Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden moves back to a clear lead in the WH2020 betting after a

SystemSystem Posts: 11,007
edited September 2020 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden moves back to a clear lead in the WH2020 betting after a day which saw him slip behind Trump

This has been a huge day on the White House race betting markets which saw, for the first time in months, Trump becoming the favourite on the Betfair exchange where so far nearly there have been nearly £72m worth of matched bets. Heaven know what the total will look like by November 3rd.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    E pluribus unum.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Legion, for we are many.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,943
    And what Rasmussen, who correctly predicted Hillary's popular vote margin in 2016, are saying
    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1301188978247335939?s=20
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
  • Options
    USA President betting

    Biden 1.95
    Dem 1.9

    Trump 2.12
    Rep 2.08

    So header is right about the sharp move back to Biden but the risk premium remains (and now for Trump also). The market is not convinced both men will make it.

    Remarkably you can lay Mark Cuban (no, me neither), Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,943
    RobD said:
    Who can forget the brilliantly successful Guardian readers letter writing campaign to Ohio oiks in 2004 telling them they must vote for Kerry
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    FPT @ MrEd

    Sorry, was not on for a while.

    My theory re the Black vote this November is fueled by one of the BLM's reactions to the series of police killings this year - voter registration drives and community organizing to get out the vote. There is a determination to vote and get black representatives involved in government at all levels, not to support one of their own in breaking barriers (Obama), but to get decision-makers in place to start tackling the issues that white politicians of both stripes have failed to do even since the civil rights movement.

    If the Black vote is turning out to vote for local and state representatives, they'll be there for the US elections - Pres, Senate and House - too.

    I think you might see some of the same effect in the Latino vote, but not so pronounced as the Black vote.
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    HYUFD said:

    And what Rasmussen, who correctly predicted Hillary's popular vote margin in 2016, are saying
    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1301188978247335939?s=20
    That is:

    Biden 49% (+3)
    Trump 45 (n/c)

    On last week

    In normal UK parlance...
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,645
    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo's message to MPs worried about how badly he has performed thus far...

    "These were the good times"

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1301163238185369600

    Well he's right, I don't know what you are criticising it for.
  • Options
    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo's message to MPs worried about how badly he has performed thus far...

    "These were the good times"

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1301163238185369600

    Well he's right, I don't know what you are criticising it for.
    I don't think Scott likes Johnson all that much.

    Just a hunch.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo's message to MPs worried about how badly he has performed thus far...

    "These were the good times"

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1301163238185369600

    Well he's right, I don't know what you are criticising it for.
    Because he'll criticise him no matter what.

    If he'd said "I know it's been tough. It's about to get easier" he'd be criticising him for that too.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    edited September 2020
    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents or my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    There have been some great photoshops of that strapline involving the Titanic, Hindenburg etc. :D
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    In local government news, the Conservative leader of Northumberland County Council has lost a vote of no confidence tonight.

    https://twitter.com/thewillmetcalfe/status/1301217648450113540?s=21
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,909
    Grandiose said:

    HYUFD said:

    And what Rasmussen, who correctly predicted Hillary's popular vote margin in 2016, are saying
    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1301188978247335939?s=20
    That is:

    Biden 49% (+3)
    Trump 45 (n/c)

    On last week

    In normal UK parlance...
    Yes, any idea why these polls don't show the change? The gap is obvious from the numbers.

    Both Ras and YouGov have shifted towards Biden, which hardly seems to fit with narrative that Trump is closing the gap?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,645

    And people whinge about Boris screwing the DUP over with his Brexit negotiations?
    I don't think many people complain about that part of what he did. The DUP got what they deserved for getting too enamoured of their status as kingmakers.
  • Options
    This is well worth a read. His comments on Trump are in my view absolutely spot on, although the overblown attempt to draw parallels with the UK risks undermining an otherwise sound argument.

    https://labourlist.org/2020/09/fascism-is-back-and-yet-the-left-are-turning-on-each-other/
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,572

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo's message to MPs worried about how badly he has performed thus far...

    "These were the good times"

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1301163238185369600

    Well he's right, I don't know what you are criticising it for.
    Because he'll criticise him no matter what.

    If he'd said "I know it's been tough. It's about to get easier" he'd be criticising him for that too.
    Which part of Scott's post contained any criticism?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    Yet none of this is reflected in the polls.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I give a lot of credence to the "Biden is running up big numbers where it doesn't matter" narrative.

