• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    121·
    28 days ago

    Winning FL would flip the entire table over. She’s not remotely close to winning FL right now. The polls in the article disagree wildly from all of the other polls we have on the matter. Biden was 4 points ahead in FL in 2020. Trump won by 4 points in FL. Harris is behind in most polls by 3.

    She’s improved her postilion in FL. She’s not remotely close to winning it. When the polls come in at +6-7 for Harris in FL, that is when she is now “break even”.

    • Icalasari@fedia.io
      5·
      28 days ago

      Plus it needs to be a massive number to overcome the, “This was clearly altered we are not certifying send it to the supreme court”

      Less because that would stop a refusal to certify, and more because it might be able to kick the Republican SC members into choosing to not hand it to the GoP in fear of retalitation

      Can’t remove them from the court. CAN shoot them

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        31·
        28 days ago

        We need the swing state victories to be out of the range of recount, and not GA. GA is automatic smoke bomb/ recount. Write that one off.

        So you need AZ at greater than a half point. You are trusting your election board in NC. PA is also half a point.

        And yeah you’ve got the crux of it. We need two+ to keep it out of the hands of the SC.

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.mlOP
      21·
      28 days ago

      Biden was 4 points ahead in FL in 2020

      ? In this very comment section you were mentioning polling average earlier that showed it as ~2.5%

      Assuming the error is the same direction as 2020 is not a given. Pollsters have made changes to their model that intentionally put more weight on areas likely to have trump supporters. Amid other changes

      Not saying she will necessarily win florida, but assuming the worst case all the time is not always accurate either

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        22·
        28 days ago

        You can go check the exact sources. I think Kamala is down in FL -2, -3? Depends on your source and poll aggregator. Biden was up ~+3 ~+4. Final result was -4? So call it a 6-7 point structural bias. Doesn’t diminish my point.

        Not saying she will necessarily win florida, but assuming the worst case all the time is not always accurate either

        Yeah thats just self delusion. You clearly have a specific confirmation bias your working to attend to. You shouldn’t delude yourself and others because reality is difficult and shitty. We only hurt yourself when we live in fantasy.

        • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.mlOP
          61·
          28 days ago

          Look if you thought the polling bias in the previous election always determined the next one, you would’ve thought Hillary was in for a big landslide because dems were systematically underestimated in 2012 including in florida. Obviously it did not go the same way. It’s not limited to 2012 either

          Pollster make adjustments every cycle. In this case, many have made some quite large ones. How much that effects the results isn’t fully knowable until only after the election happens

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            37·
            28 days ago

            Dude you just very obviously do not know what the fuck you are talking about and want things to look better than they are. You should stop.

            I get it. It sucks that the Harris campaign has flat lined and appears to be backsliding. But creating an alternative reality for your head to live in is not a healthy way to go through life. Or maybe it is, fuck I dont know that you aren’t better off living in a state of self delusion.

            • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.mlOP
              23·
              28 days ago

              An alternative reality is saying that polling error is uncertain? I didn’t declare anything about it’s direction or even that it couldn’t be the same as it was earlier

              This is something plenty of election modeling people say all the time

              Over the long term, there is no meaningful partisan statistical bias in polling. All the polls in our data set combine for a weighted average statistical bias of 0.3 points toward Democrats. Individual election cycles can have more significant biases — and, importantly, it usually runs in the same direction for every office — but there is no pattern from year to year

              https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/weve-updated-our-pollster-ratings-ahead-of-the-2020-general-election/

              The reason there’s no long-running polling bias is because pollsters try to correct for their mistakes. That means there’s always the risk of undercorrecting (which apparently happened this time) or overcorrecting (see the 2017 U.K. general election, where pollsters did all sorts of dodgy things in an effort to not underestimate Conservatives … and wound up underestimating the Labour Party instead)

              https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-polls-werent-great-but-thats-pretty-normal/

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                33·
                28 days ago

                I’m just not interested in anything you have to say any longer with regards to statistics. Its obvious you don’t have a handle on this things and blog spamming 538 doesn’t change anything about you. However, I might be interested in that cocoon of warm self delusion you’ve created for yourself. Might be the last time we get to have the “happy chemicals” for a very long time.