________________________________________________________________________________
They don't really back up their claim that the polls were wrong. Which specific results significantly diverged from the range of possibilities that the polls indicated?
I don't recall any major surprises in electoral college results. The only state results that differed from 538 predictions were Florida and maybe Georgia, but both of those were rated as toss-ups. Most states seem to be within a few points of the polling average.
The national popular vote currently has Biden a few points below the prediction, but I expect he will make up those points when California makes it through the 4 million votes that they still have left to count.
I feel like people saw the high probability of a Biden win and expected that would mean it would be called early on Election Day, but people analyzing the polls said that would only happen if Biden overperformed polls. For the most part, things went exactly as predicted. Yes, a lot of polls were off by a few points, but that is to be expected. Yes, the errors were correlated with other and were not independent, but that is also to be expected.
I can't find it now but there was a recent Economist article about how a couple polling firms were giving Donald Trump polling much higher than the average based on assumptions of Trump voters being more likely not to admit to supporting Trump for pollsters, or something along those lines
Except every time this has been investigated, there haven't been findings. The only reason to think this is the case is people's hunches.
E.g. Trafalgar, who also got it right last time. There's an interview with the guy who runs it here:
https://unherd.com/thepost/robert-cahaly-how-we-got-the-poll...
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy nut but...
are we sure the votes are counted the right way? With all the electronic voting devices, what guarantees and checks are in place to assert that a vote cast for Trump is not counted towards Biden (or vise versa)?
Does anyone know?
Asking that question isn’t conspiracy theorizing, it’s just due diligence. Like currency, elections live or die by peoples faith in them. It’s really, really important that everybody believes the outcome.
The short answer is: nobody knows. The situation is very bleak for election security right now. It’s become a partisan issue which makes it even worse. A few resources:
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/12/17/how-new-voting-mach...
https://whowhatwhy.org/2019/03/19/permission-to-cheat-audits...
https://whowhatwhy.org/2019/01/11/georgia-poised-to-pick-vul...
https://demwritepress.com/2018/11/04/democrats-must-be-prepa...
Well, for any sinlge vote, I guess it could be miscounted.
I guess the thinking is that if an election is within .5% there can be a recount. And then each polling station (county?) provides numbers separately, so to push the vote a huge amount you'd need multiple polling stations to lie to move the vote more than .5% (as I understand it, not an expert).
That said, I'd love if the full process was disclosed somewhere for public scrutiny. There should be numerous safeguards (e.g. two random people counting the same stack of ballots) in a good system.
I'm sure there are mistakes and errors during any election. In the end it probably ends up being a non-factor. While wondering about the election results validity is a valid and good question, if you are suggesting maybe the polls are correct but the voting results are wrong, I find that nearly impossible.
There are so many ways a pollster could go wrong. Sample Size, Push Polling, Shy Voters, Poor Question, Poorly Trained Survey Collectors, and on and on.
With voting it's basically did we count it right.
AFAIK in Pennsylvania they have a paper trail for all electronic votes, so essentially, they bought a pencil.
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/jo0sj4/dozens_o...
Rampant fraud.
"The One Pollster in America Who Is Sure Trump Is Going to Win"
https://www.nytimes.com/article/trafalgar-group-poll.html
And he was wrong.
No, just a catastrophe for the polling companies
It's pretty telling that they "SHUT IT DOWN" last night after Trump won Florida.
Now they're conveniently finding hundreds of thousands of ballots in states Trump won, some tranches of which are 100% for Joe Biden.
When Trump prevails in court (as he ultimately will), he needs prosecute the Democratic Party establishment and the "journalists" who conspired to steal this election
Who, besides the lonely and the weird, wants to talk to pollsters? Maybe the very passionate voter who believes the "other" side is deeply, and fundamentally evil. So for me, it comes back to the vilification of the "other" by media and educated elites that there is an insurmountable leftist bias in polling. If half of what Trump is accused of were true, this wouldn't have been close.
Totally agree with except for you last line.
Trump is accused of a lot of stuff, but so are the democrats, and all of it has some level of credibility.
That is why it is close.
Ironically I think it nets out to bring a lot more about policies and political beliefs than ‘who is accused of what’, since nobody looks that good.
Biden made some stupid unforced errors which I think confirm republican’s fears.
Trumpeting gun control at stupid moments is the biggest mistake - one which Clinton also made.
Absolutely. If the republicans could could get on board with pro choice, or the democrats could get on board with guns, each party would be unstoppable unless the other followed suit. The American people are very passionate about less regulation in both of those areas.
Yes - good example.
My sense is that it should be easier for Democrats to get on board with guns than for Republicans to get on board with pro-choice.
The reasoning is that gun deaths can be prevented by a lot of mechanisms that are not gun control but are consistent with democratic values, whereas pro-life tends to be more a product of religious or spiritual belief rather than pragmatism.
I know plenty of otherwise highly progressive people who changed their view of guns once they learned more about them.
I wouldn’t even begin to know how to change the opinion of someone who is Pro-life. I literally can’t make the case.
Pro-life doesn't need religious or spiritual origins, it can simply be that someone views abortion as the killing of another human and feels very strong about it. It's a very complicated issue and is one that I don't have strong feelings about (for or against in totality) because I think that sometimes, it's worth it to end the life of the little human and sometimes it's not. Also frankly because I'm a man and am less affected by it. I don't think we'll ever have everyone on the same page with this topic.