    At the moment his National poll lead is such that I'm not currently concerned but if it does narrow then his big bit not winning numbers in Texas and his huge margin in California come into play.

    But, contra wise, if he opens up any bigger a lead then Georgia and Texas become genuine candidates for him to pickup and a huge blow out win.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,645
    edited September 2020

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    BoZo's message to MPs worried about how badly he has performed thus far...

    "These were the good times"

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1301163238185369600

    Well he's right, I don't know what you are criticising it for.
    Because he'll criticise him no matter what.

    If he'd said "I know it's been tough. It's about to get easier" he'd be criticising him for that too.
    Which part of Scott's post contained any criticism?
    When asked in the past Scott has been perfectly explicit and upfront that he posts tweets as part of being critical. You don't need huge amounts of commentary to make that clear, given his honest intent in being critical. It was in any case critical because his commentary equated the comments made about the 'situation' by Boris as though the words were about Boris's own poor peformance (and it has been a poor performance, but I doubt Boris intended it that way).

    So please don't insult peoples' intellgience in pretending it was not critical.

    Edit: And to be clear, I am all for Scott posting tweets with little or even no commentary, I find it useful and he can criticise to his heart's content. I just don't see what there was to criticise about Boris's words as presented, particularly since if he'd said the opposite that would have been worthy of criticism.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,294
    edited September 2020
    Alistair said:

    I give a lot of credence to the "Biden is running up big numbers where it doesn't matter" narrative.

    At the moment his National poll lead is such that I'm not currently concerned but if it does narrow then his big bit not winning numbers in Texas and his huge margin in California come into play.

    But, contra wise, if he opens up any bigger a lead then Georgia and Texas become genuine candidates for him to pickup and a huge blow out win.

    I'm looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    I give a lot of credence to the "Biden is running up big numbers where it doesn't matter" narrative.

    At the moment his National poll lead is such that I'm not currently concerned but if it does narrow then his big bit not winning numbers in Texas and his huge margin in California come into play.

    But, contra wise, if he opens up any bigger a lead then Georgia and Texas become genuine candidates for him to pickup and a huge blow out win.

    I looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.
    I wish vanilla search was better so I could find my post where I described exactly how Trump would win and then finished the post with "but will never happen" or something similar.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,945

    In local government news, the Conservative leader of Northumberland County Council has lost a vote of no confidence tonight.

    https://twitter.com/thewillmetcalfe/status/1301217648450113540?s=21

    This is a shitshow that has been a long time coming. Will have to hold my counsel for now...But Jackson is not a shining light of probity in local government.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,470
    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com
  • Options
    Grandiose said:

    HYUFD said:

    And what Rasmussen, who correctly predicted Hillary's popular vote margin in 2016, are saying
    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1301188978247335939?s=20
    That is:

    Biden 49% (+3)
    Trump 45 (n/c)

    On last week

    In normal UK parlance...
    Yes, I dislike the bracketed figure being just the difference in the two numbers, what you've given, normal UK practise, is much more informative.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,129
    There is a sense afoot that in race terms Biden is ahead but Trump is closing and will continue to close.

    The possibility that between now and 3/11 things will move for BIDEN is being given a probability of zero.

    This is a major flaw because the chance of this is far from zero.

    Upshot is perhaps the worst value even money shot in the world of betting for quite some time - the unpopular and divisive and behind in the polls Donald Trump to be reelected.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,828
    Evening all :)

    Just a comment on one barometer of economic activity - transport.

    Starting with the good news - road traffic has returned to pre-Covid levels during the week and is actually higher at weekends with that led by increases in volumes of light and heavy commercial vehicles while car traffic oscillates around 90% of normal.

    Cycling also remains buoyant but clear signs it's weather dependent with cycling numbers well down on days with poor weather.

    Now, the not-so-good and that's public transport. Bus travel in London has recovered (with increases in capacity on the buses) to 50-60% of pre-Covid levels with buses outside London at around 50% of pre-Covid passenger numbers.

    Railways remain the big problem (or barometer of the success of home working if you prefer). Passenger numbers remain about a third of pre-Covid levels with spikes at the weekend and on fine days as people head out to the coast but the normal weekday numbers remain well below where they were.

