Fivethirtyeight has Biden:Trump at 85:15

[CitizenD]

2020 Election Forecast

I am a statistical modeler by profession and I've always enjoyed Fivethirtyeight's election model. They do a great job of explaining the basics and answering questions about how the models made, how polls factor in to the models, what the polls mean, what the uncertainty in the model means etc. They also have regular articles and blog posts talking about some of the more qualitative aspects of the election that are harder to formally incorporate into a model. All around it's a good experience (with the exception of the visualizations they used this year for the model... those are not great).

Right now their model has Biden winning 85% of simulations and Trump winning 15%. Based on national polling averages which have Biden at +10.1% over Trump, it's shocking that the simulations come out that good for Trump since 10.1% is not even remotely close. But, in our country the deck is stacked against democrats. Democrats need to be up 4-6% before we even have a chance of winning the national election because the electoral college over represents empty republican states, but that's where we are.

Think about that for a second. In the last 7 presidential elections (back to 1992) the democratic candidate has won the popular vote 6 times. Democrats lost to Trump in 2016 and Bush in 2000 despite winning the majority of voters. That is not a just system.

Well, no matter. The majority no longer have to suffer the tyranny of the minority. There is much greater democratic support this year than typical. Trump poked the true silent majority and now it is our turn.

 

[Nithavela]

2020 Election Forecast

I am a statistical modeler by profession and I've always enjoyed Fivethirtyeight's election model. They do a great job of explaining the basics and answering questions about how the models made, how polls factor in to the models, what the polls mean, what the uncertainty in the model means etc. They also have regular articles and blog posts talking about some of the more qualitative aspects of the election that are harder to formally incorporate into a model. All around it's a good experience (with the exception of the visualizations they used this year for the model... those are not great).

Right now their model has Biden winning 85% of simulations and Trump winning 15%. Based on national polling averages which have Biden at +10.1% over Trump, it's shocking that the simulations come out that good for Trump since 10.1% is not even remotely close. But, in our country the deck is stacked against democrats. Democrats need to be up 4-6% before we even have a chance of winning the national election because the electoral college over represents empty republican states, but that's where we are.

Think about that for a second. In the last 7 presidential elections (back to 1992) the democratic candidate has won the popular vote 6 times. Democrats lost to Trump in 2016 and Bush in 2000 despite winning the majority of voters. That is not a just system.

Well, no matter. The majority no longer have to suffer the tyranny of the minority. There is much greater democratic support this year than typical. Trump poked the true silent majority and now it is our turn.

Have the democrats ever considered convincing the people in the "empty republican states" to vote for them?

 

[timothyu]

When did obnoxious become a replacement for obnoxious? The true silent majority favours neither side.

 

[CitizenD]

Have the democrats ever considered convincing the people in the "empty republican states" to vote for them?

A lot of the empty states have economies dominated by extractive industries which will be severely restricted by any attempt to address climate change. They would be voting against their own financial interests voting democrat.

 

[Nithavela]

A lot of the empty states have economies dominated by extractive industries which will be severely restricted by any attempt to address climate change. They would be voting against their own financial interests voting democrat.

Over here in germany we have regions like those, too. The government attempts to improve the lot of those regions by spending money on reeducation and development of more sustainable industries in those regions to transition away from digging coal out of the ground.

 

[CitizenD]

Over here in germany we have regions like those, too. The government attempts to improve the lot of those regions by spending money on reeducation and development of more sustainable industries in those regions to transition away from digging coal out of the ground.

The US hasn't made a credible job retraining/direct employment plan in 90 years. Basically since the WPA.

These regions are also much more isolated and homogeneous than the regions in Germany. They are places that serve 1-2 industries (agriculture and extraction) and are surrounded by 500 km of nothing to the nearest major metropolitan area. This isn't exactly a place where you can just retrain them to do something and they can easily commute to a large city center to apply their new skills. For most people job retraining in these regions looks like moving hundreds of miles out of state.

