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

[aGDevil2k]

Being right once is meaningless. How did he do in 2020, 2018 or 2016?

Regardless of his track record, that analysis above is shit. Objectively.

IMO he did very well in 2020. He wasn't doing that stuff in 2016 at least. I first started to know who he was because he was absolutely nailing Georgia and Arizona.
He's also very pompous and his obsession with Florida is just weird (and not near where any focus should be). Now if he gets it right? I will be shocked and dude will deserve his massive props

 

[Geisterfahrer]

What the hell is the point of doing RVs just 3 weeks out? Hmmmm. Weird stuff from NBC

Because it’s a high turnout election and LV requires a lot of assumptions stacked on the demographics? @nycfan made this point recently that RV polls might actually be pretty reflective at this point (presuming I read the point correctly).

 

[BlueSmoke]

An incumbent President never loses a reelection with the economy doing this well. Now Harris isn't an incumbent. But I would think in the closing weeks she should be leaning into the economy much more in her messaging. Might help with the very groups she is worried about.

 

[nycfan]

Because it’s a high turnout election and LV requires a lot of assumptions stacked on the demographics? @nycfan made this point recently that RV polls might actually be pretty reflective at this point (presuming I read the point correctly).

Yes, that was my point earlier — in such a high turnout election RV seems to be a better approach.

 

[lawtig02]

An incumbent President never loses a reelection with the economy doing this well. Now Harris isn't an incumbent. But I would think in the closing weeks she should be leaning into the economy much more in her messaging. Might help with the very groups she is worried about.

I don't know if she can really lean into the economy, but Trump is sure as hell running away from the economy. He's all in on immigration and racism as we head to the line. Their polling must be showing the economy is no longer a great argument for Pubs, even if it's also difficult for Dems.

 

[rodoheel]

An incumbent President never loses a reelection with the economy doing this well. Now Harris isn't an incumbent. But I would think in the closing weeks she should be leaning into the economy much more in her messaging. Might help with the very groups she is worried about.

Counterpoint - all around the world the governments that were in charge for the post-COVID economic struggles are losing reelection bids left and right. (Saw that point made on Twitter recently, I believe by Matt Yglesias.)

 

[rodoheel]

I don't know if she can really lean into the economy, but Trump is sure as hell running away from the economy. He's all in on immigration and racism as we head to the line. Their polling must be showing the economy is no longer a great argument for Pubs, even if it's also difficult for Dems.

eh I don't know that Trump is really running away from the economy, he's just folding all that extra immigration/xenophobia in. I'm still seeing plenty of the Trump ads mocking Kamala for touting "Bidenomics."

 

[aGDevil2k]

Because it’s a high turnout election and LV requires a lot of assumptions stacked on the demographics? @nycfan made this point recently that RV polls might actually be pretty reflective at this point (presuming I read the point correctly).

It's not correct - there are always lots of people that are registered and dont vote. They are usually democrats. In High D turnouts, those can be missed but if it is not a balanced high turnout then RV polls fail. If one side is way more enthused, those polls suck

 

[superrific]

IMO he did very well in 2020. He wasn't doing that stuff in 2016 at least. I first started to know who he was because he was absolutely nailing Georgia and Arizona.
He's also very pompous and his obsession with Florida is just weird (and not near where any focus should be). Now if he gets it right? I will be shocked and dude will deserve his massive props

I also nailed GA and AZ. That doesn't make me an expert. How'd he do in WI with Barnes v Johnson? Or Florida in 2018? If you only count the predictions that were true and forget the ones that are false . . . it makes you a college basketball recruiting analyst (or at least that's how it was in the old days).

Even if he gets it right -- well, there's such a thing as being right for wrong reasons. That concept might be counter-intuitive to you as an engineer (lol, that's an engineer joke, not a you joke -- I studied engineering for five semesters in college before switching to physics), but to me as a law professor, it's one of the most important concepts in the entire universe. We wouldn't have jobs otherwise.

 

[nycfan]

BUT

 

[nycfan]

 

[336Heel]

An incumbent President never loses a reelection with the economy doing this well. Now Harris isn't an incumbent. But I would think in the closing weeks she should be leaning into the economy much more in her messaging. Might help with the very groups she is worried about.

Only problem is the former President Harris is running against has convinced 1/2 the country that the economy is shit. It doesn't matter what economists say. What matters is the electorate's impression of the economy.

 

[lawtig02]

BUT

Not sure what a poll amalgamating all the battleground states really adds to the mix.