    On the London Underground, passenger numbers on weekdays are about a third of where they were (though given the numbers who travel without paying the tubes are probably still crowded) and while the network is a little busier at weekends it's still well below normal.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,572
    HYUFD said:

    And what Rasmussen, who correctly predicted Hillary's popular vote margin in 2016, are saying
    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1301188978247335939?s=20
    You omit to mention that at this stage last time Rasmussen had Trump 1 point ahead of Clinton (40/39)

    https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/august_2016/questions_election_2016_white_house_watch_august_29_30_2016
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,645
    dixiedean said:

    In local government news, the Conservative leader of Northumberland County Council has lost a vote of no confidence tonight.

    https://twitter.com/thewillmetcalfe/status/1301217648450113540?s=21

    This is a shitshow that has been a long time coming. Will have to hold my counsel for now...But Jackson is not a shining light of probity in local government.
    I love a good local government political ding dong. A few years back City of York Council had the Leader sacked by his party, and in then standing down as council leader he and another councillor left the group, and then the council refused to elect a new leader at that meeting and they all had to wait.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited September 2020
    FWIW, the various statistical models as at today have the probabilities (all rounded to nearest percent) as:

    New Statesman: Biden 85%, Trump 15%
    Progress Campaign: Biden 85%, Trump 15%
    Economist Biden 86%, Trump 14%
    Five Thirty Eight: Biden 69%, Trump 30%

    I think that all these models are doing similar things, and they broadly agree on what the current best estimate of the polling position is. The reason 538 is so much less bullish on Biden than the others is simply that they build in an increased level of uncertainty (in both directions).

    Personally I think it's a mistake to try to model the uncertainty (beyond historical changes between now and the election). I prefer to look at the polling as one input - the most significant - and then to layer on top of that a political judgement as to whether this time it's going to be different,
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,945
    edited September 2020
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    In local government news, the Conservative leader of Northumberland County Council has lost a vote of no confidence tonight.

    https://twitter.com/thewillmetcalfe/status/1301217648450113540?s=21

    This is a shitshow that has been a long time coming. Will have to hold my counsel for now...But Jackson is not a shining light of probity in local government.
    I love a good local government political ding dong. A few years back City of York Council had the Leader sacked by his party, and in then standing down as council leader he and another councillor left the group, and then the council refused to elect a new leader at that meeting and they all had to wait.
    This one is quite a scandal. So serious that 3 Tory Cabinet members no confidenced their leader.
    The ludicrous "Bedlington Independents" stayed loyal.
    Lost by one vote.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    Yet none of this is reflected in the polls.
    It will take time to feed through, it might not at all depending on how shy they are about switching because they don't agree with BLM burning stuff.
  • Options

    Alistair said:

    I give a lot of credence to the "Biden is running up big numbers where it doesn't matter" narrative.

    At the moment his National poll lead is such that I'm not currently concerned but if it does narrow then his big bit not winning numbers in Texas and his huge margin in California come into play.

    But, contra wise, if he opens up any bigger a lead then Georgia and Texas become genuine candidates for him to pickup and a huge blow out win.

    I'm looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.
    For what it's worth I based my 2016 prediction on a mixture of intuition and state polls and I ignored the national polls.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,828
    A veritable blizzard of polls this evening from America as we head toward Labor Day and the traditional start of the campaign which seems to have been going on for years.

    The weekly Economist/YouGov poll has Biden up 51-40.

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/7kvpozbozh/econTabReport.pdf

    Some of the highlights - men vote Biden 46-45 but women choose Biden 55-36. Trump leads by 48-46 in the $50-100k income group but is well behind in other groups.

    The White vote is 48-45 to Trump but Biden has big leads in all the other ethnic groups.

    The Party ID split is 41% Dem, 33% Ind and 26% Rep so perhaps an over-sampling of Democrats.

    Investors Business Daily/TIPP has Biden ahead 49-4 but no crosstabs.

    Rasmussen has Biden up by four which is least surprisingly the lowest lead among the pollsters but again no crosstabs.

    The USA Today/Suffolk poll has Trump closing the gap but still down 50-43.

    Finally, the Grinnell poll puts Biden up 49-41 and thoughtfully they have also published their crosstabs:

    https://www.grinnell.edu/sites/default/files/docs/2020-09/Selzer Co GCNP 2219 Methodology.pdf

    The sampling is 35% Democrat, 34% Republican and 25% Independent which is very different from Economist/YouGov.

