Any more views on GA? I can see Biden winning in WI, but losing PA and MI now. Which means he needs GA. I saw earlier posts suggesting its 50/50 but is that right? Or wishful thinking and another case of very close but no cigar like several other states.
I'm fairly confident Biden will win Wisconsin, so he gets to 254 ECVs.
PA just looks out of reach to me. Georgia prob narrowly Trump.
Which means it comes down to Michigan, and if Biden clinches it he probably wins 270 to 268.
I think he's lost Wisconsin. There's just not enough votes left.
Milwaukee, Kenosha and Green Bay still haven't tallied their absentee ballots, and Eau Claire isn't there yet, and there's only a 100k deficit to overcome.
It looks like Trump is going to sweep the board in the midwest again winning Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. He looks like he is holding Georgia too. Is that not enough?
Ohio, you're right. Pennsylvania, you're probably right. Michigan, I'm not calling it. Wisconsin, until they start counting in Green Bay and Milwaukee it is far too early to say.
I still think Biden is value and it’s very much 50/50 at this. He needs, essentially, 2 of GA, MI, WI, PA and NC.
Let’s put NC in the Trump column immediately because it’s very very likely he will get a narrow win there.
The other states are harder to read:
GA - looks like it will be a nail biter. There are enough votes out there for Biden to take the victory, but it is going to be very very close.
PA - there are a lot of people suggesting the mail in ballots are going to bridge the gap. I think that looks a wee bit optimistic given the current Trump tally, but let’s charitably say this is a 60/40 percent chance for Trump.
MI - genuinely up in the air from my reading of the situation.
WI - again there is that gap that looks pretty sizeable but Milwaukee has yet to report and is expected to be very sizeable Dem. I think you give the edge to Biden here.
All in all, it’s on a knife edge but I could see Biden doing it. His team appear to be projecting confidence while Trump’s look defensive, if that is any reading of the situation, but it’s difficult to know if that’s from a reading of the campaign team’s view of the situation or whether it’s just projection.
Very crudely - I have put all the nytimes county results into a spreadsheet, then assumed the unreported votes go as their counties have currently gone. That doesn't include absentee ballots (I think).
I thought when doing this I would see that Biden has lots of votes to come in. But actually it doesn't look that way. It looks like the gap widens in all 3 states? Maybe i've miscalculated somehow...
I might be misreading your post but surely if you assume the uncounted votes are split in the same proportions as the already counted votes, then the existing gap will increase. Whether that is the correct assumption is the question. It might be. It probably is not.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
One other point - why would trump be talking about a "fraud" if the votes cast suggest he's going to win?
Although, to be honest, i'm not sure that Trump is all an evil genius. I think he genuinely doesn't understand a lot of stuff about elections and the vote counting process. He's not steeped in a career in politics, with all the experience that provides. He thinks that news channels 'calling' states is the same as the result. He sees Arizona being called for Biden, and doesn't understand why when outstanding votes are greater than the current lead. He doesn't understand why Biden has "won" Arizona, when the leads to him in places like Penn are far greater. etc etc
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
I thought the results in Florida were pretty good generally for Biden but washed away by the big swing in Miami.
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really dos difficult?
Finding one without other negatives, it seems so. I don't think Kamala would have won it, for example.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really dos difficult?
You're making the mistake of comparing Biden to junk polling instead of the historical record of challengers to elected presidents.
CNN obviously don't expect anyone to watch their coverage for more than 5 minutes every hour. A feature of their analysis is repeating the same thing over and over and over again, every couple of minutes.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
It's difficult in Europe, so it's difficult in the US too. Young voters seek authenticity, reliability that transcends political managerialism, and most politicians under 50 are managerialists. I don't think Buttigieg would have beaten Trump either.
Biden now out to 3.35 - has any candidate ever won from those odds this late in the count ?
I'm trying to work out if the gigantic gap in Penn is bridgeable by late reporting precincts and postals.
I think the numbers of votes in total are there and yes they will heavily favour Biden but I dont see the % diff being so high to bridge that gap. For me its all about GA now if Biden can somehow win it and the needle stays where it is!. So GA and WI looks his best bet to me, I think PA and MI arent flipping. PA I always thought might stay red, MI I really thought the polls were wide enough to allow enough slack to still keep Biden in but looking hard for him now.
Just a thought about the polls. How do the pollsters determine the demographic makeup of a state when coming up with their weightings? Are they at the worst point now because the annual census was 10 years ago, and every year that passes from that changes things and increases the amount of educated guesswork.
