Who Will be Our Next President?

We'll just wait and see

__________________
“I really have to feel that I could make a difference in the movie, or I shouldn't be doing it.“
Joe Dante

This thread might have been more interesting if you’d simply answered the OP.

__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.

It would be very bizarre if the head of State of a particular nation did not want to put the interests of that nation first. I would expect nothing less.

It’s going to be an interesting week for sure. We don’t even know which day the final result will be declared.

BTW, glad this thread didn’t go down in flames over the weekend. I do think we’ve all been mighty civil to each other, which is what I wanted.

There can only be one GOAT!!!!

__________________

Yes, but Trump started "trade wars" to "make US America great again" and more industrious and self sufficient. USA became more isolationist and he viewed international compromise as weakness. US America can do this only because of it's size and militaristic and economic power. Smaller Nations have no choice, but to compromise for it's own and greater good. Compromise can also be for self interest.

Compromise is for the weak. Anyway Biden is going to win so America can resume a bland presence on the global stage.

Any another politician achieving what Trump has achieved in Middle East by mending relationships between fighting countries would have been bestowed upon with a Nobel or at least more recognition.


Also, as an Indian I am grateful that he and the GOP have either denied or halted major monetary aid to Pakistan, which is meant for the poor and for the fight against Taliban, but is always diverted to training new terrorists instead by the Pak army that can be used against Afghanistan and India.


Hillary wouldn't have been that. She would have, in all probability, started a new war or destabilised some country. Showered Pakistan with more money. All of which Biden or the eventual President Harris (after Biden step down with bad health) will do.


(I hope Yoda doesn't get angry with me for going off-track)



As for the topic, reckon it will be Biden.


But as an academic curiosity, how affected these polls would have been with Coronavirus issue. Doesn't make it easier to conduct them. So will the margin of error be more?

Easier said than done. Nationalistic/patriotic rhetoric can be nice to hear but the reality seems much more complex. I think China is a good example of this, I despise their authoritarian regime but slapping tariffs on them and bragging about how income they've generated is meaningless if not compared with the economic costs that come from the consequences of these decisions regarding imports/exports which often fall to consumers/businesses.

I'm interested in seeing how Trump does with a lot of the "rust belt" states whose industries he promised to protect/revive, we have a similar situation in the UK with Conservatives turning to more interventionist fiscal policy rather than free-market in attempting to appeal to Northern seats.

__________________

I could be wrong but I have always been under the impressed that polls are carried out via digital means, through phone, or more nowadays online. I think it's certainly the case here in the UK at least. I take part in YouGov surveys almost everyday, it's quite easy to sign up and take part but it does require a bit of effort in the actual surveys. They actually pay you too once you've contributed enough

I agree with you on phone and online survey, but certain demographics, which incidentally have a big say in the results in most countries, are usually not tech savvy and that's where these pollsters go on ground. With US it would be the interiors or south. Even though, US didn't have strict lockdowns like other nations, I would imagine that must have been difficult to do or done to a smaller degree.

I just don't have faith in those polls with so many Trump supporters keeping quiet. The Gallup poll that says 56% of people say they are better off now then 4 years ago seems more relevant. That's an extremely high number as it is, and it was taken during a pandemic. It's really a startling number.

I’m curious how different people quantify “better off”. Is it no more debt? Is it driving a new car and a new house with debt that can’t be carried if the job goes away?

I try to see the good and bad in both sides, but I don’t “hear” people moving from one side to the other. They stick to what they always believe in and justify the shortcomings.

I can’t believe we don’t have federally mandated election protocols or a standard process for supreme court nominees. Making stuff up as we go along and bending to the whims of the majority in power is wrong, regardless of which side does it.

If betting was legal in NC I would have put a grand on Trump. That said, I don’t think record early turnout is because Trump has grown his following.

Seems dissonant to say the polls are wrong because Trump supporters are being quiet, but then also cite a poll as evidence of it. That's really a narrow thread, to saying they're answering general polls but not specific ones. Also, pollsters weight to account for these things. It's imperfect, but I think a lot of laypeople think they're just calling whoever and just shrug it off if a certain demographic decides not to answer. That's not how it works.

Anyway, what you're describing has been described before, it was once known as the "shy Tory" effect and it's been floated with different names and in different contexts in many elections since. And it'll be cited again after this one even if it doesn't end up manifesting. I'm pretty sympathetic to the idea that it exists, but thinking it can explain away the kinds of margins we're seeing is a pretty huge stretch.

If the results are massively different than expected, it won't be because of this effect, it'll be because of a more fundamental problem with modern polling.

Keeping it about me personally since that's what the poll is about, I pay less taxes, less for gas in my car, less for utilities, my wife pays less for prescription medication, and our home's value and my 401K has gone way up. Under Obama, when I was out of work for a couple of years by choice, I had to pay a penalty because I didn't have health insurance. What if it wasn't my choice? I also feel safer without any foreign conflict because I think it could have a connection to the terror attacks, which seemed to occur on a daily basis prior to Trump, practically disappearing here altogether since he's been in office. If Biden wins, I believe this all gets reversed. Even the huge increase in tax on people making over 400k will hurt someone like me a lot. If it hurts my boss, that can affect raises, bonuses, overtime, and jobs. I'm truly puzzled why anyone would want Biden to win.

Well aren't people just concerned about saying they support Trump? Saying you're better off now is not necessarily an indicator of who you support as an individual.

That's precisely what I'm getting at, yeah.

Anyway, the thing you're describing, as I mentioned, has a name and a history and all that. It'd be reasonable to say such an effect exists but as actually observed it seems pretty modest.

I didn't know there was a history to it but I don't doubt it. I still would guess it's different now with how polarizing Trump is and that people are more hesitant than ever to share their opinion with the violence from the left. I also think many Trump supporters have a great deal of mistrust for the media, for good reason, and that mistrust could very easily extend to pollsters.

That’s where weighting comes in. It would take an extreme number of "shy" voters to just get missed on any significant scale.

The better criticism is of the fact that weighting requires turnout assumptions.