Politics 20/20 now with extra hindsight!

[Bartimaeus 2,022]

8 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Interestingly, the only state that the 538 model has missed so far is Florida. Obviously, it's not over til it's over, but this take is amusing to me, considering where things stand right now

Though it looks like a few states will be outside of the margin of error, such as Wisconsin. It was definitely not a great polling cycle again (not laughably terrible, but notably off), it seems like there is...something not being accounted for in measuring Republican turnout.

[Malcador 7,185]

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/election-2020/denver-voters-overwhelmingly-pass-ballot-measure-to-repeal-pit-bull-ban 

One bright spot.

[Achilles 2,328]

Just now, Bartimaeus said:

Though it looks like a few states will be outside of the margin of error, such as Wisconsin. It was definitely not a great polling cycle again (not laughably terrible, but notably off), it seems like there is...something not being accounted for in measuring Republican turnout.

Yeah, definitely not saying there aren't polling errors. But also (so far) demonstrably false to say that everyone got it wrong.

[Darkpriest 729]

11 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Does it bother you that the graphs you post clearly show this isn't the case? It's almost like you took the words at face value and didn't even bother to look at the pictures.

I was refering to people posting things like this

 

So if it's a matter of update issues it should also be done in a more careful way. Adjust all numbers at once. 

 

I wish I could have a more direct by the minute reporting, but this kind of data is not really something I would need and I made the decision to sit this election on the cash on US market. Too much unpredictability and I don't want to be at the mercy of algos going wild on various interpretation of words and one liners. 

[Achilles 2,328]

If that graphic didn't come from the state of Michigan website, then it shouldn't be trusted.

[MedicineDan 237]

14 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Interestingly, the only state that the 538 model has missed so far is Florida. Obviously, it's not over til it's over, but this take is amusing to me, considering where things stand right now

Hell of a state to miss, but aside from that, look at the RCP polling averages.  It will be amusing to me if people let Trump hate encourage them to think that the polls were actually good.  If people think this bodes well for Democrats... go with God, my mythic hero friend.  I'm telling you, Democrats are not happy about this race. They may yet win, but shoving ~100 million bucks into a senate race that the polling average said was a tossup only to lose by double digits?  Naw, the people in the coalition who dumped Trump will return after it's not a popularity contest.  The fact that Republicans could make inroads into minority populations and get them to see that they have common ground with us is simply brilliant.

[Raithe 20,237]

For a slight break from the vote counting...

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/10/health-officials-rated-celebrities-on-trump-loyalty-while-planning-ad-campaign/?

Democratic House lawmakers have had no luck getting the Department of Health and Human Services to hand over information on its $250 million advertising campaign to “defeat despair and inspire hope” amid the devastating coronavirus pandemic.

But, the lawmakers have been able to collect documents from the federal contractors working on the campaign—and the details in those documents are “extremely troubling,” they say.

In a scathing letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar, the lawmakers revealed some of those details, which show blatant political partisanship. For instance, A-list celebrities considered for pandemic-related public service announcements were individually rated based on their loyalty to Trump and other political leanings. Of the 274 celebrities reviewed, only 10 made the cut. The rest were rejected, including Jack Black, who was dubbed a “classic Hollywood liberal” and Judd Apatow, who, the documents say, “believes Trump does not have the intellectual capacity to run as President.”

The documents also show attempts by career staff at the Food and Drug Administration to quash those “inappropriate efforts.”

[Maedhros 334]

"It could well be that at 10 o’clock on election night, Trump is winning in Michigan, he’s winning in Pennsylvania, he’s winning in Wisconsin, and he gets on the television and he says, ‘Thank you, Americans, for reelecting me. It’s all over. Have a good day.’ But then, the next day, and the day following, all of those mail-in ballots start getting counted, and it turns out that Biden has won those states, at which point Trump says, ‘See? I told you the whole thing was fraudulent. I told you those mail-in ballots were crooked. And we’re not going to leave office.’ So that is a worry that I and a lot of people have."

[Achilles 2,328]

4 minutes ago, MedicineDan said:

Hell of a state to miss, but aside from that, look at the RCP polling averages.