 

[Nithavela]

The US hasn't made a credible job retraining/direct employment plan in 90 years. Basically since the WPA.

These regions are also much more isolated and homogeneous than the regions in Germany. They are places that serve 1-2 industries (agriculture and extraction) and are surrounded by 500 km of nothing to the nearest major metropolitan area. This isn't exactly a place where you can just retrain them to do something and they can easily commute to a large city center to apply their new skills. For most people job retraining in these regions looks like moving hundreds of miles out of state.

Do they have internet?

 

[KCfromNC]

Have the democrats ever considered convincing the people in the "empty republican states" to vote for them?

Kinda hard to figure how to reach single-issue voters who are dead set on voting against their best interests.

 

[KCfromNC]

Right now their model has Biden winning 85% of simulations and Trump winning 15%. Based on national polling averages which have Biden at +10.1% over Trump, it's shocking that the simulations come out that good for Trump since 10.1% is not even remotely close.

From what I read, the model attempts to include some chance that a game-changing October surprise will hit between now and the election, likely based on 2016 where the FBI got involved late in the campaign. Others might say that's being overly cautious, both given that people are already voting in record numbers and the polling which shows how few undecided voters there are compared to previous years.

 

[Fantine]

I agree. 85% is pretty good odds, although I am still completely flabbergasted that a single American could vote for a candidate who is mentally, psychologically, morally, ethically and emotionally unfit to lead.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

If 2 Republicans asked to be write ins at this point I think they would have a decent change since many are voting against Trump rather than for Biden. Such a team would attract votes from both Dems and Repubs. Maybe even me.

 

[rambot]

And yet, do you See trumps poll approvals on 538?

Crazy it's that high

 

[expos4ever]

I agree. 85% is pretty good odds, although I am still completely flabbergasted that a single American could vote for a candidate who is mentally, psychologically, morally, ethically and emotionally unfit to lead.

Indeed. Whether they realize it or not, Trump supporters have constituted the "study participants" in what has turned out to be both a comical and a deeply worrying exploration of the capacity for human beings to choose tribal affiliation over reason.

 

[Albion]

If 2 Republicans asked to be write ins at this point I think they would have a decent change since many are voting against Trump rather than for Biden. Such a team would attract votes from both Dems and Repubs. Maybe even me.

Three or four Republicans ran against Trump in the primaries and none of them drew more than a couple of percentage points of support. It looks, therefore, that your speculation is not supported by the evidence.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Three or four Republicans ran against Trump in the primaries and none of them drew more than a couple of percentage points of support. It looks, therefore, that your speculation is not supported by the evidence.

Except that things have changed a lot.

 

[Albion]

Except that things have changed a lot.

Do you have anything solid to offer in support of that theory?

 

[SimplyMe]

Do you have anything solid to offer in support of that theory?

This article has some great examples.

 

[hislegacy]

Except that things have changed a lot.

In 2016 17 Republicans all professional politicians with decades of history and experience ran against the President. He out performed them all. He then ran against a person who was touted and the most qualified Presidential candidate in recent history, who spent more than 1,200,000,000, had the support of President Obama, who campaigned actively for her. The President beat her also.

All this time polls told us how badly Trump was going to get beaten by Clinton - right up to election day. So please don't take offence if people do not take the current polling to seriously.

 

[lasthero]

All this time polls told us how badly Trump was going to get beaten by Clinton - right up to election day.

The polls showed that more people would vote for Clinton than Trump.

That's what happened.

How were the polls wrong?

 

[essentialsaltes]

The government attempts to improve the lot of those regions by spending money on reeducation and development of more sustainable industries in those regions to transition away from digging coal out of the ground.

Hillary Clinton literally relayed that message to the coal miners of America in 2016 with a $30 billion plan, and she got nowhere with them. Trump promised to bring coal and coal jobs back.

Democrats keep trying to help blue collar workers and point out that Republican plans benefit the 1%.

Meanwhile, Republicans say 'we're the party that will help people like you, they are the party that will help people not-like you.'