Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

There is no happy ending for Bobby J – politicalbetting.com

1234568

Comments

  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    nico679 said:

    Foxy said:

    nico679 said:

    This is going to have the Trump campaign in total panic .

    Harris should invest in Iowa and get some ads out in the final days of the campaign .

    I think her closing ad, going out this weekend strikes the right note.

    https://youtu.be/U6bv6jYEVAs?feature=shared
    Interestingly she never mentions Trump in that ad . It’s a very positive ad overall which will be a world away from the likely hateful divisive Trump one .
    There is method in Trump's madness, in addition to the madness (and badness).

    Purpose is to DEPRESS voter turnout, in particular by women (but NOT just) which is one of the well-known affects of negative campaigning. Of course DJT is also trying to BOOST turnout among infrequently-voting wackjobs of his ilk - but that a separate strategy, and Trump/Vance rhetoric is designed to appeal to them.

    In contrast, Harris needs HIGHER turnout in general, and her positivity is also strategic.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,797
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If Trump loses, who will go next? Will Trump have another go?

    DeSantis and Haley would be frontrunners if he loses, Vance if he wins as incumbent VP
    Haley is the Tugendhat of the Republicans.
    Indeed, DeSantis the Badenoch and Vance the Jenrick and Trump a hybrid of Boris and Farage and Harris a hybrid of Diane Abbott and Rayner and Starmer a less senile Biden
    Diane Abbot and Rayner? You utter clown.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,551
    nico679 said:

    Dramatic polling news out of the USA .

    The Gold Standard in Iowa polling

    Selzer has just released this !

    Harris 47
    Trump 44

    Trump has moved from 1.55 to 1.76 since that came out.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    Foxy said:

    viewcode said:

    Number of registered party members for each state

    2024
    https://archive.is/wl3zb

    2020
    https://web.archive.org/web/20201108011733/https://independentvoterproject.org/map

    Example: Nevada

    2020
    Population: 3,080,156
    Registered Voters: 1,827,386 (59.33% of pop.)
    Democratic Party: 698,044 (38.20%)
    Republican Party: 587,198 (32.13%)
    Third Party/Other: 118,233 (6.47%)
    Unaffiliated: 423,911 (23.20%)

    2024
    Total Registered Voters: 2,338,582
    Democrats: 737,184 (31.51%)
    Republicans: 678,328 (29.00%)
    Third Party/Other: 59,712 (2.55%)
    Unaffiliated: 863,358 (36.94%)

    Note that since 2020, over 500,000 people have registered but the number of unaffiliated has increased dramatically.

    That's due to automatic voter registration with driving licence renewal isn't it?
    Yes. I don't know what significance to put on it. :(
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    Without going into the gory (or not), in the Midwest as a region AND state-by-state, would rather be outperforming with White voters and underperforming with Blacks & Latinos, than the other way around.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Fishing said:

    HYUFD said:

    NEW: Keir Starmer will declare the small boats crisis a 'national security' threat next week and will launch a new Organised Immigration Crime Intelligence Unit

    [
    @kateferguson4
    ]
    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1852813065714049042

    Typical solution of a flailing technocrat - establish a new "unit" - that'll solve everything. He'll be setting up a Royal Commission next I imagine.

    He's totally out of his depth. Unlike the migrants as they stream onto our beaches.
    It’s a farce. We need a Judge led enquiry at the very least.


  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    The Sun Belt is going to be bloodbath for Kam - Trump will sweep the lot for 269, so even with Penn and Mich and whisky, Kam is short.

    The moment Trump snicks a Rusty, game over.
    You can’t count.
    Okay. This is my second attempt at counting. Sunbelt give Trump 268. Penn and Mich and whisky Gives Kam 281. Is that better?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,200
    Barnesian said:

    nico679 said:

    Dramatic polling news out of the USA .

    The Gold Standard in Iowa polling

    Selzer has just released this !

    Harris 47
    Trump 44

    Trump has moved from 1.55 to 1.76 since that came out.
    We can’t ignore Emerson which showed Trump 9 ahead and that fieldwork is newer . Post the poor jobs report but even if Selzer is way out and Trump takes it by 3 that would still show Harris doing better with white voters than Biden.

    The Selzer poll is well respected and will give a boost to the Harris campaign . It will cause an absolute meltdown in the Trump campaign so let’s just enjoy that !
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    The Sun Belt is going to be bloodbath for Kam - Trump will sweep the lot for 269, so even with Penn and Mich and whisky, Kam is short.

    The moment Trump snicks a Rusty, game over.
    You can’t count.
    Okay. This is my second attempt at counting. Sunbelt give Trump 268. Penn and Mich and whisky Gives Kam 281. Is that better?
    What is your definition of "Sun Belt"?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    edited November 2

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    The Sun Belt is going to be bloodbath for Kam - Trump will sweep the lot for 269, so even with Penn and Mich and whisky, Kam is short.

    The moment Trump snicks a Rusty, game over.
    You can’t count.
    Okay. This is my second attempt at counting. Sunbelt give Trump 268. Penn and Mich and whisky Gives Kam 281. Is that better?
    What is your definition of "Sun Belt"?
    Somewhere which leaves rust feeling warm.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707
    Barnesian said:

    nico679 said:

    Dramatic polling news out of the USA .

