What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place (7 Viewers)

Warren I have to imagine picks up the majority of Bernie voters. Her's to lose now (until next week when it all changes again).

 
Not talking everyone. You asked about Trump people.  Also how can we trust polls after the last election?
Your answers indicated that Trump people didn't mind identifying as such but the theory of the "untruthful to pollsters" Trump voter persists in this forum. And what don't you trust about the polls and why do you think they miss the mark?

 
easy.  you understand how polls work and what they mean.
Polls mean nothing to me as I know who I am going to vote for. If Trump is polling at 70% and Biden at 30% I am still voting for Biden.

The analysis released  by the American Association for Public Opinion Research, found that the biggest culprit in why the polls were so wildly wrong was the level of Trump's support, most importantly in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. So many Trump voters failed to reveal their preferences until after the election.

 
Polls mean nothing to me as I know who I am going to vote for. If Trump is polling at 70% and Biden at 30% I am still voting for Biden.

The analysis released  by the American Association for Public Opinion Research, found that the biggest culprit in why the polls were so wildly wrong was the level of Trump's support, most importantly in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. So many Trump voters failed to reveal their preferences until after the election.
This is an interesting answer on two counts. First, I'd like to read more about the AAPOR's analysis. Maybe I'll finally get a definitive answer to my questions about what Trump voters say to pollsters and why.

Second, your note about voting for the "favorite" took me aback a little. We're not laying five bucks on a horse at the betting window, we're picking the candidate best suited to lead the country. You shouldn't have to defend voting for the losing candidate, I've done it at least half the time. But it takes me back to a guy I knew in college who did in fact vote for the frontrunner regardless of policies; he just couldn't stand to be affiliated with a "loser." Lakers-Yankess-Cowboys guy, too, at a time when that meant success. Guy went on to the FBI.

 
Polls mean nothing to me as I know who I am going to vote for. If Trump is polling at 70% and Biden at 30% I am still voting for Biden.

The analysis released  by the American Association for Public Opinion Research, found that the biggest culprit in why the polls were so wildly wrong was the level of Trump's support, most importantly in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. So many Trump voters failed to reveal their preferences until after the election.
i have no doubt that some people lie in polls.  i'm saying just because the 2016 Wisconsin polls were wrong, doesn't mean i stop trusting all polls, because i understand how polls work and what they represent.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is an interesting answer on two counts. First, I'd like to read more about the AAPOR's analysis. Maybe I'll finally get a definitive answer to my questions about what Trump voters say to pollsters and why.

Second, your note about voting for the "favorite" took me aback a little. We're not laying five bucks on a horse at the betting window, we're picking the candidate best suited to lead the country. You shouldn't have to defend voting for the losing candidate, I've done it at least half the time. But it takes me back to a guy I knew in college who did in fact vote for the frontrunner regardless of policies; he just couldn't stand to be affiliated with a "loser." Lakers-Yankess-Cowboys guy, too, at a time when that meant success. Guy went on to the FBI.
I have no idea why people say what they do to pollsters. Do they lie?  Do they tell the truth?  Only the person polled knows.

 
About young, black Millennials:

"Now the discourse is growing hotter, more intemperate. There’s an open disdain for the old incrementalism. Everyone—the media, even the presidential candidates—seems to be talking about reparations and overturning the antebellum power structures. There is a feeling that something radical must happen." - Peter Savodnik, Vanity Fair

Yep. This is the most polarizing election in my lifetime.

 
I'd guess it is name recognition.

If that's the case I'm betting Warren is going to take start taking those people (if the trend continues with Bernie dropping off).
Here's more on their different bases

"In poll after poll, Sanders appeals to lower-income and less-educated people; Warren beats Sanders among those with postgraduate degrees. Sanders performs better with men, Warren with women. Younger people who vote less frequently are more often in Sanders’ camp; seniors who follow politics closely generally prefer Warren.

Sanders also has won over more African Americans than Warren: He earns a greater share of support from black voters than any candidate in the race except for Joe Biden, according to the latest Morning Consult surveys."

 
Not entirely sure what you are getting at here - but Dems cannot win the Senate without also winning the White House - imo.

I do worry that if the Dems nominate Biden - it will have a negative impact on down-ticket races - because, like it or not, Biden is not bringing the crowds to the voting booths.

I am hopeful that the Dems see this before its too late...
They're aware of this, and they're ok with it.  Leadership like Joe Biden's is the reason we got Trump.  They'd rather have a depressed turnout and preserve the status quo than electrify the base and risk changing the system.  They recognize that Biden is a reliable keeper for their failed policies.  There's really no other explanation for why he is being foisted on the electorate again.

