To win, Biden must win 84.6 % of the electoral votes in battleground states.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

Last edited Sat Jul 20, 2024, 08:21 PM - Edit history (1)

I had to redo my calculations because I did the numbers when Biden numbers were better.

He is winning in none:

https://www.270towin.com/maps/biden-trump-2024-map-based-on-polls



It does not matter if he is leading nationally, those are the states that are gimmes. (He is currently not leading in any national polls)



Swing State Polls:


Pennsylvania:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/pennsylvania/trump-vs-biden


Arizona:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/michigan/trump-vs-biden

Nevada:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/nevada/trump-vs-biden

Georgia:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/georgia/trump-vs-biden


Wisconsin:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/wisconsin/trump-vs-biden

Michigan:

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/michigan/trump-vs-biden



https://www.270towin.com/news/2024/07/06/electoral-maps-compare-consensus-forecast-polling_1649.html

[Lovie777]

1. realclearpolling is toally RW.....................

[iemanja]

51. Math is now RW?

It aggregates polls. How does that make it RW, other than you don't like the results?

[rso]

58. Rso

Polls and aggregates of polls have been overestimating Republicans and underestimating democrats for the past few years as reflected in the results of actual, real elections.

[iemanja]

60. Indeed

But that's not the same as an aggregator being RW. It's a polling phenomenon. Hopefully it will continue in the GE.

[rso]

62. Rso

Right, I agree that it’s not the aggregator’s fault that the polls they are using are overestimating republicans.

[PortTack]

69. Here from media fact check RCP....cntr right leaning.

How do they do that? It isn’t hard. They are including or giving the same credibility to more RW polls such as trafalgor skewing the mix. 538 was notorious for this

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/real-clear-politics/

The polls have been abysmally wrong the last 3 election cycles

Hint: read what 538 said following just 3 states in the dem primary in 2020, or look at the last midterm, or look at ‘16, again 538, HRC had a 94% chance of winning days b4 the election.

It’s not “the I don’t like the numbers.” They are just wrong

Here’s another look at experts skewed numbers regarding a study done on statin drugs. For the sake of “numbers” I’m gong to make this easy. Out of 100 ppl tested the drug showed a 50% reduction in heart attack for those that took the drug. That number amounted to 1. The non control group the number was 2…i.e they can say a 50% reduction. Of course the numbers in the study were much larger, it was still the same

[iemanja]

86. That's about their article content

Not their polling aggregator. Yes, the polls have been wrong. There have been polling errors. But that doesn't mean the aggregation of polls is right wing.

[PortTack]

93. I addressed the weighting issue of inaccurate polls that lean right being in the mix, of course it's going to skew #s

[FBaggins]

96. Trafalgar and Rasmussen rarely show up these days

They run far fewer polls than in the past

But 538 removed polls like that and their current average (3.2%) is actually a tad larger than RCP's (3.0%)

[Nimble_Idea]

85. who waiting on that red wave

who

[iemanja]

87. That's a separate issue

[LuvLoogie]

2. Trashed

[PortTack]

71. Same!

[TheBlackAdder]

108. To win, Biden needs to get 374% of electoral votes in battle ground states. If bullshitting, bullshit big!

Amirite!

[TwilightZone]

3. 59.5% of states or 59.5% of their electoral votes?

It's kind of difficult to win part of a state, Nebraska and Maine excepted.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

8. 59.5% of the electoral votes. So it would be more than that.

[Polybius]

4. Why?

Why does he have to get to 59.5%?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

20. Right now Biden has 182 electoral votes Tump has 252

104 electoral toss-up states.

Biden needs 88 of those tossup votes to make it to 270.

He is 88 votes behind getting 270. When I did my calculations the numbers were better. So he now needs 84.6% of the toss-up electoral votes.

[Think. Again.]

31. Considering that no one will "have" ANY electoral votes until after the election...

...I call B.S.

[JohnSJ]

68. You mean we have to have an election first? A minor detail

[Think. Again.]

79. Crazy, right? Next thing you know, they won't be able to just sign up random people as electors.

[JohnSJ]

81. +++. LOL

[W_HAMILTON]

5. If you are going to rely so heavily on polls, you think the first thing you would do is understand how they work.

I just looked at the three that matter the most -- WI, MI, PA -- and Biden is within the margin of error for each, meaning it's a statistical tie.

