2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
You said there are a ton of new voters this time. The only way that's true is if there are a ton of new voters every time
Huh?
That is not the only way that is true. I don't think you are understanding my post at all. I can't even understand what you think I said to make you make these replies.
I'll try this.
Data shows a lot of people registering to vote for this election that were not voters in previous elections. The demographics of those voters are disproportionally women and minorities. None of that has anything to do with whether there was single first time voter in 2016 or 2020.
edit: wait. maybe you are missing that the demographics this time are women/minorities (which lean heavily blue as a group) whereas in previous elections, the demographics of first time voters was not skewed that way (largely male, for instance).
Huh?
That is not the only way that is true. I don't think you are understanding my post at all. I can't even understand what you think I said to make you make these replies.
I'll try this.
Data shows a lot of people registering to vote for this election that were not voters in previous elections. The demographics of those voters are disproportionally women and minorities. None of that has anything to do with whether there was single first time voter in 2016 or 2020.
edit: wait. maybe you are missing
New voters will ALWAYS be more minority than the population as a whole just because people turning 18 and new US citizens are less white than population as a whole. Without looking I can tell you think was true in 2016 and 2020 also. Where are you seeing that new voter registration are greater % women than in total voters and new registrations in 2016 and 2020?
The argument against what you are saying is simple. If this was Oct 11, 2016 or Oct 11, 2020, you could make the exact same argument. We know those elections were not blow outs. So hard to think of any reasons why this one will be.
lol
I appreciate your point of view.
The problem in 2016 was basically that the polling in MI, PA, and WI all had Hillary over 52% and when the election came around she dropped by ~7% in MI, ~5% in PA and WI. Trump did gain by ~2.5% in those 3 states but he ended up well below 50%. The polling was just wrong. And Trump gained on election day by what would have been normal considering the undecided %. I'm not sure why the polling was so bad in those states but it might have been because Hillary di
Is that true?
had Clinton at 45, Trump 42. She ended up with 47. It wasn't so much that she crashed, just that undecided plus polling error both went towards Trump and enough for him to get a small win.
FYI appreciate your general polling data posts. I enjoy reading them and they obviously take some work to do, so thanks.
No (not true) !!! I accidentally used Obama's data from 2012 thinking it was Hillary (I had the columns in the same spreadsheet...)
The 538.com 2016 data had MI: Hillary at 48.4% and Trump at 44.2% (Trump won by 0.3%). PA: Hillary at 48.9% and Trump at 45.2% (Trump won by 1.2%) and WI: Hillary at 49.6% and Trump at 44.3% (Trump won by 1%). Hillary dropped by just over 1% in MI and PA where Biden dropped by 0.6% in MI and 0.2% in PA and they both dropped by 2.7% in WI.
So my above post was really wrong about 2016. The polling was wrong but not by much for Clinton (similar to Biden in 2020). Trump gained a lot from the undecided (similar to 2020). The undecided %'s were much higher in 2016 than they are now. However in MI, PA, and WI the 3rd party candidates Johnson & Stein had more than the difference between Trump and Hillary.
If Wisconsin is wrong for Kamala in the same way it was for Hillary and Biden then Kamala won't win WI. MI and PA will depend on how the undecideds go.
Unless of course the polls change before election day in an upwards direction for Kamala.
The argument against what you are saying is simple. If this was Oct 11, 2016 or Oct 11, 2020, you could make the exact same argument. We know those elections were not blow outs. So hard to think of any reasons why this one will be.
You could not make the exact same argument because the demographics of new voters are much different.
I will dig up the sources for this info when I get home. Sorry, kind of hard to do from work.
Trump’s top general calls ex-president ‘fascist to the core’ and ‘most dangerous person to this country,’ new book says
Trump is an existential threat to democracy and will ruin this great country. what should we do? I know I know, lets take an attack ad out against Jill Stein. its a joke. the least amount of critical thinking shows them to be utterly full of **** but their supporters will never be able to apply that.
Trump is an existential threat to democracy and will ruin this great country. what should we do? I know I know, lets take an attack ad out against Jill Stein. its a joke. the least amount of critical thinking shows them to be utterly full of **** but their supporters will never be able to apply that.
You're right, hopefully Kamala wins and the other side can't ever vote again. Then and only then will democracy be saved.
Someone just figured out how democracy works - one group votes their chosen leader into office so that the other group's choice isn't voted into office.
