Are Republicans going to be surprised when Biden/Harris win decisively?

[Greg Davidson]

Biden's large lead has been remarkably stable, except for recent growth to about 10%. Looks like almost 350 electoral college votes for Biden/Harris, less than 200 for Trump/Pence. Unlike 2016, Biden's lead is above 50% nationally, and of the small number of undecided voters, most of them are likely to go for the challenger over the incumbent.

I predict there will be considerable attempts to make excuses after the loss. Like the three million imaginary illegal voters that Trump used to explain his loss of the popular vote even as he won the electoral college in 2016.

So I'd like some predictions from those of you who are going to be trying out excuses in mid-to-late November. When you make accusations about cheating, do you predict that there will be an equal amount of cheating in states with Republican Governors and Secretaries of State, or will your theory of cheating be based on only states where Democrats are in charge? Will you predict that the results will favor Biden more than the pre-election polling in states (like California) where every voter is sent a ballot?

My prediction is that the votes for Biden and Trump will be similar to the polling results, with a slight Biden tilt as the late deciders go against the incumbent.

[TheDeamon]

My own expectation is regardless of who "wins" in November, the other side is going to accuse the other side of cheating. Biden has already said as much, that the only way he can lose is through "chicanery." Which I guess means he's now announced the only electoral outcome he will now accept is victory on his part.

While also declaring the American People "don't need to know" what his intentions may be regarding the Supreme Court.

Which actually leaves Trump's "we'll see" seeming downright mild by comparison.

If Trump loses, the only thing to be said about that is that Trump has nobody to blame but himself, all of the leading indicators say he should have otherwise won this cycle. I could fully understand why people wouldn't want to vote for him.

Of course, the wild card in the mix is stuff that currently hasn't yet come to our attention(re: potential fraud). I certainly expect there is going to be all kinds of reporting about "balloting irregularities" which impact both sides of the political spectrum, with likewise biased reporting about such findings.

A Biden landslide is omnious for other reasons should it happen, as they may take that for "a mandate" much like Obama did(unless he's given a Republican Senate to fight with at the very least), and based on some of the things they promised during the Primaries, that could very well mean Civil War before 2022.

Not that a Trump win is much more cheery, as that could mean Civil War by January.

But I think the "shy voter" scenario is going to be in play in spades, and it is actually much worse than current attempts to esitimate it indicate. Which means Democrats are going to be crying all kinds of foul about the election results from in-person voting not matching up with their own polling results within anything close to the margin of error, unlike last time(2016).

[DonaldD]

The national polling will largely be correct, as it was in 2016 - and polling will likely be more accurate at a state level this time around due to better and more state level polls in swing states.

The biggest issue in 2016, especially at state level, were miscalculations, especially in local polls, in the differential of intent to vote for the two candidates; there was, in the end, no significant number of "shy voters" in the polls.  I expect pollsters will have been looking hard at this metric over the past 4 years to better predict turnout, but it remains an art.  My expectation is that the difference will be well within the margin of error, once all votes are counted.

However, I do predict that many votes will be tied up in litigation after election day - litigation initiated by both sides, but primarily by the Republicans as I expect there will be more for Republicans to gain by contesting votes.

As for who will win, and by how much?  Clearly, Biden is on his way to a big win BUT there are three weeks left - minds could still change between now and then.  That being said, Biden is polling better at this point than did Clinton in swing states: for example, his lead over Trump is 5% stronger in Florida than was Clinton at this same time, and about 2.5% stronger in Pennsylvania.  Those advantages over Clinton's head-to-head might be a bit inflated due to Trump's very bad 2 weeks, and I expect them to drop a bit now, but that still would give Biden a bigger lead than Clinton had at the same time (Clinton was actually polling ever so slightly behind Trump in Florida in early October.) I would put it at 330 electoral votes for Biden and slightly more than 200 for Trump if the election were held today.

[yossarian22c]

But I think the "shy voter" scenario is going to be in play in spades, and it is actually much worse than current attempts to esitimate it indicate. Which means Democrats are going to be crying all kinds of foul about the election results from in-person voting not matching up with their own polling results within anything close to the margin of error, unlike last time(2016).