You see different percentages in different polls from different companies, so looks like they guess to a large extent, and seems that they guess badly.
Away from the Presidential race, the Republicans are leading in all of the outstanding senate races except Arizona and Georgia special (which will go to a run off), including Michigan and Maine.
It's now possible the Republicans could hold on to 53 seats (losing AZ and CO but winning MI and AL).
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
I was just thinking that. Democrats win when they have inspiring bullshitters who promise the earth then let everybody down - Clinton, Kennedy, Obama (like Blair over here for Labour). The uninspiring but competent wonks like Gore or Biden don't cut it in elections, though they may be better at governing.
I still think Biden is value and it’s very much 50/50 at this. He needs, essentially, 2 of GA, MI, WI, PA and NC.
Let’s put NC in the Trump column immediately because it’s very very likely he will get a narrow win there.
The other states are harder to read:
GA - looks like it will be a nail biter. There are enough votes out there for Biden to take the victory, but it is going to be very very close.
PA - there are a lot of people suggesting the mail in ballots are going to bridge the gap. I think that looks a wee bit optimistic given the current Trump tally, but let’s charitably say this is a 60/40 percent chance for Trump.
MI - genuinely up in the air from my reading of the situation.
WI - again there is that gap that looks pretty sizeable but Milwaukee has yet to report and is expected to be very sizeable Dem. I think you give the edge to Biden here.
All in all, it’s on a knife edge but I could see Biden doing it. His team appear to be projecting confidence while Trump’s look defensive, if that is any reading of the situation, but it’s difficult to know if that’s from a reading of the campaign team’s view of the situation or whether it’s just projection.
Very crudely - I have put all the nytimes county results into a spreadsheet, then assumed the unreported votes go as their counties have currently gone. That doesn't include absentee ballots (I think).
I thought when doing this I would see that Biden has lots of votes to come in. But actually it doesn't look that way. It looks like the gap widens in all 3 states? Maybe i've miscalculated somehow...
I might be misreading your post but surely if you assume the uncounted votes are split in the same proportions as the already counted votes, then the existing gap will increase. Whether that is the correct assumption is the question. It might be. It probably is not.
Not necessarily as it's applied on a county by county basis. If most of the uncounted votes are in heavily D counties, - then the gap would shrink.
In any case - there were several mistakes with what I've done, so just ignore that post from me!
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
Yes I’d say he is one you can trust to be relatively objective
My Trump supporting colleagues are very bullish this morning and think it's in the bag without the need for legal challenges. Be funny if the Democrats launched some instead.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
I thought the results in Florida were pretty good generally for Biden but washed away by the big swing in Miami.
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
Okay, I wasn't up when Florida was being done on here!
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
I was just thinking that. Democrats win when they have inspiring bullshitters who promise the earth then let everybody down - Clinton, Kennedy, Obama (like Blair over here for Labour). The uninspiring but competent wonks like Gore or Biden don't cut it in elections, though they may be better at governing.
Sanders I don't think would have done worse than Biden tonight, but better or not we'll never know.
Any more views on GA? I can see Biden winning in WI, but losing PA and MI now. Which means he needs GA. I saw earlier posts suggesting its 50/50 but is that right? Or wishful thinking and another case of very close but no cigar like several other states.
NYT needles have it as a 64% shot for Biden.
And NYT have been very good tonight
Although they had Georgia about a 90%+shot for Trump at one point
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
I think the question is about evidence. The polling evidence seemed to be so strongly pro-Biden that it simply looked perverse and partisan to stand out against that consensus. In fact we have a polling failure on a scale that currently looks even greater than in 2016.
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
A decade or so ago I remember Morus doing a PB thread suggesting that Obama would drop Biden for his second term and replace him with someone youngish, fresh faced and hopeful.
Any more views on GA? I can see Biden winning in WI, but losing PA and MI now. Which means he needs GA. I saw earlier posts suggesting its 50/50 but is that right? Or wishful thinking and another case of very close but no cigar like several other states.
NYT needles have it as a 64% shot for Biden.
And NYT have been very good tonight
Although they had Georgia about a 90%+shot for Trump at one point
That was due to a data reporting issue from GA losing tens of thousands of votes.
One other point - why would trump be talking about a "fraud" if the votes cast suggest he's going to win?
