2020 Presidential Election - Trump versus Biden

Livingat45north

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,848
Points
113
One of the reasons that polling is SO difficult, is that the composition of Trump voters is very hard to sort out.

Besides the polling being significantly off by underestimating these non-traditional voters and “shy Trump voters“, I believe that there are a couple factors that won’t show up in the polling.

One is that I’m hearing that the RNC has put together a very significant ground game that is key to the “get out the vote” campaign, whereas Democrats have for some reason lessened their effort in this regard. The RNC is relying on personal contacts to assure Trump voters get to the polls, and I’m sure this is especially significant in key battleground states.

The other thing that I think could be a factor is that the Democrats have relied significantly more heavily on mail-in ballots for voting. Whether they are delivered by mail or dropped in a ballot box, a percentage of them will be disqualified for various reasons, like failure to sign or failure to enclose in the required envelopes. People voting in-person have a near 100% reliability of their vote being recorded accurately.
IMO, polling is impossible to do anymore. Even if your goal is to actually do an accurate poll (which isn't the case in many polls -- they're funded to influence vs inform), how could you do it?
  1. People that get asked to be part of the poll know they can game the system, just like you see "independent" or "republican" voters in these threads claim they're all of a sudden voting for Biden. Here it is easy to go back and time and call them out on their lie, but a pollster can't do that. You can claim to be from any party and to be whatever minority or gender you want.
  2. Even if you could do a history check on everyone to try to determine if they're telling the truth about their party affiliation and such, how do you reach a non-biased representative sample of people? It used to be everyone had a landline - one number for each family and you talked with whoever in that family picked up the phone. I don't know anyone that has a landline anymore, obviously they still exist, but it's not a huge percentage anymore. And for cellphones, I have five numbers. Does that mean I have a five times greater chance of getting included in a survey so people like me are over-represented in the polls?
  3. And even if you could get a non-biased sample pool of people, how do you actually know who's going to vote? Specifically, if they're using Absentee ballots, how do you know who's going to follow the rules correctly (which apparently was a HUGE issue in the primaries where significant percentages of ballots were rejected).
  4. And even if they do vote and follow the right procedures, how do you know they won't change their mind when they do vote? IMO in a poll people are much more likely to say they're going to vote for Ye or JoJo or even Howie, but when it comes time to actually do it, they're not going to waste their vote (Spoof being the exception of course).
People love following the polls, but I just don't see how they can pull it off. Saying they're accurate to a few percentage points is just a crap shot. If they are, it's basically luck. Sure, Arkansas is going to swing heavily Republican, and Oregon will be heavily Democratic, but purple states, you just can't tell.

So, I go back to what I think is the most significant tell.
  1. Successful politicians are the ones that win elections, it's as simple as that. They have figured out what it takes to read the voters and to adjust their campaigns to whatever it takes to get their votes. When you see a candidate make a major switch in their adverts or such, there's a reason for that change. The politician knows they need to make that change to have a chance to win. You're seeing huge pivots in Minnesota and the other swing states of Democratic candidates distancing themselves from Biden and basically no Republicans distancing themselves from Trump. And we are seeing Republicans running adverts trying to tie their Democratic opponent to Biden. As one data point, the opposite was happening in MN in 2016, back when Trump lost the state. That's the biggest tell.
  2. The second is voter enthusiasm. Trump has a HUGE ground game in the midwestern states, Biden has zero. He didn't even have a ground game office in Michigan until recently. Word of mouth is huge in getting out the vote, and the Biden camp doesn't have anything going on that front.
  3. The third is the downstream ballot. Are there significant issues happening on the lower races that will get people out to vote? This year in MN, there really isn't. Other years, there have been (e.g., Right to work laws, gay rights laws, etc.). So this year, it's 1 and 2.
All told, it adds up to Trump winning, and on his coattails will be Lewis for the Senate. We'll see if I'm right...
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
4,865
Reaction score
2,350
Points
113
Trump won’t need Minnesota if he gets either Pennsylvania or Michigan, and he is leading in both by Trafalgar’s polls though it is very close.

