All Polls Are Wrong


william.scherk

2,934 views

The phrase "all polls are wrong" was a cool hinge-point of argument last year, as the Trump train rolled on ...

Yesterday a Democrat penned an interesting article at The Hill. It didn't say that "all polls are wrong," but that surveys of President Trump's popularity in the USA are flawed and in no way indicative. In other words ... Why the polls are still wrongHere's a few excerpts from the article:

Quote

The polls that failed to detect the full strength of President Trump on Election Day continue to underestimate the president’s support for the job he is doing, paying way too much attention to the Twitter wars and ignoring the public support for many of the actions is undertaking.

This can create some serious misjudgments by organizations like the NFL and some Republican senators, who find out later that they buck the president only to their own detriment. And nothing was more devastating to Democrats than believing the election was over when it wasn’t.

Polls show the president’s approval rating all over the lot. An Associated Press poll put it at 32 percent and suggests that only 24 percent see the country as going in the right direction. This strains credulity given what happened in the special elections against the Democrats.

[...]

The methodology of some of these polls is to poll “all adults” without any qualification as to citizenship or voting intent. A lot of the nonvoters dislike politics and all politicians, and these polls also include them along with undocumented immigrants who are not screened out. Another group of polls has Trump’s approval in the low 40s, and Harvard-Harris Poll, which eliminates all undecideds, has it at 45 percent, similar to Rasmussen.

Remember, Americans liked President Obama for his way with words and his calm leadership style. They just opposed many of his policies, so Obama’s numbers gave a false sense of approval. Trump is the mirror opposite. People are put on edge by his words while favoring a lot of the positions he is taking on issues.

When it comes to rank-and-file Republican voters, Trump is the undisputed leader of the Republican Party. No poll I’ve seen puts his support from Republicans at below 80 percent and we at Harvard-Harris have it at 84 percent, which is remarkable, given his knock-down-drag-out fight with some mainstream Republicans.

[...]

The failure to understand the 2016 election was in large measure not a failure of the final polls, many of which showed a close race, but a failure to understand the powerful storyline of Trump’s appeal with his respect for cops and the military, taking a more aggressive position against our enemies, and pushing for tax and health-care reform. His style is not what won him the presidency. It was, remarkably, his substance.

I, frankly, didn’t at the time see his rise in the Republican primary as realistic. I don’t believe he has advanced his coalition from Election Day, and rank-and-file Democratic opposition has hardened. But he hasn’t lost his support either, and taking on “The Swamp” only empowers him further.

It is by watching the underlying public sentiment of what he is doing, and not his methods, that you see how polling better watch out here, as reality versus research will again be tested, and reality always wins.

Mark Penn is co-director of the Harvard-Harris Poll and was a pollster for Bill Clinton during six years of his presidency.

The Penn article also received some pushback, in this instance from Philip Bump of the fey canoes Washington Post: Why is a former Clinton pollster writing iffy poll analysis that panders to Trump supporters?

Quote

It’s true both that Trump is broadly unpopular (as measured by multiple opinion polls) and that there are positions he espouses that are popular. We will cede that since, well, it’s sort of obvious. We will also cede the point that Republicans broadly think Trump is doing a good job, something that has been noted any number of times by The Washington Post and others.

As Penn makes that point, though, he goes out of his way to include weird cultural touchstones that seem clearly intended to appeal to that Trump base.

For example, this is how Penn dismisses polling that shows Trump as unpopular:

The methodology of some of these polls is to poll “all adults” without any qualification as to citizenship or voting intent. A lot of the nonvoters dislike politics and all politicians, and these polls also include them along with undocumented immigrants who are not screened out.

There are two implications here. The first is that somehow people who don’t vote don’t get to have an opinion on the president. The second is that the number of people who reject the president is swollen by undocumented immigrants. At most, undocumented immigrants represent 3 percent of the population, a group that’s less likely to speak English and almost certainly not registered to vote. To suggest that they make up a significant portion of the responses to a poll is disingenuous.

