Page 42 of 115
Re: US Election
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:50 pm
by Bird on a Fire
FlammableFlower wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:42 pm
Serious - does anyone actually believe that?
Come on, you must know the answer to this. The 'war on Christmas' is has been a perennial topic in the UK right-wing for years too. "oh boo hoo some people prefer to use inclusive language while celebrating our festival" whinge the privileged c.nts, sobbing Christ-like tears of self-sacrifice into their mugs of eggnog.
Re: US Election
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 10:03 pm
by dyqik
Grumble wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:45 pm
bolo wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:33 pm
I am shocked, yes shocked, that you voted yes on Question 1.
What’s that?
MA ballot question (referendum) to require car makers to provide access to electronic records and software in cars.
Re: US Election
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 10:09 pm
by Grumble
dyqik wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:21 pm
Trump is trialing a new attack on Biden: "He wants to listen to Dr Fauci".
Public trust in Fauci on CoVID - 70%
Public trust in Trump on CoVID - 35%
Biden responds with “...yes”
Re: US Election
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:26 pm
by lpm
Wow, Fauci is really sh.t at throwing a rounders ball. Really really sh.t.
If that doesn't prove he hasn't a clue about global pandemics, what will?
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:32 am
by Bird on a Fire
lpm wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:26 pm
Wow, Fauci is really sh.t at throwing a rounders ball. Really really sh.t.
If that doesn't prove he hasn't a clue about global pandemics, what will?
I mean, he is nearly 80.
I love old white men and all, but unlike the USA I tend to think there might be limits to their abilities.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 2:44 pm
by EACLucifer
Early vote in Texas now somewhat over four and a half million, and over half of the 2016 turnout. Everything still pointing to a high turnout election, which probably benefits the democrats. Likewise, even if Bidens double digit leads nationally don't hold at that level, banking a significant proportion of the vote - 25% of 2016 turnout overall and more than that in a number of crucial states - during a period of such a lead is still handy.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 3:53 pm
by El Pollo Diablo
It'll certainly be interesting to see what higher turnout means in Texas. Very interesting.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:11 pm
by lpm
Jesus, Biden is really slumping in the polls today.
Not clear if it's just a freak day or the start of disaster.
He's plummeted from +10.7 in the 538 average to +10.4.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:11 pm
by dyqik
EACLucifer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 2:44 pm
Early vote in Texas now somewhat over four and a half million, and over half of the 2016 turnout. Everything still pointing to a high turnout election, which probably benefits the democrats. Likewise, even if Bidens double digit leads nationally don't hold at that level, banking a significant proportion of the vote - 25% of 2016 turnout overall and more than that in a number of crucial states - during a period of such a lead is still handy.
There's an interesting problem with polling and likely voter screens when a significant number of voters have already voted. Some of the polls are asking people how likely they are to vote, but not offering the "already voted" option.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 5:22 pm
by dyqik
NYTimes poll of Georgia has the presidential race tied, the Senate race tied (runoff required if no one gets 50% of the vote), and the leading Democrat with a 4 point advantage over either Republican option in the runoff in the Special Senate race.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:15 pm
by dyqik
Turnout in Texas has already passed 50% of 2016's total turnout.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:41 pm
by bolo
In 2016, mail and in-person early voting turnout in Texas passed 50% of eventual total turnout on day 6 of in-person early voting. Yesterday was day 7 of in-person early voting. The daily rates so far in 2020 don't look all that different from 2016. But early voting this year started 10 days earlier, so the question is whether Texans are just voting sooner this year, because they can, or whether the whether these voting rates will keep going all the way to election day, in which case total turnout will be waay higher than usual.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:54 pm
by Woodchopper
bolo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:41 pm
In 2016, mail and in-person early voting turnout in Texas passed 50% of eventual total turnout on day 6 of in-person early voting. Yesterday was day 7 of in-person early voting. The daily rates so far in 2020 don't look all that different from 2016. But early voting this year started 10 days earlier, so the question is whether Texans are just voting sooner this year, because they can, or whether the whether these voting rates will keep going all the way to election day, in which case total turnout will be waay higher than usual.
As far as I remember in 2016 the Democrats prioritized encouraging early voting. It looked like people voted sooner but turnout didn’t increase. Though it’s still a good strategy to avoid huge queues on 3 November.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:11 pm
by Grumble
How does the approval rating for Donald Trump not match the voting intention? Approval rating is higher than voting for, and disapproval is higher than voting against.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:24 pm
by dyqik
Grumble wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:11 pm
How does the approval rating for Donald Trump not match the voting intention? Approval rating is higher than voting for, and disapproval is higher than voting against.
