US Election Week Results 2020

[COB]

Can't believe I'm about to defend Hillary, but she wanted to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 55. Biden plans to lower it to 60.

 

[Penelope]

Swings and roundabouts though, when you factor in a public option and the rest of Biden's platform!

 

[ButterTart]

So as I understand it, Arizona is about to go red for a bit before going blue again.

 

[Penelope]

Much like kennel fanny.

 

[RS]

Wait, are we aware of many states being far from fully counted yet? How do we know none of them would shift?

 

[VoR]

I understand that, I honestly do - I just think that if they did THAT well by running Joe Biden with an even less progressive platform than Hillary's in 2016, they could have done EVEN BETTER (in electoral votes, Senate races, everything) if they as a party adopted some popular progressive policies that might have inspired even more (yes I'm going to say it) non-voters to get out and vote. Record numbers or not, I don't think that's something anyone should stop pushing for! PS I also know that we'll probably never agree on this, but I know you're coming from a place of good faith here. I also appreciate that you've been civil and haven't told me to "fuck off" like a certain Moopy moderator did.

I didn't tell you to fuck off, but I had just woken up to what still looked like a likely Trump victory. I appreciate we have ideologically differences (although they're actually very narrow!) but I don't think you realise how condescending and smug that post came across. You're free to express your opinion of course, but I just think you chose your timing poorly at a moment when we were all feeling very down, and I lashed out accordingly. I'm sorry that I was rude to you.

 

[COB]

Condescending and smug? Coming from you I'll take that as a compliment

 

[VoR]

Well, I tried.

 

[ButterTart]

Much like kennel fanny.

Sadly, Kennelfanny’s motto is is ‘You can’t spell Kennelfanny without Kanye’ and that was very much reflected in their votes.

 

[Jark]

My god Jark - these are all polling and political modelling 101 questions.

I know.

Do you really think you're the first person to think of these questions?

No.

It's not just the headline figure that gives the likelihood of one thing happening or the other - it's everything under the bonnet too.

Oh really?

A 10% outcome should happen.....about 10% of the time.

Wow, thankyou for explaining.

You saying this is all just "common sense" is just as ill informed as whenever some idiot on the street talks a load of shit and says it's just "common sense".

No it's not. It actually is common sense to say that polling, which is based on numbers, models, empirical data, the chances of something happening vs. previous outcomes as well as several outside human factors, cannot adapt in real-time to what is going on. Learnings from four years ago are not enough. Polling cannot accurately account for the impact of bots or Twitter trolls spreading misinformation, for example. And many of the polls this time were significantly outside the margin of error - even if Biden takes Pennsylvania it will be by at best 1.5%. Final day polling there had him 6 and 7 pts up from high quality pollsters with an average 3.2pt margin of error in most cases. Five Thirty Eight averaged the polls in Texas out at +1.1 to Trump - he took it +6. Ohio, +1.3 - he carried it +8. If pollsters can accurately account for things which could skew the results one way or the other, the results in some states wouldn't be off by double the margin of error. And they wouldn't be skewed in Trump's favour nationwide in the way that they were in a clearly systematic error of polling.

I'll engage in debate with anyone on here, even the few people I dislike, as long as they're capable of doing it civilly. Getting into these things on Moopy is supposed to be enjoyable, and with you it's not and you are not capable of civility. You're too busy blowing yourself. So, Poison Pen, knowing that I find you an absolutely unbearable piece of work with a horrible chip on your shoulder I'd like you pop me on ignore, as I have you, and then we can derail fewer threads with our interminable back and forths.

 

[AGinAg (37)]

What did VoR say?

 

[Kate]

Oh also, Kanye results are in. He did best in Tennessee

@Tisch to sue the maker of this graphic

 

[Penelope]

I know.

Then why are you asking them as if you've split the atom in finding an obvious flaw with polling?

No.

Then why are you asking them as if you've split the atom in finding an obvious flaw with polling?

Wow, thankyou for explaining.

Why are you acting as if I've pointed out something obvious you already knew when it's a refutation of your claim that a 10% chance was a "get out clause"?

No it's not. It actually is common sense to say that polling, which is based on numbers, models, empirical data, the chances of something happening vs. previous outcomes as well as several outside human factors, cannot adapt in real-time to what is going on. Learnings from four years ago are not enough. Polling cannot accurately account for the impact of bots or Twitter trolls spreading misinformation, for example.

Uh, yes it can? Polling tracks opinion changes. The effect of the spreading of misinformation is.....a change in people's opinions. Which polling would then pick up. How is it common sense to say polling can't track that? If something happens last minute to change people's minds, sure it's questionable whether polling would pick that up. That isn't so much a flaw with polling as a science as the simple observation that something that happens after most surveys have been conducted....won't be picked up by those surveys.

And many of the polls this time were significantly outside the margin of error - even if Biden takes Pennsylvania it will be by at best 1.5%. Final day polling there had him 6 and 7 pts up from high quality pollsters with an average 3.2pt margin of error in most cases. Five Thirty Eight averaged the polls in Texas out at +1.1 to Trump - he took it +6. Ohio, +1.3 - he carried it +8. If pollsters can accurately account for things which could skew the results one way or the other, the results in some states wouldn't be off by double the margin of error. And they wouldn't be skewed in Trump's favour nationwide in the way that they were in a clearly systematic error of polling.