Is the "shy voter" something played up on Fox? Just curious, I think most analyst believe that the Comey letter a few days before the election moved almost all the undecides to Trump in the last days before the election. I suppose if Fox played it up as a thing conservatives do then maybe it will be real in this election. But given the fact so many people at least have some form of their political identity out on Facebook, some type of social media, or just party voter registration I find it hard to believe there would be a significant number of "shy" voters except those in the most polarized parts of the country. Maybe a Trump supporter in Berkley would be shy, likewise a Biden supporter in Oklahoma. But I see no reason for a Trump supporter in rural Pennsylvania or Ohio to be "shy" about it.

[TheDeamon]

Is the "shy voter" something played up on Fox?

Bloomberg, right-wing news organization that it is known to be. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-28/new-study-suggests-polls-are-missing-shy-trump-voters

Some 11.7% of Republicans and 10.5% independents said they would not give their true opinion, vs. 5.4% of Democrats, according to the study by CloudResearch LLC, a Queens, N.Y.-based company that conducts online market research and data collection for clients. Among the reasons they gave was that “it's dangerous to express an opinion outside of the current liberal viewpoint,” according to Leib Litman, the co-chief executive officer and chief research officer.

CloudResearch conducted the survey online but inquired about surveys that are conducted by phone. It first asked participants for their political preference, then asked how they felt about divulging their preference for president in a phone poll. Later, it asked whom they actually did support for president.

...

The question of whether "shy Trump” voters were undercounted in polls before the 2016 election was part of an exhaustive post-mortem published by the American Association for Public Opinion Research. “Some Trump voters who participated in pre-election polls did not reveal themselves as Trump voters until after the election, and they outnumbered late-revealing Clinton voters," the AAPOR study said, adding, "This finding could be attributable to either late deciding or misreporting (the so-called Shy Trump effect) in the pre-election polls.”
...

[DonaldD]

From the first line of that link: "A new online study finds that Republicans and independents are twice as likely as Democrats to say they would not give their true opinion in a telephone poll question"

I hope you are taking this with a grain of salt...

[yossarian22c]

Is the "shy voter" something played up on Fox?

Bloomberg, right-wing news organization that it is known to be. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-28/new-study-suggests-polls-are-missing-shy-trump-voters

Some 11.7% of Republicans and 10.5% independents said they would not give their true opinion, vs. 5.4% of Democrats, according to the study by CloudResearch LLC, a Queens, N.Y.-based company that conducts online market research and data collection for clients. Among the reasons they gave was that “it's dangerous to express an opinion outside of the current liberal viewpoint,” according to Leib Litman, the co-chief executive officer and chief research officer.

CloudResearch conducted the survey online but inquired about surveys that are conducted by phone. It first asked participants for their political preference, then asked how they felt about divulging their preference for president in a phone poll. Later, it asked whom they actually did support for president.

Thanks for the link. One thing I didn't see explicitly is that the majority of the shy voters are actually going to break for Trump or lying about not supporting Trump. They gave one example of a response where a user said it was against liberal orthodoxy or something. But no hard data to show that the shy voters are overwhelmingly closeted Trump supporters.

A republican in a deep red state might feel social pressure to say they support Trump while a republican in California or New York might feel otherwise. I feel like any social political pressure to the point of lying to a pollster is unlikely to occur in the swing states. Because by definition you have at least 45% of people supporting Trump in those states. Maybe I'm wrong, the right wing news loop does produce some interesting mental states.

I think the biggest factor 4 years ago was the Comey letter. People who hadn't decided at that point then broke for Trump overwhelmingly. There are very few undecideds left this cycle.

[DonaldD]

We'll just have to wait and see - when Trump releases the Comey letter again, whether that will put him over the top and garner him more votes than Clinton this time around...

[TheDeamon]

From the first line of that link: "A new online study finds that Republicans and independents are twice as likely as Democrats to say they would not give their true opinion in a telephone poll question"

I hope you are taking this with a grain of salt...

