Elections Trump for POTUS mega thread

Fedor>Cain said:
Sure. But I also realize that they include really poorly constructed polls in their aggregate and lean right. In a race as close as this, I would be surprised if they didn't slightly lean Trump in their aggregate.

They also bought into the red wave tsunami shit in 2022 lol
Click to expand...

538's composition is garbage. Literally including any pollsters that have Trump ahead without vetting for quality.
 
Fedor>Cain said:
Who's panic wrestling? Even the RCP aggregate shows a toss up lmao
Click to expand...

All aggregate are showing toss up, but claiming biases in a few point differentials is hilarious. Also majority of polls RCP use are rated highly on 538 metrics. There's no biases on their part because the SD is on par with everyone else

Most modeling must be right wing because there's a myriad of them slightly favoring Trump.


And I'd say dems are panicking over them due to how bright their eyes were when Harris first was announcing seeing trend lines peaking for her and now that line has consistently been dipping with only a few weeks to go. Hence all this polls don't matter now ...but did when Harris was trending up
 
Fedor>Cain said:
It's not factually incorrect lmao. You are completely ignoring that they were dead wrong with their polling in the 2022 mid terms and have been skewing more right in recent years.

You can believe what you want, but the people who run the site openly talk about being conservative and their discourse is more and more associated with the right.

Nobody will argue that polling was off for the 2016 & 2020 election cycles.

Relying on old data and methodology is what got pollsters and aggregators out of whack in the first place. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong if what you are posting is accurate in 2024.
Click to expand...

I don't think mid term polling is all that relevant when we're looking at presidential election polling. Midterms are more local and more based on issues while the presidential election has more to do with personality, especially Trump as a polarizing figure, and national issues like the economy and immigration.

Of course, interpretation of polling data is all speculation and there's only one way we're gonna find out how accurate the polls are this time around. And that's to wait until election night.

One would assume pollsters learn from their past mistakes and improve their polling methods. But again, we're just gonna have to wait and see. If you take the polls at face value it's gonna be a nail biter.
 
Rob Battisti said:
Methodologies:

270: The average includes all polls within seven days of the date of the most recent poll, limited to one poll from any source. If there are fewer than five, the window is expanded to 30 days or five polls, whichever comes first. In the latter scenario, if there are multiple qualifying polls on the same calendar date as the oldest poll used, those will also be included.

RCP: harder to find I’ll have to report back
Click to expand...

You're getting confused about what I'm saying. I'm saying RCP includes polls with bad methodologies, not that their methodology itself is bad.

538 also includes some shit polls in their aggregate as well. None of these aggregators are perfect and that's why you end with a margin of error and they have 100's of simulations on who is gonna win vs lose.

Like you are saying 538 and RCP both have Trump up, but that's not really the case either. They show a Trump slant with the race being in the margin of error lol. That could mean the race swings towards Trump or the race swings Kamala. And it's not like these results are showing it barely being in the margin of error, it is showing it being basically a deadlock.
 
JudoThrowFiasco said:
All aggregate are showing toss up, but claiming biases in a few point differentials is hilarious. Also majority of polls RCP use are rated highly on 538 metrics. There's no biases on their part because the SD is on par with everyone else

Most modeling must be right wing because there's a myriad of them slightly favoring Trump.


And I'd say dems are panicking over them due to how bright their eyes were when Harris first was announcing seeing trend lines peaking for her and now that line has consistently been dipping with only a few weeks to go. Hence all this polls don't matter now ...but did when Harris was trending up
Click to expand...

Literally nobody is panic wrestling. Just explaining how aggregators and statistics work lol.

And yes, these guys bought into the red wave tsunami narrative hook line and sinker.

You could literally flip everything you said and point it back to Republicans. When Kamala was trending up, we were back to polls not mattering to them.

The truth of the matter is that the race is extremely close and could go either way. You could see Trump underrepresented like he was in 2016 or 2020....or you could see Dems underrepresented like you have seen in every election since the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. Or hell, they might even be dead on.
 
Fedor>Cain said:
You're getting confused about what I'm saying. I'm saying RCP includes polls with bad methodologies, not that their methodology itself is bad.

538 also includes some shit polls in their aggregate as well. None of these aggregators are perfect and that's why you end with a margin of error and they have 100's of simulations on who is gonna win vs lose.

Like you are saying 538 and RCP both have Trump up, but that's not really the case either. They show a Trump slant with the race being in the margin of error lol. That could mean the race swings towards Trump or the race swings Kamala. And it's not like these results are showing it barely being in the margin of error, it is showing it being basically a deadlock.
Click to expand...
I’ve said multiple times it’s tight and basically a toss up.

You’ve mentioned one poll you believe is biased, but that poll is also used in the other aggregations.
 
Fedor>Cain said:
Literally nobody is panic wrestling. Just explaining how aggregators and statistics work lol.

And yes, these guys bought into the red wave tsunami narrative hook line and sinker.

You could literally flip everything you said and point it back to Republicans. When Kamala was trending up, we were back to polls not mattering to them.

The truth of the matter is that the race is extremely close and could go either way. You could see Trump underrepresented like he was in 2016 or 2020....or you could see Dems underrepresented like you have seen in every election since the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. Or hell, they might even be dead on.
Click to expand...