“The president gets 65 percent approval for hurricane response and 53 percent approval for the economy and fighting terrorism,” Penn writes as he fleshes out “a more complex picture” of opinions on Trump. “He gets his lowest marks for the way he is administering the government. And he is a divider when people want a uniter.”

This is deliberately playing down how low Trump’s numbers are

Here's a snapshot from the folks at 538 [updated July 3 2020]:

538-snap-July3.png

86 Comments


Recommended Comments



All Polls are Wrong.  I don't see why any present poll or polling average should give comfort to the Democratic campaign, because it seems like the real campaign hasn't started.  About the only areas that might be of concern to the GOP campaign are seemingly 'iffy' contests for the Senate.  I will put down a marker here of so-called swing state polls, and return once all the votes are counted in these (maybe) key races.  

Arizona -- today Real Clear Politics aggregate of surveys suggests that Democrat Mark Kelly is ~11% in front of the incumbent GOP senator McSally.

Colorado -- RCP's page suggests (on very very scant data) that the incumbent Corey Gardner is ~10% behind challenger John Hickenlooper.

Iowa -- GOP senator Jody Ernst won over her 2014 Democratic opponent by 8.5%.  RCP has no information on the present race, but a mid-June Iowa Register survey suggested a three-point advantage to the Democratic candidate Theresa Greenfield.  

Maine -- up for re-election is Susan Collins, who won her 2014 contest by 14 points. RCP currently shows a slight lead for her 2020 opponent Sarah Gideon.

Montana  -- RCP has no data to present on the race here between Steve Daines and Steve Bullock. But I include this one to test the mettle of the Cook Political Report, who has put the race in the 'toss-up' column.

North Carolina -- the incumbent is Thom Tillis of the GOP. He faces Cal Cunningham. RCP rates this contest a 'toss-up' on scant data.

So, if Arizona, Maine and Colorado are lost by the GOP on November 3, then the Senate will be even-steven, 50 to 50.

senateElectonInteractiveJune20_2020.png

 

Link to comment

Allan Lichtman is the fellow who predicted the 2016 Trump victory -- by using his unique '13 Keys' model. From the description at the YouTube page for the video below:

"Right now, polls say Joe Biden has a healthy lead over President Trump. But we’ve been here before (cue 2016), and the polls were, frankly, wrong. One man, however, was not. The historian Allan Lichtman was the lonely forecaster who predicted Mr. Trump’s victory in 2016 — and also prophesied the president would be impeached. That’s two for two. But Professor Lichtman’s record goes much deeper. In 1980, he developed a presidential prediction model that retrospectively accounted for 120 years of U.S. election history. Over the past four decades, his system has accurately called presidential victors, from Ronald Reagan in ’84 to, well, Mr. Trump in 2016."

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

He claims to have evidence that Trump will lose but I think he is too emotionally involved in seeing Trump lose, to be believable. Check Rasmussen where it is 49/49 . . . and because of "the sure thing" that Trump's supporters will vote, I predict President Trump will be President until . . .  2024. After all he is a non drinker or smoker and he is a LOT younger than Biden. joke.  

Link to comment

What is the record DOW closing? 29,348.10 set on January 17, 2020, just before Covid-19 arrived on the shores of America from Communist China. The DOW was back up to 27,370 at 3:39 pm.

Oh, oh, President Trump is in Ohio, where 100 church goers and their families contracted Covid-19 from ONE church goer on Sunday, diagnosed today four days later, and their Governor Mike DeWine has just tested positive from it. President Trump should be in a bubble but he is not even wearing a mask!

Link to comment

Trump's re-election is certain, that is why we see all the let's-all-vote-by-mail fantasies and other shenanigans to avoid the inevitable. They know that all-mail is impossible and will only result in massive chaos. They want more chaos and more pandemic fear and anything else that will disrupt and prevent the November election. They are desperate to avoid the election totally as it will make clear that the vast majority of Americans are behind Trump in a very public way that is hard to propagandize away.

President Trump will be President until January of 2025. 

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, Peter said:

I predict President Trump will be President until . . .  2024

I'll wait till the end of October (surprises?) before I post a final prediction. My last prediction was that Kamala Harris would not be chosen to be on the ticket with Biden ... this should be known in a few days.  I am currently stocking metaphorical "crow" ...