But I will say this, you never know. Even Trafalgar could underestimate Trump. It’s within possibility that he could take Minnesota. I wish I lived in a state had that chance.
I wish you did to...😆
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,762
Reaction score
2,460
Points
113
IMO, polling is impossible to do anymore. Even if your goal is to actually do an accurate poll (which isn't the case in many polls -- they're funded to influence vs inform), how could you do it?
  1. People that get asked to be part of the poll know they can game the system, just like you see "independent" or "republican" voters in these threads claim they're all of a sudden voting for Biden. Here it is easy to go back and time and call them out on their lie, but a pollster can't do that. You can claim to be from any party and to be whatever minority or gender you want.
  2. Even if you could do a history check on everyone to try to determine if they're telling the truth about their party affiliation and such, how do you reach a non-biased representative sample of people? It used to be everyone had a landline - one number for each family and you talked with whoever in that family picked up the phone. I don't know anyone that has a landline anymore, obviously they still exist, but it's not a huge percentage anymore. And for cellphones, I have five numbers. Does that mean I have a five times greater chance of getting included in a survey so people like me are over-represented in the polls?
  3. And even if you could get a non-biased sample pool of people, how do you actually know who's going to vote? Specifically, if they're using Absentee ballots, how do you know who's going to follow the rules correctly (which apparently was a HUGE issue in the primaries where significant percentages of ballots were rejected).
  4. And even if they do vote and follow the right procedures, how do you know they won't change their mind when they do vote? IMO in a poll people are much more likely to say they're going to vote for Ye or JoJo or even Howie, but when it comes time to actually do it, they're not going to waste their vote (Spoof being the exception of course).
People love following the polls, but I just don't see how they can pull it off. Saying they're accurate to a few percentage points is just a crap shot. If they are, it's basically luck. Sure, Arkansas is going to swing heavily Republican, and Oregon will be heavily Democratic, but purple states, you just can't tell.

So, I go back to what I think is the most significant tell.
  1. Successful politicians are the ones that win elections, it's as simple as that. They have figured out what it takes to read the voters and to adjust their campaigns to whatever it takes to get their votes. When you see a candidate make a major switch in their adverts or such, there's a reason for that change. The politician knows they need to make that change to have a chance to win. You're seeing huge pivots in Minnesota of Democratic candidates distancing themselves from Biden and basically no Republicans distancing themselves from Trump. Your seeing Republicans running adverts trying to tie their Democratic opponent to Biden. The opposite was happening in MN in 2016, back when Trump lost the state. That's the biggest tell.
  2. The second is voter enthusiasm. Trump has a HUGE ground game in the midwestern states, Biden has zero. He didn't even have a ground game office in Michigan until recently. Word of mouth is huge in getting out the vote, and the Biden camp doesn't have anything going on that front.
  3. The third is the downstream ballot. Are there significant issues happening on the lower races that will get people out to vote? This year in MN, there really isn't. Other years, there have been (e.g., Right to work laws, gay rights laws, ect.). So this year, it's 1 and 2.
All told, it adds up to Trump winning, and on his coattails will be Lewis for the Senate. We'll see if I'm right...
I hope you’re right. Right now, it looks like thin margins in several states (throwing out the ridiculous polls), relying heavily on Trafalgar, but Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin may hold the key. Personally, my hunch is he wins Pennsylvania to win, but that means holding states like Arizona, NC, and Georgia. They only thing that concerns me about those states are the constant media Trump bashing about CV.
 

