Jump to content
270soft Forum

Admin election prediction update


Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It is a waste of resources to send it to me, considering I've already voted by mail for Biden. I remember Clinton was blamed for being too conservative with money and resources. Biden seems to be doing the opposite. 

Both campaigns have been beyond obnoxious with their fundraising emails. Verges on stalking and literally from the same playbook.

 

3-5 emails a day asking to donate. By the 3rd or 4th one the title is, "I saw you haven't donated in ____ months ___, what is your problem?".

 

Not sure who they learn this from but I dont know why anyone would be persuaded by it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

With 1 month to go, it's time to update my election prediction. In my last update on Oct. 3rd, I shifted my % from 80% -> 85% likely Trump wins re-election, and I expect this number to go to 0

Put me in the boring non-prediction 50/50 corner, but that's where I'm at.  It's truly a coin flip for me on how it's going to turn out.  Biden will undoubtedly outperform 2016 Hillary Clinton, but th

Although polls cannot be relied upon entirely, it is important to remember that Biden is not Hillary. His approvals are much better than hers, and Biden appeals to critical voting demographics that Hi

Just now, PoliticalPundit said:

I just go back to Iowa, NH, Nevada where Democrats overwhelmingly rejected Biden. Is enthusiasm against Trump going to cause record numbers for Biden to win? We shall see. 

 

I live in Iowa, and the so-called "yard sign battle" is beginning to narrow. I live in rural Iowa, and the fact that Biden is even competitive with Trump in that department is astonishing. Trump yard signs got out early, but slowly Biden signs are catching up.

 

1 minute ago, PoliticalPundit said:

And like @admin_270 I just straight up don't believe polls. Just saw a clip in 2016 on ABC/GMA where the pollster is talking about enthusiasm and has Clinton at 50% and Trump had 38%. 38%!! And this was like a few weeks before the election. People like Nate Silver are con-artists relying solely on polls to make BS articles then claiming victory no matter who wins. 

 

Trump hadn't yet unified the Republican base, so a low enthusiasm made of mostly his primary supporters would be understandable. 

 

2 minutes ago, PoliticalPundit said:

And does the campaigning (polling aside) seem eerily similar to 2016? Clinton was making a play for TEXAS trying to run up the score and not once went to Wisconsin (or was it Michigan? I forget). Biden is doing 0 rallies every day and Clinton could barely muster 2-3 rallies in the last week of campaigning meanwhile Trump was going to like 6 states ending rallies at 3am. Obviously w his COVID I dont see it happening but Democrats will be kicking themselves for how poorly they've run the campaign/door knocking/ground game IF Trump wins. 

 

I agree with this if Trump ends up winning. But I think Biden may be a bit more secure than Clinton, but we'll obviously see if that pans out.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wiw said:

Trimp is like a cheating, spoiled, rotten kid and we have to let him win.

Democrats better hope it's a dominant night on Election Day for them in every swing state, bc this is going till January otherwise. If Trump's leading after election day and is somehow losing after mail in voting he's gonna scream rigged until the Supreme Court arrives. The biggest disaster in American Politics. 

 

For both parties sake and the country, I hope we get either a dominant 2016 win from Trump OR a dominant steamroll from Biden. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CPE said:

Agreed 100%.  If the authorities in charge of monitoring this election process do not get/maintain clear and transparent control over the electoral process, we are going to see chaos in the streets between November and January.  I will die on the hill that the mail-in ballots need to be counted by election night, or the day after.  Letting tensions simmer over what is perceived to be a rather opaque process is going to only pour gasoline on the fire of distrust in the electoral system.

 

4 minutes ago, Wiw said:

Trimp is like a cheating, spoiled, rotten kid and we have to let him win.

