US Presidential Election 2020

[mariomike]

If all someone does is rely on a targeted google search to form an opinion then no I don't think that person is at all thinking for themselves.

Neither candidate or party was "targeted" in the search , QV.

I say again,

I simply searched two words only: "steal election".

Nothing added to the search about Biden or Trump, or Democratic or Republican. Just those two words, and that is what came up.

Is that clear to you now?

Are you tied in directly with the West Wing, or something?

Good question!

 

[blacktriangle]

Neither candidate or party was "targeted" in the search , QV.

I say again,

Is that clear to you now?

Good question!

Are you familiar with search engine bias?

Anyone can push push a button. Do you want to be a button-pusher, or an analyst of information?

And I will say I'm far less of a Trump fan than I used to be. He's a liar and a cheat, among many other personal failings, I'm sure. I think both Trump and Biden are terrible choices for the US and the world going forward. But that doesn't mean I don't try to see through bias on both ends of the spectrum.

 

[mariomike]

He's a liar and a cheat, among many other personal failings, I'm sure.

Would he cheat to win re-election?

 

[Remius]

If all someone does is rely on a targeted google search to form an opinion then no I don't think that person is at all thinking for themselves.  But Remius, I'm sure MM can defend his opinions, he doesn't need you to come running to his defence all the time.   

Quickly off the top, I'd like to know what about the following has been so terrible:

1.  3(4?) Middle East peace deals.  I'm losing count now, but how many previous US administrations accomplished any of this?

Some of these were already in place and this just formalized it.

2.  Excellent economic record.  Isn't a healthy US great for Canada?

Yes.  But he also inherited a good economy.  He also has mismanaged the economy during a crisis.

3.  All of the crazy accusations (Russia collusion etc) have been proven false.  That's good, right? (makes you wonder what other allegations are bulls**t doesn't it?).  Yet it specifically did not exonerate him.  And plenty of people around that whole issue were convicted.  My personal opinion is he himself was not involved.  Just a lot of people around him.

4.  Historic black employment and support from the black community.  That's good, right?
Good yes.  I highlight this a lot.  But it is completely undone by his alignment to white supremecist groups.

5.  Significant reduction in illegal border crossings on their southern border.  Good?
By splitting families up and caging them.  500 kids are still being held and no one can figure out who they belong to. So no.  And making up caravan hordes that suddenly disappear adore not mean you’ve reduced them.

6.  Influenced big increases in NATO spending.  Is that not good for mutual defence?
No, all that people did was change what they count as their spending. Like national police forces and their coast guards.  What big increase have we had?  Creative accounting makes it look that.

7.  How many nominations for the Nobel? 
Who is actually doing the nominations?  Just because a conservative mp from Norway nominates does not mean it will be considered.  How many were actually considered?  How many did he actually get?

8.  No new wars.  Who is mad at this one?
How many proxy wars are they still in?

9.  He's authorized the elimination of some pretty bad dudes (Soleimani etc)
So have most presidents,  this one retweeted a crazy story about Obama not getting bin laden and having seal team six eliminated.  Right.

10.  His SCOTUS nominations seem to be exceptional people.
No question there.  One can disagree with their leanings but they are qualified.

11.  Massive Fed support to states and followed experts' advice with COVID, except when he closed borders much sooner (which was the correct move). 

Sorry but no.  He routinely attacks his experts.  His current top expert he refers do is a radiologist.  He’s sidelined the actual expert in, you know, viruses.  His border closure was Swiss cheese move.  No real difference if he had left it open.  And many states including republican ones beg to differ on what kind of help they’ve received.  Trump himself said it wasn’t his problem.

Who doesn't want more of that?

I’m going to guess a majority of the American people.  But the college vote will decide if he becomes president.  The popular vote will decide if people really do want more of that or not. Not that that makes a difference.  It seemed like a majority of voters didn’t want any of that to begin with but their system doesn’t work that way.

I hardly have to come to his defence at all.  Calling you on your response that looked like a personal attack with no merit.  See my responses to your questions. Not everything is terrible but a lot of it is exaggerated or undone by other things.

 

[blacktriangle]

Would he cheat to win re-election?

Absolutely. And so would his opponents.

In the end, the only losers are the American people (and by extension, the rest of us)

 

[mariomike]

Would he cheat to win re-election?

Absolutely. And so would his opponents.

He says that at his rallies. Do you have a source to back him up?