    The Gold Standard in Iowa polling

    Selzer has just released this !

    Harris 47
    Trump 44

    Trump has moved from 1.55 to 1.76 since that came out.
    This one lady from a non-swing state. Incredible.

    Imagine crushing your entire profession like that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    edited November 2
    nico679 said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico679 said:

    Dramatic polling news out of the USA .

    The Gold Standard in Iowa polling

    Selzer has just released this !

    Harris 47
    Trump 44

    Trump has moved from 1.55 to 1.76 since that came out.
    We can’t ignore Emerson which showed Trump 9 ahead and that fieldwork is newer . Post the poor jobs report but even if Selzer is way out and Trump takes it by 3 that would still show Harris doing better with white voters than Biden.

    The Selzer poll is well respected and will give a boost to the Harris campaign . It will cause an absolute meltdown in the Trump campaign so let’s just enjoy that !
    Last thing I'll say about the Selzer poll is this

    I remember seeing Biden polling so far ahead in polls in 2020 that 413 EVs was a possibility if you believed the polls

    Then Selzer dropped a Trump +7 poll

    And I thought, "Either she's finally missed the mark hard, or everyone else is wrong"

    And guess where we ended up

    https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1852860758893248773

    Though, of course, it’s entirely possible that this is the election where Seltzer is finally wrong.
    But I know where I’m putting a bit more cash tonight.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    viewcode said:

    Foxy said:

    viewcode said:

    Number of registered party members for each state

    2024
    https://archive.is/wl3zb

    2020
    https://web.archive.org/web/20201108011733/https://independentvoterproject.org/map

    Example: Nevada

    2020
    Population: 3,080,156
    Registered Voters: 1,827,386 (59.33% of pop.)
    Democratic Party: 698,044 (38.20%)
    Republican Party: 587,198 (32.13%)
    Third Party/Other: 118,233 (6.47%)
    Unaffiliated: 423,911 (23.20%)

    2024
    Total Registered Voters: 2,338,582
    Democrats: 737,184 (31.51%)
    Republicans: 678,328 (29.00%)
    Third Party/Other: 59,712 (2.55%)
    Unaffiliated: 863,358 (36.94%)

    Note that since 2020, over 500,000 people have registered but the number of unaffiliated has increased dramatically.

    That's due to automatic voter registration with driving licence renewal isn't it?
    Yes. I don't know what significance to put on it. :(
    They also had "motor-voter" registration via driving license renewals AND new drivers (teenagers plus incomers) back in 2020.

    Nevada voter reg affiliation change(s) since then due to several factor, including influx of Californicators and (perhaps) changes in party rules re: primary voting.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707
    I wonder if the pollsters who are yet to release their final poll will suddenly start herding around Selzer instead of a tie...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401
    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    51m
    Wow. Ann Selzer's Iowa polls have a great track record.

    If Harris is even close in Iowa - let alone winning - then she should be winning Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennslyvania by more than the poll averages there are saying.


    "Older and politically independent women" driving the late shift to Harris

    https://x.com/Samfr/status/1852849276075790651
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401

    I wonder if the pollsters who are yet to release their final poll will suddenly start herding around Selzer instead of a tie...

    LOL
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    edited November 2
    Key finding of shock Iowa Poll re: Harris leading Trump in the great Hawkeye State is that, "The poll shows that women — particularly those who are older or are politically independent — are driving the late shift toward Harris."
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    edited November 3
    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Key finding of shock Iowa Poll re: Harris leading Trump in the great Hawkeye State is that, "The poll shows that women — particularly those who are older or are politically independent — are driving the late shift toward Harris."

    Anecdotally this is what the Harris campaign has been saying (FWIW) - that undecideds/independents are, as far as they can tell, breaking significantly to them.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172
    edited November 3
    Interesting to note that Harris can win the election 270-268 without Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada if she wins North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and all the ECVs in Maine, as well as one in Nebraska. This is no change in ECVs compared to 2020 despite the reallocations since then.

    https://www.270towin.com
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172

    Andy_JS said:

    Main item on the NYT front page.

    "Why Are Democrats Having Such a Hard Time Beating Donald Trump?"

    https://www.nytimes.com

    NOT on the Saturday NYT front page, at least the copy I just purchased from my local mini-mart.

    On the PRINT edition, that is.
    The NYT is on sale at the train station in my local big town, but it's probably the international edition. I don't know how much difference there is between those print editions.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,912
    edited November 3

    Fishing said:

    HYUFD said:

    NEW: Keir Starmer will declare the small boats crisis a 'national security' threat next week and will launch a new Organised Immigration Crime Intelligence Unit

    [
    @kateferguson4
    ]
    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1852813065714049042

    Typical solution of a flailing technocrat - establish a new "unit" - that'll solve everything. He'll be setting up a Royal Commission next I imagine.

    He's totally out of his depth. Unlike the migrants as they stream onto our beaches.
    It’s a farce. We need a Judge led enquiry at the very least.


    I do sometimes worry that if you wrote up the basic premise of Judge Dredd in policy wonk speech, some would genuinely go for it.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    How reliable is this polling company?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    As I understand it, no one knows who the early votes have been for, where we are expecting a lot Republicans to vote Harris so registration and lifetime allegiance can be misleading. Especially as many will do so quietly and lie when asked how.

