2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you'll permit me to add some Based Dilbert Man commentary: predicting complex systems is extremely hard. In 2016, we saw how all the smartest people, using all the best toys, were comprehensively wrong about an election with a binary outcome.

There's also the fact that nobody who's in any way professionally connected to the media/entertainment hegemony can allow themselves to be seen as providing any kind of aid and comfort to Trump and his supporters. Remember that poor fucker who got unpersoned for say, "historically, riots aren't great for Democrats." Hell, I've seen a gay porn star, of all people, issue as gun-to-his head endorsement of BLM after previously saying "man, this politics stuff is stupid, I'm out" because the hive mind is THAT bent on being the only game in town. Does anyone believe you can do honest business with, say, the New York Times (the paper that just defenestrated it's editor for publishing an editorial from a sitting US Senator) if the numbers don't say exactly what the Times want them to say?

As far as Nate Tin goes, he's a relic of the "big data" fad of the mid-2010s. He got his start in baseball statistics, which are wildly different from elections and polling. Think about it this way: as far as I know, an American baseball game can't end without a bare minimum of 52 pitches being thrown (51 fly-outs and 1 home run.) There's over 100 games in a standard MLB season. This means that you have a huge amount of data to sift through as any given event occurs repeatedly across multiple teams and parks. Presidential elections, OTOH, are once every 4 years. It's an extremely low-frequency event and a lot changes between each one, so it doesn't lend itself to diluting out the junk data the way baseball stats or other high-frequency events do.

I'm not gonna say the polls are straight-up bullshit, but this isn't baseball: they're an attempt to predict the future, not things in themselves that somehow add up to the final result on election day.
IIRC, some conservatives also called bullshit on the polls and Nate Zinc's data in 2012, so when Obama won re-election he came out with a reputation and ego boost from having owned the cons. Even in 2016 he could still claim to have been the least wrong out of all the pollsters just because of how catastrophically wrong everyone else was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid
I wouldn't even go so far as to throw away a whole state's votes to cope for Trump losing the popular vote. Trump relied on a electoral focused strategy, willingly sacrificing well-to-do white Republicans in states like California and some die-hard Evangelical votes in deep red states, for working class whites in the Rustbelt. If elections were decided by popular votes, then his strategy would have been completely different.

Further, Trump's popular vote was largely spoiled by Gary Johnson. In 2012, Gary Johnson running as a Libertarian got just less than 1%, in 2016 he got over 3%. Throw in 2/3's of Johnson's percentage, and the small amount McMlluen got, and Trump would have had a narrow popular vote.
 
That's an interesting analysis, but I was more curious about why polls like that don't get added to the RCP average when stuff like Quinnipac and the NYTimes/Siena poll do, and I personally think/suspect that the reason why is because those polls aren't heavily biased for Biden. There's been other polls from The Democracy Institute and Zogby Analytics that also aren't included in the average and those polls are less biased against Trump then the big names from more liberal sources are.

Generally speaking, I agree with Tarl Warwick(AKA Styxhexenhammer)about polls, you should rely on an aggregate of polls, but the problem is that I fear the aggregate is becoming increasingly tainted with biased inputs in favor of one candidate. Ideally you would get all sorts of information from conservative, centrist and liberal pollsters and that would produce a reasonably accurate aggregate.

You’re exactly right to have this concern. Styx hasn’t mentioned that if an aggregate is tainted by an abundance of bad pollsters, then the outlier can be what is closest to the truth.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: FunPosting101
I figure that now would be the best time to ask this. If Trump loses the election, what do you guys plan to do? I think this is important to ask given the implication of a potential Biden/Harris presidency.
.
I have other personal concerns to worry about. The election might pose an existential threat to you. Im dealing with an entirely different type of circus. I do admit I dont need historical crisises in the mix.

To be honest its too late to draw up any battle plans. You need a decade at least to get something going.

I did say (according to my Minecraft simulator)
the way to fight the left is fight tech. No way out of this. Meaning you would have to be ok with living in a pre industrial society and be ok with destroying technology at any cost to retain your freedom.

The way to achieve this would be done by destroying the economy by perpetuating white collars crimes on a massive scale. Or as much as you can. Things will fall apart if everyone did that stuff as much as they could.

Yet pulling such dumb shit takes time. Time no one anti left has.

The best you can do is run and hide. For now.

I dont know what happens if Biden wins. Corporate left wing death squads? That might actually happen.
Who knows?

Do know time isnt on the lefts side. Even if they take over.

Ive said it before and I said it again. The resources needed to sustain our hi tech society are running out. Thing will collapse.

Even if that Isnt true then there is the case of left wing societies running out of money. They dont last and are not capable of lasting.

The final thing is woke capital's project to keep their side together is a failure. Hispanics hate blacks. Muslims hate gays. Antifa wants to kill the Bidens and the Clintons.