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,129
    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    Yet none of this is reflected in the polls.
    It will take time to feed through, it might not at all depending on how shy they are about switching because they don't agree with BLM burning stuff.
    I said aaaaaaaaaages ago that Biden was the Democrat's last hope against the woke. I maintain that view.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,059
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Anyone? Not in Trump's book!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Biden would have to be unbelievably unlucky to get that sort of ECV spread.
  • Options
    An alleged teenage neo-Nazi said he was “getting armed and getting in shape” for an attack, a court has heard.

    The 17-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is accused of joining the Feuerkrieg Division (FKD) while preparing to commit an act of terrorism last summer.

    Birmingham Crown Court heard that he was admitted as a member of FKD after doing an online test where he was asked his opinion of Jews and fascism.

    The boy allegedly wrote that Jewish people “must be eradicated”, called fascism “the pursuit of restoring the natural order” and said he wanted to “go out there and provoke” a race war.


    The teenager, from Rugby in Warwickshire, passed the test and was added to private online chats between FKD members on the Wire encrypted communication app.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/teenager-neo-nazi-group-terror-attack-birmingham-crown-court-fkd-a9701591.html
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Biden would have to be unbelievably unlucky to get that sort of ECV spread.
    ... and Trump was VERY lucky in 3 states last time - difficult to repeat that.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    stodge said:

    .

    The Party ID split is 41% Dem, 33% Ind and 26% Rep so perhaps an over-sampling of Democrats.


    That's a massively ludicrous over sample of Dems. That's enough to junk that poll.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Yes, there's a point at which the states with the people living in them start to ask, "is this United States of America thing something we want to be a part of".

    That said, if the state polling is showing something totally different to the national polling my first guess would be that the state polling is wrong, rather than that the national polling is wrong or the Electoral College is wrong.

    (Or the way RCP aggregates the polling is wrong, this is the kind of comparison where you really want to account for House Effects.)
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,828



    I'm looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.

    Cogent and vaguely rude as always.

    There are three classes of State currently:

    a) the majority - Biden is piling up votes in his strongholds and is doing disproportionately well in Trump's states though he has no prospect of winning any of them including the likes of Texas and Georgia.

    b) the main battleground states - the swing to Biden is smaller perhaps 2-3% but that will be enough IF the votes come out in two months as they are now.

    c) the "mavericks" - three in particular. Arizona, where Biden is doing well, North Carolina where Trump is doing better than average and may cling on and Minnesota which is Trump's only realistic hope of a gain.

  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    But puzzled by North Carolina's inclusion. Whilst a competitive state it is completely irrelevant to who wins.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924
    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    That's the narrative, and it's one that - for example - Conrad Black and Andrew Sullivan have both written about in the last two weeks.

    But I'm a numbers rather than a narrative kind of guy. Let's see if voters are actually changing.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924
    stodge said:

    A veritable blizzard of polls this evening from America as we head toward Labor Day and the traditional start of the campaign which seems to have been going on for years.

    The weekly Economist/YouGov poll has Biden up 51-40.

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/7kvpozbozh/econTabReport.pdf

    Some of the highlights - men vote Biden 46-45 but women choose Biden 55-36. Trump leads by 48-46 in the $50-100k income group but is well behind in other groups.

    The White vote is 48-45 to Trump but Biden has big leads in all the other ethnic groups.

    The Party ID split is 41% Dem, 33% Ind and 26% Rep so perhaps an over-sampling of Democrats.

    Investors Business Daily/TIPP has Biden ahead 49-4 but no crosstabs.

    Rasmussen has Biden up by four which is least surprisingly the lowest lead among the pollsters but again no crosstabs.

    The USA Today/Suffolk poll has Trump closing the gap but still down 50-43.

    Finally, the Grinnell poll puts Biden up 49-41 and thoughtfully they have also published their crosstabs:

    https://www.grinnell.edu/sites/default/files/docs/2020-09/Selzer Co GCNP 2219 Methodology.pdf

    The sampling is 35% Democrat, 34% Republican and 25% Independent which is very different from Economist/YouGov.

    That is an oversampling of Democrats. A more likely split is probably 33% Republican (i.e. +5 relative to the country as a whole), 39% Democrat (-1), and 28% Independent (-4).

