They're by different writers, and I know on their podcast I have heard people disagree in the past about things like whether a polling difference is meaningful, so maybe they're just each calling it like they see it.
this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
262 points (93.4% liked)
politics
19120 readers
3664 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, I didn't check that. It makes sense but they still have editors. I'm not saying there's some conspiracy to keep Kamala down, but watch for this to coincidentally happen again.
Being up by 1.5% is huge. Biden being down by 1.4% caused him to drop out.
It's in the right direction, but Democrats need to overperform nationally to be in good shape in the electoral college. Big movement from where Biden was, but it needs to keep going. A Democrat down 1.4% is almost a sure loss, but a Democrat up 1.5% isn't a sure win.
Biden being down by 1.4% caused him to drop out.
And covid and not being able to string a sentence together and most of his advisors becoming doomers immediately after the debate.
While it’s good that she’s tied it up- it’s fucking pathetic that this is even a decision to make. That orange piece of shit felon shouldn’t be allowed run.
Supreme Court gets the assist. Some states would have him off the ballot right now I think.
Yup. Let's not forget that Colorado, Illinois, and Maine would have all disqualified Trump within their rights as a state, but SCOTUS overruled them.
The big thing here is that polls skew right. They have been for years. This is why Democrats have been winning again and again recently, by large margins. Young people don't participate in polls. We don't answer calls from numbers we don't know. I know I'm calling myself "young" as an elder millennial, but compared to people who answer every call, I am young. That's why polls skew right, then the election goes left. My generation and younger won't pick up the phone for numbers we don't recognize. We grew up in the tech world and know better. Boomers and GenX will pick up the phone and proudly proclaim their position. Recently polls have suggested that the right wing is ahead, yet they keep losing. Because they're losers, and I'm happy that my generation is blocking that bullshit. I hope the younger generations keep up with ending totalitarian rule and will continue the fight against psychopathy.
Generally yes, but no reason to get complacent. A large number of young people are also skewing right, particularly young men.
Also, the amount of young men for idolize people like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson is concerning, but nothing will be done to address it. Social media is just as bad for their appearance and mental health issues as IG beauty standards are for young women, ie mewing, etc.
Not only losers, they are weird
load more comments
(1 replies)
National polling averages are nice and all, but what's the situation in the critical swing states? Popular vote should be fairly meaningless unless either side is up but like 25 points.
Fairly promising, at least in relation to Biden v Trump numbers
AZ: mostly even GA: mostly even MI: mostly even, Harris with a lead depending on how much you trust Morning Consult's numbers MN: Harris leads NV: mostly even WI: mostly even, slight lead for Harris
If I'm remembering right, most of those had Trump leading prior to Biden dropping out
Yeah I think you’re right about these states polling differently following Biden’s withdrawal. Pretty sure I remember trump being ahead in at least 4 of that set.
Though there’s some concern around rigging the electoral votes https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-swing-state-officials-election-deniers-1235069692/
So if polls do tend to swing right these days, which looks possible, this could all be really good news....
Wouldn't the majority counting for president be nice
load more comments
(2 replies)
So Harris up by 1.5% is actually "tied", but trump up on Biden by 1.4% is "leads" (and explicitly different from "tied"!). No mention of margin of error in that paragraph.
I don't mind that. It bothers me when a paper-thin lead is reported as just a "lead" cuz it kills people's sense of urgency.
load more comments
(1 replies)
but one of them has the forward momentum
And the other one has media attention all day every day since 2015. Never underestimate pure media attention.
Cool. Let's make it 65/35.
One has momentum and a convention bump coming up. The other is OLD, tired and really WEIRD.
Super old, with an atrocious VP. Worst presidential ticket in my lifetime by far.
Same, which is sad because I was 18 when bush was president. But if take bush 1000X over trump.
Yeah, I couldn't stand Bush, but he was a way stronger candidate than trump.
They didn't ask me and I'm sure as hell voting.
Fuck these Chrystal balls we're voting and we're winning
Margin of error might have been smaller before than it is now. Makes a ton of sense because the race has changed so rapidly.
So Harris up by 1.5% is actually "tied", but trump up on Biden by 1.4% is "leads"
Not sure this is what they are doing, but the republican advantage in the electoral college could explain the terminology here. With polls a dead heat, democrats are losing every time.
It’s not “a little weird” they clearly explained it. It’s SOP for assessing polling and you clearly got that based on what you wrote. They did the same thing when margins were closer for Biden and Trump. This is always how it has been done. It would be weird to suddenly stop doing that.
Was the post edited in the last 5 minutes? Seems it addressed this and gave an example of how it was different for Trump v Biden.
I can’t speak to that one individual case but I listen to the podcast pretty regularly and I don’t think I’ve ever listened to a single episode that didn’t mention the margin of error at some point. They almost bring it up too much to the point where it almost feels like they’re hedging their bets. But given what OP wrote I can see why they do now
Yeah calling this weird is simply a complete misunderstanding of basic statistics. If the lead is within the margin of error, it's absolutely fair to call it tied.
Yeah, because all of the "mainstream" news channels actually skew right, since they're constantly overcorrecting to appear non-biased.
Nate Silver has similar numbers. I don’t have a great deal of faith in polls or poll aggregators, but both of those put together is a good sign.
He used to be 538, not surprised they have similar methodologies
Yeah but he had significantly more pessimistic numbers for Biden from model launch to dropping out. Whether 538 was overly optimistic for the dems or Silver was overly pessimistic, it’s good news either way when both agree Harris is up
load more comments
(1 replies)
National polls are not relevant to who wins the election for the Presidency.
That’s not what anyone claims polls do so sure you’re correct?
Claim is not that polls determine the Presidency. It's that a national poll is not relevant because Presidents are elected by state results via the EC.
“Irrelevant” is a bit of a stretch.
In a race this tight it's really not. If the national polling averages were showing either side having a massive lead it might be indicative, but at these ranges they're meaningless.
If the information wasn’t useful in any capacity then they wouldn’t bother publishing it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton have entered the chat.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›