You did notice the blurb about the American Association for Public Opinion Research? Where their findings about 2016 also happened to match up with the online polling, where the only shift noted was in regards to independents.

As to the one being "an online poll." Yes, that does warrant a grain of salt, but not all online polls are created equal, as the methodology used is wildly variable between them.

[DonaldD]

You did notice the blurb about the American Association for Public Opinion Research? Where their findings about 2016 also happened to match up with the online polling, where the only shift noted was in regards to independents.

Yes.  But it doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

The question of whether "shy Trump” voters were undercounted in polls before the 2016 election was part of an exhaustive post-mortem published by the American Association for Public Opinion Research. “Some Trump voters who participated in pre-election polls did not reveal themselves as Trump voters until after the election, and they outnumbered late-revealing Clinton voters," the AAPOR study said, adding, "This finding could be attributable to either late deciding or misreporting (the so-called Shy Trump effect) in the pre-election polls.”

Typically, the AAPOR study found, "those who admit changing their minds more or less wash out, breaking about evenly between the Republican candidate and the Democratic candidate. " Not in 2016, though: People who changed their answers when called back after the election had voted for Trump by a 16-percentage-point margin.
The AAPOR study said evidence for a “Shy Trump" effect isn't conclusive. The authors hypothesized that if voters didn't want to tell a live interviewer that they supported Trump, you'd expect Trump to do worse in live-interview polls than in ones involving interactive voice response, which is less personal. In fact, Trump, didn't do worse in live-interview polls.

I highlighted the last sentence because it was important.

What the AAPOR study found is not inconsistent with something happening very late in the election cycle that could make up or change people minds (especially undecideds or barely decided).  Something like the Comey letter.  Given the consistency between interactive voice response and live interview polls, it tends to suggest something other than "shy" voters. 

<Shrug>

Time will tell.

[oldbrian]

But I see no reason for a Trump supporter in rural Pennsylvania...(to be shy about it)

Good God, no.  If anything, it is the democrats who have to walk carefully around here.  My county tilts about 2:1 Republican, but counting the banners and yard signs would indicate more like 10:1

[Aris Katsaris]

My own expectation is regardless of who "wins" in November, the other side is going to accuse the other side of cheating. Biden has already said as much, that the only way he can lose is through "chicanery." Which I guess means he's now announced the only electoral outcome he will now accept is victory on his part.

While also declaring the American People "don't need to know" what his intentions may be regarding the Supreme Court.

Which actually leaves Trump's "we'll see" seeming downright mild by comparison.

Your memory is selective:
Back on September, it was Trump who said plainly: "We're not gonna lose this, except if they cheat"
https://www.the-sun.com/news/1537426/trump-lose-cheated-democrats-rally-virginia/
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/518407-trump-says-he-wants-beautiful-transition-but-must-be-an-honest-vote

[TheDeamon]

So Michigan early voting is +6 Democrat against Republicans, even though early voting/mail in is supposed to strongly favor the Dems and current polling is suggesting it should be Biden +11?

Nate Silver is starting to make noises that would tend to suggest he's about to start debunking the idea of a "red mirage" saving Biden should Trump look like the winner on the 3rd. Early returns are D+31, but votes remaining to be cast are only D+17. So once the Trump voters turn up to vote in person, those mail-in votes yet to be counted may actually favor Trump.

[wmLambert]

But I see no reason for a Trump supporter in rural Pennsylvania...(to be shy about it)

Good God, no.  If anything, it is the democrats who have to walk carefully around here.  My county tilts about 2:1 Republican, but counting the banners and yard signs would indicate more like 10:1

The reason there are shy Republican polling and voters is not for fear of being ostracized - it is fear of physical bullying, vandalism, and physical threats to homes and family. The reaction to rioting and looting is the Left's paradigm. the Right doesn't do that. It doesn't matter if there are fifteen out of thirty Democrats in an area - those fifteen will attack to injure. The Left pretends that Trump has never spoken out against White Supremacists, as if they are an equal threat to their own militant groups. There aren't very many of them, and most are harmless anyway. Biden says they come out of the woods carrying clubs and torches with veins throbbing - when no such thing has occurred. It is a false argument and even more, Trump has denounced them completely, and the Left knows it. Savannah Guthrie brought it up to get a rise out of Trump, knowing it was a false accusation. That is basically all they have.