Although, to be honest, i'm not sure that Trump is all an evil genius. I think he genuinely doesn't understand a lot of stuff about elections and the vote counting process. He's not steeped in a career in politics, with all the experience that provides. He thinks that news channels 'calling' states is the same as the result. He sees Arizona being called for Biden, and doesn't understand why when outstanding votes are greater than the current lead. He doesn't understand why Biden has "won" Arizona, when the leads to him in places like Penn are far greater. etc etc
Perhaps he believes there's fraud? You can't seriously believe that the stakes aren't high enough that a significant number of Democrats (and indeed Republicans) would think a bit of creative vote counting to get their guy over the line wasn't morally justifiable.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
He still might win, but it did seem weird to choose such an old fellow, because it made Trump look relatively energetic. A 40 something would have looked a much better alternative instead of a less lively old man
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
That is not correct though is it (well it maybe for some)? It generally was because the evidence pointed to those results. If there is any criticism is not they were biased by their own bias but that they believed crap evidence. Should they have been aware the evidence was likely to have been crap or not?
I think they should have been aware. Polls aren’t gospel, they are articles of faith as much as whatever Trafalgar do is, just the crowd on here treat the former with reverence, and work backwards when they’re wrong to find things they got right.
Do they? Unlike most gamblers it is noticeable how gamblers on here put there hands up when they get it wrong.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
I thought the results in Florida were pretty good generally for Biden but washed away by the big swing in Miami.
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
Nate Cohn tweets:
In a way, the situation right now is vaguely reminiscent of the situation at 11PM in 2016... but in reverse (and in slow motion). Biden's the favorite, even if narrowly, just about everywhere: PA, WI, MI, AZ, NV, GA. But the trailing candidate is close, and it could be a while
I can cash out now for an absolutely certain £1,600 haircut. Or I can stay in and win nearly £3k if Biden wins, but risk losing £3.4k if Trump wins.
I'm not sure I'll be much less happy with losing £3.4k compared to £1.6k, and even more annoyed if Biden eventually clinches it by a whisker.
What to do..?
Interesting that it's a dilemma.
I got jittery long before election day and cashed out (rarely put my money where my mouth is before), but all through election night I've felt like the odds have swung too far in Trump's favour and been tempted to bet on Biden again, including now. I've not done so because I'm too emotionally involved in the outcome.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
I think the question is about evidence. The polling evidence seemed to be so strongly pro-Biden that it simply looked perverse and partisan to stand out against that consensus. In fact we have a polling failure on a scale that currently looks even greater than in 2016.
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
When will people wake up to the inherent bias in polls have towards the politically engaged?
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
I think the question is about evidence. The polling evidence seemed to be so strongly pro-Biden that it simply looked perverse and partisan to stand out against that consensus. In fact we have a polling failure on a scale that currently looks even greater than in 2016.
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
It seems weird to dunk on the pollsters based on vote counts that we don't know yet. FL was pretty off although it's a weird state and the polls were quite varied, GA and NC seem to have been pretty close, TX was great, AZ was great. It may well turn out that the midwest polls were way, way off, but this is all based on our guesses about votes that haven't been counted yet. And I don't think we know the national score yet? It often takes quite a while to count votes in the states that nobody cares about.
There was a piece on C4 News a couple of weeks’ ago, focusing on the spread of a ‘Biden is a Communist’ video in Spanish that had been widely circulated among Latino voters in Florida. They interviewed several voters; some were sceptical about its content, but others were clearly persuaded by it. In retrospect, that appears to have been a spectacularly successful piece of micro-targeting.
Any more views on GA? I can see Biden winning in WI, but losing PA and MI now. Which means he needs GA. I saw earlier posts suggesting its 50/50 but is that right? Or wishful thinking and another case of very close but no cigar like several other states.
NYT needles have it as a 64% shot for Biden.
And NYT have been very good tonight
Although they had Georgia about a 90%+shot for Trump at one point
That was due to a data reporting issue from GA losing tens of thousands of votes.
Biden now out to 3.35 - has any candidate ever won from those odds this late in the count ?
I'm trying to work out if the gigantic gap in Penn is bridgeable by late reporting precincts and postals.
I think the numbers of votes in total are there and yes they will heavily favour Biden but I dont see the % diff being so high to bridge that gap. For me its all about GA now if Biden can somehow win it and the needle stays where it is!. So GA and WI looks his best bet to me, I think PA and MI arent flipping. PA I always thought might stay red, MI I really thought the polls were wide enough to allow enough slack to still keep Biden in but looking hard for him now.