    Women voters might be shy voters. Many may be the shy GOP to Dem switchers.

    With stunts with garbage trucks and wall to wall coverage of garbagegate and trash talk on Fox and other news, it’s helping Latino to be aware and reminded its Trumps campaign who kicked the anger off, and exactly how they did, like continued digging when you could be better off moving on. It’s certainly switched many Latino.

    Trump supporters are certainly not garbage imo.

    They’re minions.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    I haven’t heard ‘BEWARE RED FOG’ mentioned this time. Off top head, Biden won rust belt states despite Trump holding six digit leads on the first night. Will we get the same RED FOG this time?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    biggles said:


    Fishing said:

    HYUFD said:

    NEW: Keir Starmer will declare the small boats crisis a 'national security' threat next week and will launch a new Organised Immigration Crime Intelligence Unit

    [
    @kateferguson4
    ]
    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1852813065714049042

    Typical solution of a flailing technocrat - establish a new "unit" - that'll solve everything. He'll be setting up a Royal Commission next I imagine.

    He's totally out of his depth. Unlike the migrants as they stream onto our beaches.
    It’s a farce. We need a Judge led enquiry at the very least.


    I do sometimes worry that if you wrote up the basic premise of Judge Dredd in policy wonk speech, some would genuinely go for it.
    A few US counties with Sheriffs like Arpaio already did.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    Andy_JS said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    How reliable is this polling company?
    Apparently...very. It's Anne Selzer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Selzer
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Andy_JS said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    How reliable is this polling company?
    The best record of any.
    Iowa specialist.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    What would you say, if I say that Nonpartisan voters will decide the result in Nevada?

    Seeing as how they are in 2024 (as opposed to 2020) the largest group of registered voters in the state. AND not affiiated - at least formally - with ANY political party.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    As I understand it, no one knows who the early votes have been for, where we are expecting a lot Republicans to vote Harris so registration and lifetime allegiance can be misleading. Especially as many will do so quietly and lie when asked how.

    Women voters might be shy voters. Many may be the shy GOP to Dem switchers.

    With stunts with garbage trucks and wall to wall coverage of garbagegate and trash talk on Fox and other news, it’s helping Latino to be aware and reminded its Trumps campaign who kicked the anger off, and exactly how they did, like continued digging when you could be better off moving on. It’s certainly switched many Latino.

    Trump supporters are certainly not garbage imo.

    They’re minions.
    Mights, coulds, allegiences, switches...can't handle it. It's 48hrs to Tuesday and decisions must be taken. All the Kamala news in Nevada is bad.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,555
    edited November 3
    If Trump loses does the world dodge a bullet, or is that bullet coming regardless albeit in a different form?

    I cannot imagine Trump, the republicans or their celebrity oligarchs taking defeat well.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707
    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    I can do it for you. I’m good at counting and all over this EC malarkey.

    Firstly, Independent’s who put Trump in in 2016, now understand him and his platform an awful lot better. They could easily think, I want better options next time, certainly better GOP option, so if my vote finish Trump here, and gives Rep a reset, it’s in my interest to do that.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172
    edited November 3
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    How reliable is this polling company?
    Apparently...very. It's Anne Selzer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Selzer
    I always thought it was a bit odd how Iowa went from a swing state in 2000 and 2004 to apparently safe GOP.

    Dems 4.3 / 5.6 with Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.229997507
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    Too brutal.
    There are more voters registered independent that either Rep or Dem, in Nevada. You can’t really ignore how they might break - and that’s at least fairly likely to decade the outcome.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    The Sun Belt is going to be bloodbath for Kam - Trump will sweep the lot for 269, so even with Penn and Mich and whisky, Kam is short.

    The moment Trump snicks a Rusty, game over.
    You can’t count.
    Okay. This is my second attempt at counting. Sunbelt give Trump 268. Penn and Mich and whisky Gives Kam 281. Is that better?
    Do you have this bookmarked ?
    https://www.270towin.com/maps/538-forecast-2024-presidential-election
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    As I understand it, no one knows who the early votes have been for, where we are expecting a lot Republicans to vote Harris so registration and lifetime allegiance can be misleading. Especially as many will do so quietly and lie when asked how.

    Women voters might be shy voters. Many may be the shy GOP to Dem switchers.

    With stunts with garbage trucks and wall to wall coverage of garbagegate and trash talk on Fox and other news, it’s helping Latino to be aware and reminded its Trumps campaign who kicked the anger off, and exactly how they did, like continued digging when you could be better off moving on. It’s certainly switched many Latino.

    Trump supporters are certainly not garbage imo.

    They’re minions.
    Mights, coulds, allegiences, switches...can't handle it. It's 48hrs to Tuesday and decisions must be taken. All the Kamala news in Nevada is bad.
    I just explained to you, it isn’t all bad. The loud second guessing by mouthy journalists might be bad. State Polls in last couple of days have given Kam Nevada leads, how does that tally with early voting having lost it already.
  • Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794


    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    What would you say, if I say that Nonpartisan voters will decide the result in Nevada?

