Muh Polls

364,840 Views | 3355 Replies | Last: 1 min ago by will25u
agsalaska
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 12:31p, 9/11/24
AG
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they are genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Elko is a loser and we will be buying him out for some obscene amount of money in two years. - Agsalaska

Reply Quote
5
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to agsalaska • 12:35p, 9/11/24
agsalaska said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
after last night a one or two point difference in the polls in an election this close is fatal

if the final polls show Harris ahead in 6 weeks- how would that not be because of the debate?
Reply Quote
1
TRM
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:41p, 9/11/24
AG
Reply Quote
1
agsalaska
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 12:47p, 9/11/24
AG
LMCane said:
agsalaska said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
after last night a one or two point difference in the polls in an election this close is fatal

if the final polls show Harris ahead in 6 weeks- how would that not be because of the debate?



Could be a thousand different reasons and don't want to clutter this thread, but for simplicity it would have to start on todays polling. If that doesn't happen and it starts in, say, two weeks, it could be a hundred different things.

We get that you are mad.
The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they are genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Elko is a loser and we will be buying him out for some obscene amount of money in two years. - Agsalaska

Reply Quote
7
rgag12
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 12:55p, 9/11/24
AG
LMCane said:
agsalaska said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
after last night a one or two point difference in the polls in an election this close is fatal

if the final polls show Harris ahead in 6 weeks- how would that not be because of the debate?


Because most people only remember events for a couple days, unless they are earth shattering. Last nights debate was not extraordinary.

If Kamala is ahead by more than some say she is now it will because of a more recent event.
Reply Quote
1
Legal Custodian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:11p, 9/11/24
AG
The real question in all of this is do the pollsters finally on the 3rd attempt finally have Trump's support correct?

They've been off by ~3.5% and ~1.75% in the 2020 & 2016 cycles respectively. If on average they're off by 2% or so but have Trump showing 6.9% better than where they had him on this date in 2020 then it's gonna be a landslide. I got that 6.9% number from comparing how much Biden was up at this time in 2020 compared to the average now (8.0% to 1.1%)

So in 2020 the two weeks leading up to their first debate which the consensus was that Biden won, RealClearPolitics had Biden being up on average 6.5%. In the two weeks following that first debate on Sep 29, 2020, RCP had Biden's average polling at 9.7%. The final two weeks the RCP average had Biden up by 7.2% with the final actuals being Biden +4.5%.

So let's say this debate performance in which the consensus is that Kamala won, she gets a 3% bump similar to what Biden got from where she is now (which is up by 1.1%)

So that'll put her at 4.1%. If the pollsters finally have the Trump support correct, then as of now that'll put her in the win column most likely similar to Biden's victory in 2020.

If they are off by roughly the same amount as 2016 & 2020, then the actuals would be Harris +2.1% which will probably lead to Trump (depending on how the battlegrounds go) win by flipping GA, PA, & AZ.
Reply Quote
3
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 1:24p, 9/11/24
AG
RE: Predictit vs. polymarket, I think I've read many times predictit based on their comments section etc. has a much more left-leaning readership/contributor set for some reason (akin to reddit?) but I honestly don't really pay too much attention to them.

Biden was 7 points ahead of her nationally on this date 4 years ago.



Trump is very likely to outperform 2016 at this point, and she will be forced to go out and do interviews out of desperation as the election date approaches, because he should in no way agree to another debate setup. Interviews and policy are kryptonite to the Democrats.
Reply Quote
1
Edited by Staff
mirose
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 1:25p, 9/11/24
AG
LMCane said:
agsalaska said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
after last night a one or two point difference in the polls in an election this close is fatal

if the final polls show Harris ahead in 6 weeks- how would that not be because of the debate?


Because of who is doing the polling
Reply Quote
3
Captn_Ag05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:51p, 9/11/24
AG


The gap is not 13 there. 8-10 at most.
Reply Quote
SA68AG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 3:05p, 9/11/24
AG
LMCane said:
agsalaska said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.


