2020 Presidential Election

[Matthew Best]

And yet it rarely -- if ever -- happens, right?

That's correct as I understand it.

 

[Mumbles]

You can have all the opinions you want about "functioning in modern society." That's a nice platitude to distract away from the fact we're talking about something specific and fundamental to our values: universal suffrage.

It's nice to declare it is the responsibility of the disenfranchised to somehow overcome their lack of ability to participate and change the rules to allow themselves back in.

It's basically washing your hands of the problem while trying to sound positive and helpful. Completely two-faced.

At this point I'll note two things:

First, I seem to recall quite a few people pondering on the end result of rendering people entirely unable to change their situation via nonviolence.

Second, and on a related note, the US does not have universal sufferage, even among adults. We...should change this, particularly for ex-felons, for all elections. THis doesn't include the very young, but I'm not horrified by the idea of lowering the voting age to, say, 16. Frankly, I'm unconvinced that people at that age could do a worse job than, say, older people who reflexively voted for Dolt 45 or Moscow Mitch.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Second, and on a related note, the US does not have universal sufferage, even among adults. We...should change this, particularly for ex-felons, for all elections. THis doesn't include the very young, but I'm not horrified by the idea of lowering the voting age to, say, 16. Frankly, I'm unconvinced that people at that age could do a worse job than, say, older people who reflexively voted for Dolt 45 or Moscow Mitch.

1. To be 100% clear I absolutely agree with you.
2. We tried giving ex-felons the vote back here in Florida via a Constitutional Amendment that the voters of Florida overwhelmingly approved and our Republican just went "LOL okay yeah whatever we're still not doing it."
3. Given how hard it is to get 18 years old to vote I can't imagine even if it was legal getting 16 year olds to vote in anything but "statistical curiosity" numbers is gonna happen. So it wouldn't be a bad thing and I wouldn't be opposed to it, but I can't imagine it would make any functional difference unless some sort of mandatory voting came along with it.

 

[varwoche]

What's the deal with "internal polling"? How is that any better/different than "real" polling?

"According to Biden campaign insiders, internal polling shows the race is closer than it appears."

 

[JoeMorgue]

What's the deal with "internal polling"? How is that any better/different than "real" polling?

"According to Biden campaign insiders, internal polling shows the race is closer than it appears."

Usually it's pure PR. Although it's harder to account for "Internal polling of the group suggests the group is doing more poorly then thought" type cases.

Internal Polls Are Usually Bunk: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-don-blankenship-really-surging-in-west-virginia/

Slate: https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-look-so-different-from-the-public-polls.html

 

[Meadmaker]

What's the deal with "internal polling"? How is that any better/different than "real" polling?

"According to Biden campaign insiders, internal polling shows the race is closer than it appears."

Internal polling is polling conducted by the campaign itself, as opposed to the private companies that are published for public consumption.

So, if the quote above is accurate, it would mean that the campaign's own estimate of where the race stands is closer than what the published polls are saying.

As for which one is "better", which I suppose would mean more accurate, it's hard to say. Modern polls aren't really polls anymore. People don't answer their phones to strangers, so you simply cannot take an old style poll. Instead, they are professional estimates, based on survey data, but combined with whatever other data they have to massage the numbers.

 

[Craig4]

Interestingly, since they already own something like a trillion dollars of U.S. bonds, some say they almost do.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/040115/reasons-why-china-buys-us-treasury-bonds.asp

When you owe someone a million dollars, they own you. When you owe someone a trillion dollars, you own them.

 

[angrysoba]

What's the deal with "internal polling"? How is that any better/different than "real" polling?

"According to Biden campaign insiders, internal polling shows the race is closer than it appears."

Usually it's pure PR. Although it's harder to account for "Internal polling of the group suggests the group is doing more poorly then thought" type cases.
Internal Polls Are Usually Bunk: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-don-blankenship-really-surging-in-west-virginia/

Slate: https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-look-so-different-from-the-public-polls.html

Unless it gets out the vote.

 

[Meadmaker]

One thing is certain about "internal polling". If the campaign decides to make it public, it is because they think the message will help their guy. You can't put too much stock in them.


It occurs to me that another polling fixture of modern elections will be junk this year. Election night projections are largely driven by exit polls. Well those aren't really going to be very good this year, will they? Half the country will have already voted before election day, so an exit poll will be an extremely biased sample.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The Biden Campaign is greatly aided by the reports of GOP voter suppression: nothing motivates Americans to do something more than telling them that they aren't allowed to.

