Not really enjoying reading about these convos about “real foreign policy consequences”.
Problem with some polling is there isn’t enough out there. They don’t even poll districts and that’s problematic if you want a sense of it all.
3-4 isn’t great but historically it’s about right as for the predictor of 48-50 states it’s done quite well considering everyone’s “gut” feeling was Trump would win again.
I think i read that the more local the poll, the more accurate it turned out to be in gauging how close the voting would be.
Can you explain what’s wrong with it please. I only looked at it briefly last night.
The lady is concerned that there are still ballots but that the state (not sure which one) has already been called.
How can you call it if there’s outstanding ballots, or more likely don’t know how many outstanding ballots there are.
Just trying to understand these people’s views?
The may not know how many ballots were returned, but they know the maximum number there could be. That allows them to gauge the solidity of the lead at any time. The sneaky reality is that people in the military overseas never get their ballot counted, because they historically have dominated the mail in vote. This comes in late, but in a number known to be too small to tip the count in the other direction so the election gets called before these votes even arrive.
If you are not voting on the day but by mail then i think you have to register your intentions to do so in advance (so for example, a week ago Georgia knew that it could expect approximately 8k military votes maximum by close of play Friday.)
Part of the delays during vote count is then marrying up those who have voted in person against postal votes to ensure someone hasnt voted twice.
The election can be called before all votes are recieved/counted because a pattern on who people in a given area are likely to be voting for can be deduced and an approximation as to by what ration (so for example, in PA democrat areas where voting upto 90% in favour of Biden - it isnt hard to figure Trump isnt going to catch him up with remaining votes in these areas, particularly when he is also losing out to postal votes in Trump supporting areas to the democrats too)
How would such candidates even make it onto the ballot? Wtf. This reminds me of those local Indian (?) elections a few years ago.
That is relevant to a point that was raised to me this morning. Virtuall every case of coordinated electoral fuckwittery we know of is committed by GOP politicians and operatives. But right now the position even establishment republicans are taking have pushed Democrats to defending the integrity of the results. Now, when malfeasance is actually revealed it will be revealed to have been conducted by GOP politicians and operatives and they will pretend they should not be held to account because the Dems have put so much energy into denying that fuckwittery occurred.
This is such a clear play out of their playbook. I think this is too joined up to explain Trump’s motives, but I think it could well explain why so many establishment party people are reacting the way they do.
It is a coordinated strategy from the national party. The Kanye story was a difficult one to cover because people didnt want to take it seriously, but one of the things we saw was his candidacy was being driven by people associated with the white house. The idea supposedly was to get a black man on the ticket in places they hoped would pull black voters from Trump. We also saw it with several other “independent” and even green party candidates on a variety of elections.
I did wonder whether the outcome of the 2016 election was influenced somewhat by the inclusion of a Green candidate?
Seen this one?
https://twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1326311204923576321
Possibly, and it’s a bit of a controversial one because of Stein’s association with Russia. But she was at least a legit candidate, even if pushed by outside forces. If you nominate a candidate with historically high unfavourables, you dont get to complain that people felt compelled to vote third party.
What we saw this time though was a coordinated effort by white house people to push third party candidates. In some cases it was to try to split the vote, as mentioned with Kanye. But in some cases it was used to fuck with the actual process of voting. I think it was in PA they mounted a legal challenge to get the ballots reprinted because the whitehouse back green candidate was not included because the deadline for filing was missed. It was an example of a case they didnt intend to win, they just wanted to run out time to leave fewer days available to cast your ballot by mail which they believed would preferentially benefit them.
Sheesh, how long have they been putting the naming of US places to a public poll? 
Wow, they really have tried to think of everything here…while i find it quite wrong, I can’t help but think it would be somewhat fun to have a job coming up with these shenanigans.
Apparently, it is named for the 40 settlers from Connecticut who built a fort there, and claimed the land for Connecticut rather than Pennsylvania?!?