|
is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
lobster shirt posted:is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad Yes
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:06
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Hasn’t he bragged a few times about putting the judges on the court that killed Roe? It's one thing to brag about killing Roe and then hemming and hawing about leaving it up to the states, vs. supporting a federal ban. The point is that he'll say whatever he believes the audience wants to hear, regardless if it's the truth.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad there is no difference between good and bad
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
So one way to think about polling is a missing data problem. Fundamentally, missing data comes in three types. Missing Completely at Random: the cause of the nonresponse has no relationship to the data you're interested in. For polling, it would be if people who respond to telephone polls and people who don't respond to telephone polls have the same voting intentions. We know this isn't true. Missing at Random (yes the names are dumb): the cause of the nonresponse has a relationship to the data you're interested in and can be controlled for with the available data. For polling, this is what companies hope for. The idea is that if you control for race, income, age, geography, and a bunch of other variables you collect, you can remove the bias from the nonresponse and have meaningful and accurate results. Not Missing at Random: the cause of the nonresponse has a relationship to the data you're interested in and cannot be controlled for with the data you collected. This means there will be bias in your results. The line between this and MAR is very fluid and there's a lot of academic research on dealing with it. If polls are just always wrong this is the problem, the people who respond to telephone polling are different from the general population in a way we can't really quantify based on the metrics we try to collect. A lot of the work pollsters, in statistical terms, do is transform NMAR into MAR after collection and that has been getting harder and harder.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:10
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:there is no difference between good and bad hm. i disagree with this opinion but respect your right to hold it.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:11
|
|
|
Morrow posted:...the people who respond to telephone polling are different from the general population in a way we can't really quantify based on the metrics we try to collect. Wasn't this what we saw with a lot of polls leading up to the 2020 election?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:13
|
|
|
Cthulhumatic posted:Who in god's name is responding to polls? How can these pollsters even pretend that there's any kind of accuracy in what they are doing? Hence pollsters having to make so many calls or use online panels to obtain reputable results. But here's the thing about polls: You can prove how right & wrong they are after the events they've polled occur, because polls are falsifiable at that point. Morning Joe et al. can grumble about Siena's margins being out of whack bc the results displease them, but there are reasons Siena is so highly rated, and why seasoned poll-watchers like Ralston are calling the Siena polling a disaster for Democrats even if the predictive margins are exaggerated. Those reasons boil down to "track record" as well as transparency of polling methods & other factors. eta: Also polls are good for predicting trends over time, which is where one of polling's most utilitarian aspects comes in.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:15
|
|
|
Velocity Raptor posted:Wasn't this what we saw with a lot of polls leading up to the 2020 election? Yes. You're unlikely to get a response if one of the screening questions is "Are you a dumb poo poo who gets conned on a weekly basis", so you try to figure it out with other variables that will cause less embarrassment.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:16
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad Trone's an obscenely rich guy who spent $60m of his own money and was backed by AIPAC, meanwhile Alsobrooks is a former prosecutor. Both at least pretend to support progressive causes, Trone had union backing and a bunch of establishment Dem endorsements, while Alsobrooks wiped the floor with him in the "seems like a human being" categories with actual voters.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad David Trone is a super rich guy who ran, with his own money, in multiple Congressional districts before one finally got him in the door. Alsobrooks is a county-level politician. Both will be virtually identical in office. Both have different advantages in the general election; Trone has money, Alsobrooks has actual political skills.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:21
|
|
|
Any AIPAC-sponsored opponent losing, especially in a D primary, is good news in my opinion. I was glad that Summer Lee defeated her opponent, and I'm glad that Alsobrooks defeated Trone for that reason. But Bowman & Bush are in danger of losing their primaries to their AIPAC-sponsored opponents according to polling, and AIPAC's candidate is also running against Tlaib for her seat. eta: And who knows how much AIPAC will throw toward Hogan & other Rs when its sponsored D candidates lose primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:22
|
|
|
Cthulhumatic posted:Who in god's name is responding to polls? How can these pollsters even pretend that there's any kind of accuracy in what they are doing? YouGov polls can be done by anyone willing to register.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:40
|
|
|