That's why I searched: "steal election". I thought that was pretty neutral. Didn't see anything about his opponents.

And definitely did not want to start a firestorm with his online supporters.

 

[blacktriangle]

He says that at his rallies. Do you have a source for his opponents?

That's why I searched: "steal election". Didn't see anything about his opponents.

And definitely did not want to start a firestorm with his supporters.

You still haven't answered my question. Do you want to analyze things in this world, or simply be a consumer of analysis done by others?

 

[blacktriangle]

You know mariomike, I really tried. I really did.

Enjoy the election.

 

[mariomike]

You know mariomike, I really tried. I really did.

Enjoy the election.

Likewise, I'm sure. 

Speaking of answering questions, you still have not answered mine,

He says that at his rallies. Do you have a source to back him up?

 

[QV]

If all someone does is rely on a targeted google search to form an opinion then no I don't think that person is at all thinking for themselves.  But Remius, I'm sure MM can defend his opinions, he doesn't need you to come running to his defence all the time.   

Quickly off the top, I'd like to know what about the following has been so terrible:

1.  3(4?) Middle East peace deals.  I'm losing count now, but how many previous US administrations accomplished any of this?

Some of these were already in place and this just formalized it. The incumbent gets the credit.

2.  Excellent economic record.  Isn't a healthy US great for Canada?

Yes.  But he also inherited a good economy.  He also has mismanaged the economy during a crisis. Obama's recovery was slowest on record.  The second part of your statement is false.

3.  All of the crazy accusations (Russia collusion etc) have been proven false.  That's good, right? (makes you wonder what other allegations are bulls**t doesn't it?).  Yet it specifically did not exonerate him. Innocent until proven guilty is fundamental in a free society and it applies here too, even for Trump. And plenty of people around that whole issue were convicted.  My personal opinion is he himself was not involved.  Just a lot of people around him."Find me the person and I'll find you the crime."  Let's open up a special counsel on anyone and see if people in the circle are all entirely clean.  The important point here is Trump is in the clear despite years of "he's a Russian asset".

4.  Historic black employment and support from the black community.  That's good, right?
Good yes.  I highlight this a lot.  But it is completely undone by his alignment to white supremecist groups.Not ture.  The "fine people hoax" has been thoroughly debunked, MSM and the DNC perpetuate this myth because to further political damage.  It's not working

5.  Significant reduction in illegal border crossings on their southern border.  Good?
By splitting families up and caging them. Who built those cages (Obama) and why do you suppose children are removed from adults involved in human trafficking?500 kids are still being held and no one can figure out who they belong toDo you honestly believe American law enforcement is doing wrong to these kids or do you think they want to make sure they are not victims of human trafficking?. So no.  And making up caravan hordes that suddenly disappear adore not mean you’ve reduced them. Illegal border crossings are way down, that is a win.

6.  Influenced big increases in NATO spending.  Is that not good for mutual defence?
No, all that people did was change what they count as their spending. Like national police forces and their coast guards.  What big increase have we had?  Creative accounting makes it look that. Just because Canada continues to ride the coat tails doesn't mean everyone else is.  And since when is it Trump's fault countries like Canada are being disingenuous in defence spending?

7.  How many nominations for the Nobel? 
Who is actually doing the nominations?  Just because a conservative mp from Norway nominates does not mean it will be considered.  How many were actually considered?  How many did he actually get?[color=yellow]No other president has been nominated this many times, that is still significant.  Considering the recent revelations about why Obama received it, it shouldn't be any surprise Trump likely won't actually win it.[/color]

8.  No new wars.  Who is mad at this one?
How many proxy wars are they still in?
Are you mad we are not in any more new wars?

9.  He's authorized the elimination of some pretty bad dudes (Soleimani etc)
So have most presidents,  this one retweeted a crazy story about Obama not getting bin laden and having seal team six eliminated.  Right. So Trump, as CiC, is doing equally as well as Obama?

10.  His SCOTUS nominations seem to be exceptional people.
No question there.  One can disagree with their leanings but they are qualified. It's important to note how his nominations are great, while the Dem reactions in the hearings were demonstrably horrible.  Double win for Trump here.

11.  Massive Fed support to states and followed experts' advice with COVID, except when he closed borders much sooner (which was the correct move). 

