Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

2020 Presidential Election Polling Thread


TripItUp

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:
1 hour ago, JohnnyU said:

Trump is looking good IMO.  Looks like Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Arizona will go to him.  I doubt he will lose Texas, especially after the oil gaffe by Biden.  I believe he wins NC too.

Trump is definitely turning a corner when it comes to the polls.

Yeah I’m seeing a razor thin electoral victory for Trump with a massive ### kicking in the popular vote in favor of Biden (+6/7 million for Biden)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnnyU said:

Trump is looking good IMO.  Looks like Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Arizona will go to him.  I doubt he will lose Texas, especially after the oil gaffe by Biden.  I believe he wins NC too.

Sorry, but George Soros sent me 850,000 TX mail-in ballots and I’m filling them all out for Biden. Joe has this in the bag.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Yeah I’m seeing a razor thin electoral victory for Trump with a massive ### kicking in the popular vote in favor of Biden (+6/7 million for Biden)

I’m curious how the math would work for this.  I’m guessing you don’t expect Trump to win any new states.  How does he lose the popular vote by double the amount of 2016 and not lose the EC?  It seems almost impossible to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

I’m curious how the math would work for this.  I’m guessing you don’t expect Trump to win any new states.  How does he lose the popular vote by double the amount of 2016 and not lose the EC?  It seems almost impossible to me.

Massive turnout in blue state.  There were pictures of lines to vote in New York blocks and blocks and blocks long. Multiple hour waits.    Huge Cali turnout too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Massive turnout in blue state.  There were pictures of lines to vote in New York blocks and blocks and blocks long. Multiple hour waits.    Huge Cali turnout too

We’ve already seen turnout is going to be huge everywhere - is your premise that red states will be net 0 for Biden but he’ll win blue states from 2016 by twice as much as Hillary?  Not saying it’s impossible but seems very improbable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

We’ve already seen turnout is going to be huge everywhere - is your premise that red states will be net 0 for Biden but he’ll win blue states from 2016 by twice as much as Hillary?  Not saying it’s impossible but seems very improbable.

I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see how it’s a stretch to think the states play out similar to 16 but Biden picks up 3mil in aggregate votes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see how it’s a stretch to think the states play out similar to 16 but Biden picks up 3mil in aggregate votes.  

At some point, when the popular vote difference reaches a certain level, The chances of an electoral college upset the other way becomes statistically insignificant.  Not sure what that point is, but I thought it was around 6-7 points.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Massive turnout in blue state.  There were pictures of lines to vote in New York blocks and blocks and blocks long. Multiple hour waits.    Huge Cali turnout too

You could also see Biden make big gains in red states that he still ends up losing. Trump winning a state +20 in 2016 and only +5 in 2020.  Not that I think that will happen, but it’s another way a bigger popular spread could still result in a similar electoral map. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, rickroll said:

At some point, when the popular vote difference reaches a certain level, The chances of an electoral college upset the other way becomes statistically insignificant.  Not sure what that point is, but I thought it was around 6-7 points.

About 4 points according to The Economist’s model.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rickroll said:

At some point, when the popular vote difference reaches a certain level, The chances of an electoral college upset the other way becomes statistically insignificant.  Not sure what that point is, but I thought it was around 6-7 points.

Good news is we’ll find out soon.  I hope I’m wrong and it’s a Biden landslide from both aspects but it’s not what my gut’s saying.  🤷🏻‍♂️

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, caustic said:

About 4 points according to The Economist’s model.

4pts across 125mil votes is 5mil.  So it would take 150mil and maxing out the model to get to 6?  Interesting.  
 

So 2016 was pretty close to the edge of the model too. Wow. Interesting as well. 

Edited by dkp993
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

4pts across 125mil votes is 5mil.  So it would take 150mil and maxing out the model to get to 6?  Interesting.  
 

So 2016 was pretty close to the edge of the model too. Wow. Interesting as well. 

Here’s a chart of their simulation results: https://m.imgur.com/a/ck3wPT0

It shows that Republicans’ electoral college advantage is about 2 points. Dem +2 is roughly a tossup (2016 was Dem +2.1), and Dem +4 virtually guarantees an EC win.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Good news is we’ll find out soon.  I hope I’m wrong and it’s a Biden landslide from both aspects but it’s not what my gut’s saying.  🤷🏻‍♂️

I think 2016 has scarred many of us so I understand your skepticism.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dkp993 said:

I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see how it’s a stretch to think the states play out similar to 16

PA voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

WI voted D for the 7 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

MI voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

 

It doesn't seem like a stretch that at least some of these would revert. 

  • Like 3
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mystery Achiever said:

PA voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

WI voted D for the 7 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

MI voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

 

It doesn't seem like a stretch that at least some of these would revert

Definitely not saying that. Just not sure it does play out differently.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, tri-man 47 said:

This article from CNN lays out the very gloomy outlook for Trump.  Four years ago, Hillary's support was starting to collapse (not the case for Joe) in part due to her unfavorability rating (also not the case for Joe).  Trump needs bounces in a bunch of states, and that just isn't looking likely.