    Seeing as how they are in 2024 (as opposed to 2020) the largest group of registered voters in the state. AND not affiiated - at least formally - with ANY political party.
    You might be right. Genuinely. But unless you can put a real number on it - how many undecideds go Dem, how many Rep - how do I handle it?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    edited November 3

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    I can do it for you. I’m good at counting and all over this EC malarkey.

    Firstly, Independent’s who put Trump in in 2016, now understand him and his platform an awful lot better. They could easily think, I want better options next time, certainly better GOP option, so if my vote finish Trump here, and gives Rep a reset, it’s in my interest to do that.
    Fair enough. So, in your judgement who is going to win Nevada: Dem or Rep?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172
    edited November 3
    I wonder if anyone has ever stated, (and they surely must have done), the following: to be good at making predictions, you need to be sufficiently interested in a topic to be objective, but not so invested in it that you can, if only sometimes, become subjective, thus making your predictions not so reliable as they might have been.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    Too brutal.
    There are more voters registered independent that either Rep or Dem, in Nevada. You can’t really ignore how they might break - and that’s at least fairly likely to decade the outcome.
    Fair enough. So, in your judgement who is going to win Nevada: Dem or Rep?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OM fucking God


    Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.

    I don't believe Harris will win Iowa - although the Des Moines Register has a pretty good polling record. But I do believe the poll is evidence that Harris is outperforming with white voters in the Midwest, and inversely, is doing worse with black and Hispanic voters.

    The Sun Belt is going to be bloodbath for Kam - Trump will sweep the lot for 269, so even with Penn and Mich and whisky, Kam is short.

    The moment Trump snicks a Rusty, game over.
    You can’t count.
    Okay. This is my second attempt at counting. Sunbelt give Trump 268. Penn and Mich and whisky Gives Kam 281. Is that better?
    Do you have this bookmarked ?
    https://www.270towin.com/maps/538-forecast-2024-presidential-election
    Okay. I am having a third go.

    Kam 270 Trump 268?
  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 777

    I don't understand the idea the Royal Family should live like the rest of us. That would mean they weren't Royal.

    I can understand (although on a pragmatic basis disagree with) republicanism. But not that.

    Cancer can affect anyone, Royal or not.
    You're a cruel sod but I like you :D
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Btw, regarding that Emerson poll, this is what they had last time.

    Lmfao wait I just realized this is almost exactly 2020

    2020 result was
    Trump 53.1
    Biden 44.9

    https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1852832840158695769
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    As I understand it, no one knows who the early votes have been for, where we are expecting a lot Republicans to vote Harris so registration and lifetime allegiance can be misleading. Especially as many will do so quietly and lie when asked how.

    Women voters might be shy voters. Many may be the shy GOP to Dem switchers.

    With stunts with garbage trucks and wall to wall coverage of garbagegate and trash talk on Fox and other news, it’s helping Latino to be aware and reminded its Trumps campaign who kicked the anger off, and exactly how they did, like continued digging when you could be better off moving on. It’s certainly switched many Latino.

    Trump supporters are certainly not garbage imo.

    They’re minions.
    Mights, coulds, allegiences, switches...can't handle it. It's 48hrs to Tuesday and decisions must be taken. All the Kamala news in Nevada is bad.
    I just explained to you, it isn’t all bad. The loud second guessing by mouthy journalists might be bad. State Polls in last couple of days have given Kam Nevada leads, how does that tally with early voting having lost it already.
    Explain it in terms of the Dutch salute.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141

    Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.

    Both Emerson and Selzer are excellent pollsters, rated 10th and 12th respectively by 538.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    The other extreme:

    https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1852864552666337380

    General Election Poll

    🔴 Arizona - Trump +6
    🔴 North Carolina - Trump +3
    🔴 Georgia - Trump +2
    🔴 Nevada - Trump +5
    🔴 Pennsylvania - Trump +2
    🔴 Michigan - Trump +2
    🔴 Wisconsin - Trump +1

    Atlasintel #A - LV - 11/2
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    viewcode said:


    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    What would you say, if I say that Nonpartisan voters will decide the result in Nevada?

    Seeing as how they are in 2024 (as opposed to 2020) the largest group of registered voters in the state. AND not affiiated - at least formally - with ANY political party.
    You might be right. Genuinely. But unless you can put a real number on it - how many undecideds go Dem, how many Rep - how do I handle it?
    You don't. Maybe you could extrapolate from polling of "independents" but that'd be problematic at best.

    Like I said upthread, extrapolating from last election in Nevada, is at best a crapshoot.

    Though of course you might be rolling 7s instead of snake-eyes.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    Too brutal.
    There are more voters registered independent that either Rep or Dem, in Nevada. You can’t really ignore how they might break - and that’s at least fairly likely to decade the outcome.
    Fair enough. So, in your judgement who is going to win Nevada: Dem or Rep?
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    I can do it for you. I’m good at counting and all over this EC malarkey.

    Firstly, Independent’s who put Trump in in 2016, now understand him and his platform an awful lot better. They could easily think, I want better options next time, certainly better GOP option, so if my vote finish Trump here, and gives Rep a reset, it’s in my interest to do that.
    Fair enough. So, in your judgement who is going to win Nevada: Dem or Rep?
    I really don’t know 🤷‍♀️

    It would be nice if Kam can win in Sunbelt somewhere, so it’s a bit less tight than all on tight rusty races.