So while checking into the NYT polls, I noticed that the front page of the NYT features an article about the dangers of a radically partisan news outlet that's abandoned truth and shredded the credibility of its news coverage in order to focus relentlessly on appealing to a fringe group and taking down that group's political enemies, ruining its mass appeal in the process and becoming a network solely for a privileged and echo-chambered few. Which outlet could they be talking about, you ask? Fox News? OANN? Nope, they're talking about MSNBC. It's also worth noting that this is not an opinion piece, it's part of their actual news coverage. Of course, what the article is actually about is how top MSNBC management (and even Comcast management) explicitly pressured the network to move to the right and give more generous treatment to Trump toadies: quote:Mr. Conde said the new setup would provide “growth opportunities,” with each show acting like its own megafranchise. “Today,” for instance, includes an e-commerce business and online sites dedicated to cooking, wellness and books. Which is a story, true. But just look at the framing! The last sentence in that quote says one hell of a lot. It presents MSNBC as strongly pro-Biden in its coverage, and then says that NBC was just "adding balance" by hiring the outgoing RNC head who'd spread election-rigging lies and defended Jan 6. It's talking about overt efforts by management to push the network to the right, but defends it as a correct and proper effort to excise the network's far-left bias. Not only that, it even describes the president of Comcast calling up NBC (which is owned by Comcast) to personally complain about the network being too pro-Palestinian, but portrays it as a justified complaint to have. quote:But MSNBC’s success has had unintended consequences for its parent company, NBC, an original Big Three broadcaster that still strives to appeal to a mass American audience.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 21:56
|
|
|
That reminds me, yougov released another poll today in which I'd participated. When I took that poll there were a ton of drake & lamar questions that aren't in the results, like who I thought had the upper hand, what did I think of drake's song x and lamar's song y, blah blah woof woof. Other results of note: * Americans are not fond of Stormy Daniels but a plurality think Trump should be convicted in the current trial. * 96 percent of voters rank jobs & the economy as very important or somewhat important. * 97 percent of voters say the same about inflation/prices. * 95 percent of voters say the same about health care. * Biden is underwater on approval ratings for every issue they asked about, including handling climate change and abortion. * 2024 Biden voters are mainly voting for Biden bc of Trump (51 percent) while 2024 Trump voters are mainly voting for Trump bc of Trump (75 percent). * The head-to-head is tied, but 34 percent of voters think Biden will win, 42 percent think Trump will win, and 24 percent aren't sure. * Kennedy's support in this poll is the lowest I can recall seeing this year: only 3 percent. * Poll further confirms generational divide on I/P.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 22:07
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:So while checking into the NYT polls, I noticed that the front page of the NYT features an article about the dangers of a radically partisan news outlet that's abandoned truth and shredded the credibility of its news coverage in order to focus relentlessly on appealing to a fringe group and taking down that group's political enemies, ruining its mass appeal in the process and becoming a network solely for a privileged and echo-chambered few. It's funny that they describe MSNBC as this far-left progressive news organization considering they took most/all of their Muslim on-air anchors off the air the week after 10/7 in one of the most racist moves by a news organization I've ever seen: https://www.semafor.com/article/10/13/2023/inside-msnbcs-middle-east-conflict
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 22:25
|
|
lobster shirt posted:is the outcome of the maryland senate primary good or bad Extremely difficult to predict, as there is a potential gap between primary and general election voters. The weirdness of Hogan's past broad appeal as a "neutral" governor has hung over the proceedings. It's a similarly open question how that appeal would or will translate to either of the candidates as an alternative to Hogan. While the candidates were very different, neither was obviously a sort of party-sabotaging Sinema hazard, and neither was straightforwardly appealing to the whole of either the primary or general electorate. Honestly a pretty nice situation to be in, on some levels. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 22:32 on May 15, 2024 |
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 22:29
|
|
|
koolkal posted:It's funny that they describe MSNBC as this far-left progressive news organization considering they took most/all of their Muslim on-air anchors off the air the week after 10/7 in one of the most racist moves by a news organization I've ever seen: btw, there's a recent profile of Mehdi Hassan that delves into his firing at the network: quote:Hasan had been following Regev’s career for the past 15 years. Up until their interview on his Peacock show on November 16, Regev had made 13 appearances on MSNBC and NBC’s Meet the Press alone since the Hamas attack on October 7. He methodically laid the rhetorical groundwork for Israel’s siege of Gaza, including the strike on Al-Shifa hospital, which has since been reduced to rubble. In his interviews, Regev said the Israeli military would be “surgical” and do “minimum harm to civilians,” while repeating lines about Hamas using “human shields” and “beheading babies.” The anchors who had him on, such as Kristen Welker, Andrea Mitchell, and José Díaz-Balart, would lob softball questions in a serious tone: “What specifically is your understanding of what’s happening there?”