Before I log off I'd like to point out that Trump is winning by 76,337 votes in North Carolina with absentee ballots postmarked by election day being accepted until 12 November. There are, roughly, 600,000 of such votes still out there and none of the networks has called the state. I'll grant you that its a long shot for Biden but its marginally more likely than some of the theories left on here. The NYT needle has Trump at 84% in NC compared to Biden at 64% in Georgia. Neither outcome, as they say, isimpossible for either candidate.
I think we may well have just watched the last US election in our lifetimes.
There will still be another election in 2024, the Democrats will at least control the House and therefore the Congressional mandate of the date on which presidential elections must be held will remain
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
I can cash out now for an absolutely certain £1,600 haircut. Or I can stay in and win nearly £3k if Biden wins, but risk losing £3.4k if Trump wins.
I'm not sure I'll be much less happy with losing £3.4k compared to £1.6k, and even more annoyed if Biden eventually clinches it by a whisker.
What to do..?
Interesting that it's a dilemma.
I got jittery long before election day and cashed out (rarely put my money where my mouth is before), but all through election night I've felt like the odds have swung too far in Trump's favour and been tempted to bet on Biden again, including now. I've not done so because I'm too emotionally involved in the outcome.
I've got better at disconnecting my emotions and loss aversion.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
I thought the results in Florida were pretty good generally for Biden but washed away by the big swing in Miami.
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
Nate Cohn tweets:
In a way, the situation right now is vaguely reminiscent of the situation at 11PM in 2016... but in reverse (and in slow motion). Biden's the favorite, even if narrowly, just about everywhere: PA, WI, MI, AZ, NV, GA. But the trailing candidate is close, and it could be a while
Make of that what you will!
I dont see how objectively he makes Biden favourite in so many places.
Biden now out to 3.35 - has any candidate ever won from those odds this late in the count ?
I'm trying to work out if the gigantic gap in Penn is bridgeable by late reporting precincts and postals.
I think the numbers of votes in total are there and yes they will heavily favour Biden but I dont see the % diff being so high to bridge that gap. For me its all about GA now if Biden can somehow win it and the needle stays where it is!. So GA and WI looks his best bet to me, I think PA and MI arent flipping. PA I always thought might stay red, MI I really thought the polls were wide enough to allow enough slack to still keep Biden in but looking hard for him now.
NYTimes has (for counties that have reported) the mail in vote splitting 78.4/20.7
If the remaining 1,435,289 votes split liek that then Biden gets a NET 828,161 vote boost. Which even factoring in the Red Counties that have not counted in-person votes yet would give him the win.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
Yes I’d say he is one you can trust to be relatively objective
Did you trust me to be objective when I consistently forecast a Trump win?
There was a piece on C4 News a couple of weeks’ ago, focusing on the spread of a ‘Biden is a Communist’ video in Spanish that had been widely circulated among Latino voters in Florida. They interviewed several voters; some were sceptical about its content, but others were clearly persuaded by it. In retrospect, that appears to have been a spectacularly successful piece of micro-targeting.
TV Era, Broadcast politics is dead. But still some people are yet to catch up on this.
One other point - why would trump be talking about a "fraud" if the votes cast suggest he's going to win?
Although, to be honest, i'm not sure that Trump is all an evil genius. I think he genuinely doesn't understand a lot of stuff about elections and the vote counting process. He's not steeped in a career in politics, with all the experience that provides. He thinks that news channels 'calling' states is the same as the result. He sees Arizona being called for Biden, and doesn't understand why when outstanding votes are greater than the current lead. He doesn't understand why Biden has "won" Arizona, when the leads to him in places like Penn are far greater. etc etc
Perhaps he believes there's fraud? You can't seriously believe that the stakes aren't high enough that a significant number of Democrats (and indeed Republicans) would think a bit of creative vote counting to get their guy over the line wasn't morally justifiable.
Agree. It is not such a ridiculous thing to believe and if you believe you can nuke hurricanes, F35s are invisible and you can inject bleach it really is completely reasonable if not probable.
ABC News - The Republican Party is dead. The party of Bush and Reagan is the Whig Party. We now have the Trump Party.
For now, if the Democrats win a few presidential elections then the more moderate Republicans may come back but yes for the moment Trumpism remains ascendant in the GOP and one of the Trump family or Pence remain the likely nominee for 2024 too
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
It's difficult in Europe, so it's difficult in the US too. Young voters seek authenticity, reliability that transcends political managerialism, and most politicians under 50 are managerialists. I don't think Buttigieg would have beaten Trump either.
Indeed.
