100% this, but I think there's also an important angle here about just screwed the republican party is no without Trump. A few years ago you heard from many prominent republicans a bunch of stuff about, "we can't let Trump be the face of the party anymore - we'll get slaughtered electorally!"...
PA is different from other states in that there's no in-person early voting, so all early votes are by mail (which republicans have not been pushing). Note that the partisan gap in PA vs other states is wildly different.
I was really just thinking about statistical tests of models, in part because the models themselves are often changing, which is not surprising given the numerous ad hoc components they have to include. Also, the model predictions for different elections are using wildly different input...
I just read through a few things that popped up, and what I saw was no clear consensus - some papers seem to argue that betting markets are better predictors (e.g., your link, and this), others argue that they are worse (example, example), some argue that it's unclear what performs better...
Depends on how they compute margin of error, but my understanding is that's usually a purely statistical estimate of the uncertainty. An uncertainty due to turnout model would be an additional, systematic (i.e., this uncertainty does not average down if they do the poll over and over) source of...
I think unfortunately, that who really does better in debates is much less important these days than who outperforms their expectations (largely by the media sphere). I mean, in the first debate Trump was hot garbage, but he's rarely ever made any actual rhetorical sense and so there are no...
The other thing to keep in mind is that you (should) expect polls to scatter around the "true" margin, so if the true margin is Harris +5 and the polls have margins of error in the +/-4 point range, then it's expected that individual polls should get anywhere from Harris +1 to Harris +9. This...