2020 Presidential Election

[gumbomoop]

I won't be surprised if Biden offers a Cabinet position to Toomey, and maybe even to Johnson too. Both states have Democratic Governors who would, if Toomey/Johnson accepted the Cabinet positions, be able to appoint Democratic replacements for them. It's a two-fer: You gain a seat or two in the Senate as you seek that 50 vote threshold that you're unlikely to achieve with the Georgia runoffs, and then you have an incumbent running for those Senate seats in 2022.

I’d be shocked if Biden offered a spot to Johnson, who has gone full conspiracy-theory more than once. He’s done some ugly stuff. Toomey, yes, maybe, interesting.

[Bostondevil]

And I guess Alito (?) told PA to segregate those ballots which they happen to be doing anyway...

You guess Alito? Of course it was Alito. (Ok, Ok, it could have been Thomas.)

[CDu]

Last night NBC interviewed their stats guy, Lapinski (sp?) who gets to make the "calls" on states, and they asked him why he hadn't called PA yet.

His response was that they are finding that among the provisional ballots (which I think are what's left now, primarily), Trump is doing "much better" than he did with mail in ballots, where of course he trailed something like four to one.
But he didn't quantify "much better." *

So I guess it would be good for Joe to keep running up his margin (27k or so last I saw) in case Trump is doing better than we thought with provisionals.

* Santorum (so take it as you will) said that a lot of Repubs chose to get mail in ballots, but then, listening to Trump, didn't use them, came in and voted in person, and as such they received provisional ballots.
I guess this could be true, but countering that, I would think that I huge city like Phila would tend to have a lot of other (non GOP)provisionals anyway...

So there is Lapinski's rationale for the time being...

A few things:
1. We are not down to just provisionals. There are still like 90K mail-in ballots, and like 100K provisional ballots left. And not all of the provisionals will get counted.
2. The mail-in ballots are going like 80-20 to Biden. His lead is likely to be over 70K once the mail-in ballots are done. So Trump would have to win almost all of the provisionals to catch back up.
3. A decent chunk (maybe 20K) of those provisionals are from Philly. Trump isn’t gonna get a net gain on the provisionals in Philly. He might not get a net gain on provisionals at all.

[Rogue]

I think the Dems would be making a HUGE mistake by assuming that the "blue wall" has been rebuilt, or is intact, or anything like that. That wall is not solid at all. The Dems won PA, MI, and WI back by small margins, in extraordinary times -- a raging global pandemic -- against a historically unpopular and uniquely galvanizing and divisive President. Biden and Harris and the Dems would be wise to focus on the upper midwest over the next four years, listening to the concerns of the residents of those states - not just the big cities - and responding to them in a meaningful way. If they don't those folks are very, very open to returning right to the GOP in 2024 when the Dems don't have a bogeyman like Donald Trump to run against. And that blue wall will once again be shown to be made of cheese, leaving the Dems scratching their heads again about "what happened??

Alito is already getting involved in the Pennsylvania count . . .




The issue is not just that the polls were often off by more than the margin of error. It's also that they were always off in the same direction. Always overestimating the Democratic support and underestimating the Republican support. I don't know what the solution is, but I know there are lots of people who have lost all faith in the polls after this year. They were willing to give Silver and the actual pollsters a mulligan after 2016 because of how unusual the Trump personality and campaign were, but not again.

Think about it: Between the 2016 Presidential, the 2020 Presidential, and the 2020 Senate, 538 had the likelihood of Democratic victories at 70%, 90%, and 75%. They went one for three, with the one (the 90%) being extremely close in several states that decided the election. Not an easily defensible record.

It's just my opinion, no facts to back this up, but I think the polls are so off and like you said, always in favor of the Democrat, because of the media. I realize many don't think the media has a major bias, but at least half the country does. 3 of the 4 major media outlets, have made it clear that if you like Trump , you are a homophobe, racist, sexist ,lying person. When many of Trump supporters might be that, there are many who are not. So if a pollster would reach out to one of the non sexist homophobic racist supporters of Trump, they don't want to be associated with the others and blow off the pollster.