They will tear each other apart.

That means civil war even if they do take over. They will be too busy fighting and as a result things as infrastructure will be neglected and crumble to ruin.

America is a huge place. Factionism or destruction or ruin of infrastructure would mean the ability to retain control would be greatly reduced. The economic networks the corporate monopolies have will be broken up.

These parts of america which get wrecked will allow new powers against woke capital to form.

Your job as resistance isnt to save and retake this society but let it fall to ruin and rebuild a new one. Thats how you win.
 
Last edited:
I figure that now would be the best time to ask this. If Trump loses the election, what do you guys plan to do? I think this is important to ask given the implication of a potential Biden/Harris presidency.

Prepare for 1930's Germany, but with more colorful degenerates and TikTok. The real trick is to get into the rising party late enough to avoid the post-power seizure purge, but early enough to achieve meaningful status. Better to err on the side of caution.
 
Heh, for a wee laugh, here's a story running on the beeb the now. False or true, it's one funny troll.
 
One thing I just realized now is that there have been very few if any Islamist terror attacks during Trump's presidency, why? They happened pretty regularly during Bush and Obama's presidency and then just kinda stopped.

Is there a non tin foil hat explanation for this?
 
One thing I just realized now is that there have been very few if any Islamist terror attacks during Trump's presidency, why? They happened pretty regularly during Bush and Obama's presidency and then just kinda stopped.

Is there a non tin foil hat explanation for this?
The obvious answer is cause Obama and Clinton wanted to keep Islamic terror going so they can benifit from war profiteering.
 
One thing I just realized now is that there have been very few if any Islamist terror attacks during Trump's presidency, why? They happened pretty regularly during Bush and Obama's presidency and then just kinda stopped.

Is there a non tin foil hat explanation for this?
Islamorealism (still called "Islamophobia" by Establishment bitter-clingers) gets shit done. Also, not getting us involved in more sand-land wars reduces refugees and migration.
 

Here's a quick rundown on where the race stands, with the assumption that the 'competitive' states (I use that loosely) are: Georgia, Texas, Iowa, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia.

Georgia: While Stacy Abrams came close in 2018 thanks to being particularly good at supercharging turnout in the Atlanta metro area, there still isn't enough to overcome the Republican strength in the rest of the state. Monmouth is a pollster that has consistently overestimated Dem performance, and they even had Trump up in Georgia back in late July, when things were worse for Trump than they are now. There are some pollsters that have Biden up in this state but they're ones like Morning Consult which changed their methodology some time in 2019 that made them one of the most favorable pollsters for Trump in terms of gauging approval to one of the most unfavorable (that is, they went from being more favorable than other pollsters to being less favorable, which is an indication that it's not Trump's approval but their technique). Trafalgar underestimated Kemp in 2018 but was right on the money in Georgia in 2016, and they have Trump pretty close to the magic number of 50%, so while this state is getting bluer, we can assume it'll go Trump unless Biden is already winning by a decent amount. Worry about this state in 2024 and 2028.

Texas: Everything that was said about Georgia can be said about this state, just change 'Stacy Abrams' to Beto O'Cuck. Population growth in the Houston area, the Dallas area, the Austin area, etc is making the state bluer, but again - this year is not its year unless Biden is already winning by a lot. Worry about it in 2024 and 2028. Enough recent polls have Trump up, so just assume he has this in the bag.

Iowa: Opposite of Georgia and Texas. It's particularly 'swingy' in that it has lots of voters who are more prone to changing their minds than the average American voter (it went from voting for Obama by a lot to voting for Trump by a lot). Recent polls from pollsters that have understimated Trump and GOP in the past few years have Trump up in this state. Assume he has this in the bag.

Ohio: Everything said about Iowa applies to this state. This isn't 2004 where Kerry and Bush tried hard for this state because it was competitive for both sides. This is pretty much solid for Trump now.

North Carolina: There are certain areas in the state that has population trends that favor Democrats, but in 2016 it was mainly cancelled out by the fact that areas in the rest of the state voted for Trump even more than they did for Romney. Trump is improving in polling compared to a couple months ago, even Dem favored polls like that shitty Britbong pollster Redfield&Wilton had Trump up a couple weeks ago.

Florida: This is "Trump's home state" now, though that doesn't mean much. Keep in mind that in 2018, polling for Florida was laughably bad in favor of Democrats. It's a tough state to poll given its size, conflicting population trends, distinction between different groups of hispanics (for instance, you have to be careful about making sure to group Cubans and other hispanics separately, otherwise you'll have a skewed idea of how well one is doing with hispanics in this state). There are older voters moving here every year. Trafalgar was decent in the state in 2018, and in late June/early July they had it as a tie, which means that Trump is ahead right now given that things have improved for Trump since that part of the year.

