Trump vs. Harris - Please put all new polls here.

It’s easy to be likable when the other option is such a detestable POS. I’m not a huge fan of Harris either way, although I think Walz is badass, but she’s the clear and easy choice compared to a fascist wannabe dictator, convicted felon who tried to overthrow our democracy.

 

Compelling article on the high uncertainty of election forecasts.

Are these calculated probabilities any good? Right now, we simply don’t know. In a new paper I’ve co-authored with the University of Pennsylvania’s Dean Knox and Dartmouth College’s Sean Westwood, we show that even under assumptions very favorable to forecasters, we wouldn’t know the answer for decades, centuries, or maybe even millenia.

To see why, consider one way to evaluate the forecasts: calibration. A forecast is considered calibrated if the estimated probability of an event happening corresponds to how often the event actually happens. So, if a model predicts Harris has a 59 percent chance of winning, then a calibrated model would expect her (or another candidate) to win 59 out of 100 presidential elections.

In our paper, we show that even under best-case scenarios, determining whether one forecast is better calibrated than another can take 28 to 2,588 years. Focusing on accuracy — whether the candidate the model predicted to win actually wins — doesn’t lower the needed time either. Even focusing on state-level results doesn’t help much, because the results are highly correlated. Again, under best-case settings, determining whether one model is better than another at the state level can take at least 56 years — and in some cases would take more than 4,000 years’ worth of elections.

The reason it takes so long to evaluate forecasts of presidential elections is obvious: There is only one presidential election every four years. In fact, we are now having only our 60th presidential election in U.S. history.
​

Don’t trust the election forecasts

 

Bet the mortgage on Trumph. He's a lock!

 

Detroit Free Press: Trump +1 in Michigan

Donald Trump leads 44.7%-43.5% among likely voters. 4.7% of voters back Kennedy. 2.3% of voters choose another third- party option. 4.8% of voters remain undecided. Here’s the breakdown:

• 44.7% Donald Trump
• 43.5% Kamala Harris
• 4.7% Robert F Kennedy Jr.
• 2.3% Third Party Options
• 4.8% Undecided

New poll shows where Michigan voters stand in Trump-Harris race

 

Emerson College: Trump +1 in Wisconsin

Top issues

• AZ: 31% economy, 26% immigration, 13% housing affordability
• GA: 44% economy, 11% housing affordability, 10% threats to democracy
• MI: 44% economy, 11% threats to democracy, 10% housing affordability
• NC: 48% economy, 9% healthcare, 8% education
• NV: 37% economy, 15% housing affordability, 13% immigration
• PA: 51% economy, 11% threats to democracy, 8% immigration
• WI: 46% economy, 13% threats to democracy, 7% housing affordability

August 2024 Swing State Polls: Toss-up Presidential Election in Swing States - Emerson Polling

Do you see what I see?

 

Hey, if you think the forecasts are so great, bet the house on them, but I’d recommend being a bit more cautious with your savings.

 

Nor accurate ino

 

How the CNN/SSRS poll compares with others for Wisconsin over the last month.

 

I don't think there are two states that have missed harder for the Dem candidate on polling in the past two elections than Michigan and Wisconsin. Frankly, polling looks way better for Trump in these two states this time around.

 

Once again, 2024 is much more like 2008 than either 2016 or 2020. Enthusiasm directly impacts and turnout and enthusiasm among minorities and younger voter who will overwhelming vote Democrat has been as high as is currently since 2008. In fact if turnout among those demographics was as high in 2016 as it was in 2012 Donald Trump would currently be a footnote in history.

A Big Part Of Hillary Clinton's Defeat: She Alienated Millennial Voters
Young Voters Are Way More Excited to Vote for Harris, Polls Show
Surge in Democratic enthusiasm raises hopes of winning swing states
I would also add the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022 could very well be the turning point that tips white women away from Trump.

 

Like I told you, the smart money would move towards a Trump victory.after the DNC. Polymsrket:

 

2024 is much more like 2008 than 2016 or 2020
Wisconsin 2008 polls

 

Why do you only post polymarket? It's not even the largest political betting market.

 

Something just caused that gap to increase to a 7% advantage:

 

Even assuming that they're predictive betting odds aren't static. Note the change from late August/early September to the November election in 2020.

 

Interesting article about swing states that also have Senate elections. Five of them, to be exact, including Arizona, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In all five, the D candidate has a sizable lead in polling with the smallest being Rodgers in Michigan at +4.7%. In the past, splitting a ticket and voting R for POTUS and D for Senator, for example, wasn't unheard of. But in the past few elections, it's becoming more and more rare, and only Maine in 2020 had a split. (D) Biden won the state but they elected (R) Senator Collins.

Doesn't guarantee anything, of course, but if recent trends hold of states not splitting tickets, then it will be difficult for Trump to win.