The Trump Presidency

First topic message reminder :

Galted wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:Just between us few on here... I have a feeling the Queen likes Trump.

Don't ask me to explain why but their body language seemed to be in a sort of comfortable harmony when they stood beside each other in June or whenever it was. And I think he quite likes all of that pomp and ceremony... as someone who likes being the centre of attention would.

He's a cross between a court jester and a village idiot so she would love him. Probably lets him run round the grounds with the corgis.

Yes... and also the fact that he has just a touch of olde worlde charm (probably brutally drummed into him from the NY Military Academy) despite his apparently frightening unpredictability in this day and age.

Marco Rubio to be President in 2024 probably get great odds for those that like a flutter..

Florida Senator....So he will win that....Smart...Polished...Hispanic...and up against Harris who will have a crap economy she won't get away with blaming Trump for.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A kid with no qualifications acquiring...

3.5m from a Russian oligarch's wife.

1.5m for work on the board of Burisma..

5m in Consulting fees from a Company tied to the Chinese Govt..

....and all without any help from his Dad who was the Vice President at the time..

Talented kid for sure.

Got to love these two post Michigan s ebate polls..

Gravis
Biden 55
Trump 42

Trafalgar
Trump 48
Biden 46

Prove that. No qualifications? None? Who cares anyway - as I said before, but you've ignored it would appear, people may have given HB money hoping for influence w/ JB, but that doesn't mean anything if it can't be shown that it did, in fact, garner access to JB. Compared to Trump family corruption, graft and nepotism, even if true it's small beer and it's not even looking like it's true either just now...

You need to stop reading the National Enquirer.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I actually feel quite sorry for America. Even if Biden wins, the partisan hatred shows no sign of abating. Even worse, we aren't far from the same position in the UK.

Biden isn't winning because Trump is racist...He is winning because Covid has screwed up Trump's re-election with a prior thriving Economy turning pear shaped.

America is a group of States basically joined together at Election time it's not like the UK...Every State has its own laws and process...If standard of living is decent People re-elect the incumbent twas always so...

Perhaps Taft, Adams and Chester Arthur being the three exceptions...They had other problems though...Arthur's lack of corruption upset the New York faction...Taft had Roosevelt splitting his vote and Adams lost to the John Wayne of his day in the great Andy J..

The only reason Trump still has a sniff is because he isn't a politician...US is sick of those..

Always been partisan problems and always will be because of Roe v Wade and the fact we still have generations still around from the Civil rights hostilities of the Johnson era passing on their toxic spew..

Covid will make things worse because these things do get worse in hard times when People look for someone to blame.

But Black Americans should remember that White v Black wealth widened under Obama and Clinton put more blacks away than any other President in modern history and it was Biden's bill.

But only Trump is racist apparently....Though he is racist.

I get this, surprising though it may seem to you. At least there's a bright spot in all the Covid gloom. However, if America is happy to have Trump as President despite the fact that he's a corrupt, racist, misogynistic sociopath, that's up to them. IMO he's a disgrace to that Office. American politics are broken as things stand and those three arms of the executive are so far from independent now, it's a farce.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Marco Rubio to be President in 2024 probably get great odds for those that like a flutter..

Florida Senator....So he will win that....Smart...Polished...Hispanic...and up against Harris who  will have a crap economy she won't get away with blaming Trump for.

Another reason US politics is FUBAR. Must be nice living in the states that don't contribute a lot to the electoral College - no-one gives a 4X about you.

I'm afraid America is in for a period (8? 12? 16? years) where they'll have to deal w/ this polarised poison and a bunch of supine, power-at-any-cost politicians. Hopefully, they'll come out of this for the better.

Putin, Xi et al must be laughing their nuts off - two permanent members of the UN Security Council whose internal politics have gone mad.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Marco Rubio to be President in 2024 probably get great odds for those that like a flutter..

Florida Senator....So he will win that....Smart...Polished...Hispanic...and up against Harris who  will have a crap economy she won't get away with blaming Trump for.

Another reason US politics is FUBAR. Must be nice living in the states that don't contribute a lot to the electoral College - no-one gives a 4X about you.

I'm afraid America is in for a period (8? 12? 16? years) where they'll have to deal w/ this polarised poison and a bunch of supine, power-at-any-cost politicians. Hopefully, they'll come out of this for the better.

Putin, Xi et al must be laughing their nuts off - two permanent members of the UN Security Council whose internal politics have gone mad.

Maybe if you knew the history of the USA you will realise that its more democratic and tolerant than it has ever been....

