I agree with your sentiment that it is an aggregate of polls. Plus as it relates to their map, how is Texas "likely" GOP… what did he win it by in 2020?

So, when questioned about current polling showing Harris in trouble, all of the left wing pundits keep harping about some wave that's coming "the last two weeks" of people who are non-politicos that start engaging now and will pull Harris across the finish line. Is there such a phenomenon? Wouldn't those people also be accounted for in the polling?

HeardAboutPerio said:

---

Fox News Power Rankings: Voter outreach, ballot efficiency and a little Housekeeping https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-power-rankings-voter-outreach-ballot-efficiency-little-housekeeping

My take away from this is "Trump has an inefficient lead overall but not in swing states"

This is worrisome if true. I hope the positivity throughout the thread is accurate. For me, this is gonna be a squeaker.

---

SEP 30 to OCT 15th polls... the big shifts have come in the last 10-14 days

HeardAboutPerio said:

---

I agree with your sentiment that it is an aggregate of polls. Plus as it relates to their map, how is Texas "likely" GOP… what did he win it by in 2020?

---

Most of these outfits consider 'likely' something inside 8 points or so. Maybe 10. They all have a different threshold but it is pretty far out there and would generally require a massive blue or red wave to win something labeled 'likely' for the other side. It has happened though. Pretty sure Wisconsin was considered likely Blue in 2016.

#New General election poll

🔴 Trump 47% (+2)
🔵 Harris 45%

Last poll - 🔵 Harris +2

Redfield #D - LV - 10/21

— Political Polls (@PpollingNumbers) October 22, 2024

And ... the Oct 22, 2024 daily tracking chart is out ... https://t.co/U2xKEgoeNu pic.twitter.com/rg3Abjbkim

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) October 22, 2024

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Bovada was flat for 5 days after a strong Trump trend, but today odds climbed even more for Trump.

Currently Trump -175, Harris +150

---

-175 is implied 63%
+150 is implied 40%

Looks a lot like poly market

Georgia, ironically, was the one battleground state that pollsters got right four years ago; Biden led in RCP's polling aggregate by +0.8 and won by +0.3.

Bear in mind that pollsters missed Trump support by a pretty wide margin in all of the other battlegrounds, including Michigan, in both 2016 and 2020.

On this date in 2016, the RCP aggregation showed Hillary Clinton up eleven points before losing the state two weeks later by 0.3 points.

Joe Biden was up in Michigan by 7.8 points, and ended up winning it by 2.8 points.

Have pollsters improved their performances in these states? Perhaps, but I'd bet that even the good numbers for Trump in Michigan may understate his real standing on Election Day, especially against a candidate who seems to be running out of gas everywhere except the deep-blue states.

so in 2016 the polls were off by ELEVEN POINTS against Trump and in 2020 off by FIVE POINTS against Trump. What happens if it is still off by 3 points this time?

Quo Vadis? said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Bovada was flat for 5 days after a strong Trump trend, but today odds climbed even more for Trump.

Currently Trump -175, Harris +150

---

-175 is implied 63%
+150 is implied 40%

Looks a lot like poly market

---

just went over to PredictIt:

September 22
Harris 57
Trump 46

October 22
Harris 45
Trump 60

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

#New General election poll

🔴 Trump 47% (+2)
🔵 Harris 45%

Last poll - 🔵 Harris +2

Redfield #D - LV - 10/21

— Political Polls (@PpollingNumbers) October 22, 2024

---

WOW

4 point flip with Trump again leading in POPULAR VOTE?!?

Does this guy have any credibility? Take a look at his full thread.

Harris is still going to win.
1. No poll average has Trump reaching 50% (with few undecided.)
2. Harris approval is still higher in all the averages than Trump's.
3. Majority of polling is weighting to 2020/2016 vote recall to capture voters they missed in 2016 and 2020. When…

— Jeffrey Evan Gold (@jeffgoldesq) October 21, 2024

His ideas seem to hinge on unaccounted for voters and faulty polling modeling.

Red field is garbage though.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Does this guy have any credibility? Take a look at his full thread.

Harris is still going to win.
1. No poll average has Trump reaching 50% (with few undecided.)
2. Harris approval is still higher in all the averages than Trump's.
3. Majority of polling is weighting to 2020/2016 vote recall to capture voters they missed in 2016 and 2020. When…

— Jeffrey Evan Gold (@jeffgoldesq) October 21, 2024

His ideas seem to hinge on unaccounted for voters and faulty polling modeling.

---

What he says is certainly possible. He believes that they fixed the undercounts in 2016 and 2020 of the Trump support and are now undercounting young voters.

He may be right. But he does not actually provide any evidence of any of his theories and falls back on a lot of traditional logic, like a D gov helps a D pres candidate and so on.

I do believe that there has been a concerted effort to fix the undercount and have been largely ignoring comparisons to 2016 and 2020. I would caution anyone on that.

I just noticed the MOE on that Latino support poll is +/- 9 points. That seems ridiculously unreliable.

Yeah that number seems pretty darn sketchy.

In other words, he says no poll average has Trump above 50%, yet he's calling the polling unreliable, yet believes that he has the answers as to what would make them more reliable, yet still calls out "missing accurate voter counts". It reads like he's hopefully speculating.

Also how I read it.

Bunch of ifs.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Does this guy have any credibility? Take a look at his full thread.

