US Presidential Election 2020

Overheal

is_that_so wrote: »

There's an interview with Newt Gingrich via Fox who claims that Trump will get 326 electoral college votes and is based on polls he trusts. Given he got 304 in 2016, this seems quite mad.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/10/28/gingrich_map_of_trump_with_326_electoral_votes_looks_right_left_is_going_to_be_terribly_shocked.html

Throwback to when Newt predicted a landslide win for Mitt Romney

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/11/newt-explains-why-he-was-so-wrong-083483

droidus

Jon Ralston has effectively called Nevada for Biden based on county analysis of early votes.

Brussels Sprout

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

What do posters here make of the Target Smart website that claims to model which way every state is leaning in early votes - overall, seems to be broadly in line with polling, but they're giving Trump a huge lead in Texas?

https://targetearly.targetsmart.com

I just posted this elsewhere on this exact topic:

There's a problem with using the voter registration data to project outcomes. Nate Silver talked about it on one of the recent 538 podcasts. It seems somewhat unintuitive but just because somebody is registered with a party doesn't mean that they will vote for their candidate. This is especially true with Trump.

He manages to both attract some registered Democrats to vote for him while at the same time repelling some registered Republicans completely. There's also the issue that some people may have switched allegiances decades ago but never bothered updating their registration data because they don't care about voting in primaries.

I think he actually said that the 538 model doesn't factor it in at all as a direct input.

TargetSmart have Nevada as a less than 1 point race, whereas 538 have that as a 90% chance of Biden winning due to the polling average of a 7% lead.

Quin_Dub

Here's where I'm at right now having seen the latest polling.

Biden is a very strong favourite at this point and I can see him winning with a total somewhere in the low 300's - In the 315-325 range.

However , Trump absolutely can still win.

His absolute ceiling however is the 306 he got last time - He will not win any state that he didn't win last time out , I'm pretty confident in that much at least.

He is absolutely still in the mix in several swing states

Ohio , Pennsylvania , Florida & Arizona are in play and he could win some of those. I really can't see them all falling his way however, at best he'll win one or two of them.

Bottom line If Trump can manage to turn a few of those close states it could get very close overall

If it comes down to a tight race in a single State - PA and FL look like the ones most likely to be of consequence then to be honest, all bets are off.

If either of those states ends up in legal battles then who knows what will happen.

Having said all that - Trump being in the required 240/250 range such that a battle over Florida or Pennsylvania becomes a decider whilst possible , is looking quite unlikely thus far.

Unlike 2016 , there hasn't been any late swing in the polling and more importantly there are almost no "undecided" voters to be added into the mix.

MJohnston

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I just posted this elsewhere on this exact topic:

TargetSmart have Nevada as a less than 1 point race, whereas 538 have that as a 90% chance of Biden winning due to the polling average of a 7% lead.

Nate Silver just tweeted on essentially this phenomenon:

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1322188099703758850

The only thing you can realistically infer from early voting is turnout.

VinLieger

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Here's where I'm at right now having seen the latest polling.

Biden is a very strong favourite at this point and I can see him winning with a total somewhere in the low 300's - In the 315-325 range.

However , Trump absolutely can still win.

His absolute ceiling however is the 306 he got last time - He will not win any state that he didn't win last time out , I'm pretty confident in that much at least.

He is absolutely still in the mix in several swing states

Ohio , Pennsylvania , Florida & Arizona are in play and he could win some of those. I really can't see them all falling his way however, at best he'll win one or two of them.

Bottom line If Trump can manage to turn a few of those close states it could get very close overall

If it comes down to a tight race in a single State - PA and FL look like the ones most likely to be of consequence then to be honest, all bets are off.

If either of those states ends up in legal battles then who knows what will happen.

Having said all that - Trump being in the required 240/250 range such that a battle over Florida or Pennsylvania becomes a decider whilst possible , is looking quite unlikely thus far.

Unlike 2016 , there hasn't been any late swing in the polling and more importantly there are almost no "undecided" voters to be added into the mix.

The big problem being then if its close say biden in the 280s or even 290s regardless of popular vote percentage Trump will absolutely try and steal this via the courts.



I believe the only way to truly stop that is by a 306+ EC victory so trump cant confuse things by calling on the fact biden won less EC votes than trump did in 2016, because that will absolutely be one of their main strategies if it happens.

Quin_Dub

VinLieger wrote: »

The big problem being then if its close say biden in the 280s or even 290s regardless of popular vote percentage Trump will absolutely try and steal this via the courts.