Without getting into the 'who won the debate' battle on this thread, I will be kind of surprised if the debate even registers on the long term trend lines. I don't think the stat guys will be able to see it.
after last night a one or two point difference in the polls in an election this close is fatal

if the final polls show Harris ahead in 6 weeks- how would that not be because of the debate?
Trump doing or saying something really stupid within the next 6 weeks is always a possibility besides the debate. A couple of points swing to Harris now could still be overcome by a good ad campaign.
Reply Quote
Captn_Ag05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:25p, 9/11/24
AG


Reply Quote
1
Captn_Ag05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:39p, 9/11/24
AG
Reply Quote
3
Legal Custodian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captn_Ag05 • 3:54p, 9/11/24
AG
Captn_Ag05 said:
Just FYI, he said that the latest data point they had on that polling was at 8:20pm last night. I don't know what time zone he was referring to but most likely those numbers don't include post-debate stats.

Will be very curious what the numbers are he releases tomorrow if the standard is 51-47 Trump.

Again, I don't have the most trust of any polling but Rasmussen will at least show trend lines.
Reply Quote
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Legal Custodian • 4:12p, 9/11/24
AG
Yes, Rasmussen will likely bounce around for a few days, as will Silver once post-debate numbers come in (maybe over the weekend, but more early next week).



It will be a week to ten days until we see things 'settle down' imho.
Reply Quote
2
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:41p, 9/11/24
AG
Reply Quote
3
Barnyard96
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:59p, 9/11/24
AG

Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:56p, 9/11/24
Reply Quote
3
dreyOO
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 8:14p, 9/11/24
will25u said:
Gained ground with all groups other than the Godless heathens
Reply Quote
1
texagbeliever
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:37a, 9/12/24
Latest activote poll has trump and Harris tied in Georgia.

The party split weighting: 44-36-20. (D-R-I).

Georgia is closer to 40-40-20.

Let's then look at race 65-35-6 (white-black-latino)
In 2020 and 2016 the black vote was at max 27%. Obama got 30% in 2012.

Georgia is only close because the pollsters are playing with the weighting!
Reply Quote
agsalaska
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to texagbeliever • 7:40a, 9/12/24
AG
texagbeliever said:
Latest activote poll has trump and Harris tied in Georgia.

The party split weighting: 44-36-20. (D-R-I).

Georgia is closer to 40-40-20.

Let's then look at race 65-35-6 (white-black-latino)
In 2020 and 2016 the black vote was at max 27%. Obama got 30% in 2012.

Georgia is only close because the pollsters are playing with the weighting!


That split would still be well within g the margin of error. Maybe a point statistically.

It's close because it is close.
The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they are genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Elko is a loser and we will be buying him out for some obscene amount of money in two years. - Agsalaska

Reply Quote
4
texagbeliever
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to agsalaska • 8:00a, 9/12/24
agsalaska said:
texagbeliever said:
Latest activote poll has trump and Harris tied in Georgia.

The party split weighting: 44-36-20. (D-R-I).

Georgia is closer to 40-40-20.

Let's then look at race 65-35-6 (white-black-latino)
In 2020 and 2016 the black vote was at max 27%. Obama got 30% in 2012.

Georgia is only close because the pollsters are playing with the weighting!


That split would still be well within g the margin of error. Maybe a point statistically.

It's close because it is close.


1. The racial split is not within the margin of error. It is extremely unlikely.
2. The only way the model can get that ridiculous R-D-I split is by having the racial turnout they put forth. Which would statically be shocking.
Reply Quote
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 8:24a, 9/12/24
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.
I just don't understand how you can claim this:

"especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now"

Trump is literally losing in the polls in several states right now that he needs to be elected.
Reply Quote
1
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Barnyard96 • 8:26a, 9/12/24
it says "RCP Betting Average"

is that like a prediction market or ACTUAL POLLS?
Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 8:31a, 9/12/24
AG
LMCane said:
nortex97 said:
Correct. Winning has to be defined/agreed before one starts opining about the 'winner' last night. The camps had very different objectives, especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now. He didn't answer questions in an eloquent detailed way as one might expect RFK Jr. or Ted Cruz etc to have done, but I think that's because he wasn't trying to reach the same types of folks editorial writers etc. do.

