you can't be "former" and "lifelong" you mental midget. especially when you've been repeating that sentiment for the past 4 years.
So who is willing to accept
- Thread starter cnsaguy
- Start date
you can't be "former" and "lifelong" you mental midget. especially when you've been repeating that sentiment for the past 4 years.
It's like having 60 seconds on the clock and the other team needs a 90 yard TD drive with no timeouts. The odds tell you that the defense is going to prevail 90% of the time. The only problem is they have the same QB who beat you last season on an 70 yard drive with 60 seconds left. You're scared shitless. And the other guys team is shockingly confident because they've done it before. Screw what the odds say let's play the game.
I don't know what's going to happen either. All we can do is attempt to bound uncertainty with the data we have. That's what a model like 538 has is trying to do. The actual answer is already baked in - like waiting for the river card in poker. You can calculate the odds of getting the card you need based on the information you have - but that's it. The answer is what is.
538 is no different than the rest of us. Nate Silver creates his models based on facts that match his preconceived supposition about what's going to happen. He does a pretty good job of deflecting judgment on his predictions by citing "others" data but all he is doing is making a prediction based on their data regardless of how reliable it is. Sure, based on his models there probably is a 90% chance that Biden wins but everybody and their dog knows its a 50/50 race.
Maybe it's best to revisit in a few days but what do you think is happening here? Let's say Trump wins relatively comfortably... What would be your working theory?
Last day boys, somewhere between 45 and 55% of voters will make a stupid choice.
On second thought all voters will make a stupid choice Better statement is 45 to 55% will make the stupidest choice available.
On second thought all voters will make a stupid choice Better statement is 45 to 55% will make the stupidest choice available.
According to Crazyhole, everybody who says is it will be Biden has a 'preconceived bias.'
Bad metrics, which has obviously been the case in a ton of polls this year. When you see a poll has has Biden winning by 17 points in Wisconsin its pretty obvious their methodology is way off so just throw out every poll that company releases. I also disregard the media polls altogether because their business doesn't rely on having accurate polls like Emerson and Trafalgar have to.
You realize 538 weights against bad pollsters and marks partisan polls?
Trafalgar is a partisan poll.
You don't know for sure who the bad pollsters and good pollsters are until after the election, but you can get a pretty good idea ahead of time.
That's not true. They are graded by methodology not just correctly calling races, which trafalgar does only 75% of the time. They are a C- polling firm because they are using methods that don't tell the full picture. Emerson is an A- firm because they do.
So bad metrics to me means either bad methods or they're getting faulty information from those they poll. If methods are still bad then let's just give up on polling. If data is bad then I'm wondering why people aren't being truthful.
I think there is some of both going on. Its pretty widely accepted that a "shy Trump" vote exists, but its impossible to quantify. Its called the Bradley effect and its probably why Trafalgar was able to predict the swing states last time while everybody else had most of them wrong.
There are also issues with methodology. Sample sizes can lead to an extrapolation that isnt reality, particularly in states like Michigan where registration more reflects local politics than it does national and statewide politics.
There are theories on the second point. One is that the violence of the left has caused people on the right to either not answer or to answer Democrat in order to avoid being listed. The other is that youth and people on the right are a lot less likely to answer the phone from an unknown number or stay on the line taking a survey.
For #2, it's a well known fact that most people are ashamed to support Trump in public, since deep down almost everyone knows he's an absolutely horrible human being and even worse POTUS.
So they are hesitant to tell another person they support him, but will vote for him in private.
That's one of the huge projects at 538. They review and rate pollsters constantly comparing their polls to actual results. That's how they can detect (and correct) for partisan bias, and give higher weighting to higher quality pollsters.
Or Trafalgar got lucky. They had the Georgia governor race at +12 Kemp going into election day when he won by ~1.5. They had Cruz over Beto by 9 when he won by 2.5. Their methodology might look really good when things break heavily R, but that doesn't mean their methodology is actually good.
In 2012, the polling error favored Democrats. That doesn't mean that left-leaning pollsters had a magic formula that would predict the 2016 cycle.
LOL Yeah, try to convince yourself of that.
There's a lot of people who will vote for our Blowhard-in-Chief in private but are too damn embarrassed to admit it to anyone they know with half a brain they did it.
One of the great things about America is that we’ve managed a civil transfer of power just about every four or 8 years. I can’t believe that, in an era where we are told that we are so focused on embracing diversity and understanding and eliminating hate, we are going to forget that and start a new trend of violent upheaval.
Over 200 protests are lined up for tonight if Trump declares victory, which he will likely do.
I don't think this is the right way to look at it. At best, polling bounds uncertainty - it doesn't predict the outcome. Even if I can accurately say that Candidate A has a 95% chance of beating candidate B, I'm going to be wrong 1 out of 20 times.
Think of an NBA player who's a 40% 3 pt shooter. If you pick out short windows, he might have a game shooting 8/10 or going 1/10. Neither of those samples change the fact that - over the long haul - he's a 40% shooter.