 

Just now, Hestia11 said:

While that would be a good result, that simply isn't how mail-in ballots work. It takes a long process to make sure that the ballot matches everything on record, and to do security checks. If those aren't followed, it will be even messier than waiting for those mail-in ballots to be processed. Everyone's vote should be counted - it doesn't matter if you're voting in person or not. It's your vote - that's the most American thing there is. If it takes longer to check them correctly, then that is what has to happen. Plus, Republicans don't want ballots counted *before* the election either, which would decrease strain upon the clerks that have to do all the counting on election night. So it can't be both and everything happens perfectly anyway, either they need to be allowed to be counted earlier, or they need more time after the election to count them. 

Of course, if the FEC were strictly NON-PARTISAN and mostly independent from the sitting government, like most other First World Nations' (except maybe Hungary and Singapore's) electoral agency or committee, and State Governments could not impose political and parochial interference in the process, this kind of chaos and electoral interference wouldn't be as much of a problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hestia11 said:

I live in Iowa, and the so-called "yard sign battle" is beginning to narrow. I live in rural Iowa, and the fact that Biden is even competitive with Trump in that department is astonishing. Trump yard signs got out early, but slowly Biden signs are catching up.

 

Trump hadn't yet unified the Republican base, so a low enthusiasm made of mostly his primary supporters would be understandable. 

 

I agree with this if Trump ends up winning. But I think Biden may be a bit more secure than Clinton, but we'll obviously see if that pans out.

Is Iowa even technically a swing state? That's interesting. Definitely could see Trump's campaign missing some states and we get a shocker or two Democrat win (like in 2016 but the reverse) even if Trump does end up winning Wisconsin, Florida etc... 

 

think they made a horrible mistake keeping Brad Pascale so long. Trump's campaign worked better w constant switch ups. He almost needs it so the BS can get cleaned up immediately, even though more BS immediately arrives. At least ideas don't become stale. 

 

--

If Trump ends up winning it will look so obvious in retrospect purely from a campaign standpoint. But Biden was never doing 6 rallies a day even in 2008. Like Chris Rock said on SNL, Trump's stamina is extraordinary. 

 

And yes, Clinton clearly had some severe dislike for her that helped Trump win which Biden doesn't have at all. I would have liked to see Biden campaign more in the Primary vs. just getting handed the win in SC to see how voters responded to him. that doesn't sit well with me. But I'm as clueless as anyone else w how voters will respond to Biden/anti Trump. I just don't buy the polls being as lopsided as they currently are. 

 

Like do people actually think the Shy Trump voters have gone down since 2016? If anything the country has become even more polarized. As I said before, I'd add even more % pt's to whatever polls are off by compared to 2016. It's just a Trump factor. If Rubio/Cruz whoever was running I wouldn't count on it as much 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PoliticalPundit said:

Iowa even technically a swing state? That's interesting. Definitely could see Trump's campaign missing some states and we get a shocker or two Democrat win (like in 2016 but the reverse) even if Trump does end up winning Wisconsin, Florida etc... 

The tariffs have not sat kindly here. Farmers (and astonishingly I see most Biden signs in rural areas) are angry as prices have hit new lows. 

Plus they dont like sycophants - Joni Ernst is in as much trouble because of that. Iowans like independents a lot, and respect them. Grassley and Harkin are two examples of that. 

3 minutes ago, PoliticalPundit said:

down since 2016? If anything the country has become even more polarized. As I said before, I'd add even more % pt's to whatever polls are off by compared to 2016. It's just a Trump factor. If Rubio/Cruz whoever was running I wouldn't count on it as muc

I believe they have. Trump=GOP now, so to express yourself as a Republican is to be a Trump voter. That wasnt the same in 2016 when the party still was split. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PoliticalPundit said:

For both parties sake and the country, I hope we get either a dominant 2016 win from Trump OR a dominant steamroll from Biden. 

Of course, neither seems very likely, so yeah, expect missiles to start flying!

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

The tariffs have not sat kindly here. Farmers (and astonishingly I see most Biden signs in rural areas) are angry as prices have hit new lows. 

Plus they dont like sycophants - Joni Ernst is in as much trouble because of that. Iowans like independents a lot, and respect them. Grassley and Harkin are two examples of that. 

I believe they have. Trump=GOP now, so to express yourself as a Republican is to be a Trump voter. That wasnt the same in 2016 when the party still was split. 

so why did Biden do so poorly in Iowa then in the primary? 