Trump already retaking the lead in poly market is the first indicia of how 'temporary' her 'bump' once again will be.
I just don't understand how you can claim this:

"especially as Trump is clearly leading where he needs to among demographic groups/states that really matter right now"

Trump is literally losing in the polls in several states right now that he needs to be elected.
Sure, if you count NH, VA, MN etc. Or for instance that trash poll of Georgia claiming 44 D electorate share. Break it into a comparison of the cycle and look at the overall picture/demographic groups, and it's an outstanding set of numbers for Trump.



Look at the trend lines/macro views, not individual/daily polls etc, is what I am basing my analysis on. I do recommend Charlie Kirk's show yesterday with Rich Baris and Mark Mitchell (RReports).
Reply Quote
3
agsalaska
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to texagbeliever • 8:33a, 9/12/24
AG
Fair. I missed that part. I just saw the R-d-I split
The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they are genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Elko is a loser and we will be buying him out for some obscene amount of money in two years. - Agsalaska

Reply Quote
TRM
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hungry Ojos • 10:07a, 9/12/24
AG
There were a couple of polls before the debate in NC that showed Harris up.
Reply Quote
Edited by Staff
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TRM • 10:33a, 9/12/24
AG
TRM said:
There were a couple of polls before the debate in NC that showed Harris up.
There were, but such polls are belied by real world numbers as to who/how many are pulling early voting now in places like NC:



And keep in mind, Trump is doing better with blacks than Biden in 2020, so some additive component of those "D" ballot requests are also going to him. Ari (and Pew) are right about blacks, hispanics, and Jews:



Cook always lags on good news;

Reply Quote
2
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:03a, 9/12/24
AG
Woah.

Reply Quote
5
agsalaska
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 11:04a, 9/12/24
AG
Wow wouldn't that be nice.
The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they are genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Elko is a loser and we will be buying him out for some obscene amount of money in two years. - Agsalaska

Reply Quote
4
Captn_Ag05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:08p, 9/12/24
AG
Reply Quote
Hungry Ojos
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captn_Ag05 • 12:11p, 9/12/24
Is that popular vote? Doesn't Kamala need to be up AT LEAST four or five points in the popular vote to avoid an electoral college blowout????
Reply Quote
2
Captn_Ag05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hungry Ojos • 12:14p, 9/12/24
AG
Yes, this is their national vote. I think she has to win by 3 to win the EC. Perhaps 3.5.
Reply Quote
Silvertaps
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:16p, 9/12/24
AG
Please catch me up on how to read election polls in 2024.
My confidence in polling took a hit after the 2020 general election with so many of them favorable to Trump over Biden (per state and overall). What has changed in gathering of information (if any)? Seems a lot of the polling can be manipulated based on whose doing it without any accountability.
Reply Quote
1 edit
normalhorn
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Silvertaps • 12:22p, 9/12/24
That's a concern I have when looking at polls.
Other than being accurate with their final polls before the election, what incentive does a polling company have to accurately and honestly evaluate their findings?
It seems the industry is rife for manipulation that could be used to affect voter turnout
Reply Quote
1
Legal Custodian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Silvertaps • 12:23p, 9/12/24
AG
Silvertaps said:
Please catch me up on how to read election polls in 2024.
My confidence in polling took a hit after the 2020 general election with so many of them favorable to Trump over Biden (per state and overall). What has changed in gathering of information (if any)? Seems a lot of the polling can be manipulated based on whose doing it without any accountability.
Polling was not favorable to Trump in 2020. Polling was off by 3.5% from the RCP Average to actual. Biden was up 7% in the two weeks before election and finished at +4.5%. Polling has underestimated Trump's support in both 2016 and 2020.

I detailed this before in the thread but the main point is if they average the same polling skew that they've had then Kamala's lead goes from 1.1% right now to Trump +.8%. If Trump gets that, then it's an epic landslide.

If Kamala gets the same bump that Biden got after the first debate in 2020 of 3%, then it gets interesting.

The absolute biggest takeaway is that polling at this point in 2020 had Biden +8.0%. Right now it's 1.1% in favor of Harris. That's a 6.9% shift towards Trump in support. That is absolutely huge.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.