I agree, however when I have discussed this with people the question ends up boiling down to some version of ‘at what point does a fertilized egg become a person’.
I.e. the fundamental issue is a question about what constitutes a person.
Resolving this always seems to have spiritual connotations and some kind of faith is involved.
If you have strong feelings about killing people and those apply to fetuses, it implies you have a strong belief that a fetus is a person.
Yep, totally agree.
> _Trump is accused of a lot of stuff, but so are the democrats, and all of it has some level of credibility._
This is like saying, "This tennis ball is large, but so is the moon, and both of them have some level of largeness."
The _scale_ absolutely matters. There is no "both sides" this time. All the GOP fears (Biden is senile, a socialist, or a puppet) are based on lies. Everyone else's fears are based on Trump's actual policies: separating children from parents; ignoring and lying about Covid; attacking climate science; and tearing down democratic norms.
> _Trumpeting gun control at stupid moments is the biggest mistake - one which Clinton also made_
Gun control is very popular, even among gun owners[1].
Biden spent very, very little time talking about it. He mostly talked about expanding health-care access, managing Covid, and bringing back jobs. If you look at this talking points in the debates, he barely mentioned guns at all.
This fear, again, is false fear-mongering by GOP allies, just as it was when they claimed Obama would take away all the guns[2].
1.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/16/share-of-am...
2.
https://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smith/2008/08/nra-obama-m...
I’m not doing any of the things you say - I don’t equate the accusations, and I agree that Trump is much worse than Biden.
However I do think the perceptions of the two sides of one another are more equated than you do. That’s in fact my point - policies matter more than attacking Trump’s character.
As for Guns, you’re just wrong.
Biden tweeted about banning assault weapons repeatedly, even at times when it was absurd - e.g. in response to two police officers being shot with a _pistol_. This has absolutely been echoed in conservative circles, and is an accurate reflection of his stated policies on his website. Kamala Harris is also one of the most fervently anti-gun politicians on record.
As to “Gun owners favor gun control” - if you believe that you are just misinformed.
The _only_ gun control that gun owners (or the population as a whole) favor is background checks, and even this gets weaker when the actual implications of the schemes are explained.
It simply isn’t fear mongering.
All of the things that gun owners fear are in fact being demonstrated in California.
I think these are stupid policies that don’t save lives, and have definitely helped Trump both in 2016 and now.
I pick gun control because it is so ineffective, and it’s easily substituted with better polices if you want to save lives.
I.e. you can change this policy without betraying democratic values.
Cite sources. Your argument isn't interesting if it's 100% what your gut is telling you.
> _policies matter more than attacking Trump’s character_
Name any single policy that Trump and Biden are "basically" the same on. They are probably further apart than any two nominees in history.
> _As for Guns, you’re just wrong._
I showed you data. Do you have any data?
> _As to “Gun owners favor gun control” - if you believe that you are just misinformed._
The majority[1] of gun owners support the following gun-control measures:
- banning gun purchases by mentally ill people
- closing the gun-show loophole
- banning gun purchases by people on watch lists
- creating a federal database to track gun sales
> _I think these are stupid policies that don’t save lives, and have definitely helped Trump both in 2016 and now._
Gun control saves many lives, mostly from suicide and accidents.
> _I pick gun control because it is so ineffective, and it’s easily substituted with better polices if you want to save lives._
It's not that effective, but it's a top-of-mind issue for a large part of Biden's base (Black people).
1.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeawa...
2.
https://americanhealth.jhu.edu/article/how-do-gun-laws-affec...
3.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/
It’s nothing to do with what my gut is telling me.
If you are unaware of any work that contradicts the view you are espousing, then I suggest digging deeper. A few years ago I’d have assumed those kinds of source were painting an accurate picture, but if you dig deeper you’ll discover they are misleading.
A few sources you might care to examine are Gun Culture 2.0, and Open source defense. Both are written by liberal leaning people.
Your list of what the majority of gun owners support is what I said people support - background checks. You have expanded it to 4 points.
But if you dig into the research, you’ll find that when the issue is explained, the support becomes more equivocal.
At least you agree that it’s _not that effective_.
You claim it’s top of mind for a large part of Biden’s base - black people. I’m quite skeptical about that. Black people are currently the fastest growing demographic of gun owners. They are also going to be the targets of new gun laws - not the beneficiaries.
Gun control means armed police taking guns from black people at gunpoint, and black people being criminalized.
Are you really saying _that_ is top of mind for black people?
https://medium.com/handwaving-freakoutery/guns-guide-to-libe...
More importantly, even if you are right, you are making my point for me.
My point is that if Biden didn’t have a strong gun control agenda, he would be more palatable to rural Americans and conservatives who don’t actually like Trump.
Are you suggesting that Biden would lose black votes to Trump if he dialed back the gun control policy?
That sounds completely implausible.
It’s not effective policy, and it works to keep moderate Republicans and rural Americans away from Biden.
You're presenting a very slanted opinion as neutral fact.
Do you believe all facts are politically neutral?
Also, if the opinion is slanted and not factual, please explain exactly which opinions and how they're slanted. I didn't write anything that isn't an opinion of the majority of people who pay attention to US affairs.
There is certainly no evidence to support the idea that your view is the opinion of the majority, even if it is common.