An academic pollster explains why she thinks any Democratic nominee will win the presidency in 2020

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/07/10/one-term-trump.html

5 Likes

This is the kind of stuff that inspires overconfidence.

21 Likes

Dammit! Cthulhu is running as an Independent in 2020

11 Likes

Speak for yourself; I’m backing the “Sweet Meteor O’ Death” campaign at this point.

17 Likes

I have some doubts. Wall street analysts can’t tell you what’s going to happen tomorrow on the stock market. Meteorologists can’t say for sure what the weather’s going to be in a week. And a pollster probably can’t tell you who’s going to win the election in a year and a half. A model that performed well in the mid-terms may be a great model. Or it might be that out of a thousand pollsters who had models, hers happened to be right.

11 Likes

Where’s the bumpersticker I saw on BB a ways back?

ANY DEMOCRAT 2020

on the other side a TRUMP PRISON 2020 just for good measure

9 Likes

I hope she is right…

4 Likes

And absolutely none of this matters if people don’t vote.

Go vote, and encourage your friends to vote. You personally may not be the one vote that makes the difference, but if everyone who thought their one vote wouldn’t make a difference showed up and actually voted, we’d be in quite a different position now.

18 Likes

Considering that we can expect election security to be very low, that Republican lawmakers are working hard to restrict the vote, and that we’ll see as much if not more Russian interference and ratfucking, I’d say the pollster needs to go reconsider her research.

7 Likes

yeah, who knows, he can be accused of rape, caught on tape saying horrible stuff, say racist shit, break a bunch of laws…and …then,…um…win again.

8 Likes

482 days is a painfully long time, especially in politics.

2 Likes

The same pollsters had Clinton at 99% probability of winning right up to the day of election. Never underestimate the Democratic party’s ability to snatch defeat away from the jaws of victory.

3 Likes

Pardon me while I stroke my beard.

2 Likes

No, for the most part they didn’t.

5 Likes

Remember back when ol’ Nate Silver could do no wrong? Good times.

2 Likes

“… barring a shock to the system…”

If anyone can manufacture such a thing, it’s Trump and McConnell.

4 Likes

Sounds good to me

Oh okay. She’s saying nothing bad will happen unless something bad happens :confused:

As a lifelong midwesterner, no. The cruelty is the point, that’s why they voted him in. They’re just too polite, or too polite to people who look like themselves, to say so.

[Narrator:] He won’t.

15 Likes

Well, in all fairness, Five Thirty Eight gave Hilary the strong probability if winning but were saying that trump had multiple paths to victory right up to the last minute. I even recall an article after Comey’s boneheaded decision to announce the emails bullshit was reopened and there wasn’t enough polling in the interim to determine what impact it would have. This isn’t to defend Silver’s assessments, but rather to point out that his crew is always warning about reading too much into probabilistic models like this person is doing.

This statement is idiotic and something you would never hear from Silver (though I do realize this is @doctorow’s paraphrasing).

15 Likes

Hum, I wouldn’t write off Texas just yet. It seems to be turning purple. But what do I know, I’m in Austin.

1 Like

I predict possible systemic shocks. SCOTUS allowing blatant disenfranchisement and suppression. POTUS nuking Tehran or Pyongyang (or NYC) if his financials (showing he’s owned by Putin) are near release. A DEM candidates debate or Trump Tower bombed. Declaration of national emergency and martial law.

I sure loves that wishful thinking. Make it so.

4 Likes