Sorry but no.  He routinely attacks his experts.  His current top expert he refers do is a radiologist.  He’s sidelined the actual expert in, you know, viruses.  His border closure was Swiss cheese move.  No real difference if he had left it open.  And many states including republican ones beg to differ on what kind of help they’ve received.  Trump himself said it wasn’t his problem.  Trump calls everyone out, that is part of why he won.  Who has the monopoly on the experts?  Should the unelected medical expert dictate public policy? No, and they never should. 

Who doesn't want more of that?

I’m going to guess a majority of the American people.  But the college vote will decide if he becomes president.  The popular vote will decide if people really do want more of that or not. Not that that makes a difference.  It seemed like a majority of voters didn’t want any of that to begin with but their system doesn’t work that way.

And I think your guess is wrong.  Based on all of the above, and much more.  I think Trump will win by what will be considered a landslide.  Big electoral college win and a majority of the popular vote also. 
 

 

[blacktriangle]

mariomike, why did you delete your post saying you wouldn't answer anyone's questions unless they paid for your internet connection?

Did I imagine that post?

 

[mariomike]

I think Trump will win by what will be considered a landslide.  Big electoral college win and a majority of the popular vote also. 

If you don't mind me asking, QV, how did you come to that conclusion?

Reason I ask is, the majority of Americans have voted against the Republicans in six of the last seven presidential elections.

Up to, and including, the one in 2016.

That does not include the one next week, or mid-terms.

What is different this time around for the Republicans?

mariomike, why did you delete your post saying you wouldn't answer anyone's questions unless they paid for your internet connection?

I deleted it because it may have been perceived as perhaps a little bit disrespectful towards you. Which was not my intent.

I said I would not answer to you, specifically, reveng, until you answered my question,

He says that at his rallies. Do you have a source to back him up?

I'm really not here to argue with you. Vote for the candidate of your choice.

 

[Remius]

Obama's recovery was slowest on record.  The second part of your statement is false.

3.  All of the crazy accusations (Russia collusion etc) have been proven false.  That's good, right? (makes you wonder what other allegations are bulls**t doesn't it?).  Yet it specifically did not exonerate him. Innocent until proven guilty is fundamental in a free society and it applies here too, even for Trump. And plenty of people around that whole issue were convicted.  My personal opinion is he himself was not involved.  Just a lot of people around him."Find me the person and I'll find you the crime."  Let's open up a special counsel on anyone and see if people in the circle are all entirely clean.  The important point here is Trump is in the clear despite years of "he's a Russian asset".

It specifically said that the report would not exonerate him.  Like I said I don’t think he was involved.  Just some people around him.

4.  Historic black employment and support from the black community.  That's good, right?
Good yes.  I highlight this a lot.  But it is completely undone by his alignment to white supremecist groups.Not ture.  The "fine people hoax" has been thoroughly debunked, MSM and the DNC perpetuate this myth because to further political damage.  It's not working

Who debunked it?  What fine people hoax?  He didn’t say that? He didn’t talk directly to the proud boys in the debate?  Refused to denounce white supremacy directly?  Or try and save racist war criminal traitor statues to keep some of his supporters happy?  Or any number of soft racism comments he’s made.  The point is he would be far further ahead with that voting block if he used his brain to mouth filter.  Historic support for him?  Maybe in his four year history it has gone up but he will be nowhere near majority support.  Going from 8% to 16% of the black vote is nothing to cheer about.

5.  Significant reduction in illegal border crossings on their southern border.  Good?
By splitting families up and caging them. Who built those cages (Obama) and why do you suppose children are removed from adults involved in human trafficking?500 kids are still being held and no one can figure out who they belong toDo you honestly believe American law enforcement is doing wrong to these kids or do you think they want to make sure they are not victims of human trafficking?. So no.  And making up caravan hordes that suddenly disappear adore not mean you’ve reduced them. Illegal border crossings are way down, that is a win.


Yes the cages were built but that administration never systematically Or so deliberately separated families like the current one has.  Jeff sessions is on video record saying that it was to be used as deterrence.  In any other country that’s a crime against humanity.

6.  Influenced big increases in NATO spending.  Is that not good for mutual defence?
No, all that people did was change what they count as their spending. Like national police forces and their coast guards.  What big increase have we had?  Creative accounting makes it look that. Just because Canada continues to ride the coat tails doesn't mean everyone else is.  And since when is it Trump's fault countries like Canada are being disingenuous in defence spending?

Everyone else actually is.  No significant increase in spending.  Only smoke and mirrors and in a lot of cases reductions.  Except for maybe Luxembourg that hires a few extra police officers to increase their spending significantly.