The only polls proved accurate show Trump winning in a landslide. We will all need to wait forever for a conclusion - because the fix is in to delay the count until the Democrat vote counters can create enough vote-scamming to ask for recounts or new elections. We will see, but the plan is to take forever for answers.

[DonaldD]

FiveThirtyEight has Biden up by 8 in Michigan.  I think that's been pretty static for a while, but there hasn't been a lot of quality state level polls yet.

[wmLambert]

FiveThirtyEight has Biden up by 8 in Michigan.  I think that's been pretty static for a while, but there hasn't been a lot of quality state level polls yet.

Traglafar, one of the most accurate pollsters in 2016 and 2018 has Trump up 1 in Michigan. Trump up 4.5 in AZ, up 4.8 in FLA. Helmut Norpoth has Trump winning the election as a 91% certainty.

[TheDeamon]

FiveThirtyEight has Biden up by 8 in Michigan.  I think that's been pretty static for a while, but there hasn't been a lot of quality state level polls yet.

It was 11 earlier today.

[Ouija Nightmare]

But I see no reason for a Trump supporter in rural Pennsylvania...(to be shy about it)

Good God, no.  If anything, it is the democrats who have to walk carefully around here.  My county tilts about 2:1 Republican, but counting the banners and yard signs would indicate more like 10:1

The reason there are shy Republican polling and voters is not for fear of being ostracized - it is fear of physical bullying, vandalism, and physical threats to homes and family. The reaction to rioting and looting is the Left's paradigm. the Right doesn't do that. It doesn't matter if there are fifteen out of thirty Democrats in an area - those fifteen will attack to injure. The Left pretends that Trump has never spoken out against White Supremacists, as if they are an equal threat to their own militant groups. There aren't very many of them, and most are harmless anyway. Biden says they come out of the woods carrying clubs and torches with veins throbbing - when no such thing has occurred. It is a false argument and even more, Trump has denounced them completely, and the Left knows it. Savannah Guthrie brought it up to get a rise out of Trump, knowing it was a false accusation. That is basically all they have.

The only polls proved accurate show Trump winning in a landslide. We will all need to wait forever for a conclusion - because the fix is in to delay the count until the Democrat vote counters can create enough vote-scamming to ask for recounts or new elections. We will see, but the plan is to take forever for answers.

Are you actually as insane as this post makes you appear to be?

Ouija Nightmare: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

[Wayward Son]

FiveThirtyEight has Biden up by 8 in Michigan.  I think that's been pretty static for a while, but there hasn't been a lot of quality state level polls yet.

Electoral Vote.com also has him up by 8 points, with about 54% of the predicted vote.

[Wayward Son]

FiveThirtyEight's overall Presidential forecast has Trump winning in only 12 percent of the scenarios, down from 13 yesterday.

[TheDeamon]

Meanwhile there is reporting that the Biden Campaign has an internal memo saying Trump is "neck and neck" in several key states. (NY Post)

So something very weird is going on here.

[noel c.]

WS,

Hillary’s fourteen point advantage was not enough in 2016.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/92791454

As I see it, Biden needs another eight points to be competitive, good luck with that. 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/18/us/trump-vs-biden

[TheDeamon]

Another oddity to point at:

Trump's favorability rating is about 6 points higher today than it was at this time 4 years ago. Don't confuse approval with favorability, they're different markers.

And I guess there was another poll where 47% of those polled thought their neighbors were Trump voters, compared to 36% for Biden.... That's quite the wild swing from Biden being up by 11 points in the national polls.

Of course, for early voting the registered Democrats seem to be turning up, and the Republicans seem to be strangely absent in many states(even against historical numbers), so there is another path to potential victory for Biden as that could point some kind of weird enthusiasm issue for Trump.