Also, no one is winning in any state right now because the only poll that matters is on Election Day.

Happy to clarify for you!

[kerry-is-my-prez]

9. What is going to move him up. He's going down in all.

Maybe if he absolutely creamed Trump is a second debate.

[Demsrule86]

13. No more debates. They are meaningless and let's be honest Trump lied his way through the entire debate.

The media is out to get Biden along with big donors...thought you hated money in politics...but now you seem OK in allowing them to pick our nominee? I don't get it.

[rzemanfl]

14. On what planet can someone who lies constantly win a debate?

[kansasobama]

16. No debates- This is not Biden strength

No debates anymore. Find an excuse. Need a lie detector hooked up.

[BeyondGeography]

83. The debates are what sealed his win in 2020

Particularly the first one. Doesn’t anyone remember anything anymore?

It’s also why his team pushed for an early debate this year to remind everyone who the actual presidential candidate is and boost his lagging polling numbers.

If Biden punts on the second debate where is his momentum going to come from heading into the final months? In-person campaigning?

[kansasobama]

115. Biden is not the same anymore

Biden is a superb President and he will be for the next 4 years. However, he will not be the same in a TV studio. His voice is low. It is not his fault. It is age. Our country does not respect age and wisdom. He will not be able to fight back in a debate as every statement from Trump is a lie. Counterattack needs sustained long coherent nasty sentences. Debates will last 6 hours to counterattack. This is very unfair on an elderly statesman who is a doer.

[Melon]

84. He didn't lose to the lying...

He literally could not stand up to the lies. The President looked weak…he was confused. DU is somehow not seeing what 75% of democrats see…and over 30 lawmakers including Obama and Pelosi. No plan and no action will ensure the inevitable outcome to these numbers.

[dpibel]

95. Oh you are such an optimist!

Keep on truckin'!!

[Butterflylady]

99. Ok, fine. So we will not wait for an election will just give

Give the orange rat what he wants and everyone will be happy. Well I'm not happy and a whole bunch of democrats that voted in the primaries are not happy. I don't believe that 75% of democrats saw what you saw and he was not confused. He had a bad cold and jet lag. He answered all of the questions while the other guy lied his arse off.

Joe showed up, maybe it was not the best time for him but still he showed up even though he was sick. He has been the champion standing up for us fighting everyday for us. So now we should all stand up for him.

[PortTack]

74. You are relying strictly on the polls... that just isn't accurate!

[Melon]

82. If we know we are grossly behind...the plan is to do nothing

And see what happens…

Only action will change the result.

[W_HAMILTON]

110. Umm, most of us plan to do what we need to do to win regardless.

If you would change how much effort you are putting in to help reelect Biden based on the polls, you are doing it wrong.

[FBaggins]

94. A somewhat ironic post... because that isn't how polls work

Taking the most important swing state (PA) as an example. There have been five polls released in the last five days (NYT/Sienna, PPP, Insider Advantage, Civiqs, and Emerson). Three have shown a four point deficit and two have shown a five point deficit.

That is not in any sense a "statistical tie".

[kerry-is-my-prez]

104. Pennsylvania is sucking.....

[W_HAMILTON]

111. Actually it is, and the fact you don't know better...

...should have you bowing out of this debate in the future rather than spread misinformation (disinformation?).

Here, to help educate yourself:

News reports about polling will often say that a candidate’s lead is “outside the margin of error” to indicate that a candidate’s lead is greater than what we would expect from sampling error, or that a race is “a statistical tie” if it’s too close to call. It is not enough for one candidate to be ahead by more than the margin of error that is reported for individual candidates (i.e., ahead by more than 3 points, in our example). To determine whether or not the race is too close to call, we need to calculate a new margin of error for the difference between the two candidates’ levels of support. The size of this margin is generally about twice that of the margin for an individual candidate. The larger margin of error is due to the fact that if the Republican share is too high by chance, it follows that the Democratic share is likely too low, and vice versa.

For Poll A, the 3-percentage-point margin of error for each candidate individually becomes approximately a 6-point margin of error for the difference between the two. This means that although we have observed a 5-point lead for the Republican, we could reasonably expect their true position relative to the Democrat to lie somewhere between –1 and +11 percentage points. The Republican would need to be ahead by 6 percentage points or more for us to be confident that the lead is not simply the result of sampling error.

