|
CA Dems strategy of not putting forward a strong Dem candidate on the ballot as an “in case” replacement seems to be a correct one. Polling goes up as Dems think “yeah, Newsom does kinda suck, let’s gets someone else in there” and then quickly tanks as ballots go out and they realize a yes vote is a guaranteed GOP vote.
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:
i am super intrigued by the crossover episode between epidemiological analysis and political outcomes analysis when we start talking about how old conservatives are pushing a mass die-off on themselves under Delta
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ositanwanevu/status/1433426311658172421?s=21
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 15:04
|
|
|
They were the most accurate in 2020, so that's probably accurate. Especially considering his underwater approval now, and the reconciliation package isn't coming to save him. It's strange how he's getting sunk by trying to do a good thing, but loving it up horribly. TwoQuestions fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Sep 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 15:35
|
|
|
That's a push poll though, you can't really take that number at face value. I refuse to believe 60% of Americans, so every Republican, and independent, think Biden should be impeached over the withdrawal of Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
How was Rasmussen the most accurate for 2020? They didn’t have Biden running away with the election, but just dumping a “pro-GOP weight because we feel like it,” didn’t mean they were more accurate than anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:They were the most accurate in 2020, so that's probably accurate. Especially considering his underwater approval now, and the reconciliation package isn't coming to save him. I'm not sure we can distinguish between 'accurate' and 'lucky' in terms of their performance in 2020. As with many of these questionnaires, we have limited ability to know if this has any broader ramifications than 'some section of the population doesn't like Biden and are willing to say so more enthusiastically when asked while juxtaposing that question with a controversial thing he did expressed in a negative way.' Not that it hasn't been said in this thread before, but the midterms are a political eternity away, and the next general election is two eternities away, so I think we still have no clue if the Afghanistan ordeal will be meaningful.  I'm almost certain that Trump would have won reelection if COVID had not happened, and his polling was terrible to a historic level throughout his presidency. Biden will likely occupy the same boat and win reelection without some sort of international pandemic destroying the country on account of his incompetence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
I got a Rasmussen push poll earlier. I told them we should let millions of Afghan refugees into the country and that I agreed shadowy cabal of ministers and bureaucrats was controlling Bidens every move - and they were doing a great job! Hung up when they asked me how much I spent on online retail recently. Preeeetty sure they're identifying phone #s to sell on fundraiser lists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Please ignore TwoQuestions, they are a terminal doomposter. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Should the coward traitor Joseph “Hussein” Biden be impeached for betraying, abandoning, and murdering thousands of loyal and innocent army puppies purely out of the malice in his black, muslim heart?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:23
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Please ignore TwoQuestions, they are a terminal doomposter. And he didn't even ask one question, let alone two. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:31
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:How was Rasmussen the most accurate for 2020? They didn’t have Biden running away with the election, but just dumping a “pro-GOP weight because we feel like it,” didn’t mean they were more accurate than anyone else. They were more accurate in most regards than most pollsters, and they did have a couple state results dead for rights when everyone else was way off. Of course, they were still way less accurate than the average pollster results in the Before Times and they did totally blow a bunch of state results too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:37
|
|
|
the holy poopacy posted:They were more accurate in most regards than most pollsters, and they did have a couple state results dead for rights when everyone else was way off. I do remember they had Biden up by 5 in Ohio at one point, which was pretty hilarious especially considering the creepy/cringy Trump worship (fuckin shrines and everything) they had put here. One small mercy is Biden isn't worshipped as a saint by anyone, that'd be too much to bear. However, I do notice nearly half of the approval polls on FiveThirtyEight are by them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 17:45
|
|
|
Rasmussen pretty infamously puts their thumb on the scale for Republicans, however they try to be "Believable" when they do it unlike OAN/Newsmax who predicted Red California in 2020. Which is how their prediction that Trump would win by 2 points ended up being more accurate than more respectable pollsters who put Biden up by 10 in every battleground state. My point is that poll is probably closer to a 50-50 tie than it looks, but that's still pretty bad for the foreseeable future
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 18:55