Rubio?

About as much chance of becoming President as I do. Dull establishment figure, and produces all the excitement to the electorate that Jeb Bush did. Nearly 3/4s of Florida didn't vote for him during the 2016 Republican primaries.

Duty281 wrote:Rubio?

About as much chance of becoming President as I do. Dull establishment figure,  and produces all the excitement to the electorate that Jeb Bush did. Nearly 3/4s of Florida didn't vote for him during the 2016 Republican primaries.

Rubio was favourite until Trump entered the race...He has all the data and State wide contacts from his first run and he can write of the Christie incident that killed his campaign by saying 2016 was too early for him....

Politics 1-2-3......When you are older you will understand.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rubio?

About as much chance of becoming President as I do. Dull establishment figure,  and produces all the excitement to the electorate that Jeb Bush did. Nearly 3/4s of Florida didn't vote for him during the 2016 Republican primaries.

Rubio was favourite until Trump entered the race...He has all the data and State wide contacts from his first run and he can write of the Christie incident that killed his campaign by saying 2016 was too early for him....

Politics 1-2-3......When you are older you will understand.

Incorrect, Jeb Bush was favourite before Trump entered the race. Him and Scott Walker.

And don't you worry, Truss, the amount of money I've made betting on politics over the past five years, I think I understand it wonderfully well.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Spoke with a Conservative Councillor years ago at a dinner party and he said he thought Canvassing was a waste of time and it didn't change a vote

The point of canvassing isn't to change votes. The point of canvassing is to identify where your voters are so you can enlist a GOTV operation on polling day, and contact them in time for future elections.

Silly Tory councillor.

Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Spoke with a Conservative Councillor years ago at a dinner party and he said he thought Canvassing was a waste of time and it didn't change a vote

The point of canvassing isn't to change votes. The point of canvassing is to identify where your voters are so you can enlist a GOTV operation on polling day, and contact them in time for future elections.

Silly Tory councillor.

Parties already have canvas records.  We have never voted Lib Dem and yet we get Lib Dem canvassers the most.

Politics is fluid of course it's to change votes as well as protect your own.....Some think that in places where the demographic is encouraging they can twist the arm of disillusioned types or in some cases get non voters to turnout because they welcome a visit.  "Showing interest" as it were....

Back to Rubio....He will also have name recognition from 2016 and that's always a good thing.  Reagan, Roosevelt and Bush sr both lost primaries previously before coming on strong to the WH.  Bob Dole, Hubert Humphrey both lost before winning the primary later on.  A lot more examples but that's enough.

Duty281 wrote:Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

Rasmussen will be hoping their 1% prediction is somewhat more accurate than for the 2018 mid-terms.

Duty281 wrote:Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

50% of voters have already voted..

Yougov usa....Of those who have already voted..

Michigan
----------
Biden..75%
Trump 23%

You gettting the picture now ??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Marco Rubio to be President in 2024 probably get great odds for those that like a flutter..

Florida Senator....So he will win that....Smart...Polished...Hispanic...and up against Harris who  will have a crap economy she won't get away with blaming Trump for.

Another reason US politics is FUBAR. Must be nice living in the states that don't contribute a lot to the electoral College - no-one gives a 4X about you.

I'm afraid America is in for a period (8? 12? 16? years) where they'll have to deal w/ this polarised poison and a bunch of supine, power-at-any-cost politicians. Hopefully, they'll come out of this for the better.

Putin, Xi et al must be laughing their nuts off - two permanent members of the UN Security Council whose internal politics have gone mad.

Maybe if you knew the history of the USA you will realise that its more democratic and tolerant than it has ever been....

Arguably. It's all relative though. Being more democratic and tolerant than its ever been may not mean that much. You could argue the same of Russia or China.
Anyway, the point I'm making is America is going backwards just now. Weak, spineless politicians (much like here to be fair) and all that bile/hatred. I don't think it'll last (at least, I hope not), but they're going to have to go through a period of scheisse to get to a better place than they are now. Ditto the UK.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

50% of voters have already voted..

Yougov usa....Of those who have already voted..

Michigan
----------
Biden..75%
Trump 23%

You gettting the picture now ??

Interesting numbers. I hope the picture is correct. That said, we'll have far less to chat about if the Oompa Loompa has departed...

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

Rasmussen will be hoping their 1% prediction is somewhat more accurate than for the 2018 mid-terms.