7.  How many nominations for the Nobel? 
Who is actually doing the nominations?  Just because a conservative mp from Norway nominates does not mean it will be considered.  How many were actually considered?  How many did he actually get?No other president has been nominated this many times, that is still significant.  Considering the recent revelations about why Obama received it, it shouldn't be any surprise Trump likely won't actually win it.

So again, not consequential at all.

8.  No new wars.  Who is mad at this one?
How many proxy wars are they still in?
Are you mad we are not in any more new wars?

I was never mad about our last war.  Why would I be mad or happy about US wars?  The US is still in a lot of proxy wars. 

9.  He's authorized the elimination of some pretty bad dudes (Soleimani etc)
So have most presidents,  this one retweeted a crazy story about Obama not getting bin laden and having seal team six eliminated.  Right. So Trump, as CiC, is doing equally as well as Obama?

So par for the course for his job.  I would argue Bin Laden was the bigger catch but sure.  Not a reason I would vote for either of them.

10.  His SCOTUS nominations seem to be exceptional people.
No question there.  One can disagree with their leanings but they are qualified. It's important to note how his nominations are great, while the Dem reactions in the hearings were demonstrably horrible.  Double win for Trump here.

His nominations of very conservative and religious SCOTUS types may backfire as women who fear losing their rights, the gay community and people who fear losing health care may actuallly show up in bigger numbers to vote.  It won’t stop the nomination but they may choose to vote in a president, house and senate that can staunch some of the erosion they think may be coming.  It may also force the court packing strategy.

11.  Massive Fed support to states and followed experts' advice with COVID, except when he closed borders much sooner (which was the correct move). 

Sorry but no.  He routinely attacks his experts.  His current top expert he refers do is a radiologist.  He’s sidelined the actual expert in, you know, viruses.  His border closure was Swiss cheese move.  No real difference if he had left it open.  And many states including republican ones beg to differ on what kind of help they’ve received.  Trump himself said it wasn’t his problem.  Trump calls everyone out, that is part of why he won.  Who has the monopoly on the experts?  Should the unelected medical expert dictate public policy? No, and they never should. 

You said he defers to the advice of his health experts.  They don’t make public policy.  Trump does.  And he ignored them.  If he did actually listen he would not be responsible for super spreader events like the one he created at the Rose garden.

Who doesn't want more of that?

I’m going to guess a majority of the American people.  But the college vote will decide if he becomes president.  The popular vote will decide if people really do want more of that or not. Not that that makes a difference.  It seemed like a majority of voters didn’t want any of that to begin with but their system doesn’t work that way.

And I think your guess is wrong.  Based on all of the above, and much more.  I think Trump will win by what will be considered a landslide.  Big electoral college win and a majority of the popular vote also. 

You do know what a landslide in American Politics is right?  He didn’t get one last time nor did he get the popular vote.  He won’t get it this time either.  He may win, I’ve said it before, but not the way you think.

 

[QV]

If you don't mind me asking, QV, how did you come to that conclusion?

Reason I ask is, the majority of Americans have voted against the Republicans in six of the last seven presidential elections. Including the last one.

What is different this time?

That does not include the one next week, or mid-terms.

Sure MM. Trump will win this time for many reasons in aggregate: 