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:They were the most accurate in 2020, so that's probably accurate. Especially considering his underwater approval now, and the reconciliation package isn't coming to save him. This is false, by the way. IBD and The Hill appear to have been the most accurate pollsters. Rasmussen's bias appears to be about the same magnitude as Reuters/Ipsos' bias. It's just noteworthy for being biased in the opposite direction of several other major polls. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/25/which-2020-election-polls-were-most-least-accurate/
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
HOMOEROTIC JESUS posted:
Biden doesn't have the same hardcore base of support that Trump enjoys though. MAGA is a legit cult at this point. Trump may have only had like a 35% of die hards but those people absolutely worship him. Nobody worships Joe Biden. And I can't tell if your second sentence is sarcasm or not but poo poo's not going well anywhere really, even aside from the pandemic resurgence. I don't know what I might do differently but Biden isn't getting good marks overall right now and the honeymoon is over. I can't entirely hang all of that on the media either. Joe's biggest problem is being the last one to hold the 20 year hot potato of Afghanistan. His approval rating dip in the wake of that shouldn't surprise anybody.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 18:58
|
|
|
polls which are trying to be good end up wronger than rasmussen because entire generational cohorts are mostly unreachable for polling because we ignore phone calls and any online polling prompting, increasingly as we're swamped with unstoppable phone scam deluges, and the effect is strongest in the technologically apt and younger this lets rasmussen sometimes get more "accurate" numbers than the honest pollsters because they're not working around issues that you only face when you're really actually trying to find unbiased numbers
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:polls which are trying to be good end up wronger than rasmussen because entire generational cohorts are mostly unreachable for polling because we ignore phone calls and any online polling prompting, increasingly as we're swamped with unstoppable phone scam deluges, and the effect is strongest in the technologically apt and younger I'm dumb and am having trouble parsing this. If my reading is correct, you're saying Rasmussen doesn't bother with getting a correct sample they just give the opinions of whatever randos they get a hold of? That's better than NYTimes/Fox pollsters who actually try to correct for demographics/income levels/geographic concentration? (there's y'all's questions, you happy now? :P)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 19:36
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:I'm dumb and am having trouble parsing this. If my reading is correct, you're saying Rasmussen doesn't bother with getting a correct sample they just give the opinions of whatever randos they get a hold of? That's better than NYTimes/Fox pollsters who actually try to correct for demographics/income levels/geographic concentration? I think 2Q was saying that most people don't answer the phone from #'s they don't recognize, especially weird random ones, and since most polling is done by phone calls from unidentifiable numbers that any results you can get from doing that are unreliable and not indicative of the general population. Since the cross section of people who answer those calls is kind of weird. I wonder if it would help if caller ID came up and said "Rasmussen" or "Gallup"? I'd love to participate in a poll if I knew that's what the call was. Trouble is, then we'd just get telemarketers and spammers disguising their numbers as being from reputable pollsters. Or, worse, reputable pollsters selling your contact information like everyone else does. I've received robocalls from my own phone number. It's really something that we live in the age of communication and nobody ever wants to answer their phones yet still can't put them down when they drive, eat out or go to the movies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Biden doesn't have the same hardcore base of support that Trump enjoys though. MAGA is a legit cult at this point. Trump may have only had like a 35% of die hards but those people absolutely worship him. Nobody worships Joe Biden. 'Milquetoast' Joe Biden just received the most votes of any presidential candidate in history. Trump diehards are not relevant unless they vote in numbers big enough to achieve victory. No one even really knows if Trump will run again or if he could recapture his supporters' enthusiasm in another electoral attempt. Even Hillary Clinton received 65M votes in 2016 - there is a significant democratic base that will most certainly vote for Biden in 2024 even if he is not worshiped. BiggerBoat posted:And I can't tell if your second sentence is sarcasm or not but poo poo's not going well anywhere really, even aside from the pandemic resurgence. I don't know what I might do differently but Biden isn't getting good marks overall right now and the honeymoon is over. I can't entirely hang all of that on the media either. Most presidents win reelection. That's why I said what I said. It's possible Biden will not win reelection, but I'm not going to bet against him unless there are significant negative factors in 2024 that are more time relevant than the current happenings of 2021. Yeah, Afghanistan has been bad for his approval ratings but I haven't seen evidence that it will stick in a way that hurts his reelection chances. I don't even know if it will be relevant for the midterms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 20:03
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I wonder if it would help if caller ID came up and said "Rasmussen" or "Gallup"? If my caller ID showed me a pollster was calling I would pick up every time. I'd love that. I wonder who regulates the caller ID stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 20:05
|
|
|