I don't think Rasmussen have it correct. They've been polling Trump's approval ratings as above 50% for the past few days as well. Mind you, maybe they're right (and the Trafalgar polling lot), everyone else is wrong, and Trump wins with 350+ EC votes.

Wouldn't count on it though...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rasmussen General Election poll:

Trump 48 (+2)
Biden 47 (-2)

Don't be silly.

50% of voters have already voted..

Yougov usa....Of those who have already voted..

Michigan
----------
Biden..75%
Trump 23%

You gettting the picture now ??

Don't think anyone doubts that Biden's winning comfortably out of the early voters. The key question is whether voter turnout on the day, for the Republicans, can overhaul the early voters in the key states, as happened in 2016.

This is the choice..

Yougov USA...Do you think Biden is corrupt ??

Yes 40%
No..47%

Do you think Trump is corrupt ??

Yes 53%
No..39%

George Washington must be turning in his grave.

Duty281 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Spoiler:

.

Spoiler:

One week to go. Trump's polling advance in most of the 'key' states and some of the 'soft blue' states shows no sign of ending.

1) Texas is still a little close for Trump's liking, but he posted poll leads of +4 and +5 recently. This should, almost certainly, be a Trump victory.

2) Iowa's also too close for Trump's liking. At the moment it's probably in too-close-to-call territory, though you'd still expect Trump to pull through in this state. Lack of polling data here recently blurs the picture.

3) Arizona was pretty stable for Biden until recently. Polling averages had him at around a 4% lead around 9-10 days ago, now he's down to 2% and still sinking. Trump recently posted his first non-Trafalgar polling lead in this state for about a month. I think Trump's a narrow favourite in this state.

4) Similar in Florida. 17 days ago Biden had a solid 4% polling average lead, now it's come down to 1%. Trump should be taking Florida, I'd be surprised if he didn't.

5) Georgia is also trending towards Trump. Biden had an average 2% lead in this state ten days ago, now Trump has a slender advantage of around 0.5% which is continuing upwards. I expect to see consistent leads for Trump in this state over the next week. Strong chance Trump wins here.

6) Same in Ohio. At the start of October, Biden had a decent 3% lead, now Trump's firmly on the upward trajectory with a 0.5% lead. Four of the last six polls have shown Trump leads. Near nailed-on that Trump wins this one.

7) In North Carolina, Biden's lead has decreased from just over 3% to just over 1% in a matter of two weeks. This one is similar to Arizona in that Biden is still consistently in the lead in the polling, but the leads are gradually eroding. Like Arizona, I think Trump's a narrow favourite, but it's a very tight race.

8) Now some good news for Biden. Michigan shows little sign of backing Trump. Bar the Trafalgar Group polling, Biden has a strong advantage in this state and is on the upward trend. Near certainty that Michigan backs Biden.

9) Minnesota's frustrating. Lack of clear data in this state, similar to Iowa. Biden's average lead went from 9% to 6% in the space of 9 days between the 13th-22nd of this month, but nothing since then. Should be a Democrat state, but I wouldn't put the house on it.

10) Same in Nevada. This one should be going blue, but there's a lack of consistent polling data. Indications are it's a tighter race than Minnesota, but even so Biden should be confident of a victory here.

11) No worries for Biden about New Hampshire. Again not much data, but the Democrats have some good leads here which makes them clear favourites.

12) But there are plenty of worries for Biden in Pennsylvania. Trump posted his first poll lead here recently, as I thought he would. Whilst for now it's one of a kind, it follows a trend where Biden's lead has decreased from 7% to 4.5% in two weeks. I think Trump will pinch this state, he's expending a lot of effort into winning this one.

13) Wisconsin. Looks pretty solidly Blue. Biden's lead has decreased a little, but Trump isn't making enough inroads as yet to overturn it.

So, as things stand, I think Trump's a very-narrow favourite (55%-45%) to win a second term. My current prediction, subject to change, is he wins the EC by about 279-259. This is provided, of course, that he keeps the current momentum going for another week and no scandals or earth-shattering news happens in that time. But I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Biden wins it because he only needs one of the tight races in Arizona/NC/Florida/Pennsylvania to fall his way to win.

If the polling has an unaccounted for 'shy Trump' factor and/or over-represented Biden, I could see Trump getting over 300 on the EC. However, if it's the other way round and the polling has undercooked Biden and/or over-represented Trump, Biden should comfortably win the Presidency and get as high as 350 on the EC.

Great post Duty....Good analysis with one big flaw.

50% of the votes are in and Biden has a massive lead.

