7 Likes
Looked into them for 5 minutes. They look like 2nd world techbro polling firm that conducts polls âusing its proprietary data collection technology and post-stratification algorithms.â Looks like high-volume autodialing polls with a fair amount of algorithmic âinferenceâ. I would like to see their âlikely voterâ model.
Not gonna watch this, but they do seem real, if maybe letting their freak flag fly.
I donât know who will win, but my take from all the polling is that the race will end up not being close at all. Expecting a 64 or 72 level landslide in favor of one of the two big candidates.
2 Likes
idk if I have posted this before, but the two most likely swing state (AZ, GA, NC, MI, PA, WI, NV) outcomes in Nate Silverâs simulations are R sweep and D sweep, in that order.
1 Like
https://x.com/Politics_Polls/status/1851413189423939620?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Lol Robinson
1 Like
Honestly anyone talking about the polls and probabilities over and over needs to go to gulag
5 Likes
So this
Harris is probably going to win, but if she doesnât Trump will. 
9 Likes
This proves the existence of swing voters.
What does herding mean?
Basically all the pollsters make their final polls close so that they theoretically wonât be way off either way, unless of course itâs not close
According to ChrisV itâs still an exploitable thing, so I doubt itâs this.
Putting a thumb on the scale so that your poll is in line with the consensus, or just not publishing outlier polls. In 2020, an ABC News/WaPo poll in Wisconsin got the result Biden +17, which was way out of line with consensus. Biden ultimately won the state by only 0.6%. Some outlets would have just quietly buried that poll, or fudged the numbers to bring it more into line with consensus. The tendency to do this is herding.
Itâs more like foundational now, it wonât generally win by itself but any further analysis of totals you do will just be wrong without it. Thatâs why I think the comparison to home field advantage is apt, thatâs not âexploitableâ but it had sure better be included in any modelling.
1 Like
Thanks. The reason I went with âexploitableâ is because in the example you gave, I was the only one who knew about HFA. Exploitable is what Iâd generally call that. But it sounds like it has transitioned from exploitable to foundational.
I guess my confusion is summed up by the question âwhere is trump getting new votes from?â
Iâm not convinced that thereâs a meaningful group that didnât vote for him in 2020 but is now motivated to do so. Like, they werenât sure in 2020 but everything heâs done since that loss has persuaded them heâs the guy? Nah.
4 Likes
Itâs unlikely either candidate will approach the turnout numbers of 2020 (unless they do), so technically theyâll probably both âloseâ a lot of votes from 2020 to now.
He got 11 million more votes in 2020 than in 2016. Where did those new votes come from?
2 Likes