    The men-women split should be the most concerning for Trump, because women vote in greater numbers than men.
  • Options
    Some data backing up the anecdotes that towns are recovering much faster than cities (and especially London):

    https://www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,129
    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Biden would have to be unbelievably unlucky to get that sort of ECV spread.
    Yes. Exactly. But such is the implication of reliance on state polling to the exclusion of national. I prefer to go with the national and assume the state cards will fall within non outlandish distributions.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,828
    rcs1000 said:



    That is an oversampling of Democrats. A more likely split is probably 33% Republican (i.e. +5 relative to the country as a whole), 39% Democrat (-1), and 28% Independent (-4).

    The men-women split should be the most concerning for Trump, because women vote in greater numbers than men.

    The Economist/YouGov split is 41% Dem, 33% Ind and 26% Republican - would you consider that more reasonable ?

  • Options
    stodge said:



    I'm looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.

    Cogent and vaguely rude as always.

    There are three classes of State currently:

    a) the majority - Biden is piling up votes in his strongholds and is doing disproportionately well in Trump's states though he has no prospect of winning any of them including the likes of Texas and Georgia.

    b) the main battleground states - the swing to Biden is smaller perhaps 2-3% but that will be enough IF the votes come out in two months as they are now.

    c) the "mavericks" - three in particular. Arizona, where Biden is doing well, North Carolina where Trump is doing better than average and may cling on and Minnesota which is Trump's only realistic hope of a gain.

    How much is b) going to be hit by ballot issues over postal votes? 3% sounds tight if it relies on a big GOTV and people are staying home and mailing.

    Those votes might never be counted.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924
    edited September 2020
    stodge said:



    I'm looking at my 2016 notes.

    National polling not bad, state polling a load of donkey testicles.

    Cogent and vaguely rude as always.

    There are three classes of State currently:

    a) the majority - Biden is piling up votes in his strongholds and is doing disproportionately well in Trump's states though he has no prospect of winning any of them including the likes of Texas and Georgia.

    b) the main battleground states - the swing to Biden is smaller perhaps 2-3% but that will be enough IF the votes come out in two months as they are now.

    c) the "mavericks" - three in particular. Arizona, where Biden is doing well, North Carolina where Trump is doing better than average and may cling on and Minnesota which is Trump's only realistic hope of a gain.

    I would be staggered if Biden wins by four percentage points (i.e. more than the EU referendum victory), and doesn't grab the Presidency.

    Back before the midterms there was a whole bunch of discussion on exactly this very issue ("Dems need eight point lead to take the house"). And, guess what, it turned out that swings were much, much more uniform than people thought.

    Don't forget that if you win by about 4 points, then you got around 10% more votes than your opponents. That's a massive margin in the real word.

    So, I would personally keep my eye on the national vote share. Three points or more, Biden win. Two to three points, probable Biden win. One to two points, probable Trump win. One point or less, Trump win.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,828

    Some data backing up the anecdotes that towns are recovering much faster than cities (and especially London):

    https://www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/

    The data's quite old but no surprise to see Bournemouth and Southend doing well considering they are coastal towns during holiday time and are quite easy to reach.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    That's the narrative, and it's one that - for example - Conrad Black and Andrew Sullivan have both written about in the last two weeks.

    But I'm a numbers rather than a narrative kind of guy. Let's see if voters are actually changing.
    One problem with the polls last time was that in order to make the samples balanced, they compromised on randomness, which meant they failed to pick up on important movements.
  • Options
    Joe Biden's campaign, the Democratic National Committee and their joint fundraising committees together raised $364.5 million in the month of August, his campaign announced Wednesday.

    Why it matters: The total is believed to be the most ever raised by a presidential candidate in a single month,

    Axios
  • Options
    stodge said:

    Some data backing up the anecdotes that towns are recovering much faster than cities (and especially London):

    https://www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/

    The data's quite old but no surprise to see Bournemouth and Southend doing well considering they are coastal towns during holiday time and are quite easy to reach.
    Sure, the seaside towns doing well isn't unexpected.

    But the report shows Wakefield recovering better than Leeds, Newport better than Cardiff, Mansfield better than Nottingham, Telford better than Birmingham and so on.

    Whether than pattern continues we don't know yet.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,865
    I hope Charles isn't triggered by this...

    https://twitter.com/SpecCoffeeHouse/status/1301233654656622603
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,572
    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    But puzzled by North Carolina's inclusion. Whilst a competitive state it is completely irrelevant to who wins.
    How so?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903

    An alleged teenage neo-Nazi said he was “getting armed and getting in shape” for an attack, a court has heard.