- First all of the successes I've touched on a few posts up. You can argue day and night about some of those, like the NATO one for example, but people see he brought pressure to the subject, and there was some positive change.  Of course other countries will screw around and keep bucking, but he has had some wins there and NATO spending is way up.  He has 3 or 4 Middle East peace deals under his belt, it doesn't matter if those have been in play for years, Trump closed ALL those deals.  Actions such as isolating Iran, making the US energy independent, and moving the US embassy to Jerusalem really helped him do that, and those happened on his term.  His actions in Syria were measured, not a false red line like Obama. In short his foreign policy has been great.         
- Trump has done more for the black and Hispanic communities than any other administration, including Obama.  Prison reform, record unemployment most importantly.  People like Kanye, IceCube, are influential people, and he's happy to meet with them to discuss improving their communities.
- Voter enthusiasm.  Have you ever in the history of politics seen the turn out at rallies, the parades with flags and boats and trucks, like you have seen for Trump? Have you noticed the turn out lately when Obama or Biden are speaking somewhere? When you see a pick up truck flying twin American flags out the back, it's automatically attributed to Trump.  The American flag is more associated to Trump than it is Biden.  How powerful is that?
- Trump is not a Russian spy like the former administration alleged and illegally investigated him for.  Many many people are relieved by this.  But now, hearings, transcripts almost all declassified.  You can read it all for yourself.  And many people are wondering why and how high level FBI/DOJ/CIA could do what they did and why many MSM outlets furthered this.  If they can do this to him, they can do it to anyone.  And that saga is far from over. Prediction - indictments after Nov 3rd.  AG Barr has stated he does not want anything to be perceived as influencing the election (like the last admin did). 
- Biden's corruption.  On video, Biden bragged about withholding a billion dollars unless the prosecutor was fired who was investigating the company which his son sat on the board.  The Dem controlled house submitted articles of impeachment on Trump for what Biden actually did. And now, more and more has come out in relation to Biden and his corrupt dealings (Hunter's laptop, China, etc etc), that the media is relatively silent on. 
- Jobs vs Mobs.  Everything and anything to do with the Antifa/BLM riots, the Portland/Seattle crap.  Notice you don't hear sfa about antifa anymore?  Biden found through internal polling they took a huge hit, most people are pissed at that whole situation and the left.  Trump did not become the fascist dictator the left said he was, he followed the law and offered federal support top the states.
- COVID.  Trump had the courage to close borders when he did.  He was called a xenophobe and racist for doing it.  Then all of a sudden, every other country thought it was good idea too. 
- Trump is a counterpuncher.  He never attacks anyone first, but when they attack him he hits back way harder and uglier.  A lot of people love that, a lot don't.  But a lot of republicans are sick and tired of the GOP playing by the Marquis of Queensbury rules while the left doesn't, and was always winning.  Republicans now have someone who will get down and dirty and fight to win.  Who do you want fighting for you?  Someone who fights to win.
- 47 years in public office, and now Biden is for change?  No.  Biden is somehow worth millions of dollars on a public servant salary his entire life.  No.  Harris, who exited the DNC primaries at about 2% support is his running mate?  Terrible choices.  The democrats could have picked far better candidates. 
- Trump was right about: the media, pulling out of Paris Climate Accord, Iran deal, bringing back jobs from China (the magic wand Obama said), etc etc.
- and the opposition media have discredited themselves over the last 4+ years

Trump's opposition is the same as 2016, career corrupt establishment/media.  He now has a record to run on, he has been largely cleared in any of the alleged scandals, his opponents not so much, it's clear to the layperson the MSM is biased at best corrupt at worst.  And Trump represents a big middle finger to the establishment who have enriched themselves at public expense.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>And plenty of people around that whole issue were convicted.

Heh.  Yeah, there were convictions, just not related to "that whole issue".

 

[QV]

...
You do know what a landslide in American Politics is right?  He didn’t get one last time nor did he get the popular vote.  He won’t get it this time either.  He may win, I’ve said it before, but not the way you think.

Remius, I'm sure you misunderstand how people will actually look at all of this.  I'll use your super spreader Rose Garden example... everyone see's the left and Democrats encourage the Antifa/BLM rioting and looting under the guise of peaceful protests and none of those "gatherings" were deemed a such a COVID risk it should be stopped.  But we are to view the Rose Garden event as some catastrophic covid event?  No thanks.   

 

[Brad Sallows]

Warren Meyer framed a couple of common outlooks amusingly here.

"If you are a scientific Catholic (meaning your science can only come from officially-designated authorities) rather than a scientific Protestant (which allows you to take responsibility for your own understanding of the universe) then you might as well skip to the next article."

I suppose some people are "informational Catholics" and some are "informational Protestants".

 

[Remius]

Remius, I'm sure you misunderstand how people will actually look at all of this.  I'll use your super spreader Rose Garden example... everyone see's the left and Democrats encourage the Antifa/BLM rioting and looting under the guise of peaceful protests and none of those "gatherings" were deemed a such a COVID risk it should be stopped.  But we are to view the Rose Garden event as some catastrophic covid event?  No thanks. 

Actually the official line from officials is that any gathering is discouraged.  Including the peaceful protests.

I actually think they are both super spreader events.  Because I don’t distrust the science behind it. 

The difference is that one was caused by the organisation that is supposed to be fighting this.  Antifa are essentially thugs.  So apples and oranges. 

How many people actually got sick, oh and including the POTUS?  You said he defers to his health experts.  He didn’t.  That s the point.  Your what aboutism has nothing to do with the statement you made.  If he had deferred to them masks and social distancing would have been enforced.  But notice what the SCOTUS swearing in event looked like?  It took them to get burned to figure it out.