 

And in terms of shy Trump voters, I mean independents who aren't Republican. I don't think people are as bothered about the "racist, tweeting, etc" enough to actively vote for Biden than the media says.. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PoliticalPundit said:

so why did Biden do so poorly in Iowa then in the primary? 

 

And in terms of shy Trump voters, I mean independents who aren't Republican. I don't think people are as bothered about the "racist, tweeting, etc" enough to actively vote for Biden than the media says.. 

Primaries are very different from the general election, as you know. There were large Democratic turnout in the primary, which can lend itself to doing better in the general. It's not as though Biden's running against Bernie in November - he's running against Trump. This isn't a race against Democrats. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

Primaries are very different from the general election, as you know. There were large Democratic turnout in the primary, which can lend itself to doing better in the general. It's not as though Biden's running against Bernie in November - he's running against Trump. This isn't a race against Democrats. 

True, but I do think there's a crossover w Bernie/Trump voters on certain issues. Not sure if that's relevant to Iowa or not though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PoliticalPundit said:

True, but I do think there's a crossover w Bernie/Trump voters on certain issues. Not sure if that's relevant to Iowa or not though. 

There is, but not as much as I think there was in 2016. They wanted an outsider, and now they've seen what conservative leadership has gotten them, and a Biden administration would be much more preferential into getting progress done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

While that would be a good result, that simply isn't how mail-in ballots work. It takes a long process to make sure that the ballot matches everything on record, and to do security checks. If those aren't followed, it will be even messier than waiting for those mail-in ballots to be processed. Everyone's vote should be counted - it doesn't matter if you're voting in person or not. It's your vote - that's the most American thing there is. If it takes longer to check them correctly, then that is what has to happen. Plus, Republicans don't want ballots counted *before* the election either, which would decrease strain upon the clerks that have to do all the counting on election night. So it can't be both and everything happens perfectly anyway, either they need to be allowed to be counted earlier, or they need more time after the election to count them. 

To be honest, I agree with you on the point of counting them beforehand.  It wouldn't be that bad of an idea to be honest with you.  Anything to stop the powder keg that is going to develop in the weeks after Election Day.

On another note, I find the US obsession over mail-in voting rather interesting to be honest with you.  Trinidad and Jamaica recently have had early elections (these scenarios are on my list to create as well), and everything went ok with them from what I understand.  Mail-in would never work, pretty much every postal system in the Caribbean is a complete disaster, so they were held as they normally would be with voting being conducted in person.  Most notable effect is that both had drastically lower turnout levels than usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CPE said:

To be honest, I agree with you on the point of counting them beforehand.  It wouldn't be that bad of an idea to be honest with you.  Anything to stop the powder keg that is going to develop in the weeks after Election Day.

On another note, I find the US obsession over mail-in voting rather interesting to be honest with you.  Trinidad and Jamaica recently have had early elections (these scenarios are on my list to create as well), and everything went ok with them from what I understand.  Mail-in would never work, pretty much every postal system in the Caribbean is a complete disaster, so they were held as they normally would be with voting being conducted in person.  Most notable effect is that both had drastically lower turnout levels than usual.

I think whatever people are comfortable with is what they should do. If they're comfortable voting in person, then more power to them. But if they have conditions that would make them more susceptible to COVID (including age, illnesses, or other afflictions), then they should be able to vote by mail. It also depends on the area. Me, living in rural Iowa, would have no problem going to my community hall, voting quickly, and being out in likely under 10 minutes. Someone in metro DC or Atlanta, however, would have a much harder time with less polling places.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Wiw said:

Of course, neither seems very likely, so yeah, expect missiles to start flying!

Can it! Fear-mongering is not productive or welcome! It does no good for anyone EXCEPT far-right-wing extremists who use it to gain and hold power. Are you a far-right-wing extremist?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PoliticalPundit said:

 I'm curious what your thoughts @admin_270 are on the potential for corruption in mail in voting is. 

