Nate's job is not to produce true stats; rather, it's to cause a national backlash when Trump wins.
They are preparing the stage for social upheaval, riots, and violence, as Americans are led to believe that the election process was unfair.

Buckle up. The Week(s) after Election Day is going to be crazy.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

True, but there is no poll where Biden is 50% or more that doesnt have an MoE of 3-5%. The only one that keeps him above 50% if the error is -4 is the ABC +17 poll. I would be very shocked if that Poll is anywhere close to accurate.

rab79 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

I have considered it, but I think generally this board is overrating the impact of the oil and gas comment because 1) they want to think it's a big deal and 2) bias considering a large contingent of this board went to A&M/spent time in Houston area and thus has an inflated perspective of the industry's scope outside of Texas (I had a poster earlier argue that the oil comment would hurt him in WI - a state that doesn't produce oil and gas).

I won't say polling in PA hasn't tightened since the debate because clearly it has, but we'll get some higher quality polls from PA in the next couple days to know for sure.

---

Do they not burn gas diesel and propane in WI?

---

Rab79 should Google the "northern white sand" that is mined, washed, and screened in sand mines and plants in WI, what it is used for, and where the 100+ car unit trains and barges full of this sand are headed.

Pelayo said:

---

Will be interesting to see how much he hedges or walks back some of his statements as Tuesday draws near

---

He's not going to walk back anything. He's already declared the only way Trump wins is thru fruad. He's working in cahoots with the DNC and MSM (I know, same thing) to plant the seeds of doubt on any Trump win along with the ridiculous polls showing Biden is more popular than Roosevelt was in 1944.

They are planting the seeds of doubt early on so their lie can then become true when it doesn't go their way. We all know conservatives are generally more quite about things than liberals. Just look at the doxing, riots, and videos of people being harassed in public. 99% of it is one side. The MSM knows they sheeple will riot even more and cancel culture ain't seen nothing yet.

Challenger 17 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

I have considered it, but I think generally this board is overrating the impact of the oil and gas comment because 1) they want to think it's a big deal and 2) bias considering a large contingent of this board went to A&M/spent time in Houston area and thus has an inflated perspective of the industry's scope outside of Texas (I had a poster earlier argue that the oil comment would hurt him in WI - a state that doesn't produce oil and gas).

I won't say polling in PA hasn't tightened since the debate because clearly it has, but we'll get some higher quality polls from PA in the next couple days to know for sure.

---

Ok I'm not in the O&G industry, but like everyone here, i am a consumer of O&G products which is practically everything from the gas I put in my car to my clothes, shoes, plastic keurig cups I use For coffee in the morning. It's intentionally obtuse to say that reducing fracking and dismantling the oil industry only affects people in oil producing states. It will impact people from Wisconsin to Florida. Not sure about you, but I'm enjoying sub $2.00 gas.

---

Not many people really grasp this, at all.

SWCBonfire said:

---

rab79 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

I have considered it, but I think generally this board is overrating the impact of the oil and gas comment because 1) they want to think it's a big deal and 2) bias considering a large contingent of this board went to A&M/spent time in Houston area and thus has an inflated perspective of the industry's scope outside of Texas (I had a poster earlier argue that the oil comment would hurt him in WI - a state that doesn't produce oil and gas).

I won't say polling in PA hasn't tightened since the debate because clearly it has, but we'll get some higher quality polls from PA in the next couple days to know for sure.

---

Do they not burn gas diesel and propane in WI?

---

Rab79 should Google the "northern white sand" that is mined, washed, and screened in sand mines and plants in WI, what it is used for, and where the 100+ car unit trains and barges full of this sand are headed.

---

I have seen the statement that Wisconsin doesn't give a flip about the energy sector because they don't have oil and gas reserves. But they do have other mining interests, including the northern white sand that is prized for fracking operations nationwide. They do have a dog in that fight.

So dismiss that fact at their own peril.

bmks270 said:

---

How can a statistician like Nate Silver look at the numbers in Florida and Ohio, know the historical correlation to siding with the election winner, and with a straight face profess that that a Biden win is a certainty?

---

Silver is no longer a statistician in the scientific sense of the term. He's become a propaganda prop - dragged out every couple of years to spout a mountain of BS atop an ever crumbling foundation of credibility.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

I have considered it, but I think generally this board is overrating the impact of the oil and gas comment because 1) they want to think it's a big deal and 2) bias considering a large contingent of this board went to A&M/spent time in Houston area and thus has an inflated perspective of the industry's scope outside of Texas (I had a poster earlier argue that the oil comment would hurt him in WI - a state that doesn't produce oil and gas).

I won't say polling in PA hasn't tightened since the debate because clearly it has, but we'll get some higher quality polls from PA in the next couple days to know for sure.

---

We are an oil producing nation. You don't have to live in an oil producing state to understand its importance.

Higher quality polls to know for sure? Right.

Patentmike said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

And there goes your credibility. You completely ducked his main point that Biden's 50% is only b/c of a bad poll grossly skewing the numbers.