 

[a_majoor]

An interesting look at the methodologies behind the company which is predicting a Trump/Republican win. While you can argue about how effective it is, we will have some sort of proof that it is effective or not very soon now. It is good to understand how it works (and the methodology can be extended for our use if it does - doing population and area studies before deploying), and it is also good to see that some people have been attempting to get around the limitations of current polling methods and practices:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2020/10/28/usc-poll-n2578869

USC Pollster: Our Experimental But Accurate Model Shows Trump Winning the Electoral College Again
Guy BensonGuy Benson| @guypbenson|Posted: Oct 28, 2020 10:05 AM

Earlier this week, we wrote about the Trafalgar Group, an outlier pollster that routinely produces rosier results for President Trump's re-election prospects than any of its competitors. If you're on the Trump Train, you love Trafalgar, and you likely already know that its data was much more predictive of some of Trump's upset victories in 2016 -- not to mention calling the 2018 Florida governor's race correctly when basically no one else did. That said, you may be less interested in the outfit's big swings and misses, like overestimating Brian Kemp's victory margin in Georgia's gubernatorial contest last cycle by ten points. True to form, Trafalgar's latest survey shows President Trump inching into the lead in Pennsylvania:

Our new @trafalgar_group #2020Election #BattlegroundState #PApoll conducted Oct 24-25 shows undecided shrinking and a narrow Trump lead for the first time:
48.4% @realDonaldTrump,
47.6% @JoeBiden,
2.2% @Jorgensen4POTUS,
0.7% Other,
1.0% Und. See Report: https://t.co/qf16dkxcCX pic.twitter.com/Vv3i8R4cK1

— Robert C. Cahaly (@RobertCahaly) October 27, 2020

For context, the previous six Keystone State polls gave Biden an average lead of 5.5 points (though another right-leaning pollster also shows Trump surging ahead). Trafalgar's chief pollster told me that part of their "secret sauce" is asking questions that reduce the impact of "social desirability bias" in respondents' answers. The idea is that given the loud opposition to Trump across much of mass media and other taste-making institutions, some people may not want to admit to a stranger over the phone that they plan on voting for him. Part of the way Trafalgar tries to home in on someone's true intentions is to ask them more indirect questions that may reveal their actual preferences. As it turns out, USC's pollster has been doing something similar for a number of years, and here's what they've found:

From our previous research on social judgments, we learned that people seem to know their immediate social circles quite well. Their answers about the distribution of income, health status — even the relationship satisfaction of their friends, family and acquaintances — were often in the right ballpark. And when we averaged the data from their responses across a large national sample, it provided a surprisingly accurate picture of the overall population…in all five of the elections in which we tested this question, the social circle question predicted election outcomes better than traditional questions about voters’ own intentions. These five elections were the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, the 2017 French Presidential election, the 2017 Dutch Parliamentary election, the 2018 Swedish Parliamentary election, and the 2018 U.S. election for House of Representatives. In both the U.S. elections, the social-circle question predicted national and state level results better than the “own intention” question in the same polls. In fact, data from the social-circle question in 2016 accurately predicted which candidate won each state, so it predicted Trump’s electoral college victory…

Five for five thus far. So what is their data showing this year? Their traditional polling model gives Biden a double-digit lead in the national horserace, pointing to an easy win and a brutal GOP night. But their "social circle" data, which "predicted outcomes better than traditional questions" is telling a different story:

When we calculate how many electoral votes each candidate could get based on state level averages of the own-intention and social-circle questions, it’s looking like an Electoral College loss for Biden. We should note that our poll was not designed for state-level predictions, and in some states we have very few participants. Even so, in 2016 it predicted that Trump would win the electoral vote.

 

[Remius]

I’ll state my predictions for next Tuesday.

It’s cheating a bit because I have no idea who will win the presidency.  Too many variables.

But.

If Trump wins it will be a narrow win in the electoral college.  He won’t win the popular vote and I predict it will be an even wider margin than last time.

If Biden wins, it will also be a narrow win in the electoral college but he will also win the popular vote. 

In both scenarios it will be a referendum on Trump.  Not because they are picking Biden because the like him better it is because they dislike Trump more.

In both cases i think the house and the senate will be in the Democrats hands.

And in both cases there will be litigation in many voting districts.

No landslide on either side.