politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Citation needed
Like a primary source, not just a news story claiming that this is happening or you doubling down about how it’s definitely happening
Okay. And here's a PA specific trend line. And just so you don't think I'm cherry picking, here's NYT and The Hill.
Polling isn't great for minutia but these trend lines are consistent with modern losses. The only thing I'm aware of that could drastically change this now is some focus groups saying they would stay home and not vote for Trump; or vote for RFK instead if Trump is sentenced to prison. That was supposed to be a known factor now but it got pushed to after the convention and after the ballots are locked. Are we really going to hang this election on one judge doing the right thing? or are we going to do what we have to in order to actually fight?
Yeah, polling is garbage in general but using it to see relative change is actually like the one thing that it's good for.
So, your assertion is that Biden is slipping lower and lower and lower in the polls the more he does. You picked the one state where he's slipped the most, to make that point. If I did the opposite, I could pick North Carolina, and say that gaining 1.7 points since before he did his press conference means he's killing it, and that press conference restored the confidence of the voters.
Probably a fairly accurate metric -- since you're going to ignore, for reasons which will be obvious to anyone who knows what the national polls show, the national polls -- could be to add up all the swing states and see how things have changed.
In the last week, Biden's gained an average of 0.56 points in all the swing states. If you saying him losing 0.4 points in PA since the press conference means he's losing ground, then I have demonstrated that zooming out to a non-cherry-picked-to-the-single-worst-state view shows the exact opposite happening.
Similarly, in the last month, Biden's lost an average of 0.8 percentage points in all the swing states averaged together. You could write an article about how even in the face of an objectively catastrophic debate performance, less than 1% of the voters abandoned him, pointing to the resilience of his support because most of the voters (unlike the media) are smart enough to realize that one bad debate doesn't all of a sudden mean that etc etc you get the idea. Oh, also, that means he's been gaining ground back since the debate, after dipping lower than 0.8 points initially, which kind of makes sense since the debate was such a horrifying fuck-up.
See? Primary sources are fun. That's all based on the Nate Silver chart of all swing states that you sent me.
I chose PA because it's the one state we really need to win. Without PA we basically need everything on offer and a tough pick up like GA. And the national polling is a great topline, but it doesn't predict the Electoral college very well.
And this isn't just about the press conference. It's about the debate, the spin afterwards, and the press conference. None of that has managed to bring his numbers back. And Nate Silver's actual prediction, (which I'm not sure if the page will show without a subscription) is bad for democrats. If you want to go with his analysis we should already have switched to Harris.
Oh! If you're saying that switching to Harris would be a good idea, that would be a totally logical and honestly not really that crazy thing that we could have talked about.
Some guy was coming in here talking about how every time Biden opens his mouth, his poll numbers get worse, and just kind of emphasizing this wild counterfactual in service of creating a narrative that didn't exist. I was talking with that guy. If you see him, tell him I looked at the polls you sent me and he's wrong.
His polls have gotten worse though. No amount of sarcasm escapes that.