 

[CFordUNC]

"On one hand, I get it. The stakes could not be higher and the race could not be closer. It’s equal parts mystifying and enraging that someone as dumb and dangerous as Donald Trump could win the election. However, to quote a famous meme from this exact moment in the 2008 campaign:

“Everyone needs to chill the fuck out.”

I am not telling anyone to stop “bedwetting.” And I am certainly NOT telling people that Kamala Harris will definitely win. Trump may still win this race. By some measures, Trump is stronger than he was in 2020. But the whiplash between the Democratic elation of a few weeks ago and the full-on panic of the last few days is detached from reality. This has been a remarkably stable race. The vibes changed, but the race hasn't."

 

[CFordUNC]

"Remember how important it is to the entire Trump narrative and the grievances he intends to register after the results are known for him to be able to say the race was close or that he was ahead. It is part of why there are so many b.s. GOP and GOP-tilted polls out there. This is not the run away that it ought to be. But KH has run a great campaign, has not made a wrong move, has raised much more money, has many more volunteers, Trump and the GOP are a self-destructing mess, the polls have underestimated Dem support ever since Roe, and for all those reasons there is every reason as my friend
@SimonWDC would say to rather be us than them. It is going to take a sprint to the finish for all of us to ensure the turn out that will decide this--particularly among women, younger voters, voters of color and independents/disaffected GOPers. But, my view right now is she wins the popular vote by a healthy margin, wins the electoral vote where she must and picks up one or two surprise states and wins the House. As for the Senate, you've got to give the edge to the GOP right now...but...if everything I've cited above pans out properly there could be Dem surprises there too."

 

[nycfan]

 

[Zoo_View]

There’s been talk on this thread about “red polls” inflating the polling numbers for Trump in an effort to cast doubt if he loses. It seems that dems have been utilizing a contrasting strategy. It’s not that dems are manipulating poll numbers, but they seem to be highlighting and exploiting unfavorable polling numbers to gain financial contributions. I get about a hundred emails a day from democratic candidates’ campaigns, which take on an ominous and sometimes panicky tone, telling me that they are trailing or tied in the polls, or that their opponent is narrowing the margin, and therefore imploring me (or the email recipient) to donate to the campaign.

It seems that democratic candidates have taken on the strategy of trying to make the people who will likely vote for them feel that they are behind or that they’re losing ground in order to get campaign donations and motivate those people to get out and vote.

The “sky is falling” fundraising appeals have worked better than optimistic ones for decades.

 

[superrific]

Super - can you explain the point on the AIG subsidiary re the 2008 crisis. Not super familiar with that and if you got color, would appreciate it. (If we can do so without derailing the thread).

PM sent

 

[superrific]

Yes, that was my point earlier — in such a high turnout election RV seems to be a better approach.

I didn't see that point earlier. Is this an intuition or is it backed by something?

Turnout in 2020 -- the highest turnout election of our lives -- was 66%. So "high turnout election" is a relative term. As a percentage of RVs, turnout was higher -- 91%. But again, that was a crazy year (I doubt we get there this year), and even so, there was a significant gap. Because parties are doing such extensive registration outreach efforts, one imagines that turnout as a % of RVs will be lower this year.

Meanwhile, according to Pew, only 37% of voters eligible to vote in 2018, 2020 and 2022 did so. So those 37% are doing something different than the other 63% and it's important to capture that in a poll.

By contrast, I don't see what advantages an RV poll would have over an LV. In the past, an LV screen was considerably more involved than a RV one. But today, even our RV polls are subject to all sorts of weighting and self-selection corrections that LV doesn't seem to me to add much complexity or bias.

 

[Duke Mu]

It's not that Dems are prone to panicking, those Dems are almost certainly going to the polls no matter what.

The real basis behind this is that as the Dem tent is large and quite varied, the conventional wisdom is that Dems need higher turnout to win. They need to ensure that the Dem-leaning but unreliable voter feels the need to go to the polls to ensure the Dem wins and to ensure that the progressives at the margins of the party don't fall off to 3rd party votes because they think the Dem doesn't need their vote.

Now, this conventional wisdom concerning higher turnout has been turned on its ear a bit by Trump bringing some Pub-leaning unreliable voters to the polls more consistently than previous Pub nominees. So now it not only matters how high turnout is, but whose unreliable voters turn out. But being behind in the polls is still reasonably effective in attempting to turn our Dem unreliable voters and Dem-leans who could go 3rd party, so Dems still focus on it where they can.

Trump targets low information, low motivation voters. He gets enough...hopefully not enough to win.