---

Take that one out and he's still averaging over 49%. Candidates polling over 49% in the RCP average have gone on to win the state 28/29 times since 2004. If we're playing the "remove the outlier" game, taking out the Susquehanna poll that has him at 45% too brings his average back to 50. Never in that time has a candidate polled over 50% in the RCP average (including outliers like the +17 poll) and lost.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

And there goes your credibility. You completely ducked his main point that Biden's 50% is only b/c of a bad poll grossly skewing the numbers.

---

Take that one out and he's still averaging over 49%. Candidates polling over 49% in the RCP average have gone on to win the state 28/29 times since 2004. If we're playing the "remove the outlier" game, taking out the Susquehanna poll that has him at 45% too brings his average back to 50. Never in that time has a candidate polled over 50% in the RCP average (including outliers like the +17 poll) and lost.

---

Your entire argument this election cycle has been about the polls. Got anything else?

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

And there goes your credibility. You completely ducked his main point that Biden's 50% is only b/c of a bad poll grossly skewing the numbers.

---

Take that one out and he's still averaging over 49%. Candidates polling over 49% in the RCP average have gone on to win the state 28/29 times since 2004. If we're playing the "remove the outlier" game, taking out the Susquehanna poll that has him at 45% too brings his average back to 50. Never in that time has a candidate polled over 50% in the RCP average (including outliers like the +17 poll) and lost.

---

haven't been following the conversation, are you speaking to national polling?

barnyard1996 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

And there goes your credibility. You completely ducked his main point that Biden's 50% is only b/c of a bad poll grossly skewing the numbers.

---

Take that one out and he's still averaging over 49%. Candidates polling over 49% in the RCP average have gone on to win the state 28/29 times since 2004. If we're playing the "remove the outlier" game, taking out the Susquehanna poll that has him at 45% too brings his average back to 50. Never in that time has a candidate polled over 50% in the RCP average (including outliers like the +17 poll) and lost.

---

Your entire argument this election cycle has been about the polls. Got anything else?

---

Nope Feel free to call me out after the election if I'm wrong

Pelayo said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Historically you're right, but in 2016 OH was +8% for Trump compared to WI, MI, and PA. So there's a pretty big rift between OH and the rest when it comes to Trump's support.

---

I just examined the 2016 polling data and the polling margin a week before the election is about the exact same for Biden as it was for Clinton. Except now Michigan has a totalitarian governor, Philly is burning, and Trump has much more enthusiasm among is supporters than he did in 2016, and much more organized ground campaign.

However the Ohio data seems to give Biden an edge in 2020 compared to the 2016 polling numbers.

But you are right, in the final results Trump was +8 in Ohio but +<1 in the others.

---

When comparing this year to 2016 in the polls, it's useful to look not just at margins but also raw totals. In WI for example Hillary led 47-40 (+7), but that 13% undecided/3rd party broke massively for trump (both ended up with about 47%). Right now it's 50-44 (+6), so the margin may be closer, but there are fewer undecideds to help close the gap. Candidates who poll 50+% in a state rarely lose.

---

That 50% RCP average includes a poll that has Biden up +17 points, 57-40.

Wisconsin also has the largest polling error of 2016 as far as I can tell, the result was Trump won but the RCP average was Clinton +6. The Wisconsin data is garbage.

The Trafalgar Wisconsin pol is Biden +1.

---

Wisconsin did have the biggest polling margin miss. That's because 13% were undecided and 7% of these went to Trump, as opposed to 0% to Clinton. Right now less than 6% are undecided, and Biden is polling over 50% on average. Again, this is why you shouldn't just look at margins in a vacuum. 46-40 is not the same as 50-44.

---

And there goes your credibility. You completely ducked his main point that Biden's 50% is only b/c of a bad poll grossly skewing the numbers.

---

Take that one out and he's still averaging over 49%. Candidates polling over 49% in the RCP average have gone on to win the state 28/29 times since 2004. If we're playing the "remove the outlier" game, taking out the Susquehanna poll that has him at 45% too brings his average back to 50. Never in that time has a candidate polled over 50% in the RCP average (including outliers like the +17 poll) and lost.

---

haven't been following the conversation, are you speaking to national polling?

---

In this instance no, I'm talking about state polling in Wisconsin.

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

The last candidate to win the election and not win Florida or Ohio was JFK in 1960.

I doubt Biden can win those states without also winning Ohio.

---

Correlation != Causation. You've given your own proof that the election can be won without those two states, and as others have pointed out, there is another probable scenario where Biden wins without them.

Detmersdislocatedshoulder said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

1) the 538 model does not claim a Biden win is certain, only that it's likely.

2) all Biden has to do to win the election is defend the 2016 map and flip MI, WI, and PA. If you're going by PredictIt, he's poised to do just that as well as pick up AZ.

---

How is this different than all trump has to do is defend the map he already won in 2016?

---

It's implied. All other things being equal, if Biden flips those three states he wins. As long as Biden doesn't lose any ground from 2016, those three are the keys to victory. The race is probably closer than most like to admit.