It is, but there's a reason I look at 538 and not RCP

[Achilles 2,328]

2 minutes ago, Maedhros said:

"It could well be that at 10 o’clock on election night, Trump is winning in Michigan, he’s winning in Pennsylvania, he’s winning in Wisconsin, and he gets on the television and he says, ‘Thank you, Americans, for reelecting me. It’s all over. Have a good day.’ But then, the next day, and the day following, all of those mail-in ballots start getting counted, and it turns out that Biden has won those states, at which point Trump says, ‘See? I told you the whole thing was fraudulent. I told you those mail-in ballots were crooked. And we’re not going to leave office.’ So that is a worry that I and a lot of people have."

Yeah, again this is called blue shift and people have been warning about it (and trump's likely reaction to it) for months

[Elerond 2,452]

Clearly they found 300k new ballots in Arizona to prevent it flipping to blue 

[Darkpriest 729]

10 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Clearly they found 300k new ballots in Arizona to prevent it flipping to blue 

Hahaha, oh this is going to be a ride. 

So now dems will be calling foul play as well? 

Edited November 4, 2020 by Darkpriest

[Hurlshot 8,097]

50 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

 

This might be the ugliest election ever. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1876_United_States_presidential_election

Rutherford B. Hayes has something to say about that.

[Darkpriest 729]

Bill Stepien

Despite ridiculous public polling used as a voter suppression tactic, Wisconsin has been a razor thin race as we always knew that it would be. There have been reports of irregularities in several Wisconsin counties which raise serious doubts about the validity of the results. The President is well within the threshold to request a recount and we will immediately do so."

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/michigan-county-to-review-ballots-following-report-of-skewed-results_3565412.html

 

This will be a lot of pull and push on both sides. Very soon i guess thing s will escalate. 

[Darkpriest 729]

Perhaps someone can quickly provide some info, but is there some historical corellation between results to the house and senate with how people vote for the president? 

I wonder, because it seems republicans are gaining more house presence and are not losing the senate majority. I wonder if this could somehow be tied to who is more probable to win presidential election. 

Edited November 4, 2020 by Darkpriest

[Guard Dog 9,075]

6 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Perhaps someone can quickly provide some info, but is there some historical corellation between results to the house and senate with how people vote for the president? 

I wonder, because it seems republicans are gaining more house presence and are not losing the senate majority. I wonder if this could somehow be tied to who is more probable to win presidential election. 

Not that I’ve ever heard of. The political party that wins the presidential race tends to do better down ballot but that is not a hard or fast rule. There are plenty of instances where it has gone the other way. One thing to remember, congressional races are less about parties in about individual. House of representatives members in particular Are often times well known to their constituents. Party affiliation matters a lot less.Are often times well known to their constituents. Party affiliation matters a lot less.

[Darkpriest 729]

36 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1876_United_States_presidential_election

Rutherford B. Hayes has something to say about that.

Weeeeelll it's not finished yet

[ComradeMaster 277]

 

[Bartimaeus 2,022]

It's really weird how one party whose leader specifically told everyone not to use mail-in ballots doesn't have as many mail-in ballots as the leader of the party who told everyone to use mail-in ballots. Can science really explain this phenomenon?

[Achilles 2,328]

4 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

It's really weird how one party whose leader specifically told everyone not to use mail-in ballots doesn't have as many mail-in ballots as the leader of the party who told everyone to use mail-in ballots. Can science really explain this phenomenon?

Too tough for science. Need twitter sleuths for this one.

[Darkpriest 729]

[Malcador 7,185]

 

Strange times

[KaineParker 5,961]

14 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

It's really weird how one party whose leader specifically told everyone not to use mail-in ballots doesn't have as many mail-in ballots as the leader of the party who told everyone to use mail-in ballots. Can science really explain this phenomenon?

Old people.

[InsaneCommander 2,568]

24 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

It's really weird how one party whose leader specifically told everyone not to use mail-in ballots doesn't have as many mail-in ballots as the leader of the party who told everyone to use mail-in ballots. Can science really explain this phenomenon?

[Malcador 7,185]

8 minutes ago, KaineParker said:

Old people.

But the world left them behind long ago. We are the future!