Taken from: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/09/08/understanding-the-margin-of-error-in-election-polls/

So, yes, what I stated originally is very much correct and your attempt at correcting me just showed your lack of knowledge about the subject.

[FBaggins]

112. You should try reading the rest of your source

Note that he also put the nonsensical “statistical tie” in quotes?

Or you could just read my more recent reply to your misreading of the Michigan poll released this morning

[W_HAMILTON]

113. So you were posting disinformation -- got it.

And I did read it and am well versed on the subject already, but I can tell from your response time and lack of introspection shows you did not and are not.

And if you read the article, you would realize those were not scared quotes mocking the use of the term.

[TwilightZone]

6. "those are the states that are gimmes"

A gimme is something that is easy to obtain. These states are the polar opposite of gimmes.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

10. He is winning in the gimme states but none in the swing states.

[live love laugh]

7. Here we go with the moving-bar poll shit. Again...

[JI7]

11. Which Democrat is getting that ?

[Demsrule86]

12. You do no that real clear polling is conservative right ...maybe find other sources... The GOP gives money to

real clear politics.

Starting in 2020
'That site, Real Clear Politics, is well known as a clearinghouse of elections data and analysis with a large following among the political and media establishment — and the kinds of political obsessives who might now have all the counties in Georgia memorized. It markets itself to advertisers as a “trusted, go-to source” admired by campaign and news professionals alike. Its industry benchmark polling average is regularly cited by national

But less well known is how Real Clear Politics and its affiliated websites have taken a rightward, aggressively pro-Trump turn over the last four years as donations to its affiliated nonprofit have soared. Large quantities of those funds came through two entities that wealthy conservatives use to give money without revealing their identities.'

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/us/politics/real-clear-politics.html

[FBaggins]

70. That's really only relevant for their own editorial content

Which is somewhat minimal. You’ll find opinions both left and right there (always identifying the source).

They don’t run their own polls. If they show the latest five polls in some swing state and were behind by 3-5 in all of them - we can’t point to some presumed bias of the website as a reason to ignore them.

538 usually has a broader range of pollsters displayed - and they do ignore two of the formerly large pollsters that tended to bias the averages red… so we can look there instead. But the story is the same.

Like Trump in 2016 - we need a coherent story for why the polls might all be off in the same direction (i.e., “shy Trump voters”). He turned out to be correct that year. Perhaps we will be this time

[ecstatic]

15. thank you for keeping us up to date on the facts

There seems to be a shoot the messenger mentality and that's not helpful. We should all be aware of the facts during all of this.

[kansasobama]

17. Do not shoot the messenger

I agree. We are behind. How are we going to overcome. It has to be an aggressive campaign on Proj 2025 fascism. Every county, every major swing state. Can Biden-Harris do it? That is what determines this. Donors are not going to help.

[Aepps22]

43. We need to do our part

Too many on our side aren't even doing our own individual parts to help our side win. We can donate, phone bank, register new voters, etc. Our side is behind because of us and the general apathy of our coalition that happens Everytime a democratic president cleans up the mess the bad guys leave. We get comfortable and then turn on our own instead of attacking the other side. If we voted more on policies and less on whether a candidate excites us we would be doing way better. Candidly, Trump and his missteps are keeping us in this race but many of the liberal online spaces(Not DU) is filled with people saying everything is over and all hope is lost in July and that Trump winning is a forgone conclusion. I assumed that after 4 years of Trump that our side was tougher than this but the fear of Trump is almost paralyzing us from doing the work we the people can do to win. It seems like the first sign of adversity whether it be polls, debates, etc and we throw in the towel. Are we behind? Yes, can we catch up? Yes we can. Will things change when we unify and get back to focusing on Trump? Absolutely.

[LiberaBlueDem]

27. Correction

These polls are in no way 'facts'

That you call them facts makes your posts false

[ecstatic]

41. ok snapshots.

Is that better?

[Self Esteem]

18. So, Biden is basically tied with Trump in most swing states - and pretty much every swing state he needs to win?

This after a relentless three weeks of attacks from the media and some in his own party and you somehow think you're making a point?