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 22:48
|
|
|
Objectively speaking Biden's pretty good on the vast majority or salient domestic issues affecting Americans; like it was brought up earlier the Trump stimulus checks but Biden ultimately oversaw vastly more financial relief to Americans. In general if Biden loses despite all of that I think its going to be disastrous for progressive left wing economic priorities going forward, because Biden will be proof that you can be pro-labour, pro-helping the average Joe, and it will only be a political loser and instead the solution to win elections is to pass tax cuts and deregulation. I'm not sure how you fix that, you can campaign and give out that information and try to reach out when like 15% of Americans polled will still believe that 5 is a bigger number than 9? I think the polls had better be wrong in the end; that we're still too early and too much has changed about the political landscape for polling to be accurate and so on; the alternative is really grim for the future otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 22:54
|
|
|
Trump is going to lose bad. It's as simple as that. While the polls are generally getting closer and they will probably flip for Biden closer to election day, they will not show his true support. It's nonsensical that centrist Senate Dems are running 10 points ahead of Biden. Nothing explains it except the possibility of vote splitting for wanting divided government or "Biden old, Trump should have the nuclear button while Democrats should have Congress," which doesn't explain much because Trump will then have the nuclear button. I understand that the polling allegedly shows apathy for Biden and even Trump, but save for some No Joe lunatic or two, I don't know anyone who's not planning to vote for Biden. Trump will lose, he has nearly 100 federal felony charges against him, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:02
|
|
|
If Trump *can* win after what happened during his term, democracy in America is a failed experiment. Once? OK, black swan event etc. Twice? We just aren't good at this.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:03
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:If Trump *can* win after what happened during his term, democracy in America is a failed experiment. Yeah this is my thinking as well, I just fundamentally don't really care much about polls right now, maybe when we're in like end of August or early-mid October they might have utility, but it doesn't really seem like they do any good for anyone. Either the polls are wrong or people just want fascism, and I'd like to think it isn't the latter so, the situation is what it is and honestly we probably shouldn't be waiting with baited breath on every poll that gets dropped right now.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:12
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Objectively speaking Biden's pretty good on the vast majority or salient domestic issues affecting Americans; like it was brought up earlier the Trump stimulus checks but Biden ultimately oversaw vastly more financial relief to Americans. In general if Biden loses despite all of that I think its going to be disastrous for progressive left wing economic priorities going forward, because Biden will be proof that you can be pro-labour, pro-helping the average Joe, and it will only be a political loser and instead the solution to win elections is to pass tax cuts and deregulation.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
small butter posted:I don't know anyone who's not planning to vote for Biden. This should give you pause that your social circle constitutes a bubble, and certainly does not count as evidence that Biden will win.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:18
|
|
|
I am genuinely interested to see how the people who like that they were doing better under Trump due to pandemic era programs that expired under Biden will feel when Trump doesn't inherit a second once in a century pandemic and gives them gently caress all. Otoh I would rather not go through a 2nd trump term
Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 23:22 on May 15, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:18
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:This should give you pause that your social circle constitutes a bubble, and certainly does not count as evidence that Biden will win. what if he knows 50 percent plus one of all voters in the upcoming election?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:23
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:This should give you pause that your social circle constitutes a bubble, and certainly does not count as evidence that Biden will win. Disagree. My circle is actually not political, they can't tell me how many years a Senator's term is, and I'm the odd one out. But they understand that Trump is not normal, that Democrats generally have much better policies, and that Trump is probably guilty as gently caress without them knowing the details of the cases. E: my point is that the alleged apathy or historic realignment in favor of Trump is just not bearing out with anyone I know among people who don't really follow politics. small butter fucked around with this message at 23:29 on May 15, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:25