Yes, it's a polling error. They happen. It doesn't mean polling as a science is completely untenable. Pollsters can (that's can in principle - and often in practice!) accurately account for things that skew the results one way or another. That doesn't mean they always do so successfully.

I'll engage in debate with anyone on here, even the few people I dislike, as long as they're capable of doing it civilly. Getting into these things on Moopy is supposed to be enjoyable, and with you it's not and you are not capable of civility. You're too busy blowing yourself. So, Poison Pen, knowing that I find you an absolutely unbearable piece of work with a horrible chip on your shoulder I'd like you pop me on ignore, as I have you, and then we can derail fewer threads with our interminable back and forths.

Babe, you can go right back to the start when I first quoted you on the whole Florida early vote thing. I did so civilly. It was you that replied aggressively and patronisingly, and I'm going to give as good as I get in that situation, especially when you're talking out of your arse about something you don't know all that much about and talking down your nose about it as if you're the one who sees this greater truth that the whole topic is flawed when you don't even know your way around most of the basic concepts of the thing, to someone who did a bloody university degree on the science.

I'm more than happy to ignore you, but forgive me for saying it's a bit rich coming from you after you spent weeks stalking me round the forum to reply with a crap superfluous comeback to whatever post I made somewhere. I'm sorry that the second you bit off more than you can chew and got a mauling after months of you being a waspish little bitch it became too much for you to handle and made you feel like the one who'd been treated uncivilly!

Anyway in conclusion you're wrong go back to your sativa

 

[Penelope]

OT: OMG I didn't realise it actually HAD been VoR that told COB to fuck off, I'd just intended to make a throwaway joke about which mod told you to fuck off and thought of the most benign mod that came to mind The menoVoRse mood swings strike us ALL

 

[VoR]

Once again, I didn't tell him to fuck off.

 

[Diddy]

I guess it was a divisive election for Moopy too

 

[Penelope]

Could someone direct me to the original post in question, it's urgently important we settle the OTHER handbags o'clock of this election thread

 

[Penelope]

I guess it was a divisive election for Moopy too

At least nobody overreacted

 

[AGinAg (37)]

CAN WE PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE FROM DAY TO RESULTS? THANKS!

 

[Diddy]

Everyone’s so HOSTILE

especially when it comes to the politics of another country everyone’s falling over themselves to know the most about

 

[cwej]

I understand that, I honestly do - I just think that if they did THAT well by running Joe Biden with an even less progressive platform than Hillary's in 2016, they could have done EVEN BETTER (in electoral votes, Senate races, everything) if they as a party adopted some popular progressive policies that might have inspired even more (yes I'm going to say it) non-voters to get out and vote. Record numbers or not, I don't think that's something anyone should stop pushing for! PS I also know that we'll probably never agree on this, but I know you're coming from a place of good faith here. I also appreciate that you've been civil and haven't told me to "fuck off" like a certain Moopy moderator did.

I think you’re living in a dreamland if you think putting anything more progressive would have increased voting figures for democrats. The fact is that the USA is ultimately a moderates vs right-wing country. The mere mention of socialism, higher taxes, nationalisation terrifies even most of the moderates unless they’re in California or New York.

Biden has got the most votes of any president in the history of the USA, in the highest turnout proportionally for 120 years against an absolute beast of a populist. We will never be able to prove it but I think choosing a moderate democrat, that is uncontroversial, refused to get into any of the drama with Trump, actually might have been a spark of genius from them, even though I didn’t think it before the day.

Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

 

[RJN]

CAN WE PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE FROM DAY TO RESULTS? THANKS!

Very bold to suggest we'll ever actually get these results

 

[Penelope]

I think the thing a lot of people are overlooking is that fascism, historically, is really quite popular with people.

 

[ButterTart]

CAN WE PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE FROM DAY TO RESULTS? THANKS!

DONE

 

[Diddy]

I think the thing a lot of people are overlooking is that fascism, historically, is really quite popular with people.

I'm a bit partial
Maybe that’s why I like animal crossing

and I’m sorry but the swastika has great brand awareness

 

[cwej]

I'm more than happy to ignore you, but forgive me for saying it's a bit rich coming from you after you spent weeks stalking me round the forum to reply with a crap superfluous comeback to whatever post I made somewhere.

Interesting... I’m spotting a theme here for Jark.

 

[ButterTart]

Everyone’s so HOSTILE

especially when it comes to the politics of another country everyone’s falling over themselves to know the most about

I’m not being hostile you’re fucking hostile.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

I think you’re living in a dreamland if you think putting anything more progressive would have increased voting figures for democrats. The fact is that the USA is ultimately a moderates vs right-wing country. The mere mention of socialism, higher taxes, nationalisation terrifies even most of the moderates unless they’re in California or New York.