How are u posted:If my caller ID showed me a pollster was calling I would pick up every time. I'd love that. I wonder who regulates the caller ID stuff. Political pollsters/advertisers are also have an explicitly carved out exception from DNC lists, not sure about Caller ID.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:I'm dumb and am having trouble parsing this. If my reading is correct, you're saying Rasmussen doesn't bother with getting a correct sample they just give the opinions of whatever randos they get a hold of? That's better than NYTimes/Fox pollsters who actually try to correct for demographics/income levels/geographic concentration? it's that rasmussen really doesn't go into this with an honest methodology. they basically want to offer things that look good to conservatives, and they strongly bias the polls in that direction - either with blatant push-poll wording (as b-boy showed) or other various methods of fudging the outcome in that direction. they may get a correct 'sample' but in the same way other push polls do. a pollster which is intentionally trying to present unbiased data isn't going to try to pull any levers to move it X points in any direction. they're just genuinely trying to get a representative sample of the populace, through any means necessary so what rasmussen is benefiting from is that available methods of polling are getting corrupted by the observable reality of "younger tech-savvy people will never pick up our calls" because cell phone regulation in this country is a loving joke and we're swamped in scam calls daily. the ethical pollsters are doing what they can to cobble any semblance of meaningful data gathering around these challenges, but it still seems to have disrupted the reliability of poll outcomes in a way which they can't yet keep up with, especially as traditional avenues of access become ungovernable. rasmussen sort of lucks out in that their intentional desire to boast better turnout or beliefs on one side roughly matches up with the poll bias that this creates. sometimes. so they chance on their lucky swings and hope nobody pays attention to their total whoppers while they hold the media limelight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
Thank you for the clarification. Staluigi posted:
I work with phone systems on my day job, and scam calling regulation is improving somewhat. It's unlikely to be in effect before '22, but I'd be shocked if unattested calls get to people's phones by '24. https://www.fcc.gov/call-authentication TwoQuestions fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Sep 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 20:52
|
|
|
HOMOEROTIC JESUS posted:'Milquetoast' Joe Biden just received the most votes of any presidential candidate in history. Trump diehards are not relevant unless they vote in numbers big enough to achieve victory. No one even really knows if Trump will run again or if he could recapture his supporters' enthusiasm in another electoral attempt. Fair enough but I still don't share your optimism. People have short memories, things are still getting bad and a rock solid fanatical base like Trump has is quite rare and very useful. I'm not saying he's an election winning machine like someone else wrote or discounting Biden's record vote totals or how much most people despise Trump. I'm saying that his base is about is solid as I've ever seen from a politician in my lifetime and that counts. When I say "MAGA cult" I mean it in a very literal sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
I'm fairly confident any candidate running on going back into Afghanistan in 3 years will be unelectable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
Yea I think Biden’s hit on this will fade in a month or two. People will forget. The war was very unpopular, so anyone who campaigns on “should have stayed” or “let’s go back” may go over well in some circles, but not the public at large.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Yea I think Biden’s hit on this will fade in a month or two. People will forget. The war was very unpopular, so anyone who campaigns on “should have stayed” or “let’s go back” may go over well in some circles, but not the public at large. Republicans don't need to campaign on either of those, though - they can just say "Biden botched the withdrawal, I would've done it right", and since the mainstream media is committed to the fiction that there was a "right" way to withdraw, they'll happily let that go unchallenged.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2021 16:37
|
|
|
I could definitely see some Benghazi moms showing up to GOP events to keep Afghanistan in public memory, maybe a reprise of the "Left Behind" cultural phenomenon after Nixon that Reagan wouldn't shut up about. But at the end of the day, that's still feeding to the GOP's existing base of support and their perennial swingers. Texas' crusade against women seems to have (rightfully) started to eat up more media airtime lately, and at some point there's going to be an actual infrastructure week of some kind that will put the GOP into "DEBT" mode.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
Bodyholes posted:I'm fairly confident any candidate running on going back into Afghanistan in 3 years will be unelectable. trump could do it, while talking about the abortions he's paid for I don't think sense has anything to do with electoral politics anymore
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 02:50