What makes Lichtman's prediction intriguing or notable is that he has was only wrong once (Gore/Bush), and that his 13 Keys criteria are mostly the same as ever. And that none of the criteria take any notice of polling. Enphases added.

Quote
  1. Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
  2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
  3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
  4. Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
  5. Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
  6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
  7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
  8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
  9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
  10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
  11. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
  12. Incumbent (party) charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
  13. Challenger (party) charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

Also ...

43 minutes ago, Peter said:

I think [Lichtman] is too emotionally involved in seeing Trump lose, to be believable

He may be "emotional," but the criteria still remain, Peter.  The proof is in the pudding, so to speak, not in the heart of the baker.

28 minutes ago, Peter said:

President Trump is in Ohio, where 100 church goers and their families contracted Covid-19 from ONE church goer on Sunday, diagnosed today four days later, and their Governor Mike DeWine has just tested positive from it.

[for a local news angle on the Ohio Governor, via WKYC Studios: ]

Ohio churchgoer with COVID-19 infects 91 others as state struggles to contain spread of virus

 

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

Pedo Joe, who likes having his legs stroked by children in the pool, says Latinos possess diversity of thought, unlike African Americans.

Democrats: Your party gave you a field of great-appearing but fake candidates who all stepped down so that this demented imbecile could play place-holder and someone you didn't ask for could be foist upon you at the last minute. Are you not irate at being used this way, played for a fool this way?

See you in November, idiots!

 

 

Link to comment
On 8/6/2020 at 1:10 PM, william.scherk said:

My last prediction was that Kamala Harris would not be chosen to be on the ticket with Biden ... this should be known in a few days.  I am currently stocking metaphorical "crow" ...

I usually get these things wrong.

In any case, here's a fun headline from Nate Silver of all people ...

It’s Way Too Soon To Count Trump Out

Quote

[...]

While the polls have been stable so far this year, it’s still only August. The debates and the conventions have yet to occur. Biden only named his running mate yesterday. And the campaign is being conducted amidst a pandemic the likes of which the United States has not seen in more than 100 years, which is also causing an unprecedented and volatile economy.

Nor has it been that uncommon, historically, for polls to shift fairly radically from mid-August until Election Day. Furthermore, there are some reasons to think the election will tighten, and President Trump is likely to have an advantage in a close election because of the Electoral College.

canuck-the-crow-with-paintbrush.webp

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

Harry Enten is a hell of a wonk. Since he has left 538 for CNN, his analyses have been what you might expect ... Biden is holding a lead. Why? Emphasis added.

Quote
[...] But perhaps more importantly is why the polls simply haven't moved very much during this campaign.
 
Both candidates are very well known. When asked whether they had a favorable or unfavorable view of Trump, well north of 70% of voters have either a strongly positive (favorable) or negative (unfavorable) opinion of him -- the highest on record by far. More than 50% say the same for Biden in an average of polls, which is the highest on record for a challenger.
 
When I pointed out the phenomenon of two well known candidates in early May, Biden's lead was 6 points nationally. Biden has received a small bump in the polls since that time, though one is very small by historical standards.
 
Indeed, there isn't a whole lot about this race that isn't historic. From Biden's lead to the candidates not being able to go out and campaign as usual, the 2020 election has been surreal. We'll have to see if it has another surprise or two left in it.

Harry's old gang at 538 has released its 2020 Forecast. One reason you might want to make note of this forecast today ... it will come in handy as a locus of scorn and schadenfreude if election results don't bear much relation to their model.

538closeStatesAug16.png

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
31 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

One reason you might want to make note of this forecast today ... it will come in handy as a locus of scorn and schadenfreude if election results don't bear much relation to their model.

Thanks to our northern province, Canadia. MIke Myers.

I am a bit leery about the idea of mail in voting, though some voters have opted for that method over the years, as with the elderly. Of course there are always absentee ballots among the military and their families. When I vote I must show my ID, even though the polling staff may know me by sight. What if election day comes and goes but Americans are are still waiting for the absentee ballots to come in and be counted? That is not good. And there is a greater chance of fraud.