Livingat45north

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,848
Points
113
I hope you’re right. Right now, it looks like thin margins in several states (throwing out the ridiculous polls), relying heavily on Trafalgar, but Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin may hold the key. Personally, my hunch is he wins Pennsylvania to win, but that means holding states like Arizona, NC, and Georgia. They only thing that concerns me about those states are the constant media Trump bashing about CV.
Another note about MN, WI and PA voting, the weather is going to be great that day in all three states (and OH and FL and AZ and NC). If it was a blizzard in the midwest, that'd impact the Repubs as they tend to want to vote in person versus mail-in balloting. Great weather adds to the great turnout that the Repubs will get. The "day of" voters are heavily breaking towards Trump, and that will increase with the additional news that will be coming out of Hunter's laptops.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,762
Reaction score
2,460
Points
113
Another note about MN, WI and PA voting, the weather is going to be great that day in all three states (and OH and FL and AZ and NC). If it was a blizzard in the midwest, that'd impact the Repubs as they tend to want to vote in person versus mail-in balloting. Great weather adds to the great turnout that the Repubs will get. The "day of" voters are heavily breaking towards Trump.
I already looked at the forecast too. We’re on the same page there for sure.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
18,186
Reaction score
3,242
Points
113
The most unbelievable thing about this poll is Kanye getting more than 3%. :ROFLMAO: I think Tarflagger has uncovered another phenomena, the "shy Kanye" vote.
You find it hard to believe that 3% of people are so irritated by the two crap choices we have that they are saying “I won’t vote for either”? Really? You are a fool.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
1,881
Points
113
The bet on your end is really kind of pointless as it stands. You're precisely the type of coward who is going to disappear if Trump wins anyway. Not much to gain here, but entertaining nonetheless

And you definitely won't be the only one disappearing if Trump wins
Does someone need a snuggle???

Methinks, Probably Deranged does.

Here you go snookums -


1603972246232.png

Damn, that feels soooooooo good.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
956
Points
113
How many would like me to list? I could start with abortion clinic bombings, there’s been 42 of those since 1977.
Yeah, not even buying this for a second. 30+ people killed during this past summer riots with a billion dollars of property damage. Now we have philly. Rioting has become normalized now whenever there is a grievance with the police. Left extremism is much more of a threat to life and property and it is not even close.
 

ecoperson

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
334
Reaction score
253
Points
63
Dumb. No one has ever said that athletes don’t have the right to express their opinions. Just not while they’re being paid by a team, league and the fans.
So not until they are old, retired, and don't have an audience? Thanks for helping me understand the rules.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,762
Reaction score
2,460
Points
113
So not until they are old, retired, and don't have an audience? Thanks for helping me understand the rules.
Let me spell it out for you.

On the field in their uniforms.

Outside their paid sports function, they can do what they want.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
20,160
Reaction score
4,334
Points
113
IMO, polling is impossible to do anymore. Even if your goal is to actually do an accurate poll (which isn't the case in many polls -- they're funded to influence vs inform), how could you do it?
  1. People that get asked to be part of the poll know they can game the system, just like you see "independent" or "republican" voters in these threads claim they're all of a sudden voting for Biden. Here it is easy to go back and time and call them out on their lie, but a pollster can't do that. You can claim to be from any party and to be whatever minority or gender you want.
  2. Even if you could do a history check on everyone to try to determine if they're telling the truth about their party affiliation and such, how do you reach a non-biased representative sample of people? It used to be everyone had a landline - one number for each family and you talked with whoever in that family picked up the phone. I don't know anyone that has a landline anymore, obviously they still exist, but it's not a huge percentage anymore. And for cellphones, I have five numbers. Does that mean I have a five times greater chance of getting included in a survey so people like me are over-represented in the polls?
  3. And even if you could get a non-biased sample pool of people, how do you actually know who's going to vote? Specifically, if they're using Absentee ballots, how do you know who's going to follow the rules correctly (which apparently was a HUGE issue in the primaries where significant percentages of ballots were rejected).
  4. And even if they do vote and follow the right procedures, how do you know they won't change their mind when they do vote? IMO in a poll people are much more likely to say they're going to vote for Ye or JoJo or even Howie, but when it comes time to actually do it, they're not going to waste their vote (Spoof being the exception of course).
People love following the polls, but I just don't see how they can pull it off. Saying they're accurate to a few percentage points is just a crap shot. If they are, it's basically luck. Sure, Arkansas is going to swing heavily Republican, and Oregon will be heavily Democratic, but purple states, you just can't tell.