Trump needs double digit leads in Michigan and probably Penn.

He is still trailing in the majority of polls in Michigan and on the polls he is not he is only one or two points ahead.  Yet to see a poll lead for him in Penn.

I give Trump a 5% chance not 55%.

But good stuff anyway enjoyed reading it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great post Duty....Good analysis with one big flaw.

50% of the votes are in and Biden has a massive lead.

Trump needs double digit leads in Michigan and probably Penn.

He is still trailing in the majority of polls in Michigan and the of the polls he is not he is only one or two points ahead.  Yet to see a poll lead for him in Penn.

I give Trump a 5% chance not 55%.

But good stuff anyway enjoyed reading it.

I don't quite get why he wilfully ignores that fact, the election is done and dusted already.

I'll be gobsmacked if Trump were to win, but part of me thinks it's all too likely. Despite everything he's said, the nepotism and corruption of his family, the corruption of the DoJ, what's been done and is going on w/ GOP-driven packing of the lower Courts etc etc, I wouldn't be surprised if he were to 'win'. Kavanaugh has opined from the SCOTUS recently that votes will only count if they arrive by polling day, despite that not being the case in previous elections nationally and at various State levels.

We'll see how it plays out, but it's going to be a mess for years. If Biden/Harris win, it'll be a huge ask for them to even begin to turn around the political damage that's been done by Trump's scorched earth approach.

Best case if Trump wins, is the rest of the World simply ignore him and the USA for four years.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great post Duty....Good analysis with one big flaw.

50% of the votes are in and Biden has a massive lead.

Trump needs double digit leads in Michigan and probably Penn.

He is still trailing in the majority of polls in Michigan and on the polls he is not he is only one or two points ahead.  Yet to see a poll lead for him in Penn.

I give Trump a 5% chance not 55%.

But good stuff anyway enjoyed reading it.

The polls incorporate early voting. Do you grasp this point? It's not a case that, for instance, a poll average saying that Trump leads by 1% in Ohio, means that he'll only win by 1% on on-the-day voting (if said polling average is accurate), whilst excluding all the early votes. It incorporates all votes. Biden wins heavily on the early votes (like Clinton in 2016). Trump will win heavily on on-the-day votes (also like in 2016). Together it makes it a close race.

"Some statistical indicators are more useful than others. Data on early voting, for instance, usually doesn’t provide much predictive insight. Historically, the relationship between early voting in a state and the final voting totals there has been weak, and attempts to make inferences from early voting data have made fools of otherwise smart people. In the 2014 midterms, Democrats used early-vote numbers to claim that the polls were underrating their chances. Instead, it was Republicans who substantially beat the polls.

None of this deterred reporters and analysts from frequently citing early vote data in the closing weeks of last year’s presidential campaign, very often taking it to be a favorable indicator for Hillary Clinton. On Oct. 23, for instance, The New York Times argued that because Clinton had banked votes in North Carolina and Florida, it might already be too late for Donald Trump to come back in those states."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/early-voting-was-a-misleading-indicator/

Now you are right to say that early votes are coming in in greater numbers than ever before (a continuing upward trend). But this lacks context as to who, precisely, is responsible for this increase. If it were independent voters voting early and in great numbers, you could well have a point. But the ones who are actually voting early and in great numbers are those who are already solidly anti-Trump, some being pro-Trump. By and large, the independent voters, the ones who do decide elections, have not yet voted in high numbers, and a lot of Trump's base are coming out on Election Day.

Turnout is also expected to be one of the highest in US election history, so you might be misled to assume that 50% of the votes are already in.

I wouldn't worry about Michigan, personally. Can't see Trump winning it, and he doesn't need it for the Presidency.

Bookmakers currently make Biden a 67% favourite, so you should get your money on while you can if you think he's as strong as 95%.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Of course....Why I posted 75-23 Biden lead in Michigan already..

Trump needs double digit leads....because with voters left Trump is only 28 points ahead.

Look The Economist gives Trump a 5% chance.
Fivethirtyeight gives Trump an 11% chance.

Trump needs double digit leads on bellwether state regular polls.

Turnout will be higher this year you are right and sadly for Trump record numbers have voted EARLY..

No he doesn't, because that's not how it works. For instance, a poll that came out today in Pennsylvania:

Biden 48 (+0)
Trump 48 (+2)

That's every voter, the early ones and the on-the-day ones, not just the latter group. Trump doesn't need a 10% lead in this poll to break even.