After taking precautions a grocery store can have people come in and shop so why not the same for on-site voting? I hereby vote for on-site voting with the usual allowance for absentee ballots. Oh, and no “Instacart” voting, but could curb side ballot pickup and voting be legit? Hmmm? You can see the license tags. We could use drive in theater or sports pavilion parking lots. Peter   

From The Heritage Foundation. Types of Voter Fraud.

IMPERSONATION FRAUD AT THE POLLS: Voting in the name of other legitimate voters and voters who have died, moved away, or lost their right to vote because they are felons, but remain registered.

FALSE REGISTRATIONS: Voting under fraudulent voter registrations that either use a phony name and a real or fake address or claim residence in a particular jurisdiction where the registered voter does not actually live and is not entitled to vote.

DUPLICATE VOTING: Registering in multiple locations and voting in the same election in more than one jurisdiction or state.

FRAUDULENT USE OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS: Requesting absentee ballots and voting without the knowledge of the actual voter; or obtaining the absentee ballot from a voter and either filling it in directly and forging the voter’s signature or illegally telling the voter who to vote for.

BUYING VOTES: Paying voters to cast either an in-person or absentee ballot for a particular candidate.

ILLEGAL “ASSISTANCE” AT THE POLLS: Forcing or intimidating voters—particularly the elderly, disabled, illiterate, and those for whom English is a second language—to vote for particular candidates while supposedly providing them with “assistance.”

INELIGIBLE VOTING: Illegal registration and voting by individuals who are not U.S. citizens, are convicted felons, or are otherwise not eligible to vote.

ALTERING THE VOTE COUNT: Changing the actual vote count either in a precinct or at the central location where votes are counted.

BALLOT PETITION FRAUD: Forging the signatures of registered voters on the ballot petitions that must be filed with election officials in some states for a candidate or issue to be listed on the official ballot.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Peter said:

From The Heritage Foundation. Types of Voter Fraud.

We have a topic that dates back to 2016 ...

As well ...

3 hours ago, Peter said:

What if election day comes and goes but Americans are are still waiting for the absentee ballots to come in and be counted? That is not good. And there is a greater chance of fraud.

Mail your absentee ballot as soon as possible in your jurisdiction if you prefer to vote by mail, or take advantage of early voting.

(The US Postal Service has warned 46 states that all their ballots are not likely to be processed and delivered to the counting sites in time.  Why is that?)

Quote

Voting Information for Maryland Voters

Vote by Mail Anyone registered to vote in Maryland can vote a mail-in ballot. Just submit a request for a ballot, and we’ll send it to you. After you vote your ballot, you must return it to your local election office by mail, by dropping it in a drop-off box, or by taking it to your local election office. You can mail your voted ballot or take it to your local election office at any time. A list of designated drop off locations will be included with your ballot. If you request a mail-in ballot and decide to vote in person, you will have to vote a provisional ballot.

Voting federally in Canada is dead simple. You get one vote for your local candidate. That's it. Paper ballots, handmarked. Put in a box and opened under the scrutiny of party or independent designates. Counting supervised by the independent-of-government body, Elections Canada. Every single competent adult citizen is eligible -- except for the head and deputy at Elections Canada.

I do not envy Americans this election season.  The amount of misinformation is mounting and coming from all sides. If ever there was a time to rely on Objectivist epistemology, it is this season.  Just for making sense of the exaggerated nonsense and spin and BS.

To check in on the vulnerabilities of the particular electronic/paper balloting in your state/county, please consult VerifiedVoting.com. It's been updated for 2020. You can start just about anywhere on that site, but here is a map overview to match and compare your own state rules and procedures to other responsible entities (direct link https://verifiedvoting.org/verifier/#mode/navigate/map/ppEquip/mapType/normal/year/2020 ) :

verifiedVotingNationalMap.png

[Edited for clarity and spelling 2:06 Pacific]

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

Fantasies can be fun to discuss but we will re-elect President Trump by in-person balloting. It is the only tried and true method, it is the way our grandparents did it and the way we have conducted elections for hundreds of years.