The problem really comes in the definition of what politicians are for - given good speeches? read 100,000 pages of stuff* a day? Make brave decisions? Appear empathetic?
The politicians we get are the product of what we ask for, through the system.
A point articulated by a certain advisor to the current PM....
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
The latest figures on the Guardian has Trump ahead by 31,195, but it's narrowed a lot in the last few minutes.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
Would they? I don't think Buttigieg for example would have won over many more Trump voters than Biden did to be honest, Warren or Sanders would probably have done worse than Biden did
ABC News - The Republican Party is dead. The party of Bush and Reagan is the Whig Party. We now have the Trump Party.
For now, if the Democrats win a few presidential elections then the more moderate Republicans may come back but yes for the moment Trumpism remains ascendant in the GOP and one of the Trump family or Pence remain the likely nominee for 2024 too
It's the same here. The Conservative party as was is also dead (or at the very least in a coma), replaced by this populist nationalist movement.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
That is not correct though is it (well it maybe for some)? It generally was because the evidence pointed to those results. If there is any criticism is not they were biased by their own bias but that they believed crap evidence. Should they have been aware the evidence was likely to have been crap or not?
I think they should have been aware. Polls aren’t gospel, they are articles of faith as much as whatever Trafalgar do is, just the crowd on here treat the former with reverence, and work backwards when they’re wrong to find things they got right.
Do they? Unlike most gamblers it is noticeable how gamblers on here put there hands up when they get it wrong.
Can’t say I’ve noticed that to be honest. I backed UKIP to get over 9% of the vote at Even money with someone on here back in 2015, and when UKIP got 12.5% they posted how “they knew UKIP would get a decent % of the vote but get done by FPTP!”
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
Decision Desk HQ is tweeting numbers with 95%+ votes counted saying they have 'at least partial' Milwaukee absentee ballots.
ABC News - The Republican Party is dead. The party of Bush and Reagan is the Whig Party. We now have the Trump Party.
Other way round imo. Trump was captured by the GOP. Trump's wall has not been built but Trump has delivered longstanding GOP aims like tax cuts for squillionaires and corporations, partisan judges, and undermining Obamacare.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
I think the question is about evidence. The polling evidence seemed to be so strongly pro-Biden that it simply looked perverse and partisan to stand out against that consensus. In fact we have a polling failure on a scale that currently looks even greater than in 2016.
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
When will people wake up to the inherent bias in polls have towards the politically engaged?
Surely the pollsters know about that, the question is have they gotten any better at adjusting for it? The problem being it is still then part guesswork, and so someone who is complete guesswork might also do just as well, or badly.
If Trump had handled covid only a fraction more competently, and its hard to see how he could have done worse, then he would certainly have been re-elected.
It is quite shocking how badly he handled the virus, but is on the verge of re-election.
It's a sign of what an appalling candidate Biden was. I mean how could the Dems manage to find someone even worse than Hillary?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
Would they? I don't think Buttigieg for example would have won over many more Trump voters than Biden did to be honest, Warren or Sanders would probably have done worse than Biden did
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
I think the question is about evidence. The polling evidence seemed to be so strongly pro-Biden that it simply looked perverse and partisan to stand out against that consensus. In fact we have a polling failure on a scale that currently looks even greater than in 2016.
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
When will people wake up to the inherent bias in polls have towards the politically engaged?
Surely the pollsters know about that, the question is have they gotten any better at adjusting for it? The problem being it is still then part guesswork, and so someone who is complete guesswork might also do just as well, or badly.
They should discount the opinions of people who know too much about politics! Seriously
Good news. Fox were astute in tipping WI as a better bet than MI in the early hours UK time.
The best route for Biden is one that avoids PA altogether, if possible
It's good news if true, but Biden still needs 1 of GA, MI and PA. For me GA seems his best bet , at least the NY needle slightly favours him but far too close for my liking. PA and MI look hard for Biden now
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
Decision Desk HQ on Twitter reporting much more rapidly on tallies than the networks.
Trafalgar must have done pretty well as far as pollsters are concerned.
What is the next event that people can smugly take the mickey out of @HYUFD over his predictions, before he’s right and they’re wrong?
The acid test will come when the non-conservative wins. If HY successfully predicts that, he will deserve kudos.
Maybe Tralfagar’s way of coming to their conclusions is better than traditional opinion polling
For sure. It is possible that HY is a shrewd judge of evidence and selected that, based on his experience, instinct and judgement, that he felt provided the best pointer of how things might go. And didn't bother to worry PB readers about the why and wherefore.