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:I am genuinely interested to see how the people who like that they were doing better under Trump due to pandemic era programs that expired under Biden will feel when Trump doesn't inherit a second once in a century pandemic and gives them gently caress all. Otoh I would rather not go through a 2nd trump term Memories of Biden's term are fresh, memories of Trump's term are seen through rose colored glasses. More importantly, a lot of people simply aren't tuned into politics during their day to day lives. As we get closer to the election, people will pay more attention to the news, probably spend more time reading up on each nominee and will be able to make a more informed decision. That's not to say that Biden has this in the bag - but when people start being reminded of Trump's tax giveaway to corporations, his attempted rollback of the ACA, they'll hopefully be reminded that he wasn't looking out for their best interests.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:it's a given that if/when democrats lose the left/leftist policy will be blamed. might as well say the sun will rise If the Dems lose then wouldn't it be correct? It certainly isn't for a lack of leftist policy under Biden, whose policies you'd probably have to go back to the New Deal for anything comparable.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:32
|
|
|
I don't know much about polling vs actual election outcome patterns, but realistically how distasterous can a pres election poll taken in May actually be? Also please stop saying dumb stuff like "*I* know this guy is super bad and it's inconceivable that tens of millions of people I know nothing about don't also know that!!" It's tedious and embarrassing and doesn't add a lot, cmon.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:37
|
|
|
small butter posted:Trump is going to lose bad. It's as simple as that. While the polls are generally getting closer and they will probably flip for Biden closer to election day, they will not show his true support. It's nonsensical that centrist Senate Dems are running 10 points ahead of Biden. Nothing explains it except the possibility of vote splitting for wanting divided government or "Biden old, Trump should have the nuclear button while Democrats should have Congress," which doesn't explain much because Trump will then have the nuclear button. I understand that the polling allegedly shows apathy for Biden and even Trump, but save for some No Joe lunatic or two, I don't know anyone who's not planning to vote for Biden. Trump will lose, he has nearly 100 federal felony charges against him, etc. Looking forward to the think pieces on the Shy Biden Voter.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:41
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:what if he knows 50 percent plus one of all voters in the upcoming election? Popular vote doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:43
|
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:I don't know much about polling vs actual election outcome patterns, but realistically how distasterous can a pres election poll taken in May actually be? They're basically meaningless. Start caring about polls around September.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2024 23:48
|
|
|
Polls are valuable for tracking voter sentiment over time (particularly among the same pollster) as well as helping candidates with messaging, maximizing GOTV demographics, and suggesting where & what their ad buys should be. I guarantee that campaigns are caring about & paying attention to the polls (even those for downticket candidates), in spite of what they may be telling voters and/or feeding sympathetic media as talking points, and not waiting till September to do so.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 00:42
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:it's a given that if/when democrats lose the left/leftist policy will be blamed. might as well say the sun will rise They're 100% going to pin it on Gaza protesters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:Popular vote doesn't matter. good point. instead we should consider what if that poster knows 50 percent plus one of all voters in swing states
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 00:50
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:They're 100% going to pin it on Gaza protesters. The new Bernie Bros
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 01:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DylanByers/status/1790824649812848965 If this turns out to be true, given Dana Bash’s recent unhinged anti Palestinian and Jake Tapper’s career long history of anti Arab and anti Muslim racism this is going to be a giant poo poo show.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 01:38
|
|
|