Not trying to play the source game but articles like this need to be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism. Just like a Breitbart saying he has a clear path to victory article right now.   
 

* again for clarity sake I hope Trump gets stomped so I hope this is right. I’m just skeptical.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Not trying to play the source game but articles like this need to be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism. Just like a Breitbart saying he has a clear path to victory article right now.   

I really disagree with this — Enten is a very reputable elections analyst who used to work for FiveThirtyEight. That’s much different than a Breitbart article.

Back on Nov. 4, 2016, Enten wrote this article that turned out to be very prescient: Trump is a polling error away from the Presidency. He’s a solid source.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Mystery Achiever said:

PA voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

WI voted D for the 7 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

MI voted D for the 6 elections prior to 2016 and Trump won by less than a percentage pt.

 

It doesn't seem like a stretch that at least some of these would revert. 

What this tells me is that Trump was uniquely positioned to actually get some things done and be an outsider that changed things up some.  Instead we got four years of conspiracy theories, tweets, enriching himself and constant lies.  Not to mention the divisiveness going on plus the pandemic (not nearly as much his fault as the rest of this list).  People of just tired of all this.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, caustic said:

I really disagree with this — Enten is a very reputable elections analyst who used to work for FiveThirtyEight. That’s much different than a Breitbart article.

Back on Nov. 4, 2016, Enten wrote this article that turned out to be very prescient: Trump is a polling error away from the Presidency. He’s a solid source.

Sure and I believe you that he is. But again this video where he lays out everything he ends with a Biden commercial, in his piece! Come on man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Sure and I believe you that he is. But again this video where he lays out everything he ends with a Biden commercial, in his piece! Come on man. 

Speaking of 538, I do follow Silver, but he doesn't make it easy with his liberal meanderings. I hope that doesn't impact his predictions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Sure and I believe you that he is. But again this video where he lays out everything he ends with a Biden commercial, in his piece! Come on man. 

But it appears very factual that Hillary was starting to collapse, and Joe is not.  Also the data that Hilllary was deeply unpopular, like Trump ...but Joe has a positive favorability rating.  Finally, Joe is polling at 50%, and Hillary was not.  I'm sensitive to bias at CNN (guys like Cizilla), but I'm much less wary of a fact-based analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tri-man 47 said:

But it appears very factual that Hillary was starting to collapse, and Joe is not.  Also the data that Hilllary was deeply unpopular, like Trump ...but Joe has a positive favorability rating.  Finally, Joe is polling at 50%, and Hillary was not.  I'm sensitive to bias at CNN (guys like Cizilla), but I'm much less wary of a fact-based analysis.

🤞.  I certainly hope so.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AAABatteries said:

What this tells me is that Trump was uniquely positioned to actually get some things done and be an outsider that changed things up some.  Instead we got four years of conspiracy theories, tweets, enriching himself and constant lies.  Not to mention the divisiveness going on plus the pandemic (not nearly as much his fault as the rest of this list).  People of just tired of all this.

I wasn't a supporter in 2016 at all.  Indeed, in 2000 I looked forward to the day I could vote against Hillary Clinton (I had never voted for Bill Clinton).  Anyway, I eagerly cast my ballot FOR Hillary in 2016 as I felt he was wholely unfit for the office.  When he won I comforted my nearly inconsolable 15 year old daughter with "well, let's look on the bright side.  He's an outsider who isn't beholden to anyone politically.  He's a former democrat turned populist, so....I am fairly certain that he'll either be one of the 5 best or 5 worst presidents we have ever had...I just can't see how he's in the middle of the bell curve.  My problem is that I think his chances of being in the top 5 is about 5% and his chances of being in the bottom 5 are about 95%...but there is a chance, so let's lean into that."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Morton Muffley said:

I wasn't a supporter in 2016 at all.  Indeed, in 2000 I looked forward to the day I could vote against Hillary Clinton (I had never voted for Bill Clinton).  Anyway, I eagerly cast my ballot FOR Hillary in 2016 as I felt he was wholely unfit for the office.  When he won I comforted my nearly inconsolable 15 year old daughter with "well, let's look on the bright side.  He's an outsider who isn't beholden to anyone politically.  He's a former democrat turned populist, so....I am fairly certain that he'll either be one of the 5 best or 5 worst presidents we have ever had...I just can't see how he's in the middle of the bell curve.  My problem is that I think his chances of being in the top 5 is about 5% and his chances of being in the bottom 5 are about 95%...but there is a chance, so let's lean into that."

Lesson learned..... the odds win again.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Morton Muffley said:

I wasn't a supporter in 2016 at all.  Indeed, in 2000 I looked forward to the day I could vote against Hillary Clinton (I had never voted for Bill Clinton).  Anyway, I eagerly cast my ballot FOR Hillary in 2016 as I felt he was wholely unfit for the office.  

This is extremely similar to my dad's story. He loathed Hillary. In 2008 he, a lifelong Republican, switched parties so he could caucus for Obama -- not because he liked Obama, but because he wanted to keep Hillary from winning the nomination. Then in 2016 he voted for her. :lol: 

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tri-man 47 said:

But it appears very factual that Hillary was starting to collapse, and Joe is not.  Also the data that Hilllary was deeply unpopular, like Trump ...but Joe has a positive favorability rating.  Finally, Joe is polling at 50%, and Hillary was not.  I'm sensitive to bias at CNN (guys like Cizilla), but I'm much less wary of a fact-based analysis.