No, poll aggs don't produce predictions, they are used in parts of modeling which produces a probability - not one of them give predictions. Modeling is now leaning towards Trump but it's 50/50. And RCP modeling didn't predict a red wave, it's highest model was 60% I think. Columnist who worked for them may have wrote about how they thought there could be ...but a lot of pollster pubs did as well.

But I'm seeing a lot more of your ilk dismissing polling, agg and modeling a lot more than when Harris was leading. To me that's panic wrestling. But we are always going to disagree on everything politics ...so we can continue this circle if you want
 
@Fedor>Cain

Seems like polling was pretty accurate in 2022. I do remember the red tsunami talks in the media but it doesn't seem like aggregate polling was supporting that story. RCP and 538 might have their own flaws individually but there's usually not more than 1-2 points difference between them.

fivethirtyeight.com

The Polls Were Historically Accurate In 2022

Let’s give a big round of applause to the pollsters. Measuring public opinion is, in many ways, harder than ever — and yet, the polling industry just had one of…
fivethirtyeight.com fivethirtyeight.com

6c69002e91c01da8314eea74d2e7db02.png
 
WhiteMousse said:
I call bullshit on this.

Something is off. State polling has her up in all seven swing states. There is no way he get the PV unless everyone has been moving to Florida and/or Texas.

I didn't really buy the whole betting "whale" story at first because $30 million isn't even a single percentage point, but 65 - 35 on Polymarket is stupid. Unless there's some enormous secret that everybody knows except me, there's no way the odds should be like that.
Click to expand...
Ditto. We may yet come to a detente some day.
 
Rob Battisti said:
Methodologies:

270: The average includes all polls within seven days of the date of the most recent poll, limited to one poll from any source. If there are fewer than five, the window is expanded to 30 days or five polls, whichever comes first. In the latter scenario, if there are multiple qualifying polls on the same calendar date as the oldest poll used, those will also be included.

RCP: harder to find I’ll have to report back
Click to expand...
"all polls"

ZoOVDx.gif
 
JudoThrowFiasco said:
No, poll aggs don't produce predictions, they are used in parts of modeling which produces a probability - not one of them give predictions. Modeling is now leaning towards Trump but it's 50/50. And RCP modeling didn't predict a red wave, it's highest model was 60% I think. Columnist who worked for them may have wrote about how they thought there could be ...but a lot of pollster pubs did as well.

But I'm seeing a lot more of your ilk dismissing polling, agg and modeling a lot more than when Harris was leading. To me that's panic wrestling. But we are always going to disagree on everything politics ...so we can continue this circle if you want
Click to expand...

Nobody is dismissing polling if they are of my "ilk". I'm not dismissing polling.

What I'm telling you is that the aggregators are not showing that Trump or Kamala is in the lead regardless of which way they slant. They are all showing a 50/50 race that is within the margin of error....which is what you seem to agree with anyway lol.

The only conclusive thing that you can really take away from these aggregators is that we have no goddamn idea who is going to win and anybody giving you a confident answer one way or the other is full of BS.

There was a Trumper here trying to account bet me when Kamala was showing momentum. I was like dude, that's retarded, the election is a coin flip looking at polls even if they are showing a 2pt lead or whatever it was at the time.

I will say that I do not buy in any way that Trump will win the popular vote, but it's pretty obvious he has a damn good chance of winning the electoral college.
 
Fedor>Cain said:
Nobody is dismissing polling if they are of my "ilk". I'm not dismissing polling.

What I'm telling you is that the aggregators are not showing that Trump or Kamala is in the lead regardless of which way they slant. They are all showing a 50/50 race that is within the margin of error....which is what you seem to agree with anyway lol.

The only conclusive thing that you can really take away from these aggregators is that we have no goddamn idea who is going to win and anybody giving you a confident answer one way or the other is full of BS.

There was a Trumper here trying to account bet me when Kamala was showing momentum. I was like dude, that's retarded, the election is a coin flip looking at polls even if they are showing a 2pt lead or whatever it was at the time.

I will say that I do not buy in any way that Trump will win the popular vote, but it's pretty obvious he has a damn good chance of winning the electoral college.
Click to expand...

Aggregates never show likelihood even if outside the MoE. What they do show is current trend lines (of which I think RCP does the best since it uses a moving average of two week increments and then plots each - kind of like how technical analysis show trends in stocks) this gives a snap shot of what public, nation, state or riding is feeling.

How it applies to modeling is what is important in giving a probability (not a prediction) and those probabilities are often reasonably correct, even in 2016. People were mocking them but 538, rcp, pollyvote and one more I can't remember had it 65-35 to 70-30 Clinton...but that's still 1 in 3 for Trump. No one should be surprised at when 1 in 3 odds hit.

The panic wrestling (whether or not your seeing it) comes from Harris backers dismissing trend lines from the agg polling but discounting polling, pollsters or the like and looking for cracks).
 
More than a dozen former Trump administration officials on Friday came out in support of former chief of staff John Kelly, who went on the record this week to say the former president fits the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator and has no concept of the Constitution.

In a new letter, shared exclusively with POLITICO, the former Trump administration officials — some of the officials have been outspoken Trump critics for years — stated, “this is who Donald Trump is.”

Dumbold fascist saying Jack Smith should be considered mentally deranged and thrown out of the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,688
Messages
58,311,491
Members
175,998
Latest member
Fitboy485

Share this page

Back
Top