You might approve of both candidates, but still prefer one to the other.
Re: US Election
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:45 pm
by bolo
And you might disapprove of him personally, but vote for him anyway because anti-abortion judges are your top priority, or because you oppose the policies you expect Congress to pass if there's a Dem trifecta.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:34 am
by Martin_B
lpm wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:11 pm
Jesus, Biden is really slumping in the polls today.
Not clear if it's just a freak day or the start of disaster.
He's plummeted from +10.7 in the 538 average to +10.4.
Given this rate of slump, Trump will take the lead in 35 days. Luckily the election is 14 days away.
Maybe Trump just didn't say anything stupid yesterday (or no more stupid than normal) and the poll is just reverting to the mean.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:36 am
by dyqik
Martin_B wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:34 am
lpm wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:11 pm
Jesus, Biden is really slumping in the polls today.
Not clear if it's just a freak day or the start of disaster.
He's plummeted from +10.7 in the 538 average to +10.4.
Given this rate of slump, Trump will take the lead in 35 days. Luckily the election is 14 days away.
Maybe Trump just didn't say anything stupid yesterday (or no more stupid than normal) and the poll is just reverting to the mean.
Still, good job he's not melted down over a CNN interview today, and doesn't have a debate with rising CoVID cases this week.
And that he's got plenty of money on hand for campaigning.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:59 am
by Martin_B
dyqik wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:36 am
Martin_B wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 12:34 am
lpm wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:11 pm
Jesus, Biden is really slumping in the polls today.
Not clear if it's just a freak day or the start of disaster.
He's plummeted from +10.7 in the 538 average to +10.4.
Given this rate of slump, Trump will take the lead in 35 days. Luckily the election is 14 days away.
Maybe Trump just didn't say anything stupid yesterday (or no more stupid than normal) and the poll is just reverting to the mean.
Still, good job he's not melted down over a CNN interview today, and doesn't have a debate with rising CoVID cases this week.
And that he's got plenty of money on hand for campaigning.
Yes, I heard about him claiming he can get money any time he wants by calling the CEO of Exxon and selling exploration rights for a billion dollars donation to his campaign funds. (Exxon had to announce that this hasn't happened.) I get that Trump *thinks* he's telling a joke, but no-one listens to that story and doesn't think "Yep, he'd try that; he's a dodgy bastard"!
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:08 am
by El Pollo Diablo
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:09 am
by El Pollo Diablo
Trump paid more taxes in China than in the US. there's a good line for Biden.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:55 am
by Brightonian
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 5:02 am
by Grumble
bolo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:45 pm
And you might disapprove of him personally, but vote for him anyway because anti-abortion judges are your top priority, or because you oppose the policies you expect Congress to pass if there's a Dem trifecta.
Yes but that would tend to make the voting intention higher than the approval rating, not lower. I can’t understand a person thinking he’s doing a good job but not voting for him.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 6:56 am
by Woodchopper
Grumble wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 5:02 am
bolo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:45 pm
And you might disapprove of him personally, but vote for him anyway because anti-abortion judges are your top priority, or because you oppose the policies you expect Congress to pass if there's a Dem trifecta.
Yes but that would tend to make the voting intention higher than the approval rating, not lower. I can’t understand a person thinking he’s doing a good job but not voting for him.
It could just be noise. From
here we are looking at an approval rating of 42% and 40% saying that they'd vote for him. The difference is within the margin of error.
If there is a real difference it could be because, as dyqik mentioned, some people approve of of Trump but also approve of Biden more.
Re: US Election
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:57 am
by dyqik
Woodchopper wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 6:56 am
Grumble wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 5:02 am
bolo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:45 pm
And you might disapprove of him personally, but vote for him anyway because anti-abortion judges are your top priority, or because you oppose the policies you expect Congress to pass if there's a Dem trifecta.
Yes but that would tend to make the voting intention higher than the approval rating, not lower. I can’t understand a person thinking he’s doing a good job but not voting for him.
It could just be noise. From
here we are looking at an approval rating of 42% and 40% saying that they'd vote for him. The difference is within the margin of error.
If there is a real difference it could be because, as dyqik mentioned, some people approve of of Trump but also approve of Biden more.
I'm also not sure if the questions for approval are that standardized. Do they mention Trump first, or "The President", etc. Meanwhile, the questions for voting intention are much more uniform.