    The 17-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is accused of joining the Feuerkrieg Division (FKD) while preparing to commit an act of terrorism last summer.

    Birmingham Crown Court heard that he was admitted as a member of FKD after doing an online test where he was asked his opinion of Jews and fascism.

    The boy allegedly wrote that Jewish people “must be eradicated”, called fascism “the pursuit of restoring the natural order” and said he wanted to “go out there and provoke” a race war.


    The teenager, from Rugby in Warwickshire, passed the test and was added to private online chats between FKD members on the Wire encrypted communication app.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/teenager-neo-nazi-group-terror-attack-birmingham-crown-court-fkd-a9701591.html

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53392036

    A neo-Nazi group that was led by a 13-year-old boy from Estonia should be banned as a terrorist organisation, the UK government has announced.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,572
    Scott_xP said:
    How dare you criticise our illustrious PM in such a shameful way! :wink:
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924
    edited September 2020
    stodge said:

    rcs1000 said:



    That is an oversampling of Democrats. A more likely split is probably 33% Republican (i.e. +5 relative to the country as a whole), 39% Democrat (-1), and 28% Independent (-4).

    The men-women split should be the most concerning for Trump, because women vote in greater numbers than men.

    The Economist/YouGov split is 41% Dem, 33% Ind and 26% Republican - would you consider that more reasonable ?

    Right.

    The current state of the country is Registered Democrats 40%, Registered Republicans 28%, Registered Independents 32%.

    It is worth noting, for betting purposes, that in Florida the number of Registered Republicans is growing faster than the number of Registered Democrats. (That is one of the reasons I suspect it stays Red.)

    I expect those that remain Registered Republicans to be more likely to vote that Registered Democrats.
  • Options
    Why does Boris need to know the details? This is a faith-based government. Fact is not important. Just believe.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    Trump loses PV by 7 but shades the EC.

    Now that would be a crisis of legitimacy in anyone's book.
    Yes, there's a point at which the states with the people living in them start to ask, "is this United States of America thing something we want to be a part of".

    That said, if the state polling is showing something totally different to the national polling my first guess would be that the state polling is wrong, rather than that the national polling is wrong or the Electoral College is wrong.

    (Or the way RCP aggregates the polling is wrong, this is the kind of comparison where you really want to account for House Effects.)
    Completely agree.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:
    That is the sort of thing that really irritates me: how hard is it to LABEL YOUR AXES!?

    (and yes, I know that the times are given in the title. Doesn't matter. 3/10 do it again)
  • Options

    Scott_xP said:
    That is the sort of thing that really irritates me: how hard is it to LABEL YOUR AXES!?

    (and yes, I know that the times are given in the title. Doesn't matter. 3/10 do it again)
    Labelling your axes is simple:

    a) Blade
    b) Handle

    (I thank you!)
  • Options

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
  • Options

    Scott_xP said:
    That is the sort of thing that really irritates me: how hard is it to LABEL YOUR AXES!?

    (and yes, I know that the times are given in the title. Doesn't matter. 3/10 do it again)
    They have labelled the axes, it is just the twitter render does show the full image until you click on the tweet.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,531

    An alleged teenage neo-Nazi said he was “getting armed and getting in shape” for an attack, a court has heard.

    The 17-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is accused of joining the Feuerkrieg Division (FKD) while preparing to commit an act of terrorism last summer.

    Birmingham Crown Court heard that he was admitted as a member of FKD after doing an online test where he was asked his opinion of Jews and fascism.

    The boy allegedly wrote that Jewish people “must be eradicated”, called fascism “the pursuit of restoring the natural order” and said he wanted to “go out there and provoke” a race war.


    The teenager, from Rugby in Warwickshire, passed the test and was added to private online chats between FKD members on the Wire encrypted communication app.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/teenager-neo-nazi-group-terror-attack-birmingham-crown-court-fkd-a9701591.html

    In Britain he is on trial. In America he would buy an AR15, join vigilantes "protecting property" by shooting demonstrated, and praised as a patriot by the Trumpers.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,865

    Labelling your axes is simple:

    a) Blade
    b) Handle

    (I thank you!)

    Your coat...
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    But puzzled by North Carolina's inclusion. Whilst a competitive state it is completely irrelevant to who wins.
    How so?
    NC is 15 EC votes. The number of scenarios where NC's votes alone are vital to who wins is very, very limited.

