Polling data? Thanks @Doubleme for your proud analysis. Clearly the lady below don't know much...🤔
A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll found the Democratic nominee three points up on her GOP opponent, 47% to 44%, among likely voters.
The survey was conducted by the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who has a long track record of producing results that uncannily mirror final election tallies.
Polling data? Thanks @Doubleme for your proud analysis. Clearly the lady below don't know much...🤔
A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll found the Democratic nominee three points up on her GOP opponent, 47% to 44%, among likely voters.
The survey was conducted by the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who has a long track record of producing results that uncannily mirror final election tallies.
So you trust that poll but none of the others? because if we take the polling averages and just assume any lead even when statistically insigificant will reflect the election results on the day then Trump wins.
We will see on election night I hope Kamala wins plus I have a bet on Florida going Democrat, against nearly all the polls.I am hoping women come out in their droves over the abortion issue and Kamala wins in a landslide.
I am saying I do not trust the meaningless polls any of them. If you want to disregard all the other polls but believe in that one single poll because it fits what you want to belief then fair enough but that seems a bit disingenious and, well I have never been that optimistic.
Yes. I had read that-it is very good. And just the sort of fair-minded reporting sadly lacking elsewhere.
The 43 States show a slight advantage to Harris (and forget Iowa-that 1 poll is likely an outlier). And parts of the Sun Belt, particularly North Carolina and Georgia, probably balance that out. Hence-to my mind-it is the Rust Belt that is key
Yes, I saw someone making a great play about the outcome in Iowa, but to my understanding, Iowa is completely irrelevant to the eventual overall result.
So election night is nearing and I will be taking a deep dive into the numbers and what is happening throughout, and aiming to provide updates here I am not sure if others are as excited as me but its coming soon for better or for worse.
Yes, I saw someone making a great play about the outcome in Iowa, but to my understanding, Iowa is completely irrelevant to the eventual overall result.
The recent discussion about the 12th amendment (I think?) was fascinating...
I believe it's the ' little secret' that a Trump referred to where
If Trump can secure enough house objections to have certain results voided, which then brings down the total no of electoral seats below the level of 270: to ensure there can't be a majority for Harris
It then reverts to a straight single vote for each candidate from each state..... if that happens there are likely to be more Trump states than Harris so he'll win by ' hook or by crook'!
Polling data? Thanks @Doubleme for your proud analysis. Clearly the lady below don't know much...🤔
A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll found the Democratic nominee three points up on her GOP opponent, 47% to 44%, among likely voters.
The survey was conducted by the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who has a long track record of producing results that uncannily mirror final election tallies.
So you trust that poll but none of the others? because if we take the polling averages and just assume any lead even when statistically insigificant will reflect the election results on the day then Trump wins.
We will see on election night I hope Kamala wins plus I have a bet on Florida going Democrat, against nearly all the polls.I am hoping women come out in their droves over the abortion issue and Kamala wins in a landslide.
I am saying I do not trust the meaningless polls any of them. If you want to disregard all the other polls but believe in that one single poll because it fits what you want to belief then fair enough but that seems a bit disingenious and, well I have never been that optimistic.
Dave, I trust a poll (more) that statistically and historically gets the results right compared to others, which she does
All polls are ' best guess', she seems to guess better than the others, that's all
It is true to say that, if it is 269-269 that there is a simple 1 vote, 1 State thing. And, due to the fact that large population States tend to be Democrat but the larger number of smaller ones Republican, Trump would win. However, it looks almost impossible for it to end up at 269-269. Seems mad to me that the run-off should work that way on a tie-surely it should be whoever gets the most votes nationally in that instance.
But getting results "voided" is a massive step. If Judges were to decide that State votes were to be voided (as opposed to recounts, or some votes discounted for legal reasons), that would effectively be the end of Democracy. I just cannot see that happening-that would be terrible.
The mere fact that it happens to be a Republican using Supreme Court/Federal court appointees is neither here nor there. That would be just as terrible were a future Democrat appointee seek to do the same thing. And, were that to happen once, it would happen again.
When even an extremist like Farage fears something, then people should listen.
It will be a fascinating watch. And the deciding factor might end up being a comedian's "joke" or Biden's ramblings.
My understanding is it's the level and number of house senate votes that can force the issue, for which Republicans have enough...I think(think) it would only take 40% of the Republican representatives to object - for each state result, not a one off objection to cover all states-to force the issue ....