I believe the only way to truly stop that is by a 306+ EC victory so trump cant confuse things by calling on the fact biden won less EC votes than trump did in 2016, because that will absolutely be one of their main strategies if it happens.

I don't disagree , but I think for Trumps legal challenge to be viable it has to be a single State or at the absolute most two.

If he needs to turn multiple states it's just not going to fly..

Manic Moran

eire4 wrote: »

Here is the bottom line IMHO when it comes to the US Supreme Court and voting. Says so much about who they are really.

According to the US Supreme Court an American has the right to bear arms and the government if it wants to try and take a gun away from you has to go to court to prove why. However voting not so much. If the government takes away someone's right to vote they can do so and then it is up to them to go to court to prove that the government is wrong.

So the bottom line is according to the US Supreme Court having a gun is a right but voting that is only a privilege not a right. As I said above it just says so much about who they are and the US as a country.

This must be a statement founded upon prejudiced ignorance.

There are a large number of cases going through the US legal system where the government has restricted the right to a firearm and the persons in question have had to go to the courts in order to prove the government wrong. Examples include any firearms-related case which has made it to the Supreme Court from Lopez to Heller. Indeed, the only reason why such cases exist in the US legal system is a claim of overreach by enacted legislation or ordinance. Once the government has decided something, be it voting or firearms (or free speech, or intrusions of privacy, or anything else that the legislature may decide is a good idea), it is up to the affected parties to pursue the matter.

I don't agree with that assessment.

The PA case was decided last week. It was 4-4, and not 5-3. Because it was tied, the lower Court decision stood.

Fair point, I misread the article.

paul71 wrote: »

Texas, where a student cannot use their university of Texas ID to vote but someone who has a concealed gun permit can.

This is a classic suppression tactic and it is the type of thing that is widespread, targeted at the educated, catering to the rapid right.

I believe we've been over this. Whether or not you believe a student ID is sufficient to vote is one thing, there is little doubt that a license to carry is subject to stricter standards of identification and issuance, superior to a driver's license (I didn't get fingerprinted for my driver's license, for example).

RobertKK

The biggest problem in the last election was Hillary Clinton despite winning the popular vote was not liked about many.
Four years later and the biggest problem Donald Trump has is he is Donald Trump, sort of similar to the problem Hillary Clinton had 4 years ago.
Biden should win by a bigger margin when it comes to the popular vote, whether it is enough to win overall I do not know.

An Ciarraioch

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Here's where I'm at right now having seen the latest polling.

Biden is a very strong favourite at this point and I can see him winning with a total somewhere in the low 300's - In the 315-325 range.

However , Trump absolutely can still win.

His absolute ceiling however is the 306 he got last time - He will not win any state that he didn't win last time out , I'm pretty confident in that much at least.

He is absolutely still in the mix in several swing states

Ohio , Pennsylvania , Florida & Arizona are in play and he could win some of those. I really can't see them all falling his way however, at best he'll win one or two of them.

Bottom line If Trump can manage to turn a few of those close states it could get very close overall

If it comes down to a tight race in a single State - PA and FL look like the ones most likely to be of consequence then to be honest, all bets are off.

If either of those states ends up in legal battles then who knows what will happen.

Having said all that - Trump being in the required 240/250 range such that a battle over Florida or Pennsylvania becomes a decider whilst possible , is looking quite unlikely thus far.

Unlike 2016 , there hasn't been any late swing in the polling and more importantly there are almost no "undecided" voters to be added into the mix.

Lean Tossup essentially said the same today:

https://twitter.com/USA_Polling/status/1322207725263245312

marno21

Dems now looking at getting 48-57 seats in the Senate. Obviously the 57 is highly unlikely but imo there are 11 Republican seats they have at least a chance with. (CO/AZ are pretty likely D now, ME/NC are Lean D, and GA/GA/IA/KS/SC/MT/AK are either tossup or Lean R, and the momentum at the minute seems to be with the Dems). Alabama is a lost cause for Doug Jones so the Dems are starting out with 46. Michigan and Minnesota are also fairly safe.

I'd love to see how Beto would have got on in Texas had he ran. He lost to Cruz by 2 points in a state that's trending bluer since and with the Dems doing better in general this time around. He's apparently been doing great work on the ground in order to help drive the Dem vote in Texas.

Christy42

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I don't disagree , but I think for Trumps legal challenge to be viable it has to be a single State or at the absolute most two.