Also: are we ignoring 538 too?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

23. No Trump is ahead in most of the swing states.

[Self Esteem]

32. Nope. Every poll is within the MOE.

Except in states Biden doesn't need to win.

So, Trump and Biden are in a statistical tie.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

109. The only state that is within the MOE is Michigan.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

36. He is now behind in 538. That poll is not based on electoral votes.

You have to look at electoral votes, unfortunately.

[Self Esteem]

48. And yesterday he was leading.

And he might lead tomorrow for all we know.

I think you're trying to make a point that isn't real. Biden and Trump are basically tied statistically. I find that remarkable after all deluge of negative press the last three weeks.

[former9thward]

38. What about 538?

According to them Trump has a 51% chance to win and Biden 48%. Trump has a 3.2% lead in their polls.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

[Self Esteem]

47. Which flip-flops.

So, basically it's what we've been saying: this election is a toss-up. Don't you find that remarkable after all the news stories the last three weeks?

[kansasobama]

19. Thanks Kerry

DU does welcome your input. Now, what is the solution? How can Biden-Harris overcome? No donor money. This means a brutal campaign involving going to every county in major swing states. Is this possible? That is the reality. Don't care if Biden uses teleprompter. Rallies are the way to go. He is good there.

[Blue Full Moon]

22. There is donor money

Just a few like Netflix, Disney and Fox. But it's votes.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

29. They need to replace Biden with Harris.

I hate to say but they need to put the strongest possible candidate and it probably isn’t even Harris. I show that she is doing a little bit better than Biden right now. But who knows what would happen if she is the candidate? There could be new excitement from the voters.

[Think. Again.]

37. Now I get it! You're a time traveler from 2 weeks ago, right?

[Peacetrain]

50. Speaking of Vice President Harris

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219196544

[LeftInTX]

53. Any polls for Kamala are based on her hypothetically being the nominee.

How is she polling in each of the swing states?

How will she poll after she is the nominee?

She could improve or she may not etc.

[PortTack]

75. Please go read what a contested convention is, or what Prof Alan Lichtman has to say about dropping the

Incumbent.

You are wrong on all points!

[Blue Full Moon]

21. Funny

There are polls that show Biden would win over anyone else. If the democrats want to lose they will choose someone else. Biden has hit a nerve with the corporats

[kerry-is-my-prez]

24. Where are these polls? I've looked at ALL of them.

Bloomberg is the only one that shows Trump winning in any battleground states and it is not enough electoral votes to beat Trump.

[Blue Full Moon]

26. Need to read articles

Like the one about FL but it only is if it's Biden. The rich are attacking Biden because they know they are losing.

[Xavier Breath]

44. Did you mean to say that Bloomberg is the only one

showing Biden winning, or am I just tired after a long day?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

66. Bloomberg is showing him winning some battleground states.

But not enough states. Bloomberg is the only poll that is showing a few battleground states that he is leading by a few points in. I hope that poll is right but there are many that are disagreeing with it.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

89. Yes. Sorry.

[Self Esteem]

49. SurveyUSA has Biden down one nationally - and only Michelle Obama doing better.

Newsom trails by 11. Harris by three.

Do you think Newsom would win the EC if he lost the popular vote by 11?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

90. Probably not but things may change when someone

else is put in I think that it could change things.

[Self Esteem]

92. Well it's not going to happen.

[Elessar Zappa]

25. Ok?

We know Biden has to win most of the swing states. And if he’s behind then we all have work to do to get out the vote. Donate time, money and take 2 non- others to the polls to vote Biden.

[Blue Full Moon]

33. Trends show that Biden will win

All the states that have passed abortion issues and marijuana won't vote for trump

[PortTack]

76. He has to win MI, PA and WI...not all of them!

[luvallpeeps]

28. We trust polls again? N/T

[Xavier Breath]

40. When a poll fits their narrative, people here trust them.

Seems there's a poll for just about everyone these days.

[iemanja]

55. Yesterday, I was told--insisted upon--that ALL polls favor Biden

Now I'm told Real Clear Politics--a poll aggregator--is RW.

[PortTack]

77. Yes..RCP is cntr right leaning ...see post #69

[ColinC]

30. He is winning WI MI and even in PA

Right now barely losing PA but with no statistical significance.