So, I go back to what I think is the most significant tell.
  1. Successful politicians are the ones that win elections, it's as simple as that. They have figured out what it takes to read the voters and to adjust their campaigns to whatever it takes to get their votes. When you see a candidate make a major switch in their adverts or such, there's a reason for that change. The politician knows they need to make that change to have a chance to win. You're seeing huge pivots in Minnesota of Democratic candidates distancing themselves from Biden and basically no Republicans distancing themselves from Trump. Your seeing Republicans running adverts trying to tie their Democratic opponent to Biden. The opposite was happening in MN in 2016, back when Trump lost the state. That's the biggest tell.
  2. The second is voter enthusiasm. Trump has a HUGE ground game in the midwestern states, Biden has zero. He didn't even have a ground game office in Michigan until recently. Word of mouth is huge in getting out the vote, and the Biden camp doesn't have anything going on that front.
  3. The third is the downstream ballot. Are there significant issues happening on the lower races that will get people out to vote? This year in MN, there really isn't. Other years, there have been (e.g., Right to work laws, gay rights laws, ect.). So this year, it's 1 and 2.
All told, it adds up to Trump winning, and on his coattails will be Lewis for the Senate. We'll see if I'm right...
Tina won her election (handily) - check
Tina is not distancing herself from Biden - check
Large voter enthusiasm for her over JL - check
I wonder if anything is happening this year to get people out to vote? I don't know, like a presidential election, or something? - check

Tina beats Lewis.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
20,160
Reaction score
4,334
Points
113
You find it hard to believe that 3% of people are so irritated by the two crap choices we have that they are saying “I won’t vote for either”? Really? You are a fool.
Too bad Libertarians have such an extremist, off-putting message to sell, or perhaps they might scoop up more of said people.
 

Minnesota

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
1,545
Reaction score
1,016
Points
113
Yeah, not even buying this for a second. 30+ people killed during this past summer riots with a billion dollars of property damage. Now we have philly. Rioting has become normalized now whenever there is a grievance with the police. Left extremism is much more of a threat to life and property and it is not even close.
Sorry, the body counts are not close. Good try on moving the goal posts to property damage, though.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
956
Points
113
Sorry, the body counts are not close. Good try on moving the goal posts to property damage, though.
I Read an article that identified right wing attacks this year at 41 and left at 12 this year. Would guess all the mayhem and anarchy of this past summer is not taken into account. If the 30+ deaths and billion dollars of damage this summer stemmed from prolife rallies you would call that right extremism and I would agree with you. Left extremism a much bigger problem.

Similarly, if trump wins I will label the anarchy that will follow : left extremism. Biden wins you will find righties at work on Wednesday.
 
Last edited:

manderson1984

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
869
Points
113
I Read an article that identified right wing attacks this year at 41 and left at 12 this year. Would guess all the mayhem and anarchy of this past summer is not taken into account. If the 30+ deaths and billion dollars of damage this summer stemmed from prolife rallies you would call that right extremism and I would agree with you. Left extremism a much bigger problem.

Similarly, if trump wins I will label the anarchy that will follow : left extremism. Biden wins you will find righties at work on Wednesday.
If you don't want the conservatives to be associated with white supremacy, then you don't get to put liberals with their extremists either. The percentages are not that different as far as extremes on both spectrums. That's the rhetoric that is dangerous and why we have such a division.
 

Donovan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,853
Reaction score
528
Points
113
How can a reporter who does this live with himself/herself? Ugh.
They've made the decision to sacrifice their journalistic integrity in the pursuit of saving the nation from another term of Trump. They have bought into the resistance's argument that Trump is no different than a WW2 dictator. It's not just reporters, it's also their news directors and editors.
 
Last edited:

Plausible Deniability

Coffee is for closers
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
963
Reaction score
457
Points
63
They've made the decision to sacrifice their journalistic integrity in the pursuit of saving the nation from another term of Trump. They have bought into the resistance's argument that Trump is no different that a WW2 dictator. It's not just reporters, it's also their news directors and editors.
This is really what it boils down to. 100%
 
Top Bottom