Qwiss even then, the democrats have swung away from focusing on cultural issues this time around. gurgen was comparing left and right extremism, and I'm saying there is no comparison worth making no matter how you define the left

      RowJimmy yep. she even caught the over-polling of Biden in 2020. most pollsters had him up by 5-7 points in the swing states, but her final Iowa poll indicated it was going to much tighter, and it was. even if the margin of error is in trumps favour that only puts him at 1+ which is a terrible result. there's confluence with a few other red state polls that came out in the last few days in Kansas and Ohio, which show her being much closer than she should be in those states as well. its being driven by women, independents and eating into the margins in trump favoured rural areas. it feels like the real killer for him on election day could be the republican defection rate

        Gazza M oh I agree. The only people who call the democrats far left are extreme conservatives.

          fuck around and find out.

          I'm hesitant to say it, but it sounds like there might be reason to think Kamala Harris will soon removing one word from her job title..?

            Kinda amazed to get online and read all these major outlets with headlines saying the race is "too tight to predict" at this stage. It makes the whole US political system feel almost phantasmal.

            Is there any more reliable polling analysis out there than that?

            the polling industry is under real scrutiny this cycle. that iowa-selzer poll caused quite a stir, because it was the first highly rated poll that significantly broke from the 50-50 narrative. nate silver said he suspected alot of pollsters were 'herding' their polls to reflect a 50-50 race, so as to protect their reputations. the other factor is that the market may have been flooded with payola polls that favour the GOP and maintain the appearance of a competitive race. for example, there was a sudden influx of 4-5 GOP sponsored iowa polls right on the heels of the selzer one to counter the narrative. there's some data coming through in recent days that suggests late undecideds are breaking for harris, as well as a swing towards her among senior women voters.

            polls close in 24 hours. we should have an indication on how the tight the race is based on how places like Virginia and Michigan are called on election night. if harris is running behind Bidens numbers in those states, then it's time to pepper your angus. North Carolina and Georgia should also be called on the night and if she steals either of those, trumps path is very narrow.

              Gazza M nate silver said he suspected alot of pollsters were 'herding' their polls to reflect a 50-50 race, so as to protect their reputations. the other factor is that the market may have been flooded with payola polls that favour the GOP and maintain the appearance of a competitive race. for example, there was a sudden influx of 4-5 GOP sponsored iowa polls right on the heels of the selzer one to counter the narrative.

              I've been thinking all through our conversations—even on here—that the pollster comment feels like it's more about influence than measurement.

                Burnwinter would be better still if the Dems won the House. The Senate is too much of a stretch but if would be awful for Harris if the Republicans controlled both Houses.

                  this turd needs to take a massive L

                    Clrnc that's about right. there hasnt been any quality polls since august that show trump cracking 47/48 in the rust belt, whereas quite a few have had her holding around the 50/51 mark. barring 2016, the rust belt has been fairly blue for the last few cycles hence the 'blue wall' moniker. I read an article which said the phenomenon of the hidden trump voter may be less of a factor this time, as pollsters are sampling more republicans so they don't miss again. there hasnt been a presidential polling 'miss' 3 elections in a row since the 70s but again trump is unlike any other candidate. if anything in the rust belt flips its most likely over for her.

                      How many of those simulations did Hillary win? It amazes me that Silver is still listened to.

                        Qwiss
                        Silver's explanations in the days leading up to the 2016 election of what the 35% chance his model was giving Trump (when other people were saying 95-98%) were extremely coherent and emphasized the fact that a polling miss in Wisconsin would not be independent of a polling miss in Michigan. Which is what happened.

                            RowJimmy I reckon his models are bullshit and he hasn't a fucking clue. Has he ever predicted a presidential election wasn't going blue? He's playing to his crowd. If he said Trump was going to win he'd lose his audience.

                                everyone had Hillary at 90%+, and he had her at 65% and was roundly mocked for it. and he doesn't pander to any one audience. his sponsor is polymarket, which is thiel funded. he's been alot more MAGA friendly since 2020, including pushing the 'red wave' narrative in 2022 midterms which turned out totally wrong. I still think he's been clueless this cycle because of all the junk polls he puts into his model, which had trump as the favourite up until the last few days

                                Seems to me all his polling is nonsense. These "models" are bollox and just content for people. There is no real science to them. Polling companies are dodgy enough themselves but his grift is even more dubious. Being Thiel funded just removes even more credibility IMO.