And you are subscribing far too much importance to early votes. Imagine, for instance, that 65 million people in the USA are going to vote for Biden. If 50 million of those choose to vote early, say, then that equals record-breaking numbers. But does it shift the dynamic of the election, or the numbers who are going to vote for Biden? No, it just means they voted early rather than on the day. It all counts the same.

FiveThirtyEight do give Trump a 11% chance, but that shoots up to 68% if Trump takes Pennsylvania.

Where do you get your figures from Duty? The most recent data from fivethirtyeight differs from what you posted in quite a number of the states you listed.

E.g. 7) In North Carolina, Biden's lead has decreased from just over 3% to just over 1% in a matter of two weeks.

But fivethirtyeight has Biden at +2.4 (more than double what it was a month ago).

JuliusHMarx wrote:Where do you get your figures from Duty? The most recent data from fivethirtyeight differs from what you posted in quite a number of the states you listed.

E.g. 7) In North Carolina, Biden's lead has decreased from just over 3% to just over 1% in a matter of two weeks.

But fivethirtyeight has Biden at +2.4 (more than double what it was a month ago).

Sorry, should have clarified the averages were taken from RealClearPolitics.

Just found the source of Truss' quoted 75-23 Michigan poll and it confirms what I thought in that early voters are going heavily for Biden, but Election Day voters are mostly for Trump. So this poll says that:

Overall, Michigan is 52-42% in favour of Biden in this poll. That's every voter, the early ones and the on-the-day ones.

Those who have already voted are breaking 75-23% in favour of Biden. Those who have not yet voted, but are still likely to, are 57-35% in favour of Trump. The early group comprises 43% of the overall voting block, the later group the remaining 57%.

There's two more results in this poll.

Pennsylvania is overall 52-44% in favour of Biden in this poll. Those who have already voted are 87-9% (!) in favour of Biden. Those who have not yet voted, but are likely too, are 59-38% in favour of Trump. The early group comprises 29% of the overall voting block, the later group the remaining 71%.

Wisconsin is overall 53-44% in favour of Biden in this poll. Those who have already voted are 73-26% in favour of Biden. Those who have not yet voted, but are likely too, are 57-39% in favour of Trump. The early group comprises 41% of the overall voting block, the later group the remaining 59%.

Overall, according to this poll in those three states, 86% of likely Trump voters plan to vote on Election Day, 55% of likely Biden voters plan to vote on Election Day.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d9dBaTakMFNbWgeu_CATXf3iUDa32vaq/view

Wrt to early voting, they say a Biden the hand is worth two in the George W Bush

Third Quarter GDP figures for the USA get released tomorrow. The headline figures* are going to produce a big, big boost for Trump as he tries to get voters to the polls on Election Day in huge droves. It will tie in brilliantly with his campaign message that he's a better choice than Biden to manage the economic recovery of his country over the next four years, and hammer home his steady advantage on the economy v Biden.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/27/economy/gdp-report-third-quarter-preview/index.html

*And yes, I know these gains are just making up for previous losses incurred.

And the news that he's ended the pandemic is just fantastic.

Wall Street only fell by 3% yesterday. Yay Trump.

Trump doing as many as 13 rallies in the next four days. And he's aiming to attack the 'soft blue' states with four visits to Pennsylvania, three to Michigan, and one each in Minnesota and Wisconsin. The others are in the usual spots of Florida, Georgia and possibly North Carolina.

It's interesting that he's targeting Michigan so much. Conventional polling seems to indicate it's out of reach, and even further away from going red than Minnesota + Wisconsin, but maybe his internal campaign polling is saying different.

Either way, he's trying to emulate Truman's bottom-of-the-ninth comeback in '48 and setting about it in a similar fashion.

Biden, meanwhile, is incredibly sedate by comparison, perhaps deliberately so. In the last eleven days, he's only done four tiny, low-key events outside the safe state of Delaware (in NC, Penn. Georgia, Florida). Then Wisconsin and Iowa tomorrow, maybe Michigan on Saturday.

Trump's trying to make up the deficit in eyeballs from a lack of money to run ads apparently by getting free coverage from rallies.

GSC wrote:Trump's trying to make up the deficit in eyeballs from a lack of money to run ads apparently by getting free coverage from rallies.

More chances to spread covid to his supporters

Saw someone tweeting that Facebook have been charging the democrats more for adds than GOP.

Spot the difference..Michigan.

Trafalgar
Trump 49
Biden..47

Swayable
Biden 59
Trump 40

Trafalgar has Trump winning Florida, Ohio, Iowa and closing down Biden in Penn and Mich.