---

^for every state above this line, you can pretty much assume it'd go for Trump if the 'election were today'. It's the states below that are a bit more spurious

Arizona: Ex-Mormon MILF Kyrsten Sinema won this state in 2018, but Joe Biden is no Kyrsten Sinema. Polling here has been ticking upwards for Trump. In 2018 polling was better for Dems earlier on and got better for Republicans as time went on despite Sinema winning. Difference is, Biden is no Sinema and Trump is no McSally.

Michigan: In 2018, despite not having nearly as much funding as Beto O'Rourke, John James(R) pulled off a respectable loss against Debbie Stabenow(D). This shows the state has undeniably trended Republican since the 2000s.

Stabenow wins by 16 in 2006: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan
Stabenow wins by 21 in 2012: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan
Stabenow wins by only 6 in 2018: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_United_States_Senate_election_in_Michigan

keep in mind that incumbents like Stabenow who haven't gone openly radical have some crossover appeal to people who voted Trump in 2016. Biden won't have the same inherent advantage that she had. Trafalgar was on point in Michigan in 2016 and 2018. Recently they have Trump and John James ahead in the state. I'd say it's 55%-45% chance that Trump wins if the 'election were today.'

Wisconsin: Much of what was said about Michigan applies here. Trump can do a bit better with the 'establishment Republican' types in the WOW counties around Milwaukee. He can continue to do better with white rurals in other parts of the state. I'd say it's a 52%-48% chance that Trump wins if it were today.

Pennsylvania: Despite touting himself as 'Scranton Joe' or 'the scrappy kid from Scranton,' there doesn't seem to be a huge 'home state' boost for Biden in this state.


The Morning/Call Muhlenberg College poll overestimated Hillary by quite a bit in 2016. This year, they have Biden doing a bit worse than Hillary was at around the same point in the year. Other pollsters in PA also have the same kind of thing going on. Of course, there is no *guarantee* that the error will be the same this year, but many of them flopped in 2018 as well in other states. In 2018, PA was a good year for the Dems but that was mainly because the GOP didn't even try very hard given that district lines were redrawn and the incumbent senator Bob Casey has a last name that's very good for voters in the state (his father was a well liked pro-life Democrat - Bob Casey managed to win over a decent chunk of Trump voters). Maybe a 50-50 chance it goes Trump if it were today.

Minnesota: Emerson polling has shown to be decent this year for the 2020 Dem primaries, and in the Massachusetts Senate primary a couple days ago, they mostly nailed the margins. They have Minnesota pretty close this year. Minneapolis riots and general Republican trends in the rural areas can contribute to ending the streak (voted Democrat every presidential election since Nixon won it in 1972).

maybe a 48%-52% chance Biden wins if it were today

New Hampshire: Not much attention in this state, but some of the same pollsters that overestimated Dems by a lot in this state only for Trump to almost win it, have Biden up by about the same amount.

48-52% chance Biden wins if it were today


---
(one of my classes starts in a few minutes so I gotta hold off on completing the rest, so here are a few quick blurbs

Maine: First district is pretty much safe Dem, second district is pretty much safe R.

Nevada: Trump can do better with hispanics this year, though it remains to be seen if he can overcome the shady universal mail expansion that the D governor did recently.

New Mexico: Similar to Nevada. Trump improvement with hispanics ironically makes this state easier than Colorado and Virginia.

Colorado: Lots of white liberals from Cali and other states have moved here which makes it pretty solid for the Dems. Let me put it this way, if Biden accidentally says the n-word, then Trump could win this state (but he wont be winning titanium Dem states like California).

Virginia: Similar to Colorado, but it's even worse given that establishment dems and RINOs on the government teat keep moving to NoVa.

The last three states are basically mostly safe for Biden. The Dems should assume they have this in the bag and focus on winning: Nevada(relatively easy for them to win) New Hampshire (not too hard) Minnesota(could be a surprise loss for the dems) Wisconsin Michigan Pennsylvania (doable but they really gotta try)

They don't need Florida North Carolina Ohio Iowa Georgia Texas to win. Might as well forget about those now if I were a dem (but I'd prefer they waste their time in those states)
 
I figure that now would be the best time to ask this. If Trump loses the election, what do you guys plan to do? I think this is important to ask given the implication of a potential Biden/Harris presidency.

Personally, I see only two options, learn a new language and move to a non-cucked country or figure out how to fight the totalitarian one-party regime. Doing the former option is cowardly as all it would be is running away from our nation's problems. Not to mention, who's to say that country won't become a socialist/communist dictatorship anyway? If Trump cannot win this election, we will have no choice but to take matters into our own hand.