Link to comment

All Polls Are Wrong, but 'some just smell so sweet' ... a mention of a hopeful sign in polling on the President's Twitter account. 

I've been hiding my addiction to YouTube pundits perhaps not well, but I should mention a relatively-small account that I have been paying attention to for months. The guy producing the video below is still in high school and does not show obvious signs of communism, but is biased towards Biden (as may be much of his demographic). He doesn't have much if any impact on a larger discourse (ie, he's no million-subscriber presence like Tim Pool or David Pakman, has no invites from networks), but is such a wonk that he goes Harry-Enten-deep on every raft of polling that surges down the river ... and uploads fresh video at least twice a day.

Here he is after having fed the latest public opinion output into his maw. If you want a sample of how a left-leaning mini-pundit with Electoral OCD interprets the latest in context -- or how he misinterprets wildly-wrong estimations ...

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

A strong position on polls from the Front Porch:

On 10/4/2020 at 9:06 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

All polls in the fake news media are wildly inaccurate, but they will get closer to reality starting about one week before the election.

The reason is, before that one week period, they are not polls intended to reflect reality. They are, in practice (but not name), suppression polls. Their purpose is to manipulate public perception, thus alter their voting habits and choices.

A week out from election day, the fundamental nature of these polls changes. Suddenly correct types of people will be polled in the correct quantity and some of the polls will be published. These polls are, in practice (but not name), cover-your-ass polls. :evil: 

A polling company that is wrong about everything close to election day loses clients for the next go around.

There is one kind of poll that tends to be accurate (and, even then, not all the time). This is called an "internal poll" and is rarely published. This is only for insiders.

When you start seeing weird shit that looks like Hail Mary passes by one political party or another, that means the internal polls are looking like hell for their side and they are panicking. That's when a lot of "muh racists" campaigns start, for instance.

:) 

Discuss and argue about polls if you like. But it's the same thing as talking about a game show teams. One week out is the time to start talking about polls in relation to the actual election and be somewhere in the ball park of reality.

Michael

Set your "Now I Can Look At Polling" clocks for the week of October 25th. 

Link to comment
On 8/6/2020 at 1:10 PM, william.scherk said:
On 8/6/2020 at 12:33 PM, Peter said:

I predict President Trump will be President until . . .  2024

I'll wait till the end of October (surprises?) before I post a final prediction. My last prediction was that Kamala Harris would not be chosen to be on the ticket with Biden ... 

I should mention again a neat interactive toy at the Cook Political Report website.  Here's a static screenshot of the tools on the page:

swingOmeterCOOKpr.png

The five sliders allow slight or major adjustment to the prior assumptions about turnout differentials. In other words, given the assumptions of the Cool Political Report forecast, you can nudge up or down variables in their model. For example, just decreasing the number of "White non-college graduate" who may vote for Biden ... results in a Trump Electoral College victory.  

swingOmeterCOOKprWhiteNonCollege.png

Michael's Front Porch advice is in line with his general contentions about polling, but he asserts that 'polls in the fake news media' will get close to reality about one week out.

On 10/6/2020 at 10:30 AM, william.scherk said:

A strong position on polls from the Front Porch:

On 10/4/2020 at 9:06 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

All polls in the fake news media are wildly inaccurate, but they will get closer to reality starting about one week before the election.

That last week will be a month's worth of intense hoopla away.  I won't comment on "The Polls" until then, but leave a link to the 270toWin.com interactive Electoral College map.  

If the race is "tightening up" or  the lying fraudster pollster-industrial complex conspirators finally release 'true'-ish state-by-state survey results, you can get ahead of the curve and design a likely scenario.  This can serve two purposes -- helping to lessen any worries by giving a rational and reasonable model for what you should expect once the votes are in and counted -- and allowing a focus on the races ('swing' or battleground or 'toss-up') you think could be decisive. 