Without early voting this Election would be close..

'What Ifs' don't pay the rent..

Though the early voting numbers aren't coming out anywhere near as big as the polling indicates for Biden, so I'd be concerned if I were him with the red wave set to come out on Election Day.

53% of early ballots returned in Texas are from GOP registered voters. 25% in Pennsylvania... quite a bit higher than the 9% forecast in one previous poll. 43% in Wisconsin when the polling has it in the 20s. 41% in Michigan when, again, the polling has it in the 20s.

According to another poll, in North Carolina 30% of Republican voters are voting on the day, compared to just 8% of Democrat voters. So it's another concern for Biden when you see 31% of the overall early returns are from Republican voters.

And the long early voting lines in Georgia? 51% of early ballots are coming in from Republican-registered voters.

With Trump in a double-digit lead with voters on Election Day, these early numbers aren't good for Biden. Frankly, they're terrible.

if the numbers are terrible for Biden, why do 538 have Biden with an 89% chance of winning, given that they have access to all the same data? Are you saying you are right, but they are wrong?

JuliusHMarx wrote:if the numbers are terrible for Biden, why do 538 have Biden with an 89% chance of winning, given that they have access to all the same data? Are you saying you are right, but they are wrong?

Personally, I don't find 538 to be a good predictor. They have been ridiculously partisan in the past - once claiming Trump had more chance of being in the NBA Finals than winning the Republican nomination, and saying Sanders would struggle to win any states past Iowa and New Hampshire in the 2016 primaries (he won 20+ more!).

You can draw your own conclusions from the data. All I'm saying in the above post is that the early vote numbers are nowhere near as big for Biden as the polls (the few polls that have directly asked for early vote numbers) said they would be in a number of states.

One example, this poll (linked-below) in Texas reads:

Those voting by mail or absentee ballot - 63% Biden , 31% Trump
Those voting at an early voting location - 48% Biden, 46% Trump
Those voting on Election Day - 62% Trump, 32% Biden
Overall figures - 47% Biden, 47% Trump

https://poll.qu.edu/pennsylvania/release-detail?ReleaseID=3680

So Biden should, if that poll is accurate, have a lead amongst the early voters.

But the NBC-projected statistics show that of the 8.49 million ballots returned, both by mail (16% of the early total) and early in-person voters (84%), Republican-registered voters account for 53%, Democrats 37% and independents 10%. It's obviously not an exact science, because you get a tiny % of Republican voters voting Democrat and vice versa, but these statistics indicate a healthy lead for Trump in Texas with early voters, which is the opposite of what is widely believed to happen.

And it's the same story across multiple other states. We're not seeing Biden's lead as big as it should be with the early voters, apart from in safe blue states with huge populations like California and New York.

William Hill are offering 50/1 on Trump winning (for new customers, t's & c's etc).

Paid out in minuscule free bets, being the key T&C on that one! The general odds haven't moved much recently - Biden still 1/2, Trump 17/10.

Haven't seen much mainstream media commentary on what I mentioned above, though there was this article yesterday.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2020/10/29/trump-by-a-landslide-in-texas-early-voting-numbers-are-diverging-strongly-from-the-polls/?sh=6751be261fca

It's hard to read much into it - maybe covid, or other factors, has led Republicans to vote early this time, so they won't turn out so much on the day - especially since the early voting total has already surpassed the overall total from 2016. Can't be that many left who haven't voted, relatively speaking. After all, they can only vote once (despite Trump suggesting they try to vote twice - I think it was part of his 'law and order, unless breaking the law helps me' stance).
Texas has never looked like going Biden's way, in any case.

So the early voting numbers by party registration in the key states (ongoing of course):

Texas - 53% Rep. 37% Dem. 10% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). If accurate, terrible for Biden.
Ohio - 49% Rep. 38% Dem. 13% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). If accurate, no way Biden's winning here.
Minnesota - 31% Rep. 46% Dem. 23% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Good for Biden.
Wisconsin - 43% Rep. 35% Dem. 22% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Terrible for Biden, if accurate, especially with 3/4s of the early vote being mail-in. Trump might have a half-decent chance in this state if these figures are correct.
Michigan - 41% Rep. 39% Dem. 20% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Woeful for Biden, if accurate, well below the 75% in the earlier poll that Truss brought up.
Georgia - 51% Rep. 42% Dem. 7% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Same as Ohio.

