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: 144K
  • Politics 
The crowd size phenomenon is interesting. That's what I ignorantly discounted in 2016.

If it still has merit, why are his crowds so sparse (Pitt yesterday) where hers are more packed? We just don't know but it's interesting.

And the small dollar donations used to be a bigger GOP thing and now she's crushing that.
It wasn't ignorant. There was no recent evidence of crowd sizes as having a strong predictive role. And let's be honest, we still don't know that. The 2016 election was turned on its head by an October surprise (Comey) and vote suppression efforts (to a lesser extent). Trump was getting huge crowds when the polls said he was losing badly.
 
It wasn't ignorant. There was no recent evidence of crowd sizes as having a strong predictive role. And let's be honest, we still don't know that. The 2016 election was turned on its head by an October surprise (Comey) and vote suppression efforts (to a lesser extent). Trump was getting huge crowds when the polls said he was losing badly.
But in short they are indicative of enthusiasm. And that is a metric that can usually give some doubt that polls could be slightly off to one side. That's one thing she's got more of this cycle

All in all, polls could well just be in more trouble than they even were in 2020 and 16.

Phone Spam detection and flagging is way better for calls and texts in just 4 years and definitely 8. I have to imagine people engaging in phone calls is down. Texts from random #s way down and responding to unknown email in the phishing day and age? Absolutely plummeted. That's one I know from work and it's way way way worse to get engagement via email than 4 years ago
 
How the hell does any of that PREVENT a trump win?

Good grief do you read what you write? Go play with some crypto and doom scroll Twitter
Are you arguing semantics? If it really bothers you, there are many things that could change and Trump could still lose despite the betting markets currently favoring him.
 
I do not wish to make people feel hopeless. I just try to cull and share possibly relevant information as it becomes available.

I could discontinue the poll and turnout data posting here — it’s not like you can’t all find it easily enough if you want to do so.
 
Are you arguing semantics? If it really bothers you, there are many things that could change and Trump could still lose despite the betting markets currently favoring him.
It's not semantics. You literally said betting markets changing could PREVENT a trump win.

How is that possible?
 
But in short they are indicative of enthusiasm. And that is a metric that can usually give some doubt that polls could be slightly off to one side. That's one thing she's got more of this cycle

All in all, polls could well just be in more trouble than they even were in 2020 and 16.

Phone Spam detection and flagging is way better for calls and texts in just 4 years and definitely 8. I have to imagine people engaging in phone calls is down. Texts from random #s way down and responding to unknown email in the phishing day and age? Absolutely plummeted. That's one I know from work and it's way way way worse to get engagement via email than 4 years ago
To add some additional input here:

Email click rates at 1.5% is considered “reasonable” engagement these days. That’s roughly 10 participants in 1,000.

It’s just not an effective way to market but email campaigns are cheap, like penny’s on the dollar cheap.

Text click rates are just slightly above, at roughly 2%.

All that to say, Harris has the superlative ground game - that’s door to door engagement. Canvassing is THE most effective way to market and her campaign exceeds Trump’s in spades.

It WILL be reflected in the voter turnout.
 
To add some additional input here:

Email click rates at 1.5% is considered “reasonable” engagement these days. That’s roughly 10 participants in 1,000.

It’s just not an effective way to market but email campaigns are cheap, like penny’s on the dollar cheap.

Text click rates are just slightly above, at roughly 2%.

All that to say, Harris has the superlative ground game - that’s door to door engagement. Canvassing is THE most effective way to market and her campaign exceeds Trump’s in spades.

It WILL be reflected in the voter turnout.
Exactly. It's hard to describe how low engagement in comms has gotten. And how is changed so much in 4 years... And more in 8.

I am suspicious if rates are higher with lower education. No basis... Just curious. And if so... Well then I bet polls are off
 
It's not semantics. You literally said betting markets changing could PREVENT a trump win.

How is that possible?
Oh good Lord. Find something else to argue about.

You're correct. The betting markets will not technically prevent Trump from winning. Trump may not win despite the betting markets currently favoring him. Embrace your victory.
 
What trends?
I've read some articles recently which have pointed out that despite the ups and downs of polling, in general the polls have been remarkably stable over the past couple of months, and they have consistently given Kamala a lead. Of course I'm skeptical of polls in general this year, but I do think as we get closer to election day a lot of very anxious Democrats are freaking out (and not without reason, I might add, given that Trump might win). And my guess is that this anxiety will get worse for some people as we get closer to the election. The trauma of 2016 for Democrats is very real.
 
