agjacent said:

---

Anyone else looking forward to the Selzer/DMR Iowa poll dropping tomorrow?

For those unfamiliar:

Iowa Poll will show if Donald Trump or Kamala Harris has the edge before Election Day

The Iowa Poll, a Register exclusive since 1943, is a closely watched indicator of candidate strength during election cycles, as well as Iowans' opinions on other important issues.

Does Vice President Kamala Harris have a chance of beating former President Donald Trump in ruby-red Iowa?

With Election Day right around the corner, our new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll will reveal whether Harris or Trump has the upper hand among Iowa voters.

Our last poll in September showed Trump leading Harris by 4 percentage points, a much tighter race than our June poll, which showed Trump leading President Joe Biden by 18 points. Biden eventually dropped out of the race.

The initial results from the November Iowa Poll will be published online at 6 p.m. Saturday at DesMoinesRegister.com. Those results also will be published in print in the Des Moines Register on Sunday.

---

This poll will tell us a lot about Ann Selzer's honesty as a pollster. For those who don't know, she spiked the Trump +18 in June and likely wasn't even going to announce it all except that the result leaked out anyway.

For reference, she understated Trump by 1.2% in 2020 and understated Trump by 2.5% in 2016, for an average miss of 1.85% in the Democrats' favor compared to actual election results.

For the purpose of this exercise, therefore, I'm going to operate on the assumption that whatever her polls says tomorrow, Trump will likely do about 1.85% better in the actual voting in Iowa.
-------
Here's my take on what the different results would mean:

If she has Trump up by less than 7 its straight up bull**** and she's intentionally schilling for the Harris campaign.

If she has Trump up by 9 Trump will likely win Wisconsin*, and the Electoral College.

If she has Trump up by 11 or more it means Trump probably wins the presidential election by a comfortable margin (perhaps including a popular vote victory).
-------

My guess is she will hedge (chicken out) and publish Trump + 7-8.5, which would signal a close election that could go either way... that way... any range of possibilities from a narrow Harris victory (by running the table in the Rust Belt) to a comfortable-ish Trump victory (Trump popular vote with >312 EC) would fit just barely within her margin of error.

In other words, it will be as pro-Harris as she can make it without compromising her credibility (too much) as a pollster after the election results come in.

* Iowa and Wisconsin have similar enough demographics that they tend to trend the same way. In the last two presidential elections Trump performed on the average 9.6 points better in Iowa than in Wisconsin. If she has Trump up by 9 in her poll that means he's probably winning Iowa by 10.5-11 points, which means he's probably winning Wisconsin.

“My reporting is that she's in trouble in Wisconsin,” says @MarkHalperin of Kamala Harris. “This is based on three sources — two Republicans, one Democrat — all of whom know the state quite well and all of whom told me today … they would be somewhere between surprised and… pic.twitter.com/41alRNqW8L

— 2WAY (@2waytvapp) November 2, 2024

Well that's a bit more comforting…

The first of my final predictions for 8 battleground states is now released. North Carolina looks poised to go to Trump by roughly 5.1% on the strength of its early voting data and party registration trend. It is an essential hold as it retains the Core 235 electoral vote base…

— Seth Keshel (@RealSKeshel) November 1, 2024

outofstateaggie said:

---

“My reporting is that she's in trouble in Wisconsin,” says @MarkHalperin of Kamala Harris. “This is based on three sources — two Republicans, one Democrat — all of whom know the state quite well and all of whom told me today … they would be somewhere between surprised and… pic.twitter.com/41alRNqW8L

— 2WAY (@2waytvapp) November 2, 2024

---

This would be amazing! C'mon you cheeseheads!!

Highway6 said:

---

will25u said:

---

The propagandists are playing with y'all.

All of the gloom and doom needs to stop. Polls don't matter any longer.

VOTING DOES!

Get yo' asses to vote if you still can, and if not, vote on election day!

VOTE VOTE VOTE!

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

---

This x1,000,000

Vote damnit!

---

VORE!!!

This morning's update. Chart tells the story I think. Possibly another update later today.https://t.co/vsGVG189Sa pic.twitter.com/rCSpsT1sEx

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 2, 2024

Hold onto your butts

Geez y'all are sensitive.

This is a toss up. It's not going to be a blowout for trump.

Carry on though.

Here's the simple math. It comes down to 3 states and they are all a coin flip. Trump just has to win 1 coin flip out of 3. Harris needs to be 3 of 3.

From a probability standpoint, she has a 1/8 chance of pulling 3 heads in a row. No idea how he's coming up with a 50/50 chance for all 3 states

Philip J Fry said:

---

Here's the simple math. It comes down to 3 states and they are all a coin flip. Trump just has to win 1 coin flip out of 3. Harris needs to be 3 of 3.

From a probability standpoint, she has a 1/8 chance of pulling 3 heads in a row. No idea how he's coming up with a 50/50 chance for all 3 states

---

True, but those states never split. This year may be different.

1939 said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

Here's the simple math. It comes down to 3 states and they are all a coin flip. Trump just has to win 1 coin flip out of 3. Harris needs to be 3 of 3.

