• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Early elections predictions

Who will win US presidential elections of 2024 ?

  • Total voters
    82
Trausti said:
I always find this retort bizarre; as if because of a person's sex or race we have to lower the bar; because of a person's sex or race they should be shielded from the critiques we usually lob at politicians.
Click to expand...

Tell me more about the critiques usually lobbed at politicians from Team "They're Eating the Pets".
 
johnny karate said:
Tell me more about the critiques usually lobbed at politicians from Team "They're Eating the Pets".
Click to expand...

If you're running for the highest office in the land, please don't use your sex or race to avoid criticism of your policies (or, in this case, lack thereof).
 
Trausti said:
If you're running for the highest office in the land, please don't use your sex or race to avoid criticism of your policies (or, in this case, lack thereof).
Click to expand...

Tell me more about this criticism of policies from the political party rallying behind the guy who recently said that migrants have bad genes.
 
acbytesla said:
Aye, there's the rub. Achieving a true random sample. I worked for a pollster for two years. Getting a random sample in the 1980s was hard then. And I believe it is harder today then ever.
Click to expand...

That's still no excuse to stop trying and simply working towards the answers you want to hear though.
 
ahhell said:
I find the betting markets mildly interesting even knowing they aren't generally predictive. Frankly, when the polls seem to all be within the margin of error, why see what the betting markets are doing. This year, they might be about as predictive as the polls.
Click to expand...
You might be right about that. Since Harris took over from Biden, the favorite has changed hands at least 4 times in the betting market.

For example, at Covers.com, the current odds being offered are Trump: -138, Harris: +110.

For those unfamiliar with the American way of calculating odds, that's 138/100 on for Trump and 110/100 against for Harris. (In Australia, the payout for a $1 bet would be Trump: $1.72 and Harris: $2.10).
 
arthwollipot said:
The point isn't that they've stopped trying. They're trying. It's just tremendously hard to do.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't think they are any more. The polling companies have baked in the voter disenfanchisement of the repugs, hence why we don't see the massive swings from poling and exit polls to reported results any more, despite the fact that we know that in most republican controlled states elections aren't being held on anything resembling democratic lines.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
Honestly, I don't think they are any more. The polling companies have baked in the voter disenfanchisement of the repugs, hence why we don't see the massive swings from poling and exit polls to reported results any more, despite the fact that we know that in most republican controlled states elections aren't being held on anything resembling democratic lines.
Click to expand...

If what you are saying is true, then we would have little idea how many states each candidate will win. We would see huge surprises in the elections themselves.

In fact, we don't really see that. The "surprises" we see are relative, but they are almost always within the margin of error of the polls.
 
Samson said:
Well, Harris has squandered an 8 to 11 lead to trail 11 to 10.
Good luck!
Not sure who can stomach 4 years of her appalling contentless speech mannerisms, but democracy wins regardless.
That is the not China not Russia not Iran not Afghanistan paradigm.
Let's all celebrate that.
Click to expand...

Sounds pretty close to "Democrats are annoying so Republicans get to be evil."

And how do you "Squander" variations within the margin of error?
 
gnome said:
Sounds pretty close to "Democrats are annoying so Republicans get to be evil."

And how do you "Squander" variations within the margin of error?
Click to expand...
There is a lot of denial going around. Kamala is a very poor candidate and can't possibly win.
Imagine her trying to weave a complicated web as Trump can. She is a simpleton and the people will not elect her.
Hollywood is riddled with simpletons who do her no favours by implying the white working class are irrelevant.
70% of working class men under 30 are voting Trump.
These guys build the palaces for the Hollywood fakers.
 
Last edited:
Huh, I guess Abe Simpson was weaving when he was talking about taking the ferry to Shelbyville.
 
Sometimes the question is who would you want to sit next to at a dinner party.
 
No, it really isn't. It is who is the repsonsible adult who best seems fit to do the job aong the 2 choices.

And in either scenario, Harris is the answer.
 
Samson said:
Sometimes the question is who would you want to sit next to at a dinner party.
Click to expand...

In the past that comparison might have some traction but I'm not sure that's a winning angle right now.

I notice you didn't answer my question about margin of error. Why attach significance to noise within that range? I'm sure you had no problem assuming that Kamala's leads were statistical variations.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom