Jump to content

General & Casual Politics Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 847
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vermillion

    646

  • ClashAndBurn

    110

  • Bears01

    14

  • Kassi

    6

Posted

It’s the way the entire top 3 are guaranteed landslide losses for me:

 

 

Like… this is a dogshit selection of candidates. Every single one of them would be horrifyingly awful.

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

 

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted (edited)

Yikes at Quinnipiac torpedoing the doomers. Just like in 2020, when all of them were wrong :coffee:

 

I don’t love Joe Biden, but thank god most of the country isn’t wearing rage glasses installed via twitter. Abortion is killing the GOP, ironically

Edited by thesegayz
Posted
1 hour ago, thesegayz said:

Yikes at Quinnipiac torpedoing the doomers. Just like in 2020, when all of them were wrong :coffee:

 

I don’t love Joe Biden, but thank god most of the country isn’t wearing rage glasses installed via twitter. Abortion is killing the GOP, ironically

Quinnipiac is one poll out of many, which are indicating a landslide loss for Joe Biden when you look specifically at swing states.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Dems won two special elections tonight, both of which look to be pretty big landslides.

Flipped George Santos seat for Congress and helped grow the PA state Dem majority.

 

Yet again REAL WORLD data showing the leftists that their fantasy world does not exist outside their bubbles. :alexz: 

  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sannie said:

Dems won two special elections tonight, both of which look to be pretty big landslides.

Flipped George Santos seat for Congress and helped grow the PA state Dem majority.

 

Yet again REAL WORLD data showing the leftists that their fantasy world does not exist outside their bubbles. :alexz: 

Were there polls conducted that disagreed with the outcomes of these special elections? If not, then this is entirely moot and not at all a legitimate argument in favor of ignoring data.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Were there polls conducted that disagreed with the outcomes of these special elections? If not, then this is entirely moot and not at all a legitimate argument in favor of ignoring data.

It is 2024 and polling has been broken for years, and real-world data proves it. I am also talking about the doom mongering from leftists who claim the Dem party is over and everyone hates Biden :rip:. Clearly not in the real world.

 

Dems having a trifecta is huge battleground states like PA and MI going into November is huge.

  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
26 minutes ago, Sannie said:

It is 2024 and polling has been broken for years, and real-world data proves it. I am also talking about the doom mongering from leftists who claim the Dem party is over and everyone hates Biden :rip:. Clearly not in the real world.

 

Dems having a trifecta is huge battleground states like PA and MI going into November is huge.

The polls were very accurate in 2016, 2018, and 2022. In 2016, Nate Silver actually got a lot of flak from other data pundits because his predictive model (not a poll, just a predictive model) gave Trump a 33% chance of winning the election. These data pundits thought Silver's predicted chance for a Trump win was too high. Why? Just cause. The last batch of polls coming out of the three states that decided the 2016 election had Trump and Hillary in a statistical tie, with Trump narrowly leading in Michigan. As for 2022, the "red wave" was something right wing pundits assumed to be on the horizon because it was a midterm year and they would openly reject polling data because "the polls aren't to be trusted." Then the poll, shockingly, turned out to accurately predict there wouldn't be a red wave.

Quote

Did the polls predict a red wave or was that the pundits interpreting the polls? 

Polling never predicted a red wave - certainly not in the Senate and with a wide range of uncertainty focused mostly on more moderate GOP gains in the House. Last night was a win for traditional pollsters as opposed to more partisan pollsters with less transparent and/or questionable methodologies, whose results received a lot of hype before election day.

...

Vibes or moods have too often influenced media narratives in recent elections, from what was thought to be a surefire win for Clinton, despite tight polling, and a landslide for Biden despite the margin of error inherent in his lead.

https://www.rutgers.edu/news/what-happened-red-wave

 

The only notably off recent year was 2020 and for easily explainable reasons. 

 

What's been off is punditry, not the actual polling data.

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted
On 2/13/2024 at 10:24 PM, Bloo said:

Were there polls conducted that disagreed with the outcomes of these special elections? If not, then this is entirely moot and not at all a legitimate argument in favor of ignoring data.

Liberals gloating over Suozzi’s win are also ignoring that Republicans overwhelmingly vote on Election Day, avoiding mail-in ballots because Trump ordered them to be distrustful of voting by mail. And on the day of the election, there was a historic snow storm that dramatically impacted turnout.

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

 

Posted

The American government is living in a delusional fantasy land. Joe Biden himself is completely detached from reality.

 

 

  • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.