    The closing stages of the campaign Kam has both won the campaigning, and got some polling swingback, so I feel a lot better about the Rust Belt states going into next week.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    AP (via Seattle Times) - Kamala Harris will appear on SNL in last episode before presidential election
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172
    Interesting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/02/us/politics/election-2024-harris-progressives.html

    "In Shift From 2020, Identity Politics Loses Its Grip on the Country

    There are signs that society is moving away from the progressive left’s often strict expectations about how to discuss culture and politics."
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,794
    Andy_JS said:

    I wonder if anyone has ever stated, (and they surely must have done), the following: to be good at making predictions, you need to be sufficiently interested in a topic to be objective, but not so invested in it that you can, if only sometimes, become subjective, thus making your predictions not so reliable as they might have been.

    This is a plot point in the Foundation novel series! (Genuinely)
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    Time change from Daylight (Summer) > Standard Time in most US states tonight at 2am Sunday.

    We're falling back -1 hour after springing ahead +1 earlier this year.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    Too brutal.
    There are more voters registered independent that either Rep or Dem, in Nevada. You can’t really ignore how they might break - and that’s at least fairly likely to decade the outcome.
    Fair enough. So, in your judgement who is going to win Nevada: Dem or Rep?
    No strong conviction - it’s a coin flip, IMO.
    I’m pretty confident the independents will break for Harris, thoigh.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    As I understand it, no one knows who the early votes have been for, where we are expecting a lot Republicans to vote Harris so registration and lifetime allegiance can be misleading. Especially as many will do so quietly and lie when asked how.

    Women voters might be shy voters. Many may be the shy GOP to Dem switchers.

    With stunts with garbage trucks and wall to wall coverage of garbagegate and trash talk on Fox and other news, it’s helping Latino to be aware and reminded its Trumps campaign who kicked the anger off, and exactly how they did, like continued digging when you could be better off moving on. It’s certainly switched many Latino.

    Trump supporters are certainly not garbage imo.

    They’re minions.
    Mights, coulds, allegiences, switches...can't handle it. It's 48hrs to Tuesday and decisions must be taken. All the Kamala news in Nevada is bad.
    I just explained to you, it isn’t all bad. The loud second guessing by mouthy journalists might be bad. State Polls in last couple of days have given Kam Nevada leads, how does that tally with early voting having lost it already.
    Explain it in terms of the Dutch salute.
    Well, if we really must put in such terms, the voters are effectively “snorkelling”. They are placing apparatus over the eyes, so you can’t clearly see what’s going on, and only know when you can actually “taste” the votes.

    GOP to Dem switchers will be going about the business unseen.
    Trump/Kam canvesser knocks on the door “have you voted,can you tell me who for?”
    “Yes. We have both voted already, for Trump.”

    Snorkelling.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,200

    The other extreme:

    https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1852864552666337380

    General Election Poll

    🔴 Arizona - Trump +6
    🔴 North Carolina - Trump +3
    🔴 Georgia - Trump +2
    🔴 Nevada - Trump +5
    🔴 Pennsylvania - Trump +2
    🔴 Michigan - Trump +2
    🔴 Wisconsin - Trump +1

    Atlasintel #A - LV - 11/2

    They’ve had 3 battleground polls in 6 days ! We’re supposed to believe they’ve managed 21 polls of separate states in that time . They fluked the last election and are now the Trafalgar of Brazil .
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707
    OT thread on what it would take to make Polymarket missettle:
    https://old.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/1gi7z5s/market_risk_of_a_51_attack_on_polymarket/
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,172
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    edited November 3

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Her record in Iowa is astonishingly good. Pretty much only one national or state level miss. The rest are within 1-3%. Sometimes on the nose.

    Anything less than a Trump win by 7% is disastrous for his Presidential chances.

    For the broader picture, bear in mind that Iowa has some of the toughest abortion laws in the US - it bans almost all abortions after 6 weeks.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    I guess the argument she might be wrong is that she has really old-school methods that work until they're overtaken by the modern world, and this is the cycle when modernity finally catches up with Iowa.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,707
    Long-shot tip: Indiana in case the writers got lazy and they're just doing the Obama-McCain map again
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Indeed.
    That's why I said I think she's more likely to be the one who's right in an election like this one.
    We know that most uf the rest are weighting by previous vote (and also by likelihood to vote) - which by definition will undersample a whole swath of voters.

    If those voters skew in a particular direction, and if they turn out in greater numbers than predicted, we could have the diametric opposite of the polling error from 2020 (which Selzer also got right).

    Or she could have got it wrong for just about the first time.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Thanks @MartinVegas
    Always good to get first hand stuff.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928

    Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.

    There's a really interesting map on Nate Silver, which shows inflation over the last four years by State. The Midwest has suffered almost none, while the Southwest has had a very serious problem.

    That could be why Iowa (and Wisconsin and Michigan) are outperforming for Harris, while Nevada and Arizona are much worse
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    The Polymarket whale might get stranded - Trump's odds are fading fast there, too.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    Nigelb said:

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Indeed.
    That's why I said I think she's more likely to be the one who's right in an election like this one.
    We know that most uf the rest are weighting by previous vote (and also by likelihood to vote) - which by definition will undersample a whole swath of voters.