I refuse to accept living in a communist woke dystopia the thieves at DNC have planned for us. A world where we cannot hold jobs that we want, cannot choose to be apolitical, cannot better ourselves financially, cannot hold those who burn, loot and murder accountable, and cannot even protect our vulnerable minors from depraved pedophiles is a hell not worth living in. I would sooner die than to accept this new normal. The United States is a country worth fighting for, which I cannot say for anywhere else even ones I like like Japan.

Apparently AtlasIntel is reliable but as with all polls, I will take it with a grain of salt. It is interesting to look at though.

We have never had a candidate lead with over 3% in popular vote in national election and still lose the electoral college. The demographic breakdown would be a bad sign for white voters as Trump would have a four percentage advantage over Biden(50R-46D). He also is five points behind Biden in independent votes and those carried him the last election. This would mean he has lost the white working class and it would likely cost him Rust Belt states like Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Iowa. Possibly Ohio too, but the double digit black population might save the state in this scenario.

On the other hand, the poll shows him doing exceptionally well among Asian, Hispanic, and especially African-American voters. 41% of Hispanic voters, 37% of Asian voters, and 28% of black voters is much better than either the Republicans or Democrats expect Trump to do. This would lock the South down as quite a few states have a high Hispanic and/or African-American population and put Virginia in play for Trump as that too has a high non-white population. Furthermore, it locks down Arizona and Texas, states that will be critical to Trump's victory and puts New Mexico, Nevada, and maybe Colorado in play.

We would be looking at a map that is similar to the 2000 and 2004 election give or take a few states. That said, I'm not expecting a jump that high in nonwhite votes or a drop that low for white votes. Just an interesting exercise.
If this happens with the way things are currently I'd be full-blown conspiratard "ELECTION WAS RIGGED!" mode. I know either way there's going to be people screaming this, but I'm just being honest.
I think I'd give up on the feds but I'm more motivated than ever to keep these pinkos out of my local areas and I'd be looking into how to fix this country.
To be clear, I'm not even a Republican and I don't think I'm unique in this mindset. The Democrats are just on the crazy train and picking up pace, it's terrifying. They kowtow to people who literally hate this country.

I was thinking about this last week and I don't think it's a stretch to say this is one of the most important elections in US history due to what the dems have become and what they want to achieve.
 
1599150814366.png


They are having a sad about this, claiming that Trump just told everyone to double vote.
 
Personally, I see only two options, learn a new language and move to a non-cucked country or figure out how to fight the totalitarian one-party regime. Doing the former option is cowardly as all it would be is running away from our nation's problems. Not to mention, who's to say that country won't become a socialist/communist dictatorship anyway? If Trump cannot win this election, we will have no choice but to take matters into our own hand.

I refuse to accept living in a communist woke dystopia the thieves at DNC have planned for us. A world where we cannot hold jobs that we want, cannot choose to be apolitical, cannot better ourselves financially, cannot hold those who burn, loot and murder accountable, and cannot even protect our vulnerable minors from depraved pedophiles is a hell not worth living in. I would sooner die than to accept this new normal. The United States is a country worth fighting for, which I cannot say for anywhere else even ones I like like Japan.
This might be cringe, but I'll say it anyway. If you're a white American (and in particular Christian) and you're not at least planning an exodus to another country, you're an idiot. The demographics are still manageable is many parts of the country, but the overall demographic shift is horrifying. And it's the overall population that determines our country's laws and culture. I see Catholic churches get burned and vandalized like every week, and not a word from anyone in power. A woman got punched while attending mass by a black woman and they immediately let her go.

This country will by no means be a safe place to live in about 15 to 20 years regardless of who wins what election. As of right now Poland or Hungary seems to be the safest places in the world, but that could also change in the near future.
 
This might be cringe, but I'll say it anyway. If you're a white American (and in particular Christian) and you're not at least planning an exodus to another country, you're an idiot. The demographics are still manageable is many parts of the country, but the overall demographic shift is horrifying. And it's the overall population that determines our country's laws and culture. I see Catholic churches get burned and vandalized like every week, and not a word from anyone in power. A woman got punched while attending mass by a black woman and they immediately let her go.

This country will by no means be a safe place to live in about 15 to 20 years regardless of who wins what election. As of right now Poland or Hungary seems to be the safest places in the world, but that could also change in the near future.
Every other place is pozzed and I like guns. What's a guy to do?
 
IIRC, some conservatives also called bullshit on the polls and Nate Zinc's data in 2012, so when Obama won re-election he came out with a reputation and ego boost from having owned the cons. Even in 2016 he could still claim to have been the least wrong out of all the pollsters just because of how catastrophically wrong everyone else was.
I believe Silver and is methodology got a lot of cred back in 2008 (or maybe 2012) for accurately predicting the election results in every state. While somewhat impressive, it's not that great of an acheivement. Without any data at all I could predict the outcome in probably at least 35 of the states. Plus McCain and Romney were extraordinarily weak candidates so it's a safe assumption that Obama would win most swing states against them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back