[DonaldD]

According to FiveThirtyEight's polling average, as of October 17, 2016, Clinton was up 49.7% to 42.7% in the popular vote - as compared to Biden's current lead of 52.4% to 41.9%.  Biden's lead is still 3.6% ahead of Clinton's at the same time 4 years ago.  Plus, there is little chance that Comey will send a letter to Congress the week before the election this year... not to mention that there simply are far fewer available or undecided votes to be had (especially with all the advance polling).

As for Trump's enthusiasm deficit - it's not so strange.  4 years ago, he was an unknown, and it was easier to project people's hopes onto that blank canvas.  Today, Trump has to deal with his record.  Even the most partisan have to see that many people, mistaken though they might be, don't like his record.

[TheDrake]

According to FiveThirtyEight's polling average, as of October 17, 2016, Clinton was up 49.7% to 42.7% in the popular vote - as compared to Biden's current lead of 52.4% to 41.9%.  Biden's lead is still 3.6%

Huh? How's that math work? 52.4 - 49.7 =2.7
By margin, it is 10.5 - 7 = 3.5

[noel c.]

When Donald starts doing math, look the other way.

[DonaldD]

Huh? How's that math work? 52.4 - 49.7 =2.7
By margin, it is 10.5 - 7 = 3.5

The Biden/Trump differential is currently 10.6% on 538 - I expect the numbers  above (52.4 and 41.9) were rounded.

[TheDrake]

Huh? How's that math work? 52.4 - 49.7 =2.7
By margin, it is 10.5 - 7 = 3.5

The Biden/Trump differential is currently 10.6% on 538 - I expect the numbers  above (52.4 and 41.9) were rounded.

None of your links demonstrates that the math came from somewhere else. In any event, I think it is not that significant. Nobody should waste their time talking about National polling numbers. It might just mean that a lot more Californians are now "likely voters" which doesn't make a dime of difference to the outcome.

[yossarian22c]

Huh? How's that math work? 52.4 - 49.7 =2.7
By margin, it is 10.5 - 7 = 3.5

The Biden/Trump differential is currently 10.6% on 538 - I expect the numbers  above (52.4 and 41.9) were rounded.

None of your links demonstrates that the math came from somewhere else. In any event, I think it is not that significant. Nobody should waste their time talking about National polling numbers. It might just mean that a lot more Californians are now "likely voters" which doesn't make a dime of difference to the outcome.

That I'll agree with. For Trump to win the polls have to be off by at least 6% in Pennsylvania and the northern midwest. If Trump wins all the toss up states; Iowa, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Arizona he still loses if he can't pick off Penn, Wisconsin or Minnesota.

[TheDrake]

Well, Biden in the most recent reputable PA polls (B+ or better) range from +3 to +13, which seems like a fair bit of uncertainty, although the +3 is an outlier. Clinton had been widely showing margins of +5 to +12 in mid October

[yossarian22c]

Well, Biden in the most recent reputable PA polls (B+ or better) range from +3 to +13, which seems like a fair bit of uncertainty, although the +3 is an outlier. Clinton had been widely showing margins of +5 to +12 in mid October

There's a lot fewer undecideds this year. Clinton was almost never above 50% in the polls. Biden is at 52.8% (using 538's averaging of the polls). That's an important distinction, because of the Comey letter right before the election and potentially other reasons almost all the undecideds broke for Trump.

[wmLambert]

You also miss the effect the Hunter laptop will do to Biden when the MSM is faced to admit it's legitimacy, Besides that, there is so much else out there that cannot be hidden away. The most effective Trump commercials are simply showing Biden lying to us. That one with him bullying a reporter saying he was so much smarter than him, and then "proved it" by saying he was the top award-winning student with a full-paid scholarship, top of the class honors, and three degrees. Then the ad cuts to MSM reporters saying he was on a half-scholarship, was in the bottom of the class, no honors, and only one degree. Biden said he would put his brilliance up against that bullied reporter. He did and failed.

When a person lies, it defines him. Then there are the proven plagiarism. It is a theme, not minor coincidences.

There is also his dementia. Everyone knows he is unable to hold his own without help. He is absolutely the worst candidate of all time.

[wmLambert]

What will destroy the Democrat Party is their unbridled support for Biden - no matter what.