    If Biden takes NC he's almost certainly taking other states that will push him clear of a 15 vote margin of victory. Similarly Biden has plentiful paths to winning that don't involve taking NC.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    I've been talking to friends in the US and they all say the same thing, Biden leads the polls but the feeling on the ground is that Trump has the momentum because he's been gifted a stronger hand by the riots and the Dems lack of condemnation of their own side and the very blatant media bias. This is among all likely Dem voters as well.

    The CNN graphic of "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" in front of burning buildings has become a recruiting tool for Trump among middle class suburban whites, it's team Trump saying "we told you, they'll lie to your face and expect you to accept it" and it's working for them among parents of my friends who were previously in the Dem column.

    Absolute nonsense. Biden made a speech on 2nd June this year where he was very clear he was against all this stuff so this can't be true.

    He doesn't need to do any more.
  • Options

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
    THREE MILLION more Americans voted for Hillary than for Trump!

    Who knew!

    Let me re-iterate!

    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    That's right: STEAL!
  • Options

    FWIW, the various statistical models as at today have the probabilities (all rounded to nearest percent) as:

    New Statesman: Biden 85%, Trump 15%
    Progress Campaign: Biden 85%, Trump 15%
    Economist Biden 86%, Trump 14%
    Five Thirty Eight: Biden 69%, Trump 30%

    I think that all these models are doing similar things, and they broadly agree on what the current best estimate of the polling position is. The reason 538 is so much less bullish on Biden than the others is simply that they build in an increased level of uncertainty (in both directions).

    Personally I think it's a mistake to try to model the uncertainty (beyond historical changes between now and the election). I prefer to look at the polling as one input - the most significant - and then to layer on top of that a political judgement as to whether this time it's going to be different,

    Amen.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:
    I hope his backbenchers are
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095

    Joe Biden's campaign, the Democratic National Committee and their joint fundraising committees together raised $364.5 million in the month of August, his campaign announced Wednesday.

    Why it matters: The total is believed to be the most ever raised by a presidential candidate in a single month,

    Axios

    You could have raised ten times that, but if you are using it to market a Trabant....

    Even if the only other car you can buy is a Lada.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,321
    HYUFD said:
    Well, if life would be totally obliterated by Biden's election, the other effects seem somewhat superfluous.
  • Options
    Off topic, my LinkedIn feed is going utterly apeshit with job ads for Amazon: PMs, programme managers, IT/logistics and distribution managers galore.

    They are recruiting like a Mo Fo.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Scott_xP said:
    One of those ID cards is in inverted commas, indicating it isn't really an ID card.

  • Options

    HYUFD said:
    Well, if life would be totally obliterated by Biden's election, the other effects seem somewhat superfluous.
    Should get @SandyRentool 's vote then.
  • Options
    This article about the new head of the Civil Service is very interesting and quite reassuring that it sounds like a very suitable person has been chosen to fill the role: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-civil-service-chief-simon-case-had-been-forced-out-over-brexit-m0qr20399
  • Options

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
    THREE MILLION more Americans voted for Hillary than for Trump!

    Who knew!

    Let me re-iterate!

    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    That's right: STEAL!
    You can repeat your previous post using even more capitals.

    It doesn't make it more convincing.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
    THREE MILLION more Americans voted for Hillary than for Trump!

    Who knew!

    Let me re-iterate!

    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    That's right: STEAL!
    Take it up with a lot of long dead people....
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
    Yes but.

    That works so long as everyone thinks it is fair. If you get wildly disproportionate results, then people will no longer think it fair, and if it happens repeatedly, then people will eventually say it doesn't work for them.

    If the Dems got 60% of the vote, and the Republicans 40%, and President Trump won the electoral college. And then that happened again, and Ivanka won, then you would likely end up with secession. (See East Pakistan for what happens when people think the electoral system no longer works for them.)

    (I would point out that the founding fathers did not actually settle on the electoral college as it is now, and they actually left it to states to decide how they would choose to send delegates.)
  • Options
    People are over compensating for what happened in 2016. Biden isn’t an overwhelming favourite but the most likely outcome is a fairly comfortable wins for the Dems on a similar level to 2012
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,924
    HYUFD said:
    When the voters of Massachusetts choose to stick with the same Senator they've had for the last two decades, it shows how the Democrats have changed...