Examples from 270toWin:

265B-273T.png

272B-266T.png

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
On 10/21/2020 at 11:18 AM, william.scherk said:
On 10/6/2020 at 10:30 AM, william.scherk said:

A strong position on polls from the Front Porch:

On 10/4/2020 at 9:06 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

All polls in the fake news media are wildly inaccurate, but they will get closer to reality starting about one week before the election.

That last week will be a month's worth of intense hoopla away.  I won't comment on "The Polls" until then, but leave a link to the 270toWin.com interactive Electoral College map.  

The time is upon us. 

Link to comment
On 10/21/2020 at 2:18 PM, william.scherk said:

The five sliders allow slight or major adjustment to the prior assumptions about turnout differentials. In other words, given the assumptions of the Cool Political Report forecast, you can nudge up or down variables in their model. For example, just decreasing the number of "White non-college graduate" who may vote for Biden ... results in a Trump Electoral College victory.  

swingOmeterCOOKprWhiteNonCollege.png

 

 

I don't think that 8% black vote is accurate. Here is a history of black voting:

Black-Political-Affiliation-1936-to-2016

11% in 2004 as a response to 9/11, presumably, and Bush's pro-war stance. 4% and 6% against the first black president, and 8% for Trump in 2016. Since Trump's win I can only imagine black support for the president is up. It's hard to qualify that, but it's probably easier to put it in terms of loyalty to the Democrats being down. It's not so much that Trump has been great, but that the overwhelming Democrat support isn't sustainable when it hasn't come with any noticeable benefits to black people.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, william.scherk said:

The time is upon us. 

William,

It sure is.

I can fill up your thread with stuff like the following that is starting to appear from all over the place.

Them pollsters gotta eat next go around.

:)

Michael

Link to comment

  Some opinions about this last week of the 2020 election, with attention paid to polling getting "closer to reality."

On 10/4/2020 at 9:06 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:
On 10/4/2020 at 1:13 PM, ThatGuy said:

A week out from election day, the fundamental nature of these polls changes. Suddenly correct types of people will be polled in the correct quantity and some of the polls will be published. These polls are, in practice (but not name), cover-your-ass polls. :evil: 

All polls in the fake news media are wildly inaccurate, but they will get closer to reality starting about one week before the election.

 

The two main mainstream sources of polling aggregates are Real Clear Politics and Five Thirty Eight, with the Cook Political Report offering several visualizations of the all-important Electoral College map. 

Quote

A week out from election day, the fundamental nature of these polls changes. Suddenly correct types of people will be polled in the correct quantity and some of the polls will be published. These polls are, in practice (but not name), cover-your-ass polls. :evil: 

Single national polls are perhaps the least indicative of where any particular state race stands, but the rolling averages are often cited.

Here's a snapshot of the 538 average; click the image or this link to get to the page -- which also shows tabular data of each item in the average:

538AV-oct29.png

Quote

Discuss and argue about polls if you like. But it's the same thing as talking about a game show teams. One week out is the time to start talking about polls in relation to the actual election and be somewhere in the ball park of reality.

The Real Clear Politics average is the data-source most often cited by the Trump-friendly election-watchers I follow (including Styxhexenhammer666).  Here's a snapshot and link to the page at the RCP site:

rcp_av-oct29.png

If you are interested in the sweep and sway of polls from individual states, both the mainstream sites allow you to dig deeply.  Your "Watch List" might be several or all of the states that are considered 'swing states' (meaning, have been known to swing between presidential candidates in the past half dozen national races).  For me, I will be watching Florida over the shoulder of various Trump supporters.  

Here is a snapshot of the 538 page on Florida; on the page are also listed all the polls that were folded into the average. The coloured dots are individual polls comprising the average:

538FloridaOCT29.png

-- if the polling is woefully wrong, instead of just wrong, it hasn't yet become fully apparent.  Here's the boringly wonkish 'state of the polls' article penned by Nate Silver, from yesterday, "We Have A Lot Of New Polls, But There’s Little Sign Of The Presidential Race Tightening."

Quote

After a surprisingly sluggish weekend for polling, the floodgates have opened, with a mix of high-quality polls, low-quality polls and pretty much everything in between. And although there are some outliers in both directions, they tell a fairly consistent story, overall: A steady race nationally, perhaps with some gains for Joe Biden in the Midwest.