This is why what 538 does is so much better than looking at individual polls. When a state is 40/60 odds, that's basically giving our 3 pt shooter one shot - he'll miss more often than he makes it, but he's going to make it plenty of times. The pollster who "predicted" the made shot may have had unique insight, or may have just gotten lucky.
A good example is looking at the performance of mutual funds. In any given year, you expect 50% of funds to outperform due to random chance. Over 2 years, you expect 25% to outperform both years due to random chance, and so on. It can be very hard to prove - statistically - the difference between lucky and good over small sample sizes.
We get 1 presidential election every 4 years, we don't get hundreds of 3 pt attempts over a few months. Each 3 pt shot is a binary result, but it doesn't validate or invalidate the 40% expectation of the shot.
In a hypothetical non-partisan scenario where the results are uncertain (votes are still being counted - no credible organizations have declared a winner) - but POTUS declares victory and initiates lawsuits to stop the vote count in state's he's currently leading - do you think citizens should protest in that scenario or not?
It just depends on the election laws in each state and whether they are being followed. In Pennsylvania, it's a slam dunk lawsuit that votes received after today can't be counted. Other states may be unclear, but like with Michigan the district court already addressed it.
That is a Breitbart reporter referencing a Trump campaign staffer. None of that is coming from the Biden campaign.
I guess this will just need to be revisited after votes are counted. I'm thinking of it from the perspective that there actually is a silent Trump vote out there. If it shows up and Trump wins "with ease" then we simply have to look at it as if the methods are flawed right? What's the alternative if it turns out we're unable to actually gauge public preference when polling?
I did read a good piece over the weekend that attempted to put to bed the silent Trump voter idea by looking at Senate races in these battleground states. Essentially that we'd see the silent voter impact in discrepancies here bc people are less likely to lie about Senator voting preferences.
So if concerted efforts to find this silent vote still end up missing it then I think that's very interesting.
Again this might all be moot if Biden runs away with it, I just find it all very interesting.
In your personal life I would imagine you interact with various business and personal circles. In each of those circles there may or may not be a preferred candidate but I would image in at least some there is. If politics were ever a discussion, which candidate would would carry the highest social cost for an individual to come out and support?
I've been giving this a lot of thought myself recently.
Go on Facebook, check the number of friends you have, then say you voted for Trump. See what happens.
Regardless of what anyone on this board does, the truth is that the Biden campaign has already come out and said they will not accept a loss tonight. They will have a victory speech if they win, but no concession speech if they lose. They will drag it out and who knows if they would ever accept a loss.
Today its called the Biden campaign.
Starting tonight it will be called the Biden riots.
I don't think you will see riots unless votes are tossed out. If the American people vote for Trump they should get Trump. But if they vote for Biden they should get Biden.
Trump is running his whole campaign on invalidating votes. That's what's going to cause the riots.
It was a beautiful afternoon yesterday and one of my neighbors was out on his deck. He is someone I've never talked politics with but who I've worked with on our Association's board over the years. He and his wife are good, intelligent people and responsible neighbors.
Yesterday he was talking with a friend on the phone and started going off on how the media has it out for Trump. I could hear him from my own deck and was aghast. I couldn't believe how this man -- who was so responsible in so many aspects of his life -- could be supporting Trump this year in this election.
Living in a red state, I have many extended family as well as people I consider to be good friends who are Republicans. That's never been a big deal to me in how I've interacted with them. As some of you know, I was a card-carrying Republican myself once upon a time. Truth be told, I can even understand how people could have voted for Trump in 2016. But for the life of me, I find it difficult to understand how one's allegiance to a political party could allow someone to ignore Donald Trump's countless failings as a leader and rationalize a vote for his reelection. Trump will go down in history as the worst President we've ever had.
That's the problem, these people actually think these insane things are happening. people like him and others just simply no longer live in the same reality as the rest of us.
I think we all know the answer, and its not because of some ridiculous "deep state conspiracy". Its because Trump is an international embarrassment.
You should be embarrassed to support trump. Public humiliation is the appropriate response to doing something as idiotic as being a trump voter in Nov of 2020.
Yeah, I think they have this backwards. I think Trump losing would cause for more issues, unless as you say, there is evidence that votes are being tossed and people look at it as being stolen. That isnt to say there wont be some issues if Trump wins fairly, but I think Trump losing, or evidence that the election results arent legit, are easily the scenarios that are going to cause more issues.
The other scenario is if Trump declares victory before the results are actually determined. As soon as he declares victory his hardcore supporters are going to think he won. If it turns out he didnt win after everything is counted, then I would expect some issues from his supporters. It is going to be interesting to see if/when he decides he won.
Why would they accept a loss before the votes are counted? Unless it is an electoral blowout one way or the other, there is no reason for either candidate to be conceding or declaring victory tonight.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
How did you enjoy the Shareholder Meet & Greet with Frost?
- Latest: Knight_Light