 

[Segnosaur]

It occurs to me that another polling fixture of modern elections will be junk this year. Election night projections are largely driven by exit polls. Well those aren't really going to be very good this year, will they? Half the country will have already voted before election day, so an exit poll will be an extremely biased sample.

Unless of course poling companies have been doing some exit polls of people who voted in the advanced polls, and when they do their regular polling, inquire about people who did mail-in ballots.

So on election eve, they can say "Biden got X% in exit polling on election day, Y% in advanced and mail in voting, for a predicted result of Z%"

 

[Armitage72]

The Biden Campaign is greatly aided by the reports of GOP voter suppression: nothing motivates Americans to do something more than telling them that they aren't allowed to.

There was a political cartoon I saw recently. I can't post it from where I am right now, but it showed a barbed wire-topped brick wall labeled "Voter Suppression" and a massive pile of people climbing on each other to get over it, like the scene in "World War Z", labeled "Voter Enthusiasm".

 

[varwoche]

Internal polling is polling conducted by the campaign itself, as opposed to the private companies that are published for public consumption. So, if the quote above is accurate, it would mean that the campaign's own estimate of where the race stands is closer than what the published polls are saying.
As for which one is "better", which I suppose would mean more accurate, it's hard to say. Modern polls aren't really polls anymore. People don't answer their phones to strangers, so you simply cannot take an old style poll. Instead, they are professional estimates, based on survey data, but combined with whatever other data they have to massage the numbers.

Yes, I get that. And yes the quote is real, according to whoever it was who reported that on TV last night.

 

[Meadmaker]

Unless of course poling companies have been doing some exit polls of people who voted in the advanced polls, and when they do their regular polling, inquire about people who did mail-in ballots.

So on election eve, they can say "Biden got X% in exit polling on election day, Y% in advanced and mail in voting, for a predicted result of Z%"

That's what they'll have to do, but it's a lot harder than just going to a polling place and asking people how they voted. With ballots coming in from all over, it's impossible to get a representative sample. They can't have pollsters camped out by mailboxes asking people, "Hey, is that a ballot?"

There's a lot of mathematical modelling involved today in projections. They don't just report poll results. They look at historical averages, poll results, and actual numbers as they come in from early reporting precincts. It just won't be easy this year, because things are so different from any previous election that they won't have good models set up. It will be interesting to see how well they do. I'm guessing that the projections won't come as quickly as we are used to.

Unless it turns out to be a landslide, then a few percentage points here and there won't matter.

 

[Craig4]

I like that Trump does a 1 hour Town Hall then finishes up and leaves. Biden does an hour and a half, and then keeps going for another hour or so even though it's not on TV anymore. Yet Biden is the "sleepy" one.

And Biden owned that room last night. Trump flailed and didn't know how to handle people who don't buy his bull ****.

 

[angrysoba]

I like that Trump does a 1 hour Town Hall then finishes up and leaves. Biden does an hour and a half, and then keeps going for another hour or so even though it's not on TV anymore. Yet Biden is the "sleepy" one.

Trump had lots of presidential things to do, like watch FOX News, and **** talk people on Twitter, and feel sorry for himself.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Unless it gets out the vote.

Politics is complicated (citation needed) so nothing is certain but I think in most cases painting your candidate as being behind will backfire more often. You'll lose more "I don't want to back the losing horse" voters then you will scare people back on your side.

Uncomfortable truth but "Popularityism" (not Populuraism that's an entirely different thing) is probably more of a factor then we want to think it is. People want to think they are backing the most likely winner.

The actual politics of the individual candidates aside neither one of them would have the support they do if there was no chance of either of them winning.

 

[Craig4]

Biden looks like he's topped out in all the swing states. His increases that started when Trump got sick seemed to have stopped and stayed static. He's hovering around 4.1-4.5 in Florida and staying within half a percent in all the other swing states. That's probably just the top of the market for Democrats in those states. The way he's staying static though probably means that there just aren't undecided voters anymore.

 

[timhau]

One thing is certain about "internal polling". If the campaign decides to make it public, it is because they think the message will help their guy. You can't put too much stock in them.

.... except in the Trump campaign, who will release it if it pleases their guy.

 

[pgwenthold]

Unless of course poling companies have been doing some exit polls of people who voted in the advanced polls, and when they do their regular polling, inquire about people who did mail-in ballots.

So on election eve, they can say "Biden got X% in exit polling on election day, Y% in advanced and mail in voting, for a predicted result of Z%"

I don't know about that as much as they know where the ballots are coming from, and can use that.

Certainly any statement from any campaign needs to be taken as a marketing statement. And note, the statement that it's closer than being reported doesn't mean too much because it could only mean that its closer than 17%, which "has been reported."