Months out it's silly to panic about polls, especially given that the current consensus is that Biden is only narrowly behind or statistically tied. That said, digging into the numbers suggests Biden needs to do something to make up for lost ground, or make some assumptions about the electorate and state of the race that would improve his numbers as Summer approaches. The Nevada numbers are dire, and I think attempts to dismiss them are really getting into unskewing polls territory. What nails it for me is that the Senate race, polling the exact same people, looks perfectly plausible as a tie given the national environment. The national environment right now looks to be about D+2 or 3, which would make Nevada (an R+1 state) more or less a dead heat. The fact that Nevada is disproportionately young and hispanic, two groups Trump has been making huge ground with (as seen in the '20 election), makes it the perfect storm for a Biden underperformance. Do I believe he's down 12 points? Not really, but high single digits seems possible when you add in the additional extra harm that COVID/inflation has done to the uniquely tourist/casino centric Vegas economy. It's a clear outlier but one which has a theory behind it. Outside of Nevada the numbers are fairly consistent - biden is 2-5 points behind where he was in 2020, with sunbelt states (AZ, NV, GA) being closer to the higher end and rust belt (MI, WI, PA) on the lower end. The saving grace and the cope that you can cling to if you think Biden is going to overperform these - it's still early, and many voters are disengaged. Biden's CONSISTENTLY done better with likely voter screens compared to registered voter or "all adults" polls - suggesting that high information, highly engaged voters still favor him and there's a lot of soft Trump support on the margins that may not even bother to vote on election day. This is a risky strategy because if those voters get activated Biden's probably hosed, but it does suggest that his weakness among young voters on Palestine may not hurt him as much as polls of young folks might indicate. As voters start to tune in, those low info voters may also change their minds and return to his camp. The anti-cope and big fear is that Trump pretty consistently overperformed his polls in '16 and '20, ESPECIALLY in the very rust belt states that Biden appears to be holding firmer in. I think the high propensity voter turn to Biden mitigates this some, but if this holds at all going into '24, Biden is toast. Remember that he won by an extremely thin margin in '20, and can basically not afford to lose any voters. He loses in 24 if the following vote margins go against him from '20: Georgia 16 EV - 11,779 votes Arizona 11 EV's - 10,457 votes Wisconsin 10 EV's - 20,682 votes That would be a Trump 272 - 266 win. 40,000 vote difference. That's also still with a loving 5% popular vote lead (gently caress the EC). He'd also need to hold all the other states, including the 80k margin in PA and 33k in Nevada (which is looking dire, though it's only 6 EV's). The Biden admin needs to hope that by blanketing the airwaves in Summer/Fall with ads they're able to sway a percentage or two of voters and deactivate some of that soft Trump support. Reminding voters of the chaos and insanity of the Trump years might work as that seems to be what's hurting Biden right now, the goldfish brain of the American voter, but we'll see if that actually works. I'm a bit skeptical of advertising in races where name recognition is already pretty high, but voters do seem to have forgotten some key aspects of the Trump years.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Gyges posted:Looking forward to the think pieces on the Shy Biden Voter. I don't think it's that Biden voters are shy. One guy is a ridiculous, criminal, election LOSER moron, which is obvious to anyone who's not in the cult. The other guy is normal, passed a bunch of good legislation, and is not responsible for women getting the rights they've had for generations stolen from them. We're not seeing any evidence that Trump and Republicans are doing well beyond polling - not in election results, not in fundraising, not in state party functionality, not in anything. I think that it's very obvious what will happen in November. I mean, COME ON - Republicans barely captured the House in 2022 and lost in 2023. The most recent high-profile House race was won by a Democrat who doubled his polling, which reads to me that when it matters and when people are paying attention, Democrats win. Republicans had everything going for them in 2022 then and they hosed it up big time: 1. The party in the White House almost always loses the midterms in modern times (2006, 2010, 2014, 2018) 2. Raging inflation and the shock of those prices (that people are more accustomed to now) 3. Impending economic collapse and recession 4. November 2022 was the stock market low of Biden's presidency (25% off peak) 5. Roving marauders and CRIME CRIME CRIME If they're not winning in 2022, they sure as hell ain't winning in 2024. Incumbency advantage, crime way down since 2022, no one is talking about Covid since 2022 Omicron wave, inflation way down from 2022, new stock highs, what recession?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 01:49
|
|