However it's also possible that he tipped the conservative to win because he always tips the conservative and wants the conservative to win, and simply dredges up whatever data he can find to support a preconceived outcome.
In the latter case, the surprise isn't HY's forecast, but the conservative win (if indeed that transpires).
As I said a few days back, if you always cheer for Arsenal, and Arsenal wins, you're a fan, not a pundit.
I guess the same goes for those lefties who wrote the threads that tipped Remain, said to lay Boris for the leadership, and backed Clinton and Biden?
Biden might still win of course. He’s only the same price now as Trump was 24 hours ago
As much as I love this site, I don't take much notice of what people think will happen because they are mostly biased to what they want to happen. There aren't many people who I trust to be objective, particularly in terms of this election. @Richard_Nabavi suggested that the figures coming out of from Florida yesterday weren't great for Biden, and that made me think that this was going to be close. I trust him to be objective. Most people on here, unfortunately, aren't.
I thought the results in Florida were pretty good generally for Biden but washed away by the big swing in Miami.
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
Nate Cohn tweets:
In a way, the situation right now is vaguely reminiscent of the situation at 11PM in 2016... but in reverse (and in slow motion). Biden's the favorite, even if narrowly, just about everywhere: PA, WI, MI, AZ, NV, GA. But the trailing candidate is close, and it could be a while
Make of that what you will!
I dont see how objectively he makes Biden favourite in so many places.
There are 1.4 million mail ballots in Pennsylvania still to count. Biden has won the won's counted by 78 to 20.
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
Can someone answer this? NYT and NBC are still stuck on the 84% count figure.
Well it was noted that Biden only needed to outperform Trump by tiny margins in several states to win, given how close the election was last time, though the assumption was he had at least managed a couple of percent easily enough! Less than 1% in it last time there, remarkable if that was the case again.
Where are you getting the results from? I was getting them from the NYT interactive but that still shows Trump over 100k ahead on that and hasn't updated in ages.
Decision Desk HQ on Twitter reporting much more rapidly on tallies than the networks.
Comments
Those should bring in over that number for Biden.
Is Minnessota not in the upper Midwest anymore?
All they had to go was put up someone youngish (mid 40s) fresh faced and hopeful and they'd have walked this.
Was that really so difficult?
Although, to be honest, i'm not sure that Trump is all an evil genius. I think he genuinely doesn't understand a lot of stuff about elections and the vote counting process. He's not steeped in a career in politics, with all the experience that provides. He thinks that news channels 'calling' states is the same as the result. He sees Arizona being called for Biden, and doesn't understand why when outstanding votes are greater than the current lead. He doesn't understand why Biden has "won" Arizona, when the leads to him in places like Penn are far greater. etc etc
Of course the results have been pretty good for Biden in TX and AZ as well.
It's now possible the Republicans could hold on to 53 seats (losing AZ and CO but winning MI and AL).
In any case - there were several mistakes with what I've done, so just ignore that post from me!
We need more votes counting in GA. I’m kind of tending to your view in the Midwest, but the NYT needles make me think that Biden *might* pick up GA?
Both in national and, especially, in state calls the polls have been way off. This to the point that we simply can not rely on them in betting... thats going to make life a lot more "interesting" going forward.
Anywhere else do we need to wait until this evening to get results?
He has it I think.
In a way, the situation right now is vaguely reminiscent of the situation at 11PM in 2016... but in reverse (and in slow motion).
Biden's the favorite, even if narrowly, just about everywhere: PA, WI, MI, AZ, NV, GA. But the trailing candidate is close, and it could be a while
Make of that what you will!
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1323918327958413313?s=20
"It's the hope that kills you"
I got jittery long before election day and cashed out (rarely put my money where my mouth is before), but all through election night I've felt like the odds have swung too far in Trump's favour and been tempted to bet on Biden again, including now. I've not done so because I'm too emotionally involved in the outcome.
Still trying not to shit it though.
If the remaining 1,435,289 votes split liek that then Biden gets a NET
828,161 vote boost. Which even factoring in the Red Counties that have not counted in-person votes yet would give him the win.
The problem really comes in the definition of what politicians are for - given good speeches? read 100,000 pages of stuff* a day? Make brave decisions? Appear empathetic?
The politicians we get are the product of what we ask for, through the system.
A point articulated by a certain advisor to the current PM....
The best route for Biden is one that avoids PA altogether, if possible
That was incredible neck
Ouch, how close is that!
I think that's where Biden wins or loses this. He should be up to 254 ECVs now.