If he needs to turn multiple states it's just not going to fly..

Indeed but he is attacking a few before the election. It is why they are desperately attempting to stop as many votes from being counted as possible so he needs less legal challenges or more races are within a margin of legal challenge.

Mr.Nice Guy

What worries me about the polls is the 'shy Tory' factor.

Four years ago Clinton was seen as unlikeable and Trump was able to ride the 'I'm not a politician' shtick to great effect. Someone voting Trump back then wouldn't have had any qualms about revealing that he had their vote. This time, however, Biden isn't seen as unlikeable as her, while Trump has become taboo with the statements he's made. Most of his base aren't shy about supporting him with the MAGA hats and whatnot, but I worry that there is still a significant chunk of voters who are more tight-lipped about their intentions. A part of the electorate who are telling pollsters, friends, co-workers and so on that they won't be voting for Trump who will, on voting day, go ahead and do precisely that.

Larbre34

Trump needs every marginal situation to go his way. Biden can win some and lose some and still cruise to 300+

He has no chance of recovering centrist Dems and independents in enough numbers, not to mind the Lincoln conservatives. He's toast.

Christy42

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

What worries me about the polls is the 'shy Tory' factor.

Four years ago Clinton was seen as unlikeable and Trump was able to ride the 'I'm not a politician' shtick to great effect. Someone voting Trump back then wouldn't have had any qualms about revealing that he had their vote. This time, however, Biden isn't seen as unlikeable as her, while Trump has become taboo with the statements he's made. Most of his base aren't shy about supporting him with the MAGA hats and whatnot, but I worry that there is still a significant chunk of voters who are more tight-lipped about their intentions. A part of the electorate who are telling pollsters, friends, co-workers and so on that they won't be voting for Trump who will, on voting day, go ahead and do precisely that.

What is interesting is that this phenomenon gets mentioned every election and I have yet to see it happen. People predicted in 2016, minor but important error. People predicted the opposite on here expecting exit polls to over predict Sinn Féin's result. Nope.

Trust the polls but be aware of the effect of margin of error.

Overheal

Larbre34 wrote: »

Trump needs every marginal situation to go his way. Biden can win some and lose some and still cruise to 300+

He has no chance of recovering centrist Dems and independents in enough numbers, not to mind the Lincoln conservatives. He's toast.

His campaign can’t afford that attitude though. Hillary decided ahead was safe in ‘blue’ states and it cost her.

Dillonb3

marno21 wrote: »

Dems now looking at getting 48-57 seats in the Senate. Obviously the 57 is highly unlikely but imo there are 11 Republican seats they have at least a chance with. (CO/AZ are pretty likely D now, ME/NC are Lean D, and GA/GA/IA/KS/SC/MT/AK are either tossup or Lean R, and the momentum at the minute seems to be with the Dems). Alabama is a lost cause for Doug Jones so the Dems are starting out with 46. Michigan and Minnesota are also fairly safe.

I'd love to see how Beto would have got on in Texas had he ran. He lost to Cruz by 2 points in a state that's trending bluer since and with the Dems doing better in general this time around. He's apparently been doing great work on the ground in order to help drive the Dem vote in Texas.

The amount of money they wasted in Kentucky could've helped push more of those Tossups to Lean D. Pity about Jones losing his seat as his opponent is clueless

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

His campaign can’t afford that attitude though. Hillary decided ahead was safe in ‘blue’ states and it cost her.

Yep the message of get the **** out and vote, alongside pushing that's it not won until it's won needs to keep going until polls close. Even suspect Michael Moore being entirely negative probably motivates some people to go out and vote.

listermint

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

What worries me about the polls is the 'shy Tory' factor.

Four years ago Clinton was seen as unlikeable and Trump was able to ride the 'I'm not a politician' shtick to great effect. Someone voting Trump back then wouldn't have had any qualms about revealing that he had their vote. This time, however, Biden isn't seen as unlikeable as her, while Trump has become taboo with the statements he's made. Most of his base aren't shy about supporting him with the MAGA hats and whatnot, but I worry that there is still a significant chunk of voters who are more tight-lipped about their intentions. A part of the electorate who are telling pollsters, friends, co-workers and so on that they won't be voting for Trump who will, on voting day, go ahead and do precisely that.

But why?

Itssoeasy

Lads, yes Biden is looking good in the polls and there’s more paths to 270 for Biden BUT it’s not signed sealed and delivered yet. Joe Scarborough is saying that Florida will be counted more or less on the night(he was a senator from there so I assume he knows the lay of the land) and apparently they are counting early and mail votes today so it wont be drawn out thing at least according to him.