The polls are off, and they're consistently off in one direction.

[bundabergdevil]

I’d be shocked if Biden offered a spot to Johnson, who has gone full conspiracy-theory more than once. He’s done some ugly stuff. Toomey, yes, maybe, interesting.

Ron Johnson? He was actively involved in going after Biden's son. Not going to happen.

At some point, the Democrats need to ask themselves why they're the only ones extending the olive branch. Obama had a few GOP members in his cabinet - Hagel, LaHood, Gates, IIRC. Biden is considering it. As a voter with positions all over the policy map, I appreciate it and think seeking diverse views is the sign of a good leader. But, the GOP have been seeking a permanent majority (or permanent minority w/ majority rule) for a while. I'm not sure I can recall even symbolic Democratic appointment in the last few Republican administrations let alone a few major appointments like the ones Obama made (or that Biden is considering).

[CDu]

Biden’s lead in GA is up to 7.2K now.

[House P]

Last night NBC interviewed their stats guy, Lapinski (sp?) who gets to make the "calls" on states, and they asked him why he hadn't called PA yet.

His response was that they are finding that among the provisional ballots (which I think are what's left now, primarily), Trump is doing "much better" than he did with mail in ballots, where of course he trailed something like four to one.
But he didn't quantify "much better." *

So I guess it would be good for Joe to keep running up his margin (27k or so last I saw) in case Trump is doing better than we thought with provisionals.

* Santorum (so take it as you will) said that a lot of Repubs chose to get mail in ballots, but then, listening to Trump, didn't use them, came in and voted in person, and as such they received provisional ballots.
I guess this could be true, but countering that, I would think that I huge city like Phila would tend to have a lot of other (non GOP)provisionals anyway...

So there is Lapinski's rationale for the time being...

Nate Cohn and others have reported that the provisional ballots have been tracking the overall results for the county. So, in that sense they have been trending “more Republican” than the mail-in votes, but that is only because the mail-in votes are tracking heavily towards Biden, even in counties won by Biden.

If that is the case, the only way Trump makes up significant ground with the provisional ballots is if the are disproportionately coming from counties Trump won by huge margins. It has been reported that Philly has 19k provisional ballots and Allegheny county has 17k provisional ballots. That would suggest that at least a third of the provision ballots are coming from two of the most heavily Democratic areas in the state.

[budwom]

A few things:
1. We are not down to just provisionals. There are still like 90K mail-in ballots, and like 100K provisional ballots left. And not all of the provisionals will get counted.
2. The mail-in ballots are going like 80-20 to Biden. His lead is likely to be over 70K once the mail-in ballots are done. So Trump would have to win almost all of the provisionals to catch back up.
3. A decent chunk (maybe 20K) of those provisionals are from Philly. Trump isn’t gonna get a net gain on the provisionals in Philly. He might not get a net gain on provisionals at all.

that makes sense, but given that, I'm not sure why the stats guys are being so cautious...I guess they want to see the 27k lead run up considerably...

[CDu]

that makes sense, but given that, I'm not sure why the stats guys are being so cautious...I guess they want to see the 27k lead run up considerably...

Nate Cohn’s guess is that they are waiting for the lead to exceed the margin for recount (0.5%) or for all the votes to be counted, whichever comes first.

[budwom]

Nate Cohn’s guess is that they are waiting for the lead to exceed the margin for recount (0.5%) or for all the votes to be counted, whichever comes first.

is the recount threshold .5%? If so, (with roughly 7 million ballots) 35k would do it...i'd like to think that's achievable by today

[CDu]

is the recount threshold .5%? If so, (with roughly 7 million ballots) 35k would do it...i'd like to think that's achievable by today

Yes, and yes.

