- 392 Posts
- 586 Comments
57·23 hours agoHe’s also not spoken to the president either who has attempted to call as well. Biden is not even running for president anymore
We can help make that happen
Canvass, Phone bank, Textbank, etc. for Texas Democrats:
https://www.mobilize.us/texasdemocrats/
Write letters to likely dem voters in Texas to make sure they turnout!
They’d get sued pretty immediately for that. It’s very explicitly against the law to do so. It’s illegal to remove voters from registration anything beyond 90 days out from the election. Voting rights groups and DOJ have sued Alabama for doing so 84 days out, they’d absolutely sue for after voter registration deadlines
Today is the last day to register to vote in Texas. Make sure to double check your registration because of voter purges and vote!
See how to do so below. Note that there’s only mail and in person registration and not online registration unlike most states. Registration by mail must be postmarked by today!
She does have kids as a stepmother. They just apparently don’t count that
George Washington did not have any children by blood either, so got to be before 1789
Meanwhile Biden is considering calling a special session directly. It’s not a commonly used presidential power but it is an option
Look at their comment history, they’re likely trying to be funny but alas satire is hard on the internet when people can genuinely have such takes
The leads in some of the latest Florida polls are now within margin of error of those polls
52·2 days agoThat’s actually not the full quote. The full quote show he was not talking about any of those issues at all. He was concerned with the allies being “liberal” and “communist”
It dawned on me today… The bad guys won in WWII. There were no “good guys” in that war. The controlling interests had a jump ball. If you look closely, you see the link between liberalism and communism in the Allied forces. Remember what Gen. Patton said and why they capped him.
They are primarily focusing on the main swing states for president, but Florida does matter a good amount in terms of the senate though. It’s a rarer somewhat close pickup opportunity. With Montana not looking as great lately we’ll likely need to flip either Texas senate or Florida senate to keep the senate control. Or there’s the close race in Nebraska where Indepdent Osborn could give us a 49-49-1 senate if neither flip and we lose Montana
My response was more so to the “you don’t get to ‘wish’” part. It could go the same way, it could not. It’s not consistent year to year. Assuming it is when long term data does not support that, isn’t helpful
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
No where am I claiming that Harris definitely will necessarily be underestimated, I am saying it is possible. Or perhaps even just underestimated by less. Dismissing the possibility out of hand by N=1 is what I am responding to
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
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/
That’s not how your earlier comments are phrased. The earlier comments declare that this is a given structural bias and that it will always exist. How is entirely ignoring the 2012 election any more real than saying we can’t be sure?
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
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
Polling error has historically moved in inconsistent direction. Data goes back further than 2020. In 2012, Democrats were underestimated in florida by ~2 points. Romney was up 1.5% in Florida poll average vs Obama winning Florida by 0.9%
Assuming it certain to go that way is not a given either. My point is that you cannot be certain about it
That’s assuming the polling error goes the same way. That’s not a given at all especially as many pollsters have made methodology changes such as some doing much heavier rural sampling
Polling error has gone both directions in the past. Dems were underestimated by polls in 2012 for instance
We’re not talking about national polling, however
I doubt the VP and President disagree all that much about “we should give hurricane victims aid”. The president can informally ask the VP to do simple tasks like “hey keep in touch with this governor and see if they need anything” when they think you’ll do what they’d do. The VP can’t act directly on things themselves
You also want to keep the person who might have to take over for the president at any moment to be in the loop at all times. You wouldn’t want them scrambling to get caught up in the off chance they had to take over for the president
Keep in mind he’s also refusing to meet with Biden