Also polls are trash anyways

[Blue Full Moon]

34. FL also

[kerry-is-my-prez]

46. That is only 44 electoral votes. I don't show him ahead in those states.

Only in one poll. He needs 88 electoral votes to make it to 270.

[ColinC]

65. 538 is what I go off of. He is ahead in the 226 reliably blue states as well: 270.

But also statistically tied in Nevada and Arizona as well as NC, GA and FL.

Counting Biden out because he isn’t overwhelmingly ahead in July 2024 is like counting out Obama because he wasn’t overwhelmingly ahead (and in fact behind in all battlegrounds as well) in July 2012. Perhaps we should ask President Romney how it worked to count out Obama 4 months early?

[NoMoreRepugs]

35. Polls favor the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl - me, I say play the games.

[ColinC]

98. +10,000

[BootinUp]

39. Get back to us when there is a truly valid concern. nt

[iemanja]

56. Yeah, why is winning the election a valid concern

Sheesh. Imagine that.

[BootinUp]

57. The data at this juncture actually should look this way. I would look bad if I was beaten to a pulp. nt

[iemanja]

61. I don't follow your point

Are you saying it would be worse if Biden were truly in trouble?

[BootinUp]

63. I am saying that the beatings will stop after he is nominated and

he can recover.

[iemanja]

64. Ah, okay

Point taken.

[jmbar2]

42. I think the polls have been corrupted by big money. Not reliable.

[hlthe2b]

45. I have to go to work and can't review this, but in general the polls are worthless now.

Even in the best of times (less volatile) you need TREND data.

So, while I too wish Kerry had once been President, I have more faith in Biden than to swallow this whole.

[Emile]

52. If it wasn't Biden but someone else, wouldn't they have

the same numbers, if they are correct? So what's your point?

[rso]

54. RSO

Biden will win MI, WI, PA and NE-2 and thus get to 270.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

103. That would do it. I see MI, but he's been behind

forever in WI and Penn. I don’t know a thing about NE - did he get that in the last election?

You’re the first person to offer a reasonable argument instead of the usual conspiracy or “don’t believe polls” - it actually makes me feel better now that I look at it. He will have to have something big happen to get his poll numbers to move though. They have been stagnant or moving downward in the states you mentioned.
I’m still not feeling comfortable. Especially when you have so many people who are in the know expressing doubts

Wisconsin

+3 Tr - 7/18 Trafalger
+3 Tr - 7/18 Emerson
+5 Tr - 7/15 The Times (UK), You Gov
+5 Tr - 7/12 Say YouGov
+2 Tr - 7/10 NSOR
+3 Bi - 7/5 Bloomberg
+5 Tr - 6/28-7/2 Fabrizio
+6 Tr - 7/1 Remington

Michigan

+1 Tr - 7/17-7/18 Pub. Pol. Harris +5 Tr, +2 Tr
+2 Tr - 7/18 Trafalger
+3 Tr - 7/18 Emerson
+1 Bi - 7/15 Redfield
+2 Tr - 7/12 Say YouGov
+3 Tr - 7/13 MRG
+5 Bi - 7/2-7/5 Bloomberg
+3 Tr - 6/29-7/1 Remington
+4 Tr - 6/21-6/26 EPIC MRA
+1 Tr - 6/13-6/18 Emerson
Tie - 6/3 Mitchell


Penn

+4 Tr - 7/17-7/18 Pub. P, Harris Trump +2,+4
+4 Tr - 7/18 Insider Adv.
+6 Tr - 7/18 Emerson
+5 Tr - 7/15 Redfield
+3 Tr - 7/12 NYT/ Siena
+3 Tr - 7/12 Say YouGov
+7 Tr - 7/1-7/5 Bloomberg
+5 Tr - 6/29-7/1 Remington
+4 Tr - 6/27-6/28 Cygnal

[rso]

59. Rso

Polls and aggregates of polls have been overestimating Republicans and underestimating democrats for the past few years as reflected in the results of actual, real elections.

[ALBliberal]

67. Ridiculous he won by winning like

50K more than Trump over the battleground states.

Yes it was scary close. But please stop stick with facts.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

107. That was then, this is now.

[bigtree]

72. snapshot polls at this point are like fantasy football

...have fun.

For entertainment purposes only, though.