Iowa - 32% Rep. 48% Dem. 20% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Good for Biden, but far from insurmountable for Trump.
Arizona - 37% Rep. 38% Dem. 25% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Poor for Biden. A tiny lead here, possibly even a small deficit, is a worrying position to be in from the early votes. Mail-in ballots can continue here until Election Day.
Florida - 38% Rep. 40% Dem. 22% Ind/Other. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Underwhelming for Biden, particularly with Trump able to engineer a high-turnout on Election Day like in 2016.
North Carolina - 31% Rep. 39% Dem. 30% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Solid for Biden, but he'll be needing most of those independents to break for him.
Pennsylvania - 22% Rep. 68% Dem. 10% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). On the face of it, good for Biden, however the polling I've seen has anticipated a 80%+ Dem. vote amongst the early voters in Pennsylvania, mostly because it's all mail-in. So some caution required here.
Nevada - 36% Rep. 40% Dem. 24% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Nowhere near as strong as you'd expect for Biden.
New Hampshire - 21% Rep. 52% Dem. 27% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). That's more like it for Biden. Near watertight lead here.

I might argue from glancing at the figures that the Republicans are sightly over-weighted in the projected data.

Even so, these figures are tremendously concerning for Biden, and there's no way we're seeing the strong, dominant leads from early-voting that we thought we would in most states. Texas/Ohio/Wisconsin/Michigan/Georgia/Arizona/Florida/Nevada all look decent for Trump from this data.

There's certainly an element, I think, of more Republicans voting early than you would ordinarily expect, but they are still going to have a huge turnout advantage on election day over the Democrats.

Early voting has passed 80 million, but it's expected (I think) that the total number of votes could go as high as 150 million (65% turnout), so there's still plenty  of people left to vote.

I disagree that Texas has never looked like going Biden's way. He's had a number of narrow poll leads in that state and always threatened to turn it blue. He still might turn it blue.

He might, but given that it's 44 years since it last voted Democrat, if it did, it would indicate a landslide victory.

Yes, if Biden took Texas you'd expect him to roll-up all of the key battleground states, like Florida and Ohio, too. Would give him 412 on the EC.

Duty281 wrote:So the early voting numbers by party registration in the key states (ongoing of course):

Texas - 53% Rep. 37% Dem. 10% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). If accurate, terrible for Biden.
Ohio - 49% Rep. 38% Dem. 13% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). If accurate, no way Biden's winning here.
Minnesota - 31% Rep. 46% Dem. 23% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Good for Biden.
Wisconsin - 43% Rep. 35% Dem. 22% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Terrible for Biden, if accurate, especially with 3/4s of the early vote being mail-in. Trump might have a half-decent chance in this state if these figures are correct.
Michigan - 41% Rep. 39% Dem. 20% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Woeful for Biden, if accurate, well below the 75% in the earlier poll that Truss brought up.
Georgia - 51% Rep. 42% Dem. 7% Ind. (Projected data NBC/TargetSmart). Same as Ohio.

Iowa - 32% Rep. 48% Dem. 20% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Good for Biden, but far from insurmountable for Trump.
Arizona - 37% Rep. 38% Dem. 25% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Poor for Biden. A tiny lead here, possibly even a small deficit, is a worrying position to be in from the early votes. Mail-in ballots can continue here until Election Day.
Florida - 38% Rep. 40% Dem. 22% Ind/Other. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Underwhelming for Biden, particularly with Trump able to engineer a high-turnout on Election Day like in 2016.
North Carolina - 31% Rep. 39% Dem. 30% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Solid for Biden, but he'll be needing most of those independents to break for him.
Pennsylvania - 22% Rep. 68% Dem. 10% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). On the face of it, good for Biden, however the polling I've seen has anticipated a 80%+ Dem. vote amongst the early voters in Pennsylvania, mostly because it's all mail-in. So some caution required here.
Nevada - 36% Rep. 40% Dem. 24% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). Nowhere near as strong as you'd expect for Biden.
New Hampshire - 21% Rep. 52% Dem. 27% Ind. (Publicly available/100% accurate). That's more like it for Biden. Near watertight lead here.

I might argue from glancing at the figures that the Republicans are sightly over-weighted in the projected data.

Even so, these figures are tremendously concerning for Biden, and there's no way we're seeing the strong, dominant leads from early-voting that we thought we would in most states. Texas/Ohio/Wisconsin/Michigan/Georgia/Arizona/Florida/Nevada all look decent for Trump from this data.

There's certainly an element, I think, of more Republicans voting early than you would ordinarily expect, but they are still going to have a huge turnout advantage on election day over the Democrats.