Polling data? Thanks @Doubleme for your proud analysis. Clearly the lady below don't know much...🤔
A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll found the Democratic nominee three points up on her GOP opponent, 47% to 44%, among likely voters.
The survey was conducted by the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who has a long track record of producing results that uncannily mirror final election tallies.
So you trust that poll but none of the others? because if we take the polling averages and just assume any lead even when statistically insigificant will reflect the election results on the day then Trump wins.
We will see on election night I hope Kamala wins plus I have a bet on Florida going Democrat, against nearly all the polls.I am hoping women come out in their droves over the abortion issue and Kamala wins in a landslide.
I am saying I do not trust the meaningless polls any of them. If you want to disregard all the other polls but believe in that one single poll because it fits what you want to belief then fair enough but that seems a bit disingenious and, well I have never been that optimistic.
Dave, I trust a poll (more) that statistically and historically gets the results right compared to others, which she does
All polls are ' best guess', she seems to guess better than the others, that's all
She does have a good record. And, were that the only factor, I would agree with you.
Trouble is there are a lot of polls. And the average lead-including that poll-is for a sizeable win for Trump in Iowa. She freely admits she was surprised by that poll finding
well finding out more Selzar is more statistically reliable then the polls that contradict her due to the others have potential built in bias but if she was right and that swing was reflected across all states Kamala wins in a landslide and takes more then 400 electoral college votes would love to see it but I just cant see that happening.
Comments
A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll found the Democratic nominee three points up on her GOP opponent, 47% to 44%, among likely voters.
The survey was conducted by the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who has a long track record of producing results that uncannily mirror final election tallies.
We will see on election night I hope Kamala wins plus I have a bet on Florida going Democrat, against nearly all the polls.I am hoping women come out in their droves over the abortion issue and Kamala wins in a landslide.
I am saying I do not trust the meaningless polls any of them. If you want to disregard all the other polls but believe in that one single poll because it fits what you want to belief then fair enough but that seems a bit disingenious and, well I have never been that optimistic.
I think the key swing states will be the Northern ones-Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan. Whoever wins 2 or 3 of those will be very likely to win
I found this very interesting...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-0dfcfee6-7d9f-4d20-a07e-aa7b85dc56bd
The 43 States show a slight advantage to Harris (and forget Iowa-that 1 poll is likely an outlier). And parts of the Sun Belt, particularly North Carolina and Georgia, probably balance that out. Hence-to my mind-it is the Rust Belt that is key
@Essexphil
Yes, I saw someone making a great play about the outcome in Iowa, but to my understanding, Iowa is completely irrelevant to the eventual overall result.
I believe it's the ' little secret' that a Trump referred to where
If Trump can secure enough house objections to have certain results voided, which then brings down the total no of electoral seats below the level of 270: to ensure there can't be a majority for Harris
It then reverts to a straight single vote for each candidate from each state..... if that happens there are likely to be more Trump states than Harris so he'll win by ' hook or by crook'!
@Essexphil @Tikay10 Have I got that right?
Either way from 06:00 tomorrow morning the news will be a fascinating watch
All polls are ' best guess', she seems to guess better than the others, that's all
It is true to say that, if it is 269-269 that there is a simple 1 vote, 1 State thing. And, due to the fact that large population States tend to be Democrat but the larger number of smaller ones Republican, Trump would win. However, it looks almost impossible for it to end up at 269-269. Seems mad to me that the run-off should work that way on a tie-surely it should be whoever gets the most votes nationally in that instance.
But getting results "voided" is a massive step. If Judges were to decide that State votes were to be voided (as opposed to recounts, or some votes discounted for legal reasons), that would effectively be the end of Democracy. I just cannot see that happening-that would be terrible.
The mere fact that it happens to be a Republican using Supreme Court/Federal court appointees is neither here nor there. That would be just as terrible were a future Democrat appointee seek to do the same thing. And, were that to happen once, it would happen again.
When even an extremist like Farage fears something, then people should listen.
It will be a fascinating watch. And the deciding factor might end up being a comedian's "joke" or Biden's ramblings.
My understanding is it's the level and number of house senate votes that can force the issue, for which Republicans have enough...I think(think) it would only take 40% of the Republican representatives to object - for each state result, not a one off objection to cover all states-to force the issue ....
Trouble is there are a lot of polls. And the average lead-including that poll-is for a sizeable win for Trump in Iowa. She freely admits she was surprised by that poll finding
TRUMP 1.67 (4/6)
HARRIS 2.5 (6/4)