Harris is still going to win.
1. No poll average has Trump reaching 50% (with few undecided.)
2. Harris approval is still higher in all the averages than Trump's.
3. Majority of polling is weighting to 2020/2016 vote recall to capture voters they missed in 2016 and 2020. When…

— Jeffrey Evan Gold (@jeffgoldesq) October 21, 2024

His ideas seem to hinge on unaccounted for voters and faulty polling modeling.

---

Not a poll and not worth discussing. There are thousands of people on twitter posting their opinions. This guy is just another one.

#NEW NATIONAL poll - favorable/unfavorable rating

🔴 Trump: 50%-48% (+2)
🔵 Harris: 48%-50% (-2)

Gallup | 10/22 pic.twitter.com/RAWCvTdoMK

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 22, 2024

Like I have said before. We won't know anything about polls until after the election and the hindsight.

It's going to be a close race. Trump HAS to pick off a rustbelt state and GA. Harris wins if she goes 3/3 in the rustbelt.

Trends in polling is what to watch. And if you have been paying attention almost all if not all swing states are trending Trump.

Will it be enough, who knows. Get out and VOTE!

If major pollsters have Trump up or tied, even slightly behind, in the national popular vote, this election is over; and Trump will be 47

For those with the interest and the time in getting into the nitty gritty.

#NEW NEVADA poll

🔴 Trump: 49% (+2)
🔵 Harris: 47%

AARP | 10/8-15 | N=600LV

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 22, 2024

MagnumLoad said:

---

If major pollsters have Trump up or tied, even slightly behind, in the national popular vote, this election is over; and Trump will be 47

---

This may not be correct. You are assuming that pollsters haven't changed or changed little the voting demographics since 2020 or 2016.

I personally think that they have changed some. They are giving R's more share and D's less. But did they get it right? Won't know until after the election.

They could have also swung too far to the R side and are overstating Republicans(doubtful).

MagnumLoad said:

---

If major pollsters have Trump up or tied, even slightly behind, in the national popular vote, this election is over; and Trump will be 47

---

*With the caveat that their mathematical adjustments are not over-correcting for Trump now instead of under-correcting like in 2020 and 2016. All of these polls take raw data and perform math voodoo to try to account for variables. There's been a lot of attempted correction for the shy Trump voter. We'll see what happens.

Quote:

---

There's been a lot of attempted correction for the shy Trump voter

---

Is there anything/link that states this? Any poll state this?

Quote:

---

The Hill just released a story, "What if Joe Biden was the better candidate all along?" Here's another: "Forget Kamala Harris: Should Democrats Have Picked Michelle Obama?" More: "Even Dem Voters Show Signs Of 'Buyers Remorse' Over Party's Unprecedented Electoral Moves: I&I/TIPP Poll."

The last article is absolutely worth reading. Its polling data showed that 58% of Democrats agreed with the statement: "The process the Democratic Party used to select its nominee for President did not yield the strongest candidate." [emphasis added]

Remember, this isn't the polling data of conservatives, PJ Media readers, or undecided voters these are Kamala's fellow Democrats!

Additionally, 54% of Democrats agreed with the statement that "I lost significant faith in the Democratic Party because it did not disclose Biden's health issues during the primary process." [emphasis added]

---

LINK

if this is accurate Trump wins

👀 https://t.co/W3wjiwadh5

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) October 22, 2024

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

#NEW NEVADA poll

🔴 Trump: 49% (+2)
🔵 Harris: 47%

AARP | 10/8-15 | N=600LV

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 22, 2024

---

I am no expert on the Mountain West but it seems if Trump wins Nevada..

he will absolutely win Arizona.

If the polls are good, they do. They have mathematical models (called "weighting") which correct for variables (and one of the reasons they provide a margin of error). A lot of the weight explanations and their raw data are behind paywalls but the final results are often put out in public without a public discussion of their weighting process.

This one provides the data tables and states they mathematically weighted based on likelihood of voting:

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/us-presidential-election-national-voting-intention-21-october-2024/#usvipop

Some other polls will weight based on other factors.

Science Denier said:

---

Quote:

---

There's been a lot of attempted correction for the shy Trump voter

---

Is there anything/link that states this? Any poll state this?

---

I haven't seen it anywhere. In the public media/university polls that now have Trump leading or tied... they are still oversampling and overweighting Democrats from what I can see.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

If the polls are good, they do. They have mathematical models (called "weighting") which correct for variables (and one of the reasons they provide a margin of error). A lot of the weight explanations and their raw data are behind paywalls but the final results are often put out in public without a public discussion of their weighting process.

This one provides the data tables and states they mathematically weighted based on likelihood of voting:

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/us-presidential-election-national-voting-intention-21-october-2024/#usvipop

Some other polls will weight based on other factors.

---

The most accurate polls are the private, expensive ones that we don't see and the campaigns keep private.

The Democrats have been seeing something very definitive and very worrisome for them since about 3 weeks ago, roughly.

Trump going hyperbolic on poly market.

Hit 25% this morning, now at 32%

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Trump going hyperbolic on poly market.

Hit 25% this morning, now at 32%

---

My only concern with betting markets on the election is we know males are more likely to vote for Trump. We also know that around 75% of people who bet on sports are male. While I hope it's a good sign of things to come, I wonder how accurate betting will line up with the actual results. .