TomOnBoard

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yep the message of get the **** out and vote, alongside pushing that's it not won until it's won needs to keep going until polls close. Even suspect Michael Moore being entirely negative probably motivates some people to go out and vote.

In the light of the legal manoeuverings in mixed control States (Dem Governor/Rep Assembly) such as PA, the window for SAFE mail-in voting has now closed. The focus must now be solely to get remaining voters to get out and vote on Tuesday, or in person where the 'early' voting option still exists.

TomOnBoard

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Lads, yes Biden is looking good in the polls and there’s more paths to 270 for Biden BUT it’s not signed sealed and delivered yet. Joe Scarborough is saying that Florida will be counted more or less on the night(he was a senator from there so I assume he knows the lay of the land) and apparently they are counting early and mail votes today so it wont be drawn out thing at least according to him.

Hopefully Broward will be able to satisfy Joe's deadline, now that Brenda Snipes is out of the picture...

TomOnBoard

This is stunning!

The total 2016 vote has already been surpassed in TX...

WOW!

https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1322238082804969472?s=09

Overheal

Trump is eh, ambitious?

https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/1322216056975511557?s=20

He's going to be a haggard mess on election night.

Larbre34

Overheal wrote: »

Trump is eh, ambitious?

https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/1322216056975511557?s=20

He's going to be a haggard mess on election night.

As opposed to?

Larbre34

Overheal wrote: »

His campaign can’t afford that attitude though. Hillary decided ahead was safe in ‘blue’ states and it cost her.

I quite agree, but they are keeping the pedal floored all the way through to 10pm Tuesday by the looks of things. I'm happy to say it though.

marno21

Dillonb3 wrote: »

The amount of money they wasted in Kentucky could've helped push more of those Tossups to Lean D. Pity about Jones losing his seat as his opponent is clueless

Absolutely, Kentucky was always a lost cause. McConnell was a lot easier to neuter by removing his majority rather than a Hail Mary pass at trying to remove him.

gmisk

Overheal wrote: »

Trump is eh, ambitious?

https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/1322216056975511557?s=20

He's going to be a haggard mess on election night.

Whats new about that...

Overheal

I mean, look at the map against that itinerary

IDC if you have your own jet, that's nuts. But I imagine it will be not much more than tarmac appearances.

Larbre34

Overheal wrote: »

I mean, look at the map against that itinerary

IDC if you have your own jet, that's nuts. But I imagine it will be not much more than tarmac appearances.

He's been reduced to that for weeks already.

PopePalpatine

MJohnston wrote: »

Nate Silver just tweeted on essentially this phenomenon:

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1322188099703758850

The only thing you can realistically infer from early voting is turnout.

My worry about all of these Republican voters shifting to Biden is that they'll revert to voting Republicans Reps and Senators, and Mitch McConnell gets to reprise his "Dr No" role from 2010-16.

Outlaw Pete

Brian? wrote: »

Maybe you’ve been taken in here.

By what exactly? I see nothing to suggest the reporter is being dishonest.


https://twitter.com/jakejakeny/status/1322208696311652356

froog

this "state picker" on fivethirtyeight is really great. play around with it and see the various routes to winning. helpfully tells you what way they are leaning to make it easier.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-election-map/?cid=abcnews

TomOnBoard

The latest estimates from 538 still has TX leaning Trump, with 65% of their election simulations giving him the result, despite that massive early voting record.. As 538 creates its simulations based on poll returns, I sincerely hope that, in this case, the 538 calculation is for the birds...

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

By what exactly? I see nothing to suggest the reporter is being dishonest.


https://twitter.com/jakejakeny/status/1322208696311652356

"no human being could be that perfect"

ROFL okay:





"Looks like it was really done by a machine, absolutely"

<--- "NO HUMAN BEING COULD BE THIS PERFECT"



Is this the legally blind guy with Hunter's laptop?

Outlaw Pete

Not sure what you're rolling on the floor laughing about.

You think this guy has been had, and it's all a ruse?

Grand, not sure what's so funny about that though.

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Not sure what you're rolling on the floor laughing about.

You think this guy has been had, and it's all a ruse?

Grand, not sure what's so funny about that though.

I think you've been had to pass this clear garbage along.

