Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

2024 Pre-Election Political Polls | POLL - Trump would have had 7 point lead over Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 6K
  • Views: 183K
  • Politics 
I'm not sure if that analysis of WI population trends is very helpful. Migration (in or out) affects the voting population, but births do not. So in these counties where births outnumber deaths . . . well, that's a problem for two decades from now, if we still exist.

Plus, that migration is tracked at the county level. Sure, people are leaving Milwaukee. If they are headed out of state, that matters; otherwise it only matters for the House and potentially state races.

Also it's worth remembering that migration into a red area doesn't necessarily mean an influx of Republican voters. There's not necessarily a very high correlation between the political views of an area and the political views of its newcomers. We've talked about that re: NC in this cycle, and of course it's familiar to anyone who had spent any time in Cary or Fuquay Varina in the 80s.

So basically we don't know from that chart or article whether population changes since 2020 will help either candidate or how much.
 




www.aarp.org

AARP Poll: Harris and Trump Virtually Tied in Wisconsin

The presidential race is tight In key battleground state
www.aarp.org www.aarp.org

"... Forty-nine percent of likely voters favor Harris while 48 percent support Trump in a head-to-head matchup. When the lens shifts to voters 50-plus, former President Trump takes a 3-percentage-point lead over Vice President Harris, according to the poll. Fifty percent of older voters prefer Trump, while 47 percent favor Harris. ...

The latest presidential poll results, which are within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent for likely voters and plus or minus 3.5 percent for older voters, show a shift from an AARP Wisconsin poll taken in late June and early July when voters were asked about a matchup between Democratic President Joe Biden and GOP candidate Trump. In that summer poll, Trump was 5 percentage points ahead of Biden among all voters, and he led Biden by 9 points among voters 50-plus. Harris became the Democratic presidential nominee Aug. 5 after Biden announced he was ending his reelection campaign ..."

[AARP tends to assume 50+ turnout at/above historic norms and youth turnout below historic norms in the LV efforts, which is not a bad assumption, honestly]

 
Last edited:
altmin said:
Seems like Wisconsin is bleeding blue area voters and it is being masked a bit by births, but those are non-voters.
Click to expand...
Bleeding blue area voters doesn't mean bleeding blue voters. White flight in the 1960s and 1970s pummeled cities, but it didn't make the cities less Dem. In fact, they became more Dem, I'm pretty sure. In the case of white flight to the burbs, it didn't affect the statewide vote totals in the short-term, and probably in the long-term contributed to GOP growth. But migration out of state obviously makes a difference, duh.

I'm more concerned about deaths. Black people, unfortunately, have lower life expectancies than white people. So it's possible that black boomers are dying faster than white boomers, and that would be a good trend for Pubs. I'm not sure how pronounced it is.

The other thing to remember about that link above is that it's measuring from the last census. The data for the 2020 census was largely conducted in the spring and summer of 2020 -- i.e. around the time that Covid was disproportionately killing people in bigger cities like Detroit and NYC. What we care about are the voting rolls from 2020 (because we are implicitly using that as the reference point for how this election will go). There's a gap in time there, and if lots of city deaths happened in those months, then we'd see a big change in the population numbers from census to now, and less change in the population numbers from November until now. That process would then reverse when Covid swept through WI, primarily after the election.
 
Saw the Chair of the Wis Dem party the other day on TV He said 2/3s of all Dem Voters in Wis do not live in Live or Madison or Milw. Now he did not say "metro areas" so it could be City limits proper...But anyway-interesting
 
nycfan said:
[AARP tends to assume 50+ turnout at/above historic norms and youth turnout below historic norms in the LV efforts, which is not a bad assumption, honestly]
Click to expand...
In light of Dobbs and abortion props, why would you assume that 50+ would exceed historical norms and under 50 would trail historical norms. I predict that under 50 voters will be significantly above 2020 and 2016 percentages.
 
Calheel said:
In light of Dobbs and abortion props, why would you assume that 50+ would exceed historical norms and under 50 would trail historical norms. I predict that under 50 voters will be significantly above 2020 and 2016 percentages.
Click to expand...
Abortion can brings olds to the polls as well, given that churches are community hubs for anti-choice folks and churches skew really old.

I will make no predictions about turnout.
 
superrific said:
Abortion can brings olds to the polls as well, given that churches are community hubs for anti-choice folks and churches skew really old.

I will make no predictions about turnout.
Click to expand...
Yes, but on the theory that the out-group will be more motivated (and all the polling and prior props show that to be the case), I see no scenario where under 50s vote below historical norms.
 