From a probability standpoint, she has a 1/8 chance of pulling 3 heads in a row. No idea how he's coming up with a 50/50 chance for all 3 states

---

True, but those states never split. This year may be different.

---

I think the last time they did was 1988?

Rockdoc said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

This morning's update. Chart tells the story I think. Possibly another update later today.https://t.co/vsGVG189Sa pic.twitter.com/rCSpsT1sEx

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 2, 2024

Hold onto your butts

---

Quit being such a Nancy. What did you expect the polls to do at this stage?

---

They are doing exactly what I said they do months ago. Who runs most polls?

Are we in 'statistical dead heat' territory yet?

Have they rolled out this tried and true tagline yet?

If you can't think of anything smart to say, just say 'statistical dead heat' and it will carry you through.

My completely unscientific take: it seems like polls have indicated Trump has a pretty good chance of winning, but pollsters have low confidence in those results and are hedging by saying it's a toss up. They don't want to make a prediction and be wrong.

BQRyno said:

---

My completely unscientific take: it seems like polls have indicated Trump has a pretty good chance of winning, but pollsters have low confidence in those results and are hedging by saying it's a toss up. They don't want to make a prediction and be wrong.

---

Yeah when every single swing state poll is within 2 points with a 4 point MoE they don't really mean anything

BQRyno said:

---

My completely unscientific take: it seems like polls have indicated Trump has a pretty good chance of winning, but pollsters have low confidence in those results and are hedging by saying it's a toss up. They don't want to make a prediction and be wrong.

---

Also, if you listen to Baris's videos he goes through why pollsters are just throwing their hands up and just declaring a tie. He basically walks through multiple instances of pollsters who were fired or black-listed back in 2016/2020 when they showed polls with Trump either tied or in the lead. It was very disturbing to listen to.

Quo Vadis? said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

My completely unscientific take: it seems like polls have indicated Trump has a pretty good chance of winning, but pollsters have low confidence in those results and are hedging by saying it's a toss up. They don't want to make a prediction and be wrong.

---

Yeah when every single swing state poll is within 2 points with a 4 point MoE they don't really mean anything

---

Right. What leads me to believe they're manipulating the results is the cross tabs can be completely different across polls and then they still reach the same result. It doesn't make sense unless they're aiming for a particular result.

It's too late. Trump will not carry Minnesota, but this endorsement could've taken out Ilhan Omar in the primary.

Philip J Fry said:

---

Here's the simple math. It comes down to 3 states and they are all a coin flip. Trump just has to win 1 coin flip out of 3. Harris needs to be 3 of 3.

From a probability standpoint, she has a 1/8 chance of pulling 3 heads in a row. No idea how he's coming up with a 50/50 chance for all 3 states

---

Your math is based on the same faulty assumption that led several pundits to predict a 90%+ chance of a Clinton victory in 2016.

Polling errors in different states are highly correlated. these are not three independent contests. If the polls are off slightly in either direction, the candidate who is underestimated is almost certainly going to win.

YokelRidesAgain said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

Here's the simple math. It comes down to 3 states and they are all a coin flip. Trump just has to win 1 coin flip out of 3. Harris needs to be 3 of 3.

From a probability standpoint, she has a 1/8 chance of pulling 3 heads in a row. No idea how he's coming up with a 50/50 chance for all 3 states

---

Your math is based on the same faulty assumption that led several pundits to predict a 90%+ chance of a Clinton victory in 2016.

Polling errors in different states are highly correlated. these are not three independent contests. If the polls are off slightly in either direction, the candidate who is underestimated is almost certainly going to win.

---

Polling errors always favor democrats compared to Trump

JB99 said:

---

Polling errors always favor democrats compared to Trump

---

Your n is 2. Mathematically, that is like assuming that a coin that comes up heads twice in a row is rigged.

It's not faulty when the "experts" say there's a 50-50 chance in each state.

YokelRidesAgain said:

---

JB99 said:

---

Polling errors always favor democrats compared to Trump

---

Your n is 2. Mathematically, that is like assuming that a coin that comes up heads twice in a row is rigged.

---

It's not 2. It's 2 x the number of pollsters that got it significantly wrong over two election cycles which is a large number.

If Kamala is going to Florida she is desperate. She is losing there bad. Maybe she just sent Hilary to help down ballot.

She's stumping against Rick Scott. Not for Kamala. It's still a worthless endeavor as Tampa is solid Blue with Castor and no need for her there.

All about turnout now, but team anti-CCP has an advantage:

PollFair Presidential Polling Averages:

National
🔵 Harris 49% (+2)
🔴 Trump 47%

Michigan
🔴 Trump 48%
🔵 Harris 48%

Pennsylvania
🔴 Trump 49% (+1)
🔵 Harris 48%

New Hampshire
🔴 Trump 47% (+1)
🔵 Harris 46%

Nevada
🔴 Trump 49% (+2)
🔵 Harris 47%

Wisconsin
🔴 Trump…

— PollFair (@poll_fair) November 2, 2024

If that NH vote could verify, this thing is over…

Fingers crossed…