Not an expert on it. I am sure there is some possibility for mail in ballots to be used illegally, destroyed illegally, various SNAFUs, and so on. But there is potential for fraud in every form of voting. I don't know how it compares to other forms, but certainly there are different risks, and certainly this level of mail in voting is unprecedented in certain states.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Can it! Fear-mongering is not productive or welcome! It does no good for anyone EXCEPT far-right-wing extremists who use it to gain and hold power. Are you a far-right-wing extremist?

Quite the opposite, actually.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be short

In a 2000, 2004, 2008 2012, everything could happen because candidates and plateforms were different but had common grounds

In 2016 but even more in 2020, both parties used so different rethorics that now the electors can hardly switch from one candidate to another

And when Georges Floyd died I told myself "around 60% of Americans won't be okay with how Donald Trump responds" and I was mostly right.

50% of Americans want to get rid of Trump, 40% will support Trump wathever happens and 10% are independents and Republicans who have enough of Trump even if they already voted for a republican in the past. Their vote will be really difficult to be earned back (a part of the 10% will vote Trump in the end but not more than half of them max).

The events of the 2020 election have made this race a stable one, we are very far from the 1988 and 1992 elections where switching from a candidate or a party to another during an election was mostly okay.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin_270another factor is 3rd party. It appears Libertarians are getting about 3 to 2% and Green is getting 1% or less. Green is also in far less ballots, including in crucial states. Kanye is only a write in basically. I can only see Trump supporters really writing him in. Wouldn’t make sense for anyone already leaning Biden. 

The Libertarian Party nominee is less of a moderate than the Johnson/Weld ticket, which probably means the ticket will take more Trump voters than Biden voters. This is reflected in the latest Arizona poll (A+ polling company too. Biden 49% Trump 41% and Libertarian 3%. If that 3% were applied to Trump you’d have about the average margin Biden is winning by in this state. 
 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Edouard said:

I will be short

In a 2000, 2004, 2008 2012, everything could happen because candidates and plateforms were different but had common grounds

In 2016 but even more in 2020, both parties used so different rethorics that now the electors can hardly switch from one candidate to another

And when Georges Floyd died I told myself "around 60% of Americans won't be okay with how Donald Trump responds" and I was mostly right.

50% of Americans want to get rid of Trump, 40% will support Trump wathever happens and 10% are independents and Republicans who have enough of Trump even if they already voted for a republican in the past. Their vote will be really difficult to be earned back (a part of the 10% will vote Trump in the end but not more than half of them max).

The events of the 2020 election have made this race a stable one, we are very far from the 1988 and 1992 elections where switching from a candidate or a party to another during an election was mostly okay.

and how do you know those polls are accurate? What if most trump supporters just hang up the phone? 

 

and this 50% or whatever thing doesn't matter. It's purely the EC. 

 

I really think people are not accounting a lot of trump supporters and enthusiasm.. time will tell obviously. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be saying "bla bla trump beat hillary after losing in the polls bla bla the polls are biased bla bla" right now, but despite me agreeing with part of that I don't think this streak will continue. I genuinely cannot be sure. I would have to make a "non-prediction" as the glorious admin calls it and go 50-50, maybe 51 in trumps favor but thats barely anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

without making a long post, which I will make closer to election day, I would say 85% Biden. With 10% of Trump winning being he does something unethical to win (Republican legislation electors switching to Trump, and overturning a states results as an example) and 5% Trump fairly wins. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd give Biden a 70% chance of winning. Interesting perspective to bring up the 100 other non-polling metrics, but by far polling is the most important (and I agree it gets more important nearer to the election.)

Here's my prediction below, which I created a few weeks ago and still stand by today. 335-203, not quite a landslide, but a solid victory for Joe.

https://www.270towin.com/maps/BNWVp 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I buy a lot of this article

 

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/06/four-notes-election-reporter-notebook-426599

 

especially absentee ballots being disqualified in important swing states

 

and Trump losing by a LOT with women. While I do think his POC vote will increase by a lot more than people think, white women are going to be a major issue for Trump. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...