    If those voters skew in a particular direction, and if they turn out in greater numbers than predicted, we could have the diametric opposite of the polling error from 2020 (which Selzer also got right).

    Or she could have got it wrong for just about the first time.
    For what it's worth, I think it is highly likely that - like in 2020 and 2016 - one of the two candidates will sweep the swing states.

    I would also think that the Iowa poll might also have an impact about how we think about two Senate races.

    My general view was that Sherrod Brown was going to struggle in a year when Trump would win Ohio by 10 points. Sure Brown will outperform Harris, but in that scenario he'd still lose by 4 to 5 points.

    If Iowa is anything like the Selzer poll (i.e. close), then Ohio will probably only be 4 or 5 point win for Trump, and probably means that Brown should be favorite.

    Likewise (despite my earlier scepticism), it suggests that the independent in Nebraska might be worth a small punt.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Indeed.
    That's why I said I think she's more likely to be the one who's right in an election like this one.
    We know that most uf the rest are weighting by previous vote (and also by likelihood to vote) - which by definition will undersample a whole swath of voters.

    If those voters skew in a particular direction, and if they turn out in greater numbers than predicted, we could have the diametric opposite of the polling error from 2020 (which Selzer also got right).

    Or she could have got it wrong for just about the first time.
    For what it's worth, I think it is highly likely that - like in 2020 and 2016 - one of the two candidates will sweep the swing states.

    I would also think that the Iowa poll might also have an impact about how we think about two Senate races.

    My general view was that Sherrod Brown was going to struggle in a year when Trump would win Ohio by 10 points. Sure Brown will outperform Harris, but in that scenario he'd still lose by 4 to 5 points.

    If Iowa is anything like the Selzer poll (i.e. close), then Ohio will probably only be 4 or 5 point win for Trump, and probably means that Brown should be favorite.

    Likewise (despite my earlier scepticism), it suggests that the independent in Nebraska might be worth a small punt.
    I put a bit of cash on Nevada yesterday.
    But really the safest/value bet at the moment is just Harris to win, if that Selzer poll is anywhere near right.
    I wonder if she'll be favourite again before Tuesday ?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Indeed.
    That's why I said I think she's more likely to be the one who's right in an election like this one.
    We know that most uf the rest are weighting by previous vote (and also by likelihood to vote) - which by definition will undersample a whole swath of voters.

    If those voters skew in a particular direction, and if they turn out in greater numbers than predicted, we could have the diametric opposite of the polling error from 2020 (which Selzer also got right).

    Or she could have got it wrong for just about the first time.
    For what it's worth, I think it is highly likely that - like in 2020 and 2016 - one of the two candidates will sweep the swing states.

    I would also think that the Iowa poll might also have an impact about how we think about two Senate races.

    My general view was that Sherrod Brown was going to struggle in a year when Trump would win Ohio by 10 points. Sure Brown will outperform Harris, but in that scenario he'd still lose by 4 to 5 points.

    If Iowa is anything like the Selzer poll (i.e. close), then Ohio will probably only be 4 or 5 point win for Trump, and probably means that Brown should be favorite.

    Likewise (despite my earlier scepticism), it suggests that the independent in Nebraska might be worth a small punt.
    I put a bit of cash on Nevada yesterday.
    But really the safest/value bet at the moment is just Harris to win, if that Selzer poll is anywhere near right.
    I wonder if she'll be favourite again before Tuesday ?
    I put money on Polymarket yesterday.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.

    There's a really interesting map on Nate Silver, which shows inflation over the last four years by State. The Midwest has suffered almost none, while the Southwest has had a very serious problem.

    That could be why Iowa (and Wisconsin and Michigan) are outperforming for Harris, while Nevada and Arizona are much worse
    Here's the map:


  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,664
    In the last 24 hours 538 chance of victory has gone

    From: Trump 50, Harris 49

    To: Trump 53, Harris 47

    They have the Selzer Iowa poll but it has been much more than offset by a whole host of AtlasIntel polls showing Trump leading in every battleground state.

    Of course AtlasIntel could be wrong but we need to be careful not to only consider the polls we like - albeit that Selzer has a brilliant reputation.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: having been rained off yesterday, qualifying is rescheduled for 10.30am this morning and the race has shifted to 3.30pm. There remains a high risk of rain, although hopefully in lower quantities, throughout pretty much the entire day.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.

    There's a really interesting map on Nate Silver, which shows inflation over the last four years by State. The Midwest has suffered almost none, while the Southwest has had a very serious problem.

    That could be why Iowa (and Wisconsin and Michigan) are outperforming for Harris, while Nevada and Arizona are much worse
    Here's the map:


    FWIW: if the inflation map is correct, Harris will win Wisconsin and Michigan, and lose Nevada, Arizona and - yes - Pennsylvania.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: having been rained off yesterday, qualifying is rescheduled for 10.30am this morning and the race has shifted to 3.30pm. There remains a high risk of rain, although hopefully in lower quantities, throughout pretty much the entire day.

    I like my dad's idea: F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport. Make the cars so they can drive in whatever weather. Have tyres for hot weather, wet weather, flooded tracks... if a road car can drive in it, so should an F1 car. :)

    (Yes, I know this is impractical - it would be fun though.)
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,095
    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    There will be a late swing
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    MikeL said:

    In the last 24 hours 538 chance of victory has gone

    From: Trump 50, Harris 49

    To: Trump 53, Harris 47

    They have the Selzer Iowa poll but it has been much more than offset by a whole host of AtlasIntel polls showing Trump leading in every battleground state.