    What?
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    A selection of polls today, in UK style:

    Ipsos - Biden 47 (n/c) Trump 40 (n/c) - last week
    YouGov - Biden 51 (+4) Trump 40 (-1) - last Friday
    IPC/TIPP - Biden 49 (+1) Trump 41 (n/c) - last month
    USC Dornsife - Biden 51 (-1) Trump 42 (n/c) - yesterday
    Rasmussen - Biden 49 (+3) Trump 45 (n/c) - last week
    Suffolk - Biden 50 (-3) Trump 43 (+2) - last month
    Quinnipiac Biden 52 (n/c) Trump 42 (+5) - mid-July
    Selzer - Biden 49 (+2) Trump 41 (-2) - since March
    Opinium - Biden 54 (+2) Trump 39 (-1) - 7th July
    Morning Consult Biden 51 (+1) Trump 43 (n/c) last week.

  • Options
    Over 400 migrants landed today.. almost 10% of the record for the whole year.

    Utterly insane.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I feel like this is 2019 GE repeated. The Tories should have been 1.1 or so to win a majority but they weren't from recollection, people were convinced - including me, I am guilty - of thinking 2017 might be repeated. Is there a chance of that here?

    That's what I've been saying for a long time. Trump is America's Corbyn and people are making the same mistakes in logic now as they were in 2019.
    The media were living in a bubble in 2016 and their response since then has been largely to continue living in the same bubble. People who tried to report from outside it, like Andrew Sullivan, have been excommunicated.
    The bubble that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump?
    There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton was a more popular candidate than Trump...oh.


    I thought we'd got beyond the 'Clinton really won', shtick.

    I mean, if we actually want Trump to lose this time..
    The point was about popularity. Would you say the 2016 vote indicated Clinton was more popular, less popular or about as popular as Trump in the USA?
    The point was about the bubble thinking that Clinton was more popular than Trump such that her victory was a sure thing.

    As it turned out she wasn't popular enough to win the electoral college - which is where it counts.
    The ELECTORAL KINDERGARTEN (as it should be called!) is just an unfair, outdated, crappy means for the popular vote LOSER to STEAL the White House!

    Sad!
    It's the United States of America, not the American Union.

    The founding fathers designed the electoral college so that the President would command a weighted majority of all the states taken together rather than just stacking up votes in certain places to achieve a national "popular" win, but at the risk of splintering the states apart as a consequence.

    Rather than quibbling about the fact Hillary squeaked the popular vote by barely 2% they'd do better to ask why she didn't appeal across the country.
    Yes but.

    That works so long as everyone thinks it is fair. If you get wildly disproportionate results, then people will no longer think it fair, and if it happens repeatedly, then people will eventually say it doesn't work for them.

    If the Dems got 60% of the vote, and the Republicans 40%, and President Trump won the electoral college. And then that happened again, and Ivanka won, then you would likely end up with secession. (See East Pakistan for what happens when people think the electoral system no longer works for them.)

    (I would point out that the founding fathers did not actually settle on the electoral college as it is now, and they actually left it to states to decide how they would choose to send delegates.)
    It's a 2% margin leading to a very narrow win via ECVs not a 20% abomination.

    Let's deal with reality and not hypotheticals.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:

    BIden's overall lead is up but his lead in battleground states is down according to RCP.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com

    But puzzled by North Carolina's inclusion. Whilst a competitive state it is completely irrelevant to who wins.
    How so?
    NC is 15 EC votes. The number of scenarios where NC's votes alone are vital to who wins is very, very limited.

    If Biden takes NC he's almost certainly taking other states that will push him clear of a 15 vote margin of victory. Similarly Biden has plentiful paths to winning that don't involve taking NC.
    North Carolina counts 'backwards' to Virginia (Biden will start out ahead there early in the night and go backward)
  • Options

    Some data backing up the anecdotes that towns are recovering much faster than cities (and especially London):

    https://www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/

    Interesting. Wondering how much this implies that towns have an older demographic profile than cities and thus a lower propensity to shop online. And also whether it says something about the type of jobs in those cities v towns and the ability for workers to get the job done from home.

    I know Cardiff well, and a very small minority of offices have welcomed staff back in any numbers. Our office is closed until at least January for any return in numbers. Its available for staff who can't work at home but to be frank is so desolate and unwelcoming, that no-one wants to be there and are more than happy to keep working remotely with occasional outdoor meet-ups with colleagues.
This discussion has been closed.