 
BassNBrew said:
What's the scoop with Steyer?  He's advertising in NC right now.  Seemed kind of strange to see a political ad now.
Yeah, those ads are his effort to get into the debates.  Steyer is loaded and has spent a lot of money on advertising to reach the polling and donor thresholds to make the next debate.  It looks like it's going to work, he's very close to qualifying.  He basically just bought his way into the top 12 candidates.

 
Mile High said:
 Sources say Hickenlooper will drop out of the presidential race today. Expected to run against Cory Gardner for US Senate. 
Done. Can he use funds raised for Pres'l bid if he run for Senate? 

"I’ve heard from so many Coloradans who want me to run for the United States Senate. They remind me how much is at stake for our country and our state. I intend to give that some serious thought. I’ve been a geologist, a small businessman, a mayor, a governor, and a candidate for president of the United States. At each step, I’ve always looked forward with hope. And I always will. Thank you."

 
[SIZE=10.5px]Dems basically need CO, AZ, ME, and maybe NC to have any chance to make the Senate 50-50, assuming they lose AL[/SIZE]

 
I don't really know that much about Colorado politics but would someone further left have a chance against Gardner?  Obviously the most important thing is for Dems to win the seat but I wouldn't want Senator Hickenlooper getting in the way of President Warren's agenda with all his "socialism" crap.

 
Hick reportedly came out of the gate with about a 13-point lead over Gardner. I'll try to find a link to where I saw that.
This looks like it - 51% to 38%  https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/125995/ppp-hickenlooper-51-gardner-38

And he seems to have a clear path to the nomination:

Six hundred likely Democratic primary voters in the state were polled and 61% preferred Hickenlooper, compared to 10% for Mike Johnston and 8% for Andrew Romanoff. Fifteen percent were undecided and 6% favored Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who said Friday that she isn’t running in 2020.

The poll was conducted July 25-28 by the Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group, which has a B+ pollster rating from FiveThirtyEight

 
Done. Can he use funds raised for Pres'l bid if he run for Senate? 

"I’ve heard from so many Coloradans who want me to run for the United States Senate. They remind me how much is at stake for our country and our state. I intend to give that some serious thought. I’ve been a geologist, a small businessman, a mayor, a governor, and a candidate for president of the United States. At each step, I’ve always looked forward with hope. And I always will. Thank you."
When I think of "liberal Colorado geologist and sometime businessman", this is the first guy who comes to mind.

 
This looks like it - 51% to 38%  https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/125995/ppp-hickenlooper-51-gardner-38

And he seems to have a clear path to the nomination:

Six hundred likely Democratic primary voters in the state were polled and 61% preferred Hickenlooper, compared to 10% for Mike Johnston and 8% for Andrew Romanoff. Fifteen percent were undecided and 6% favored Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who said Friday that she isn’t running in 2020.

The poll was conducted July 25-28 by the Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group, which has a B+ pollster rating from FiveThirtyEight
🤨

 
I don't really know that much about Colorado politics but would someone further left have a chance against Gardner?  Obviously the most important thing is for Dems to win the seat but I wouldn't want Senator Hickenlooper getting in the way of President Warren's agenda with all his "socialism" crap.
To the left of Hickenlooper? Yes - someone to the left of Hickenlooper would wipe out Gardner. Cory Gardner should just start packing up now and send stuff back every week. Then he won't have much to move when he's defeated - any warm liberal body would beat him he's that bad.

 
(Maybe I'm just in denial, but) THis seems like a possible outlier poll. It is conducted online and has a C+ rating from 538. 
In their July poll, Buttigieg was at 25%.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/iowa/
Not the same poll.  Change Research is the same polling company - but different criteria based on the client - in this case Iowa Starting Line.

Last poll for Iowa Starting Line was in May - https://iowastartingline.com/2019/05/20/starting-line-change-research-poll-biden-sanders-locked-in-iowa-tie/

Biden and Sanders were leading with Warren, Buttigieg and Harris bunched together.

 
It could still be an outlier - the poll with Mayor Pete at 25% was certainly an outlier - but I think it is in line with Biden trending down, and Warren being the most logical person to pick up those votes in Iowa.

 
Thx for the clarification. I saw a different Iowa poll recently that looked pretty bad for Bernie, so maybe she is getting more of the progressive lane. (Bernie had the highest unfavorables - by a lot-of any candidate.)
ETA- Looking at the link now, it does seem to have come somewhat equally from Biden and Sanders.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
To the left of Hickenlooper? Yes - someone to the left of Hickenlooper would wipe out Gardner. Cory Gardner should just start packing up now and send stuff back every week. Then he won't have much to move when he's defeated - any warm liberal body would beat him he's that bad.
Sounds like a Gardner/DiBlasio ticket could bring the nation together.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top