[PortTack]

78. Prof Alan Lichtman agrees with you!

[ViewObsessed]

73. Joe's got this

Rust belt loves him

[LonePirate]

80. So we have reached the point where people love polls if they show good news and despise them if they show bad news

This is not going to end well.

[Omaha Steve]

88. Omaha has ONE swing vote

And it will be a toss up.

[waterwatcher123]

91. Election polls are 95% confident but only 60% accurate, Berkeley Haas study finds

https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/election-polls-are-95-confident-but-only-60-accurate-berkeley-haas-study-finds/#

"Why is polling so often wrong" Boston Globe, April 3, 2024 (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/03/opinion/why-are-presidential-polls-wrong-biden-trump/)

There are several circumstances in the 2024 election that are impossible to account for in polls. One of these is the substantial number of people who voted for Nikki Haley or a candidate other than Trump in the Republican primary (Biden won Arizona by 10,457 in 2020, 110, 966 voted for Nikki Haley/Other in the 2024 Republican primary). Arizona, Florida, Nevada and a number of other states also have a reproductive rights amendment on the ballot. These ballot initiatives have the potential to significantly increase turnout and to change the dynamics of elections in the respective states.

It is best to take the these polls with a grain of salt at this stage in the election process. They were wrong in 2016, 2018, 2020 and in 2022. So, they are pretty poor indicators of election outcomes.

[lees1975]

97. I doubt there's much real data in those polls.

The media needs them for their narrative. They don't even reflect what would be realistic shifts over the past two years, given how well Democrats did in all of these states in the mid-terms, which the polls failed to predict.

These polls also do not take into account he is within margins of errors of polls in North Carolina and Florida, and has actually surged in Florida, due to strong support from women voters.

[B.See]

100. If that's true then that'd be true of ANY Democratic nominee, would it not?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

106. Yes - but another candidate may have better numbers in some states.

There are some states that used to be battleground that are no longer. A few of them have gone pink. Some that used to be safe, leaning,etc are now downgraded. I find it hard to believe that is really the new standard from now on in every election. I believe that Biden is just looking so bad to people that this is an anomaly.

[orangecrush]

101. Trashed and goodbye

[IbogaProject]

102. Real got bought out during the 2016 election, maybe in 2015

They always had right wing and centrist articles but their poll aggregating stopped being unbiased in 2016. Sad because it was a great resource before that happened.

[Emrys]

114. I used to keep a close eye on RealClearPolitics' polling during the first Obama election

At that point, rather than sticking with the same slate of polls for comparison purposes, it was blatantly obvious that they'd cherrypick which polls they'd aggregate on any particular day to favour McCain.

People were running around with their hair on fire for various reasons at this point in both Obama campaigns.

I haven't paid RealClearPolitics any attention since then, so I don't know if that's still the case today.

[IbogaProject]

116. It wasnt as biased in the Obama years

It got way worse in 2016 or so. I majored in Statistics including a graduate survey sampling course. I've been disappointed to watch both this rise of biased push polls and the gradual decline of traditional polls. The first collapse in quality was when the major networks' shared polling organization failed in either 1992, 94 or 96, after that the networks pulled back from using a combined polling effort. The math behind old school phone polling is very interesting and was very well researched. Now it's broken from decades of wealth accumulation and polls being run by people with different education.

[Emrys]

117. The bias in the Obama years was subtle to those who weren't wary about it, but still clearly noticeable.

I had to point it out repeatedly to people during the two Obama campaigns as people kept getting taken in.

If RCP got worse after that - and I'll certainly take your word for it - it must have gotten pretty bad!

I cling to these commonsense words from a Democratic Party pollster and strategist I made into an OP a few days ago, which encapsulated what I've always felt, especially about early polling:

Stop with the polling. Polling is instructive, it's not predictive. A three- or four-point race, you build a campaign to overcome that, and you tell that story.

Full interview here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219190564

[Duncan Grant]

105. I want you to devise a strategy to destroy the Democratic Party.

None of the pundits or donor class are hammering Joe Biden for *MY* benefit. They’re doing it for their own interests. If you need further explanation, I’m going to say you haven’t been paying attention for the last 24 years.

This is a public relations campaign. Don’t be fooled.

[lees1975]

118. You said it.

These polls are the most inconsistent batch of data in an election I've ever seen.