These markings are clearly done by hand, each mark is different from one another. The ballot has been physically tampered with and now, reportedly, in the hands of multiple individuals with opportunity and motive to tamper with it. I would not trust some rando with an agenda on twitter that these aren't just pen marks, when we can see for ourselves from his own footage that it's not machine markup.

Also I'll repeat, why would anyone feel the need to fix New York....

pixelburp

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Also I'll repeat, why would anyone feel the need to fix New York....

Yes, this feels quite relevant in the rush to pander to conspiracy theories that somehow New York requires shenanigans to lock down a Democrat ticket. That's patent nonsense, starting at a conclusion and working backwards, reality be damned. What next, West Belfast caught cheating to favour Sinn Fein?

MJohnston

Similar to the Upshot’s resource, 538 have created a “when can I expect a result from each state” tracker:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-results-timing/

Brian?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

By what exactly? I see nothing to suggest the reporter is being dishonest.


https://twitter.com/jakejakeny/status/1322208696311652356

By a lie.

Why would this be done in NY. It makes absolutely no sense. It's pointless.

An Ciarraioch

North Carolina does seem to be swinging back towards Trump, judging by recent polls, and Florida also within the MoE, though Biden still appears to have greater room for manoeuvre.

froog

MJohnston wrote: »

Similar to the Upshot’s resource, 538 have created a “when can I expect a result from each state” tracker:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-results-timing/

looks like florida is the one to stay up for. if it goes biden, it's game over. election could be over by 1 or 2am irish time.

BonnieSituation

is_that_so wrote: »

There's an interview with Newt Gingrich via Fox who claims that Trump will get 326 electoral college votes and is based on polls he trusts. Given he got 304 in 2016, this seems quite mad.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/10/28/gingrich_map_of_trump_with_326_electoral_votes_looks_right_left_is_going_to_be_terribly_shocked.html

Yup. I commented on it earlier in the thread.

For my sins I watched that live on Wednesday night/Thursday morning. It was one of the most batshít things I've seen in a long while and that's saying something. The whole segment with Hannity was a lesson in cognitive dissonance.

Brussels Sprout

MJohnston wrote: »

Similar to the Upshot’s resource, 538 have created a “when can I expect a result from each state” tracker:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-results-timing/

What odds on them bringing back the needle from 2016. I'd say the average NYT reader would be having PTSD if they saw that thing again.

BonnieSituation

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

By what exactly? I see nothing to suggest the reporter is being dishonest.


https://twitter.com/jakejakeny/status/1322208696311652356

I think you've convinced me now.

It's clear that the Dems are trying to steal the election in Queens. Thank you.

TomOnBoard

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

What odds on them bringing back the needle from 2016. I'd say the average NYT reader would be having PTSD if they saw that thing again.

Ah, the good old trembling needle...a great idea that was failed by poor data feeding it...

And no, I believe the NYT said it won't be making an encore this year..

BonnieSituation

froog wrote: »

this "state picker" on fivethirtyeight is really great. play around with it and see the various routes to winning. helpfully tells you what way they are leaning to make it easier.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-election-map/?cid=abcnews

I did it there and gave both candidates all their likely wins and threw Trump OH and PA (267) and Biden AZ (271).

It really highlights just how tough it's going to be for Trump.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-election-map/#AZ:0,TX:1,CO:0,FL:1,GA:1,MI:0,MN:0,N2:0,NC:1,OH:1,PA:1,WI:0,AK:1,AL:1,AR:1,CA:0,CT:0,DC:0,DE:0,HI:0,IA:1,ID:1,IL:0,IN:1,KS:1,KY:1,LA:1,MA:0,MD:0,ME:0,M1:0,M2:0,MO:1,MS:1,MT:1,ND:1,NE:1,N1:1,N3:1,NH:0,NJ:0,NM:0,NV:0,NY:0,OK:1,OR:0,RI:0,SC:1,SD:1,TN:1,UT:1,VA:0,VT:0,WA:0,WV:1,WY:1

BonnieSituation

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Not sure what you're rolling on the floor laughing about.

You think this guy has been had, and it's all a ruse?

Grand, not sure what's so funny about that though.

It's pretty funny that you still think that this is in anyway legitimate.

BonnieSituation

pixelburp wrote: »

Yes, this feels quite relevant in the rush to pander to conspiracy theories that somehow New York requires shenanigans to lock down a Democrat ticket. That's patent nonsense, starting at a conclusion and working backwards, reality be damned. What next, West Belfast caught cheating to favour Sinn Fein?

Tbf to Trumpists, the anti-SF mob is more rabid and more irrational sometimes.