    Of course AtlasIntel could be wrong but we need to be careful not to only consider the polls we like - albeit that Selzer has a brilliant reputation.

    Agree absolutely: however the one thing that all the national polls have tended to show is that Harris doing a little better with white voters than Biden, and a lot worse with Hispanic and Black voters.

    And the Selzer Iowa poll - and many of the AtlasIntel numbers - are consistent with that. If both are a little bit right, it would suggest Harris loses Iowa (but relatively narrowly), but holds on nearby Wisconsin and Michigan. It would also suggest she loses in the Southwest.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    How are you accounting for those registered independent ?
    I'm not.

    I need a brutal sieve. I don't have the time nor the tech to do anything but something brutal. I don't need to know the exact numbers, just which of DEM and REP are bigger. So it becomes as simple as:

    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    Too brutal.
    There are more voters registered independent that either Rep or Dem, in Nevada. You can’t really ignore how they might break - and that’s at least fairly likely to decade the outcome.
    Not only that, but I suspect that the "new" independents are likely younger than average, and more likely to be Democratic leaning. In the "old days" they would have been registered Democrats, but now they've been automatically registered to vote, they haven't bothered setting up a party affiliation.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    edited November 3
    Mr. Jessop, there is a problem in that the wet weather tyre works in a tiny window of rain before the safety car or a red flag comes out, so they're practically never used for racing. Scope to increase that.

    F1: I'm going to have a tiny bet on Hulkenberg to win qualifying each way. He did this years ago, in a Williams, on a wet-but-drying track. If you've got a free £1 bet or suchlike, this is when to use it.

    Edited extra bit: those odds shift to 61 with boost, or you can back him at 200 on Betfair.

    Edited 2, Edit Harder: backed with a pound or two at 210 on Betfair, set up a covering hedge at 20 and a green-each-way one at 5. Unlikely but not impossible.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,162
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    This is a bit old now but it was a great podcast with Ann Selzer talking about how she does what she does:
    https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-focus-group-with-sarah-longwell/s4-ep15-it-s-not-that-hard-to-win-iowa-with-j-ann-/

    That's a good interview. You definitely need to take her polling very seriously.
    Selzer describes her methodology as hinging on not making assumptions about the electorate from one race to the next, so it's plausible she's picking up a shift that is being missed by the rest.
    Indeed.
    That's why I said I think she's more likely to be the one who's right in an election like this one.
    We know that most uf the rest are weighting by previous vote (and also by likelihood to vote) - which by definition will undersample a whole swath of voters.

    If those voters skew in a particular direction, and if they turn out in greater numbers than predicted, we could have the diametric opposite of the polling error from 2020 (which Selzer also got right).

    Or she could have got it wrong for just about the first time.
    For what it's worth, I think it is highly likely that - like in 2020 and 2016 - one of the two candidates will sweep the swing states.

    I would also think that the Iowa poll might also have an impact about how we think about two Senate races.

    My general view was that Sherrod Brown was going to struggle in a year when Trump would win Ohio by 10 points. Sure Brown will outperform Harris, but in that scenario he'd still lose by 4 to 5 points.

    If Iowa is anything like the Selzer poll (i.e. close), then Ohio will probably only be 4 or 5 point win for Trump, and probably means that Brown should be favorite.

    Likewise (despite my earlier scepticism), it suggests that the independent in Nebraska might be worth a small punt.
    I put a bit of cash on Nevada yesterday.
    But really the safest/value bet at the moment is just Harris to win, if that Selzer poll is anywhere near right.
    I wonder if she'll be favourite again before Tuesday ?
    I put some of my Kemi winnings on a Harris win at 5/4 yesterday. Quite happy with that and my first bet on this race. Cannot see how trump was value at 4/6
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Seltzer, either she or Emerson are going to look like fools in 72 hours time.

    One thing I have heard mentioned - but can't see the cross tabs so cannot verify - is that only 7% of respondents in the Iowa poll mentioned the Economy as their number 1 priority. Which seems odd.

    There's a really interesting map on Nate Silver, which shows inflation over the last four years by State. The Midwest has suffered almost none, while the Southwest has had a very serious problem.

    That could be why Iowa (and Wisconsin and Michigan) are outperforming for Harris, while Nevada and Arizona are much worse
    The other state variable is Dobbs.

    In terms of negative effects, it obviously has a greater effect in red states - and not just on the availability of abortion.

    Maternity service clinics - particularly in rural areas - have been closing across the country,
    Rightly or wrongly (there's also the issue of funding and reimbursement levels), that's getting blamed on the red state abortion bans.
    (Which certainly have an effect on insurance cost and availability for practitioners.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    edited November 3

    viewcode said:

    OK, Nevada. Let's predict the votes based on the change in a thing since 2020.