Let’s dive right in. Following our rules from my colleague Geoffrey Skelley’s post earlier this week, we’re going to look at every poll where at least half of the survey took place after last week’s debate, with a comparison to the most recent pre-debate survey by the same firm. If the pollster hasn’t surveyed a state before, we’ll make the comparison based on what the FiveThirtyEight polling average said in that state as of the night of the debate (Oct. 22) instead.

[...]

Here's another interactive feature from the gang at 538; this one lets you run scenarios against their forecast models:

538_exploreScenarios.png

Spoiler

538Explore.gif

 

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

When do we start posting all those tightening and flipping polls out there?

We?  There are enough links to the aggregators for all who are interested to check for themselves. 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, william.scherk said:

We?  There are enough links to the aggregators for all who are interested to check for themselves. 

William,

Data dump?

Well that's not very helpful to the reader, is it?

Here. Let me help curate this a little better and with a little more drama instead of long boring sheets of loaded questions and percentages.

Here is a montage of short mainstream media clips put together by Rush Limbaugh today (transcript only):

Left Freaks Out Over Trump Crowds, Tightening Polls

Quote

I want to take you back and remind you of something. Last Monday, one week ago on this program, I said this.

RUSH ARCHIVE: So, folks, here’s where we are right now. If we see the mainstream polls by Wednesday or Thursday suddenly tightening, if they suddenly show a close race, well, then we’re gonna know some things. Among the things that we will know is that they were lying throughout the past three years.

RUSH: I remember after I made this statement I was pilloried. I was mocked. I was laughed at. I was made fun of. People said, “Rush, come on. They’re not gonna tighten their polls. They’re not gonna do that. They’re using the polls to suppress the Trump turnout. They’re not gonna do it.” Ah, ah, ah, ah. Not so fast. We have one of our famous media montages. We take you now to the Drive-By Media trying to disguise their freak-out.

[begin montage]

ANDERSON COOPER: New polling tonight in some key swing states which show a tightening race.

NORAH O’DONNELL: I’m hearing from people there is a tightening of the gap, and there is an enthusiasm on the Republican part.

RUSH: Uh oh.

STEVE DOOCY: All across the country, the pollsters are saying that the race is tightening.

RUSH: Uh oh!

DON LEMON: There are signs of tightening in the race.

RUSH: UH OH!

DON LEMON: The race always tightens at the end, doesn’t it?

JEFF MASON: We see the polls tightening.

RUSH: UH OHHHH!

TOM LLAMAS: The polls are so tight right now.

HOWIE KURTZ: The race is really tightening.

ALEX WITT: This race tightening.

MAEVE RESTON: More of a tightening now.

RUSH: Uh oh.

MARK MCKINNON: Tightened quite a bit.

KATHERINE KAY: Democrats are saying, look, they are seeing the race tightening in the last few days in some of those crucial battleground states.

BRET BAIER: In these battle ground states, it is narrowing, and narrowing fast.

F. CHUCK TODD: Each state in the battleground could be very, very tight. Are we missing something? Do you think we’re missing something?

[end montage]

RUSH: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I thought I didn’t know what I was talking about. I thought that I was laughed at, mocked, and made fun of because I said that they were gonna report the race as tightening. I said, “If they report the race tightening…” I said, “If we see them report the race tightening, then we’re gonna know some things.”

That’s all I said, and here they are. They’re freaking out. They are concerned about this.

This is only for those who are interested, of course.

:)

Michael

Link to comment


 

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

Poll: 79 Percent of Trump Voters Believe ‘Election Was Stolen‘ breitbart.com/2020-election/…via @BreitbartNews They are 100% correct, but we are fighting hard. Our big lawsuit, which spells out in great detail all of the ballot fraud and more, will soon be filled. RIGGED ELECTION!

 

Percent of Trump Voters Believe ‘Election Was Stolen’Politico’s 2020 Voter Priorities Survey shows that a vast majority of Trump voters believe the election results are fradulent.breitbart.com

November 24th 2020

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now