Early voting has passed 80 million, but it's expected (I think) that the total number of votes could go as high as 150 million (65% turnout), so there's still plenty  of people left to vote.

I disagree that Texas has never looked like going Biden's way. He's had a number of narrow poll leads in that state and always threatened to turn it blue. He still might turn it blue.

You're assuming that a 'registered' Republican/Democrat is voting for the party that they're 'registered' with. While I imagine more registered Democrats will vote for Biden, I suspect the Republican scenario is a different. Not long to find out now, in any case.

That's indeed why I said a couple of posts above that it's not an exact science - because you will get tiny percentages of each registered voter group voting for the opposite party, but these won't be in great numbers. The polling is pretty consistent, in this regard, of saying that between 92-97% of registered Democrats will vote Democrat, and the same for the Republicans.

I suppose you could argue that the tiny % of registered Republicans who want to vote Biden may be more likely to turn out early that the bigger % of registered Republicans who want to vote Trump, and this may skew the figures, but only by a small amount. This may even be offset by the 'Trump Democrats' voting early.

Either way, the big leads that were anticipated for Biden are not happening in most of the 13 key battle states. Even if you're generous and give him the entire independent vote, it's still not happening in most places. These numbers are very bad for him. Now of course it doesn't automatically follow that his election chances are buggered as a result. Maybe there's been a late shift of Republicans moving over from Election Day voting to Early Voting which means the on-the-day advantage is less. Or it could be that the voter enthusiasm for keeping Trump in is far greater than the enthusiasm to keep him out...that would be catastrophic for Biden.

As much as this election will come down to a select number of states, if the National Polls are anywhere near accurate then it's really tough to see how Biden loses.

Biden's generally got around an 7-8 point lead Nationwide (51.3-43.5) compared to Hilary (46.8-43.6) in 2016, where the National polls were within the margin of error. If the National polls are that accurate again, it is tough to see how Trump's wins.

JDizzle wrote:As much as this election will come down to a select number of states, if the National Polls are anywhere near accurate then it's really tough to see how Biden loses.

Biden's generally got around an 7-8 point lead Nationwide (51.3-43.5) compared to Hilary (46.8-43.6) in 2016, where the National polls were within the margin of error. If the National polls are that accurate again, it is tough to see how Trump's wins.

I think that's partially explained by the expected higher turn-out of the Dem. vote in safe blue states, especially the ones with large populations like California and New York. I expect Biden's win over Trump in the popular vote stakes to be somewhere between 3.5-6.5%, but this is still a margin where Trump can take the EC.

Whilst the electoral college makes the election fun from an analytical perspective, I think it serves as a very poor model for electing a President.

Hmm. Hilary won the PV by 2.1% in 2016, so if Biden wins by another 4 points - I just can't see him losing when the margins in PA, WIS and MI were so narrow even if there is a case of him just running up 'extra' votes in NY and CA. There has to be enough swing to Biden in those states to secure him the election.

Does become (even more) farcical if Biden did win by 6 points and loses the EC!

In terms of early voting turnout in the 13 battleground states that will decide the election, bearing in mind overall turnout is expected to be higher in 2020 than in 2016, and that there's still a couple of days left:

Texas's early voting has nearly exceeded the complete (early + on the day) turnout in 2016. Arizona's in the same position as Texas, as is Nevada.

Georgia's early voting is about 85% of the complete turnout in 2016. North Carolina reads the same.

Florida's early voting is about 75% of the complete turnout in 2016.

Iowa's early voting has reached about 60% of the complete turnout in 2016. Same in Wisconsin.

Ohio is only 55% of the complete turnout in 2016. Michigan roughly the same.

Minnesota's early voting is around 50% of the complete turnout in 2016.

Pennsylvania's early voting is only around 33% of the complete turnout in 2016. New Hampshire's early voting is even lower, around 25% of the complete turnout in 2016.

So anything from Florida downwards looks pretty sweet for Trump. He's going to get healthy turnout numbers on Election Day in any of those states. In some states, like Penn./Michigan/Ohio/Minnesota/NH, he's going to get a huge turnout drive going. Bear in mind, as well, we're expecting turnout to be higher in 2020 than in 2016.

In the states with ridiculously high early turnout, and a consequently low Election Day vote, Georgia and Texas's figures already look strong and nigh-on watertight for Trump. Arizona/Nevada/North Carolina all seem tight races, shrouded in mystery with a heavy independent presence among the early votes.