[Furniture]

It's just my opinion, no facts to back this up, but I think the polls are so off and like you said, always in favor of the Democrat, because of the media. I realize many don't think the media has a major bias, but at least half the country does. 3 of the 4 major media outlets, have made it clear that if you like Trump , you are a homophobe, racist, sexist ,lying person. When many of Trump supporters might be that, there are many who are not. So if a pollster would reach out to one of the non sexist homophobic racist supporters of Trump, they don't want to be associated with the others and blow off the pollster.

The polls are off, and they're consistently off in one direction.

Something is wrong when the margin of error is consistently in one direction...

[CDu]

Something is wrong when the margin of error is consistently in one direction...

Yes, as all have agreed, the polls were off problematically in one direction. Shift them all by 3% and we wind up where they should be, with results falling on either side of the mean. That is a problem. So clearly the polls need to go back to the drawing board if they want to get back to getting things right.

[Devilwin]

You guys need to use my scientific method of counting yard signs..lol Been right last two elections...

[Bostondevil]

It's just my opinion, no facts to back this up, but I think the polls are so off and like you said, always in favor of the Democrat, because of the media. I realize many don't think the media has a major bias, but at least half the country does. 3 of the 4 major media outlets, have made it clear that if you like Trump , you are a homophobe, racist, sexist ,lying person. When many of Trump supporters might be that, there are many who are not. So if a pollster would reach out to one of the non sexist homophobic racist supporters of Trump, they don't want to be associated with the others and blow off the pollster.

The polls are off, and they're consistently off in one direction.

It's just my opinion but I think the conservative media folks are much more to blame, they are the ones who keep saying that polls can't be trusted. They've poisoned the water so much that their claims have come true in Presidential Election years. We are dealing with lots of people who have been conditioned not to trust this stuff to the point that non-response bias is real. It doesn't seem to be happening in the midterms, at least not yet. Polls were largely correct in 2018. We'll see what happens in 2022. As for having no facts to back up the claim that the non-conservative media makes it clear that if you like Trump you are homophobe, racist, sexist, lying person - you've got that right. Lots of media outlets view Trump that way but all of his supporters? I'm not seeing that. There have been countless articles on the white working class man over the past 4 years that seek to understand and sympathize with his plight, way more focusing on that particular group than any other. Granted not all Trump supporters are white working class, but they are the ones that get the most attention, from all media outlets.

As to there being major bias in the media, as long as you include FOXNews and One America News and Newsmax and the Wall Street Journal and any other media outlet with a decidedly conservative bent in that statement, then yeah, I'll agree with you.

[CDu]

You guys need to use my scientific method of counting yard signs..lol Been right last two elections...

I prefer my method based on a shifted assumption of the polls, which looks like it will get 52 of 53 right (49 states plus NE2, ME2, and DC) to some count of signs in rural NC.

[Devilwin]

I prefer my method based on a shifted assumption of the polls, which looks like it will get 52 of 53 right (49 states plus NE2, ME2, and DC) to some count of signs in rural NC.

Just kidding. My "method" is far from scientific..

[CDu]

Just kidding. My "method" is far from scientific..

To be clear, my method was only loosely scientific (take the polls, shift them by a gut guess) . VERY loosely.

[Native]

It's just my opinion but I think the conservative media folks are much more to blame, they are the ones who keep saying that polls can't be trusted.

But if the polls are consistently off, wouldn’t that make this true?

[sagegrouse]

Prediction for the lull ...

Kamala Harris will not be the first woman to serve as vice president. Trump will resign to accept a pardon from Pence, and Nikki Haley will become VP for a very short time to add to her resume for 2024. You heard it here first!

To become VP, Nikki Haley would have to be appointed by Pence and confirmed by the Senate. When would that happen? And, because the VP does almost nothing anyway, why would we need to have a VP? We have gone long periods with a VP in the past, such as after:

Harrison death - 1841-1845, Taylor death - 1850-1853, Lincoln assassination -1865-1869, Garfield assassination - 1881-1885, McKinley assassination - 1901-1905, Harding death - 1923-1925, FDR death - 1945-1949, Kennedy assassination - 1963-1965. And brief periods after the Agnew resignation in 1973 and the ascension of Gerald Ford in 1974.