[DonaldD]

Only the Murdoch properties are paying any attention to the Giuliani/Russian smear attempts at this point, and the true believers don't need any more convincing.  Fool me once...  If you need any evidence, it's been several days since the 'scandal' broke, and Biden's support has only gained a percentage point - the lead now sits at 10.7%

What will destroy the Democrat Party is their unbridled support for Biden - no matter what.

What are you smoking?

[wmLambert]

Only the Murdoch properties are paying any attention to the Giuliani/Russian smear attempts at this point, and the true believers don't need any more convincing.  Fool me once...  If you need any evidence, it's been several days since the 'scandal' broke, and Biden's support has only gained a percentage point - the lead now sits at 10.7%

What will destroy the Democrat Party is their unbridled support for Biden - no matter what.

What are you smoking?

On the contrary, Biden is proved corrupt by that undisputed truthful laptop info. You cannot deny it by saying the deceived are oblivious to it. If you haven't noticed, the Biden camp has not denied the laptop is Hunter's. The documentation is absolute, and Radcliffe has stated clearly that in no way is it a smear or disinformation by anyone except Hunter Biden, himself. Specifically, Russia is not a part of this at all. Except in liars' minds.

...And how is the average Democrat on the street supposed to have a clue what to think when the MSM and Social Media refuses to even divulge it? You really need to clean up your act and stop deflecting.

[yossarian22c]

On the contrary, Biden is proved corrupt by that undisputed truthful laptop info. You cannot deny it by saying the deceived are oblivious to it. If you haven't noticed, the Biden camp has not denied the laptop is Hunter's.

You have an interesting definition of "undisputed."

[Wayward Son]

The most effective Trump commercials are simply showing Biden lying to us. That one with him bullying a reporter saying he was so much smarter than him, and then "proved it" by saying he was the top award-winning student with a full-paid scholarship, top of the class honors, and three degrees. Then the ad cuts to MSM reporters saying he was on a half-scholarship, was in the bottom of the class, no honors, and only one degree. Biden said he would put his brilliance up against that bullied reporter. He did and failed.

Yep, I can see all these undecided voters immediately turning to Trump, who has never bullied or denigrated a reporter, or lied about his past accomplishments, in the last 3 3/4 years he's been in office.

Or is it the last 3 3/4 months?

The last 3 3/4 days?

Hours?

I can't remember now. 

[DonaldD]

Because it's fun to play with the way back machine, here is some more context from 2016: according to the FiveThirtyEight national polling average, on the Monday, 2 weeks before election day in 2016 (October 24) Clinton's lead in the popular vote was 6.3%.  Today, Monday October 19, 2020, also 2 weeks before election day, again according to the 538 average, Biden's lead is 10.7% nationally.

In 2016, the Comey letter was about to drop (October 28 in 2016, the equivalent of 4 days from now) and Clinton's lead was about to crater.  It will be interesting to see if there is any significant movement in the polls over the next week.

[yossarian22c]

Because it's fun to play with the way back machine, here is some more context from 2016: according to the FiveThirtyEight national polling average, on the Monday, 2 weeks before election day in 2016 (October 24) Clinton's lead in the popular vote was 6.3%.  Today, Monday October 19, 2020, also 2 weeks before election day, again according to the 538 average, Biden's lead is 10.7% nationally.

In 2016, the Comey letter was about to drop (October 28 in 2016, the equivalent of 4 days from now) and Clinton's lead was about to crater.  It will be interesting to see if there is any significant movement in the polls over the next week.

Its also important to note that Clinton's polling was consistently below 50%. With a couple people on the right polling about 5%. So the undecideds breaking for Trump and people deciding not to vote 3rd party after all shift things a lot harder towards Trump. Those same dynamics aren't in play this time. Biden is polling at 52.5% and Trump at 41.8%. So even if the full 5.7% of undecideds or third parties go to Trump he still loses.

[Wayward Son]

The Comey letter cost Hillary 3 percentage points.  Nationally, she lost with about 2 percentage more votes.

So the polls were accurate (as much as you could expect) at the time.  The electoral college just happen to break Trump's way.