Last edited:
I've read some articles recently which have pointed out that despite the ups and downs of polling, in general the polls have been remarkably stable over the past couple of months, and they have consistently given Kamala a lead. Of course I'm skeptical of polls in general this year, but I do think as we get closer to election day a lot of very anxious Democrats are freaking out (and not without reason, I might add, given that Trump might win). And my guess is that this anxiety will get worse for some people as get closer to the election.
I’m terrified
 
I’m terrified
I can tell. And my guess is that most liberals are feeling some anxiety right now, and with good reason. Having said that, I'm not the type who is going to express said anxieties on an anonymous message board, but maybe that's just me. My own feeling is that right now all we can do is make sure we vote, try to convince others we know who agree with our views to vote, and hope and pray for the best.
 
I can tell. And my guess is that most liberals are feeling some anxiety right now, and with good reason. Having said that, I'm not the type who is going to express said anxieties on an anonymous message board, but maybe that's just me. My own feeling is that right now all we can do is make sure we vote, try to convince others we know who agree with our views to vote, and hope and pray for the best.
Yeah I just can’t believe we are about 2 weeks away from this country voting an absolute piece of shit into the office of president. It’s shocking. And That means I am that close to simply not caring anymore.
 
Yeah I just can’t believe we are about 2 weeks away from this country voting an absolute piece of shit into the office of president. It’s shocking. And That means I am that close to simply not caring anymore.
Well, I guess the difference is that I'm not giving up just yet and I'll wait until the actual election returns come in and for Trump to win before I'll worry too much. Maybe it's just that I'm older now, but I have enough to focus on at work and with my family to worry about things this far in advance. If Trump wins I'll indeed be anxious and depressed and seriously worry about the country's future, but as I said I'm not giving up just yet, and I don't think the election is a lost cause.
 
But in short they are indicative of enthusiasm. And that is a metric that can usually give some doubt that polls could be slightly off to one side. That's one thing she's got more of this cycle
While campaign rally turnout is indicative of enthusiasm, it's indicative of enthusiasm among the base and the base is already going to the polls for their candidate.

I don't think campaign rallies are indicative of support among the low-propensity voters who decide elections and therefore likely shouldn't be viewed as a significant input toward who will win an election.
 
NBC News with a poll this morning on how folks feel on the issues

And if it's accurate, Harris is in good shape.. Her side of the issues is over 50% in each one
This one??????

dbdc9317-2f2f-4624-a0b0-d5cd2f994ebc.jpg

That doesn't look especially good for Harris.

 
But in short they are indicative of enthusiasm. And that is a metric that can usually give some doubt that polls could be slightly off to one side. That's one thing she's got more of this cycle

All in all, polls could well just be in more trouble than they even were in 2020 and 16.

Phone Spam detection and flagging is way better for calls and texts in just 4 years and definitely 8. I have to imagine people engaging in phone calls is down. Texts from random #s way down and responding to unknown email in the phishing day and age? Absolutely plummeted. That's one I know from work and it's way way way worse to get engagement via email than 4 years ago
1. Well, you didn't know that the rallies were indicative of enthusiasm. I didn't either. I thought it was a lot of bullshit. I'm not sure it's not bullshit, but in any event, I don't think I was ignorant in 2016. I think the knowledge didn't exist. I don't think you were ignorant.

2. This whole idea that response rates are down and therefore the polls are bad -- I don't know if the conclusion follows from the premise. Low response rates mean that pollsters have to work harder to get their samples, that's true. But it doesn't necessarily follow that the samples they get are somehow systemically biased. With all the polling we have, only systematic bias is likely to get through a poll average.

Could the low response rates create systematic poll biases? Sure, it could. I can think of a lot of plausible stories consistent with that idea. Maybe Trump supporters have become more eager to talk to pollsters because Trump talks about the polls so much and they want to push him into the lead. Maybe the people who used to respond to polls have had enough, and thus bias in the polls in previous elections could therefore cause the polls to bias the other way (though that is unlikely because of numbers). It could be that the total universe of people who answer polls has shrunk so much that the pollsters are basically just sampling the same people over and over again (though this story also potentially runs into number problems).

But we don't know any of that to be true. It's also possible that the samples pollsters have obtained are, in fact, representative and the only issue was the difficulty and cost of obtaining them. The fact that the polls are commonly weighting by recalled vote, and the polls that don't tend to favor Kamala in the EC, gives me some hope. That's an unreliable method and I think it's being used as an ad hoc patch of uncertain validity. But again, we don't know.
 
I can tell. And my guess is that most liberals are feeling some anxiety right now, and with good reason. Having said that, I'm not the type who is going to express said anxieties on an anonymous message board, but maybe that's just me. My own feeling is that right now all we can do is make sure we vote, try to convince others we know who agree with our views to vote, and hope and pray for the best.
I largely agree with you, but isn't an anonymous message board a great place to express yourself and vent those anxieties? I know I largely cannot discuss my concerns with others around me, so this is a helpful environment.
 
Back
Top