Calheel said:
Yes, but on the theory that the out-group will be more motivated (and all the polling and prior props show that to be the case), I see no scenario where under 50s vote below historical norms.
Click to expand...
All right. Fair. I can see scenarios but I have no idea just how realistic they are.

It also wouldn't surprise me if this is a thing that the AARP does to give their polls a bit of a stamp. They don't want to poll seniors only, because then they will be irrelevant; but they do want their polls to kinda reflect senior interests since everyone is going to interpret an AARP poll that way. So they fiddle with turnout assumptions as a balancing act.
 
RockyMtnHoo said:
Obviously have to get to 270 first, but I really hope it’s a bigger margin than that. Losing by multiple states would be tough for the Trump legal team to overcome, but if it’s literally decided by one state, I don’t trust the courts at all.
Click to expand...
It depends on which state, though. The Supreme Courts of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are all Dem/liberal. Especially PA. The PA Supreme Court is good, and tends to follow the law. It might rule against Dems if the law isn't on their side, but it's not going to put its thumb on the scale for the GOP. Of that I'm certain. A good friend of mine has long clerked on that court.

The Supreme Court is, of course, the wild card. Most of the issues that come up will involve state law, so the Supreme Court shouldn't really be involved. On the other hand, they've managed to federalize a whole lot of law that didn't used to be federal, so maybe they will find a way to do that here as well.

A few years ago, I wouldn't have thought the Supreme Court would try to mess with the election. It would want to stay out of it. But that appears not to be the case. It's really amazing to read that Roberts was the prime mover on the Trump v. US case. I knew the "Roberts the institutionalist" was always more myth than real, but it's been revealed to be more myth.

So with that caveat, any Supreme Court intervention would be risky. If it tries to help Trump (more than it already has!), it will make Supreme Court reform a top priority for Dems. If the fuckery fails, then President Kamala could be expected to go to war with it.
 
nycfan said:
YouGov: Harris 49, Trump 45 (Sept. 15-17 results)


youGov.jpeg
Click to expand...
Lotta insight in the crosstab:
  • 90% of Trump voters rate "Democrats want migrants to come into the country illegally so they will vote" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 56% of Trump voters rate "Haitian immigrants are abducting and eating pet dogs and cats" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 55% of Trump voters rate " In some states it is legal to kill a baby after birth" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 41% of Trump voters rate "Tariffs on imported Chinese goods are paid by China, not Americans" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 30% of Trump voters rate "Public schools are providing students with sex-change operations" as Definitely True or Probably True
First of all, kudos to the 59% of Trump voters who are not buying the "China will pay for the tariffs" line. That's WAY more than I expected.

We could talk about the 55% of Trump voters who think infanticide is legal in the US or the 30% that believe that US Public Schools are providing kids sex change operations...

But honestly I'd rather talk about the 90% of he Trump voters who think that Democrats are bringing in illegal immigrants so they can vote... WTF? Have your minds all melted to jelly? This question scored a full 34 points more believable than the next question tested. At the risk of repeating myself... WTF??? I mean only 6% of Trump voters were willing to rate that statement as Probably or Definitely False.

It boggles the mind. WTF is going on here? Is there a board Trump voter who can weigh in here and provide some perspective, I'm truly flabbergasted.
 
Last edited:
Ddseddse said:
Lotta insight in the crosstab:
  • 90% of Trump voters rate "Democrats want migrants to come into the country illegally so they will vote" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 56% of Trump voters rate "Haitian immigrants are abducting and eating pet dogs and cats" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 55% of Trump voters rate " In some states it is legal to kill a baby after birth" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 41% of Trump voters rate "Tariffs on imported Chinese goods are paid by China, not Americans" as Definitely True or Probably True
  • 30% of Trump voters rate "Public schools are providing students with sex-change operations" as Definitely True or Probably True
First of all, kudos to the 59% of Trump voters who are not buying the "China will pay for the tariffs" line. That's WAY more than I expected.

We could talk about the 55% of Trump voters who think infanticide is legal in the US or the 30% that believe that US Public Schools are providing kids sex change operations...

But honestly I'd rather talk about the 90% of he Trump voters who think that Democrats are bringing in illegal immigrants so they can vote... WTF? Have your minds all melted to jelly? This question scored a full 34 points more believable than the next question tested. At the risk of repeating myself... WTF??? I mean only 6% of Trump voters were willing to rate that statement as Probably or Definitely False.

It boggles the mind. WTF is going on here? Is there a board Trump voter who can weigh in here and provide some perspective, I'm truly flabbergasted.
Click to expand...
Looks like the Pubs' goal of destroying public education has worked on half of the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top