Correct, and in addition to voting: baseless impeachments, fake dossiers, Russian scare propaganda, lawfare, attempting to remove the other guy from the ballot, intentional and egregious misrepresentations, highly questionable electoral tactics and assassination attempts! All will preserve the integrity of our institutions (and public trust in them).
Correct, and in addition to voting: baseless impeachments, fake dossiers, Russian scare propaganda, lawfare, attempting to remove the other guy from the ballot, intentional and egregious misrepresentations, highly questionable electoral tactics and assassination attempts! All will preserve the integrity of our institutions (and public trust in them).
Lolz. This from the guy who was lecturing us on fallacies not long ago. Physician, heal thyself.
Not really going to deign to address the substance of much of this nonsense, but as a point of fact you might want to note that it was Republicans who tried to remove Trump from the ballot. The rest of your list is similarly vapid.
Lolz. This from the guy who was lecturing us on fallacies not long ago. Physician, heal thyself.
Not really going to deign to address the substance of much of this nonsense, but as a point of fact you might want to note that it was Republicans who tried to remove Trump from the ballot. The rest of your list is similarly vapid.
Correct, the Republican strongholds of Illinois, Colorado, and Maine almost preserved democracy by removing him from the ballot, until the Republican Supreme Court wrongly ruled against such a thing. (They need to be impeached, too!)
How do you even sleep with this level of cognitive dissonance? It must be torturous.
Correct, and in addition to voting: baseless impeachments, fake dossiers, Russian scare propaganda, lawfare, attempting to remove the other guy from the ballot, intentional and egregious misrepresentations, highly questionable electoral tactics and assassination attempts! All will preserve the integrity of our institutions (and public trust in them).
One side had their son and campaign manager meet with a Russian national they knew had contacts to the Kremlin to dig up dirt on their opponent. The other side didn't.
One side has accusations of "lawfare" with no evidence other than their desire for it to be true. The other side has actual evidence of Trump doing what they accuse Democrats of, from Trump's own mouth of course. For example:
AP: Trump ups pressure on Barr to probe Bidens as election nears
President Donald Trump on Tuesday called on Attorney General William Barr to immediately launch an investigation into unverified claims about Democrat Joe Biden and his son Hunter, effectively demanding that the Justice Department muddy his political opponent and abandon its historic resistance to getting involved in elections.
Source:
Regardless of what you think about polls, I wouldn't say that better markets have been particularly accurate either. HRC was a prohibitive favorite in betting markets in 2016, and there was plenty of free money to made in 2020 betting on Biden, even after all the votes had been counted.
Also, the one thing that reliably moves betting markets is a shift in polling results.
In 2016, i think the markets had trump considerably higher than what the polls where showing. In 2020, they were fairly inline, which made sense at least to me because Biden was a strong candidate and was blessed with a unique boost of voter turnout due to covid and he still barely beat trump in three swing states. Now the market has gone from having trump around 38% in 2020 to 52% at this moment. That is a significant difference than what weve had. Im kind of torn because part of me firmly believes that trump ia stronger than we realize but qeve also had 8 years to get people to realize how dumb he really iz.
I got the info from Tom Bonier, for the record. Had a few minutes and tried to trace to primary sources but ran out of time. Might look later tonight but my schedule for this evening gets busy real fast.
A quick look here should get you some idea of what I'm talking about though:
I see he's talking about early vote results, which is interesting but a different topic. Take your time on the voter registration stuff, doesn't have to be today.
At one dinner earlier this year with a group of Trump-friendly billionaires including Nelson Peltz and John Paulson, Mr. Musk voiced an earnest, if naïve, belief in the way that politics should work. He dismissed the power of television advertising and spoke sweepingly of an organic movement to elect Mr. Trump, with supporters persuading others to join the cause. Two voters by two voters — that was how Mr. Trump would win, he said.
In April, Mr. Musk arranged for a dinner to be held at the Los Angeles home of the venture capitalist David Sacks. There, Mr. Musk and a phalanx of some of the world’s wealthiest people — including Rupert Murdoch, former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and the onetime Trump supporter Peter Thiel — said that 10 by 10 voters was how Mr. Trump would win. Mr. Musk told about a dozen dinner companions that supporting Mr. Trump would be politically safe if they did it in large numbers — and so it was important for the businesspeople to organize their peers.
Bombshell report from NYT about Musk and a cabal of billionaires working to get Trump elected. Curious, since this is exactly what people have been projecting onto Kamala. I’m sure the resident magas find it disturbing that a cabal of elites are trying to decide an American election.
Paywall removed and paywalled version below.