One should also note that, from Donald's link, that Trump had a 28.6% chance of winning back then--a bit better than 1 in 4.  And anyone who played D&D would know that 1 in 4 ain't bad odds.

Currently, FiveThirtyEight gives the Donald about 1 in 11 odds of winning.

[wmLambert]

...You have an interesting definition of "undisputed."

You mean with the fact that the Biden legal team has not disputed the laptop is Hunter's. ...Or that any emails are not his and not edited? ...Or maybe that Schiffs's own intelligence gatherers said he is not reporting what they told him? ...Or maybe that Biden is already being written off by the DNC?

[wmLambert]

The Comey letter cost Hillary 3 percentage points.  Nationally, she lost with about 2 percentage more votes.

So the polls were accurate (as much as you could expect) at the time.  The electoral college just happen to break Trump's way.

One should also note that, from Donald's link, that Trump had a 28.6% chance of winning back then--a bit better than 1 in 4.

No, the polls were never accurate. They predicted a Blue Wall that Trump could never get past. Hillary was just a bad candidate. The Electoral College was the target of Trump's candidacy. The Democrats were just clueless. Also don't forget, the polls changed right before the 2016 elections to make it appear closer than what they had been predicting. The pollsters were shills for Democrats - but they didn't want to appear at the end as bad as they were presenting themselves, to ensure future work. They are still over-sampling Democrats and unlikely voters with no caveats. The polls that were accurate last time all favor Trump. They say he has a 91% probability of winning in a landslide.

[TheDeamon]

I'll still stand by on I'm not expecting anything. I suspect there is a "shy voter" effect in play making the polls very unreliable and that people are misleading the pollsters in significant numbers.

I would be shocked if Trump wins the popular vote, but unsurprised if he wins the Electoral College.

I would also be unsurprised to see Biden win the Electoral College, because as I said, I don't think the polls are reliable this year for a list of reasons which only has shy voters as the top of the list. (Sampling method, and other factors play in as well)

Although I might stock up on popcorn, as stuff I'm hearing indicates we can expect left-wing riots after the November election regardless of if Trump wins or not, and that some of those riots will continue even after Trump leaves office should he lose. January is going to be amusing to say the least.

[DonaldD]

No, the polls were never accurate.

FiveThirtyEight had Clinton up by 3.6% in its final average before the election.

The final vote tally had Clinton up by 2.1%.

That was actually very accurate, and definitely within the margin of error.

[wmLambert]

No, the polls were never accurate.

FiveThirtyEight had Clinton up by 3.6% in its final average before the election.

The final vote tally had Clinton up by 2.1%.

That was actually very accurate, and definitely within the margin of error.

Do you contest my statement that "the polls changed right before the 2016 elections to make it appear closer than what they had been predicting?"

[TheDeamon]

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

Date   Republicans   Independents   Democrats
2020 Sep 14-28:   28   42   27
2018 Nov 1-11:    28   39   31
2016 Nov 1-6:      27   36   31

If you're sampling based on 2018 or 2016 voter numbers, it looks like you could be looking at a +4% sampling bias in favor of Democrats.

Of course, I guess there also is this(looks like they have a rounding error in the most recent poll:

Asked of independents) As of today, do you lean more to the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?

Date     Republicans/Republican leaners   Democrats/Democratic leaners
2020 Sep 14-28:   44   47
2018 Nov 1-11:    43   46
2016 Nov 1-6:     43   46

[DonaldD]

Is it your contention that polling companies are unaware of voter affiliation, or that they are unaware of how voter affiliation has changed and do not take voter affiliation into consideration?  Because ascertaining voter affiliation is a part of almost every single poll.

[yossarian22c]

Early and absentee voting numbers are trending strongly for democrats. It could be Trump has discouraged his voters from voting that way, but a vote cast is one that can't be ruined by bad weather, long lines, family emergencies, or work on election day. But its creating a significant gap that Trump will need to come back from to win in key states.

[DonaldD]

... or a likely explosion in the number of COVID-19 cases...

[yossarian22c]

... or a likely explosion in the number of COVID-19 cases...

Was trying to figure out how to like/agree to a post with a .