    2020 Results
    * 2020 results were DEM 50.06%, REP 47.67%, which are rebased to DEM 51.22% REP 48.78% to total to 100%
    * DEMVOTE2024 = DEMVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)
    * REPVOTE2024 = REPVOTE2020*(thing now)/(thing then)

    Uniform State Swing: (based on state poll then vs state poll now)
    * DEM 48.22%, REP 51.95%, REP WINS

    Registration: (based on registration numbers then vs registration numbers now)
    * DEM 48.98%, REP 51.02%, REP WINS

    Guys, I'm sorry, but I don't see her winning this. Uniform swing, early votes and registration changes all indicate that Trump will win Nevada. Happy to hear counterargument but if it's "there will be a late swing" I will say bad words.

    There will be a late swing
    Trump tried for a late swing last time.

    Well, he wanted to hang Mike Pence, anyway.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    ydoethur said:
    "Donald Trump's day of campaigning on Saturday ended in North Carolina, where he boasted about holding "the biggest rallies in the history of any country"."

    Nuremberg: "Hold my stein..."

    1934: The 6th Party Congress was held in Nuremberg, 5–10 September 1934, which was attended by about 700,000 Nazi Party supporters.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/02/us/politics/election-2024-harris-progressives.html

    "In Shift From 2020, Identity Politics Loses Its Grip on the Country

    There are signs that society is moving away from the progressive left’s often strict expectations about how to discuss culture and politics."

    Just rejoice at that news.

    @MaxPB and I have been pointing out that identity politics is on the wane for some time.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    If you see one of our air samplers around town, feel free to cough at it. We're implementing some new pathogen surveillance techniques.

    It's amazing how well air sampling works...

    https://x.com/SolidEvidence/status/1852804401095720983

    Now that could revolutionise pandemic response. A national network woukd made it far easier to control something like COVID, without much of the economic dislocation.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,162

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/02/us/politics/election-2024-harris-progressives.html

    "In Shift From 2020, Identity Politics Loses Its Grip on the Country

    There are signs that society is moving away from the progressive left’s often strict expectations about how to discuss culture and politics."

    Just rejoice at that news.

    @MaxPB and I have been pointing out that identity politics is on the wane for some time.
    Corporations are now scrapping their DEI teams too.

    https://x.com/nypost/status/1852383790720496006?s=61

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    Taz said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/02/us/politics/election-2024-harris-progressives.html

    "In Shift From 2020, Identity Politics Loses Its Grip on the Country

    There are signs that society is moving away from the progressive left’s often strict expectations about how to discuss culture and politics."

    Just rejoice at that news.

    @MaxPB and I have been pointing out that identity politics is on the wane for some time.
    Corporations are now scrapping their DEI teams too.

    https://x.com/nypost/status/1852383790720496006?s=61

    I would point out that anyone who thinks what Leon said was not racist, are perhaps the people who are in most need of some DEI education...
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 993
    A poll in Iowa that has unexpectedly put Kamala Harris ahead of Donald Trump in what was previously expected to be a safe state for the Republicans has sent shockwaves through America’s poll-watchers......

    The Selzer poll has Harris over Trump 47% to 44% among likely voters. A September poll showed Trump with a four-point lead over Harris and a June survey showed him with an 18-point lead over then-candidate Joe Biden.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/02/harris-unexpected-lead-over-trump-iowa-selzer-poll
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,362
    edited November 3
    Icarus said:

    A poll in Iowa that has unexpectedly put Kamala Harris ahead of Donald Trump in what was previously expected to be a safe state for the Republicans has sent shockwaves through America’s poll-watchers......

    The Selzer poll has Harris over Trump 47% to 44% among likely voters. A September poll showed Trump with a four-point lead over Harris and a June survey showed him with an 18-point lead over then-candidate Joe Biden.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/02/harris-unexpected-lead-over-trump-iowa-selzer-poll

    A 21% switch pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of anyone thinking keeping Sleepy Joe as the candidate was wise.

    Trump would have been winning some crazy unlikely states.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    Icarus said:

    A poll in Iowa that has unexpectedly put Kamala Harris ahead of Donald Trump in what was previously expected to be a safe state for the Republicans has sent shockwaves through America’s poll-watchers......

    The Selzer poll has Harris over Trump 47% to 44% among likely voters. A September poll showed Trump with a four-point lead over Harris and a June survey showed him with an 18-point lead over then-candidate Joe Biden.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/02/harris-unexpected-lead-over-trump-iowa-selzer-poll

    Trump’s campaign are obviously worried, given how hard they are pushing the Emerson poll.

    Wrong thinking really. They should be yelling from the rooftops that this shows he will lose if his supporters don’t vote, but of course they daren’t as that would wreck his narrative that the election is being stolen.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205

    Icarus said:

    A poll in Iowa that has unexpectedly put Kamala Harris ahead of Donald Trump in what was previously expected to be a safe state for the Republicans has sent shockwaves through America’s poll-watchers......

    The Selzer poll has Harris over Trump 47% to 44% among likely voters. A September poll showed Trump with a four-point lead over Harris and a June survey showed him with an 18-point lead over then-candidate Joe Biden.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/02/harris-unexpected-lead-over-trump-iowa-selzer-poll

    A 21% switch pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of anyone thinking keeping Sleepy Joe as the candidate was wise.

    Trump would have been winning some crazy unlikely states.
    I might well be wrong, but I don't think the September and June polls mentioned were also by Selzer, so the methodologies will be different, and direct comparisons harder?
Sign In or Register to comment.