this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
45 points (74.7% liked)

politics

19146 readers
2854 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kescusay 52 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Uh, there are several recent polls that have Biden ahead, while Democrats have been over-performing polls by about 9 points in recent elections.

It's become so noticable that US News did an article about it.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 5 months ago

Don’t believe anything polls say. They don’t really qualify those polled very well, and they’re piss poor at capturing the actual true demographics of the voting community.

It’s best to always assume your vote is direly needed.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

538 has been reliable in the past elections. They show an almost-tied race with Trump slightly ahead: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/

[–] cbarrick 9 points 5 months ago

Nate Silver is no longer at 538.

There are different people running the models these days.

[–] ShunkW 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Wasn't 538 wrong about Trump winning in 2016 though?

[–] Skepticpunk 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

No. 538 gave Trump the best chances out of any model, which Nate was criticized heavily for. 1-in-3 chances, which is what Trump had in 2016, are still pretty likely.

[–] cbarrick 7 points 5 months ago

Everyone was wrong in 2016.

538 was the least wrong of any model anywhere.

And Nate Silver was ridiculed at the time for giving Trump such a high chance of winning, before the election.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

538 gave Trump and Clinton similar chances. They essentially called the race too close to call.

[–] just_another_person 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Could you expand on that?