Biden has got the most votes of any president in the history of the USA, in the highest turnout proportionally for 120 years against an absolute beast of a populist. We will never be able to prove it but I think choosing a moderate democrat, that is uncontroversial, refused to get into any of the drama with Trump, actually might have been a spark of genius from them, even though I didn’t think it before the day.

Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

To defend the Sanders/progressive position.

A lot of Trump votes, despite him being President now, still seem to come from those voting against how things used to be and voting for some form of change. A progressive candidate, such as Sanders, who could capture that energy would have a reasonably good chance of winning.

To think of an electorate as a simple left right spectrum is a folly, and that's where a lot of the justification for Sanders bashing comes from.

 

[Diddy]

I’m not being hostile you’re fucking hostile.

fuck off

btw I’m tired so..

 

[Eddie]

Who knew that rather than stoking the fires of adversary between the Presidential candidates, this thread would instigate tension and produce rivalries far juicer in nature.

 

[VoR]

I think you’re living in a dreamland if you think putting anything more progressive would have increased voting figures for democrats. The fact is that the USA is ultimately a moderates vs right-wing country. The mere mention of socialism, higher taxes, nationalisation terrifies even most of the moderates unless they’re in California or New York.

Biden has got the most votes of any president in the history of the USA, in the highest turnout proportionally for 120 years against an absolute beast of a populist. We will never be able to prove it but I think choosing a moderate democrat, that is uncontroversial, refused to get into any of the drama with Trump, actually might have been a spark of genius from them, even though I didn’t think it before the day.

Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

I honestly cannot understand the logic that would lead anyone to conclude that the number of left-leaning people who weren't sufficiently motivated to vote against an open racist/facist/tax fraud but would have voted for more socially liberal healthcare and economic platforms wouldn't be counterbalanced by a equal if not much, much greater number of people who could never bring themselves to vote for any candidate/platform with a credible link to the socialism the country has been trained to be so terrified of.

But I suppose pointing that out would be smug and condescending.

 

[ButterTart]

fuck off

btw I’m tired so..

Proper condescending.

 

[Diddy]

I think that’s one thing that’s allegedly baffled me, triggered by that tweet from... I want to say Brooke Shields?

people voting for trump because they want change. it seems an odd reason for voting for an incumbent, even if you DO like him

 

[Penelope]

But I suppose pointing that out would be smug and condescending.

NO VoR, thou shalt NOT be a cow!

 

[Indie]

just IMAGINE the arguments Moopy could have if Labour win the next UK election.

 

[Eddie]

I declare this thread more fascinating than the election itself.

 

[VoR]

To defend the Sanders/progressive position.

A lot of Trump votes, despite him being President now, still seem to come from those voting against how things used to be and voting for some form of change. A progressive candidate, such as Sanders, who could capture that energy would have a reasonably good chance of winning.

To think of an electorate as a simple left right spectrum is a folly, and that's where a lot of the justification for Sanders bashing comes from.

Isn't that a bit of a false analogy though?

You're comparing people who went out and voted (for Trump) to people who didn't vote at all.

I really can't imagine there'd be a significant window for swing between Trump and Bernie Sanders. So you're relying on a HUGE uptick from people who didn't care to vote at all in this election, and given the turnout and tenor of this election, I just don't see that.

 

[RJN]

I think you’re living in a dreamland if you think putting anything more progressive would have increased voting figures for democrats. The fact is that the USA is ultimately a moderates vs right-wing country. The mere mention of socialism, higher taxes, nationalisation terrifies even most of the moderates unless they’re in California or New York.

I don't think this is necessarily true. I can only speak anecdotally, but I know progressives in Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee etc.

New York and California are not some special exceptions in the country. There is a real ideological range everywhere. My county votes more Democratic than most of the counties in New York. Of course, the electoral college downplays this, leading to even more disenfranchisement.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Isn't that a bit of a false analogy though?

You're comparing people who went out and voted (for Trump) to people who didn't vote at all.

I really can't imagine there'd be a significant window for swing between Trump and Bernie Sanders. So you're relying on a HUGE uptick from people who didn't care to vote at all in this election, and given the turnout and tenor of this election, I just don't see that.

It is a risky strategy, but I don't think it can be dismissed as easily as our centrists friends often do. Electorates are complicated, hard to predict and understand, and this is a position that hasn't been tested properly nationally in the US so I find the certainty with which it is being dismissed misplaced

 

[cwej]

I don't think this is necessarily true. I can only speak anecdotally, but I know progressives in Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee etc.

New York and California are not some special exceptions in the country. There is a real ideological range everywhere. My county votes more Democratic than most of the counties in New York. Of course, the electoral college downplays this, leading to even more disenfranchisement.

well yes there are pockets all over I can see that and obviously don’t have the experience of living there so I’m sure you know more.

but I am just astounded at how many people kept banging on about socialism, over and over and over throughout the election night, when Biden is barely left of centre. There’s a complete lack of understanding of what socialism is throughout your country, which is unique to America. Maybe I shouldn’t have highlighted California and NY as exceptions, but the point is pretty much everywhere you go in America, more people are terrified of the word socialism than turned on by it.