As far as the collapse goes, note that it appears that Election Day is in the rear view mirror for a whole lot more people in 2020 than in 2016. So even if polls were to start tightening, it won’t make a difference for a substantial percentage of voters. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigbottom said:
4 hours ago, tri-man 47 said:

But it appears very factual that Hillary was starting to collapse, and Joe is not.  Also the data that Hilllary was deeply unpopular, like Trump ...but Joe has a positive favorability rating.  Finally, Joe is polling at 50%, and Hillary was not.  I'm sensitive to bias at CNN (guys like Cizilla), but I'm much less wary of a fact-based analysis.

As far as the collapse goes, note that it appears that Election Day is in the rear view mirror for a whole lot more people in 2020 than in 2016. So even if polls were to start tightening, it won’t make a difference for a substantial percentage of voters. 

Around 33% of the voters had already voted before the final debate. In 2016, only around 1% of voters had cast their ballot by the 3rd debate. That's a huge advantage for Biden.

As of tonight, around 60 million ballots have been cast, or roughly 40% of the expected total.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, bigbottom said:

As far as the collapse goes, note that it appears that Election Day is in the rear view mirror for a whole lot more people in 2020 than in 2016. So even if polls were to start tightening, it won’t make a difference for a substantial percentage of voters. 

I just looked at a map by state in the WPost (with over 58M voting to date):

Iowa, Ohio, and Georgia have surpassed 2016 already (so 100%).  Michigan exceeds by 125%.  Wisconsin and Texas exceed 150%.

Florida and NC are at 75% vs. 2016.   Arizona is at just 25%, while Pennsylvania (and New York) are the two lowest at less than 25%.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tri-man 47 said:

I just looked at a map by state in the WPost (with over 58M voting to date):

Iowa, Ohio, and Georgia have surpassed 2016 already (so 100%).  Michigan exceeds by 125%.  Wisconsin and Texas exceed 150%.

Florida and NC are at 75% vs. 2016.   Arizona is at just 25%, while Pennsylvania (and New York) are the two lowest at less than 25%.

Just to make sure I understand, this is early voting numbers being surpassed and not overall vote numbers, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2020 at 9:46 PM, The Z Machine said:

What's going on with Ohio?  Are they all on board the Stephen Miller white nationalism train?

Not sure specifically what you're referring to, but Ohio (Cincinnati specifically) is probably the most racially charged city I've ever lived in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Commish said:

Not sure specifically what you're referring to, but Ohio (Cincinnati specifically) is probably the most racially charged city I've ever lived in.

Early 2000s with the riots?

That has calmed and gotten much better, but Ohio has serious rural vs. city dichotomy going on right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, caustic said:

YouGov (B):

PENNSYLVANIA
Biden 51%
Trump 44%

WISCONSIN
Biden 51%
Trump 43%

MICHIGAN
Biden 51%
Trump 42%


Also, that IBD/TIPP national tracking poll that suddenly went from Biden +8 to Biden +2 is back up to Biden +7.

Do you pull these from 538 or is there an easier way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Early 2000s with the riots?

That has calmed and gotten much better, but Ohio has serious rural vs. city dichotomy going on right now.

Yeah...we got there in 2004...lived there til 2007.  It really caught me off guard and I've lived in the south my entire life prior to that.  I think we were getting there near the end of it all...definitely no actual riots that i can remember, but KKK parades etc.  The other thing that struck me as odd was the religious divide.  Seemed like all the Catholics lived on one side of town and everyone else on the other.  Maybe that was just perception, but that's sure what it seemed like :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AAABatteries said:
1 hour ago, tri-man 47 said:

I just looked at a map by state in the WPost (with over 58M voting to date):

Iowa, Ohio, and Georgia have surpassed 2016 already (so 100%).  Michigan exceeds by 125%.  Wisconsin and Texas exceed 150%.

Florida and NC are at 75% vs. 2016.   Arizona is at just 25%, while Pennsylvania (and New York) are the two lowest at less than 25%.

Just to make sure I understand, this is early voting numbers being surpassed and not overall vote numbers, right?

Correct. Link

As one example, MN had 568k early votes in 2016 and 3.0M total votes. So far, MN has received 1.2M early votes. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tri-man 47 said:

I just looked at a map by state in the WPost (with over 58M voting to date):

Iowa, Ohio, and Georgia have surpassed 2016 already (so 100%).  Michigan exceeds by 125%.  Wisconsin and Texas exceed 150%.

Florida and NC are at 75% vs. 2016.   Arizona is at just 25%, while Pennsylvania (and New York) are the two lowest at less than 25%.

NC is over 2016 early voting totals. At 2/3 of total 2016 turnout. I think total 2016 turnout will be passed by the weekend. 

Nearly 800k voters who didn't vote in 2016 have already voted.

https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/NC.html

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...