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:I could definitely see some Benghazi moms showing up to GOP events to keep Afghanistan in public memory, maybe a reprise of the "Left Behind" cultural phenomenon after Nixon that Reagan wouldn't shut up about. But at the end of the day, that's still feeding to the GOP's existing base of support and their perennial swingers. While I doubt any of the packages will pass, we'll still go into "DEBT" mode until there's more tax cuts, especially if the Dems fail to raise the debt ceiling. The memories of the withdrawal will fade, but the feelings will remain, and the things people get mad at Biden and the Dems about will become more and more unhinged. Remember, people vote for blood & soil/feelings, not policy anymore, if they ever did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 16:13
|
|
|
Today is probably the first good test for polling agencies since the election. 538 has the CA governor recall with Keep at 57.3%. I imagine turnout is the big driver today, and we probably won't have the final count for a week or two with mail-in ballots. I'd say Newsome getting recalled would be a big warning sign that pollsters are still way off the mark.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
Double post, but gently caress it. Looks like the final polls were pretty close as the end result was about 63%, so if anything they favored the Republicans a little. The bigger news is that Larry Elder got 47% of the vote for the replacement questions, which is way higher than anticipated. It probably came down to name recognition since he seemed to be the one making the biggest amount of news lately. Republicans love their radio hosts I guess. Probably a sign for the future of who Republicans are going to elect. I don't think this right wing guys have enough cross appeal to win elections in any sort of moderate to blue state, so this seems like a losing strategy (I hope it's a losing strategy).
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2021 19:46
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Double post, but gently caress it. Looks like the final polls were pretty close as the end result was about 63%, so if anything they favored the Republicans a little. I wasn't following super closely but I saw it mentioned in 538's commentary that about half of the ballots voting against the recall left the replacement candidate blank. He took 47% of the vote for people who bothered marking a preference for the replacement, but as a percentage of all ballots cast only 26% of the voting electorate voted for him--which IIRC is basically right in line with polls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
Yea that makes sense. It did seem like there was some late movement towards Elder, as I looked at one poll from Trafalgar that had him at 41% for replacement. There is some thought, even from other Republicans, that Elder's constant claims of fraud suppressed their own vote. Probably impossible to tell how much of that had a real effect. There's also the effect that if you think your side is going to lose, you're less likely to show up to vote. I have thought about this a lot since 2020 though. If Republicans keep screaming about voter fraud, how many of their voters won't bother to show up since they'll think the system is rigged against them anyway? It wouldn't be the first time Republicans shot themselves in the foot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2021 15:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1438603501806968835 Note this number doesn't fully account for the Dems ramming through a nakedly partisan map in NY state, which they are currently threatening to do. Clicking through shows a lot of good info about the current state of play for redistricting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2021 21:49
|
|
|
Gerrymandering has limits, as awful as it is and as important as banning it is. The R's did almost as much damage as it was possible to do the last time around, and pushing the line too far risks a catastrophic backfire, especially since in a post-North Carolina and Pennsylvania world the possibility of court involvement can't necessarily be overlooked if you try too hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2021 09:51
|
|
|
There's also a risk that the Republicans could overextend somewhere like Texas or Georgia and and have their map turn into a Democratic gerrymander by the end of the decade. I don't think they will, but having to avoid that puts a limit on how aggressive they can get. edit: and the incumbent representatives usually don't want an aggressive gerrymander, it mixes up their constituents for primaries James Garfield fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Sep 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Gerrymandering has limits, as awful as it is and as important as banning it is. The R's did almost as much damage as it was possible to do the last time around, and pushing the line too far risks a catastrophic backfire, especially since in a post-North Carolina and Pennsylvania world the possibility of court involvement can't necessarily be overlooked if you try too hard. https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1438606430404231175 Basically the Republicans don't have much room for improvement, but clearly feel threatened by anti-gerrymandering rules applying in states they've captured.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2021 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
I usually wouldn't get too hung up on CNN, but it's tied to a J. Ann Selzer poll and I believe she's still respected in her methodology. https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/iowa-poll-joe-biden-approval/index.html quote:(CNN)It's the rare poll that makes an entire party sit up and take notice. The new Iowa poll is one of those polls. I do wonder how useful Iowa is now as a swing state given how its demographics and voting patterns have trended, but this is concerning. The Democrats seem to be facing a big uphill path for maintaining a congressional majority, but that's not necessarily a surprise. Hopefully it's not a wipeout defeat, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2021 15:09
|
|