Anyone discussing a replay of 2016 here?

[Maxheader]

You know. The one where Hillary was 10 pts above trump, Won the popular vote?
Lost the electoral votes. Why?

[hlthe2b]

1. My, oh my. Is it Debbie Downer time?

Why would you think this?

[obamanut2012]

8. Right?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

10. Heaven forbid we have ENTHUSIASM going into a monumental election

We have to rend our garments in fear of the Orange menace….

[onandup]

2. Kamala is a much better candidate

And Trump is worse than in 2016. But I agree it's anyone's election right now.

[Dennis Donovan]

3. No...

There are different metrics in play in 2024 than there were in 2016.

Apples and oranges.

[Frasier Balzov]

4. In 2024 the mistake of 2016 will be washed away.

And the USA will have its first woman president.

Thank you Joe. Can't say that enough.

[Silent Type]

5. Not if we show up at polls and vote for Harris. Hopefully, no Democrat votes against our candidate because

they are mad for some petty reason like our candidate lost primaries as in 2016, giving us trump. Don’t see that happening this time, thank gawd.

[Tribetime]

6. That's why i'm focusing on the Iowa poll at 4% by the Gold Standard of Polling

If Iowa poll is at 4% at final poll we should be around 7% or 8% Nationwide.This poll in 2016 had Trump winning by 9%....most everyone else was 2% or so....Final result he won Iowa by 9% 2016

[Wiz Imp]

13. You're making the mistaken assumption that the accuracy of polling at both the state and national level stayed stagnant

over the past 8 years. Not only do circumstances effecting elections and voting patterns over time change, but polling models change as well. Not criticizing you, but pointing out it's not a good idea to try to guess results relative to polling.

My advice is to hope (and do everything you can to help) polls to show as close of margins as possible (if Harris trails) and as large of margins as possible where Harris leads. If polling looks good for Harris overall, there is an excellent chance she will win.

[Tribetime]

16. No, I'm assuming the Iowa.Polster is still right on the money

And there's a shift that she's overperforming Biden by 4% overall. That's my humble opinion.I'm sure I could be wrong

[Frank D. Lincoln]

14. Gold standard Iowa poll. That's a great point. Thank you. nt

[BlueGrimmy]

25. The same Iowa poll around this time in 2020

had Biden tied with Trump, and Biden ended up losing Iowa by 8.5% or so. Switching to Kamala has significantly tightened the race from a few months ago, and the trend is certainly in our favor, but we're currently behind where we were 4 years ago, at least in Iowa, so we have to keep working and GOTV.

[Tribetime]

35. I don't know but the final poll had trump winning by seven

So their final numbers were pretty close.One percent off

[obamanut2012]

7. No, why do you?

[NewHendoLib]

9. Good grief...

[betsuni]

11. "Why" what?

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

12. Yeah, kinda. In the sense that everywhere even in progressive media it's

All Frump, All the Time. If its not the endless clips of Frump blathering ad nauseum its people reacting to Frump, or what he said, or what happened to him, or laughing at Frump, or making jokes about he said, or analyzing him.. SICK OF IT. I want to hear what OUR people are saying, every day, cos that's what makes me feel energized but I really have to hunt for it. And btw in case anyone is wondering - yes I do see the irony in that my post here is pretty much all about Frump. SIGH....

[H2O Man]

15. The sky is falling!

[elocs]

17. "Why?" The Constitution?

I never heard that Hillary was up by 10. She and too many Democrats were over confident and they either didn't bother to vote or voted for a 3rd party candidate. She was so sure that she would win that she didn't bother to make a general election campaign stop here in Wisconsin and nobody does that anymore.

[Sugarcoated]

18. Nope

Nope nope noper

[TwilightZone]

19. Clinton was only up 3.6% in the final polls and Trump had a nearly 30% chance of winning.

More revisionist history, eh?

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Every cycle is unique, including this one.

[Trueblue Texan]

29. I remember in 2016 as soon as started seeing the numbers roll in from Florida...

...I had that sick feeling that TFG was going to take the election. I don't know why 538 had Florida leaning blue, maybe that's why I expected Hillary to win--I wasn't even worried about it. Until I saw the votes coming in from Florida.

But I do think this time is different. I don't think anyone who cares about this nation or democracy is going to leave it to chance. They will make it to the polls. They made it during a pandemic and I think this time, they will be even more determined.

[MustLoveBeagles]

20. Just you

[Sky Jewels]

21. Seriously?

The circumstances of this election are vastly different. Give it a rest.

[Wanderlust988]

22. Hillary lost a lot due to Comey and the 3rd Party voters

Harris won't have that problem this time. Also Trump in 2016 was a shiny, new object. Not this time!

[soandso]

23. Nope

[Blue_Roses]

24. Trump had Russia's help

Joe Biden has already shut that down as of Friday.

[samnsara]

26. ive replayed it every damned minute of every damned day

10 pts up then the fbi report then zip. at least we dont have that looming yet.

[displacedvermoter]

27. Constantly it seems

[-misanthroptimist]

28. No.

Harris is up ~6% and will win by 8-12% nationally. She will get at least 305 EVs, with possibilities of more than 360. Of course, that depends on both hard work by supporters and people voting.

But, hey! Thanks for playing.

[Johnny2X2X]

30. This is likely

2016 was a shock mostly because a couple of the states had polling that was way off, mainly Michigan and Wisconsin. State polling is often less predictive than national. But the Comey stuff flipped a ton of voters in those key states, that was the unaccounted for polling error in my opinion.

2020 saw a bigger polling miss nationally, but the state polls were pretty good.

This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum, there's explanations for a lot of it. Statisticians and pollsters learn and adjust, and hopefully get better. I think she is ahead and would win if the election were today, but there's still a lot that could change.

[-misanthroptimist]

37. When we get to the last few days, I'll make my estimate.

In 2016, the only state I missed was NH, which was very, very close. One of the problems with the polls in 2016 was the third party voters. As always happens in polling, third parties do a lot better than they do on election day. Taking this into account, allows one to figure things very close to the actual election.

In 2012, I also missed only one state. (Don't remember which off the top of my head.)

In 2020, I missed two states: AZ, and GA -both of which were very close. I'm not perfect at this, but I do have some skill. OTOH, my post above is based more on feeling than data. As I said, when we're a couple of days out I'll have a pretty good idea how things will turn out...probably.

[Nixie]

31. 2016 was different with an unnecessarily prolonged primary

that resulted in our nominee fighting two fronts, sadly. All that weakened our candidate in the final stretches, apparently by design. Fortunately, we're not experiencing that destructive futility this year.

[Quiet Em]

32. 2016 was a wake up call for people who don't usually vote

Many regretted it and have been voting in record breaking numbers ever since. The majority of people are not going to risk putting the dictator wannabe back in power.

[Think. Again.]

33. I've been too busy worrying about...

....how in the world Kamala suddenly turned Black and if I've been wrong all these years about how genetics work.

[newdayneeded]

34. I held my nose and voted for

Hillary, I'll crawl through broken glass to vote for Kamala.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

36. I am worried