|
|
Post by baggins on Oct 19, 2024 18:36:41 GMT
Highlander. Who wants to live forever? Nevermind, Baggins drunk ramblings. There will be one. Not Yatton though. |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,568 
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 19, 2024 19:08:30 GMT
More of a case "there's always one." 😀 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 21, 2024 11:04:17 GMT
Twenty-eight days to go to the election. Despite the long build-up, most of the campaign money is spent in the final weeks of the campaign - and so although postal ballots are already starting to be cast, plenty can and normally will change...but where do the swing states stand today? Nevada ( 6 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.5% (-0.5%) Trump 49.5%Arizona (11 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.6% (+1.0%) Harris 49.4%
Georgia (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.5% (+1.0%) Harris 49.5%
Pennsylvania (19 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.4% (-0.7%) Trump 49.6%
Michigan (15 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.9% (-0.7%) Trump 49.1%Wisconsin ( 10 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.8% (-0.8%) Trump 49.2%
North Carolina (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.4% (+0.7%) Harris 49.6%
Virginia (13 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 54.1% (-0.9%) Trump 45.9%
In the last three weeks Trump has moved back into the lead in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina. Not enough to win the electoral college but momentum has been swinging back in his direction across all of the swing states, although all still to play for on both sides -including his 'home' state of Florida which is now technically within the margin of error...
Florida (30 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 52.0% Harris 48.%
Fifteen days to the election and Trump continues to make ground....if the election was today and the polls are correct he would win the electoral college with at least 281 votes (it takes 270 to win) whatever way Michigan and Wisconsin go - at the moment they are both dead-heats... Nevada ( 6 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.1% (-0.4%) Trump 49.9%Arizona (11 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.9% (+0.3%) Harris 49.1%
Georgia (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 51.0% (+0.5%) Harris 49.0%
Pennsylvania (19 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.3% (+0.7%) Harris 49.7%
Michigan (15 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.9%) Trump 50.0%Wisconsin ( 10 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.8%) Trump 50.0%
North Carolina (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.5% (+0.1%) Harris 49.5%
Virginia (13 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 53.7% (-0.4%) Trump 46.3%
Florida now looks to be safe for Trump as Harris has fallen back...
Florida (30 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 52.9% (+0.9%) Harris 47.1%
|
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 21, 2024 11:07:53 GMT
Twenty-eight days to go to the election. Despite the long build-up, most of the campaign money is spent in the final weeks of the campaign - and so although postal ballots are already starting to be cast, plenty can and normally will change...but where do the swing states stand today? Nevada ( 6 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.5% (-0.5%) Trump 49.5%Arizona (11 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.6% (+1.0%) Harris 49.4%
Georgia (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.5% (+1.0%) Harris 49.5%
Pennsylvania (19 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.4% (-0.7%) Trump 49.6%
Michigan (15 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.9% (-0.7%) Trump 49.1%Wisconsin ( 10 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.8% (-0.8%) Trump 49.2%
North Carolina (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.4% (+0.7%) Harris 49.6%
Virginia (13 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 54.1% (-0.9%) Trump 45.9%
In the last three weeks Trump has moved back into the lead in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina. Not enough to win the electoral college but momentum has been swinging back in his direction across all of the swing states, although all still to play for on both sides -including his 'home' state of Florida which is now technically within the margin of error...
Florida (30 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 52.0% Harris 48.%
Fifteen days to the election and Trump continues to make ground....if the election was today and the polls are correct he would win the electoral college with at least 281 votes (it takes 270 to win) whatever way Michigan and Wisconsin go - at the moment they are both dead-heats... Nevada ( 6 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.1% (-0.4%) Trump 49.9%Arizona (11 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.9% (+0.3%) Harris 49.1%
Georgia (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 51.0% (+0.5%) Harris 49.0%
Pennsylvania (19 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.3% (+0.7%) Harris 49.7%
Michigan (15 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.9%) Trump 50.0%Wisconsin ( 10 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.8%) Trump 50.0%
North Carolina (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.5% (+0.1%) Harris 49.5%
Virginia (13 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 53.7% (-0.4%) Trump 46.3%
Florida now looks to be safe for Trump as Harris has fallen back...
Florida (30 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 52.9% (+0.9%) Harris 47.1%
|
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 21, 2024 17:42:22 GMT
So the space monkey is chucking a million dollars a day trying to get voters to register in swing states . Nothing from Super on this surprisingly 🙄?
HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania, Oct 20 (Reuters) - Pennsylvania's Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, on Sunday called on law enforcement to investigate billionaire Elon Musk for his promise at a weekend pro-Trump rally to give away $1 million each day until Election Day.
Musk on Saturday gave a $1 million check to an attendee at the rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which was hosted by America PAC, a political action group the Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab CEO set up to back Republican Donald Trump in the Nov. 5 presidential election.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Shapiro said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that Musk’s plan to give money to registered voters in Pennsylvania is “deeply concerning” and “it’s something that law enforcement could take a look at.”
The money is the latest example of Musk using his extraordinary wealth to influence the tightly contested presidential race between Trump and his Democratic rival Vice President Kamala Harris. Pennsylvania is a must-win state for both Trump and Harris.
|
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 22, 2024 10:28:55 GMT
So the space monkey is chucking a million dollars a day trying to get voters to register in swing states . Nothing from Super on this surprisingly 🙄? HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania, Oct 20 (Reuters) - Pennsylvania's Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, on Sunday called on law enforcement to investigate billionaire Elon Musk for his promise at a weekend pro-Trump rally to give away $1 million each day until Election Day. Musk on Saturday gave a $1 million check to an attendee at the rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which was hosted by America PAC, a political action group the Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab CEO set up to back Republican Donald Trump in the Nov. 5 presidential election. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Shapiro said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that Musk’s plan to give money to registered voters in Pennsylvania is “deeply concerning” and “it’s something that law enforcement could take a look at.” The money is the latest example of Musk using his extraordinary wealth to influence the tightly contested presidential race between Trump and his Democratic rival Vice President Kamala Harris. Pennsylvania is a must-win state for both Trump and Harris. Not sure why I should comment...but since you asked so nicely... Is it legal? No idea, some say yes, others no - I'm sure the courts will decide and decide quickly. Is it unprecedented? In this specific way yes but plenty of other people and organisations have funded plenty of schemes to get people to register to vote and even helping them to physically cast a postal or in-person ballot - where do you draw the line? |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 22, 2024 10:40:36 GMT
So the space monkey is chucking a million dollars a day trying to get voters to register in swing states . Nothing from Super on this surprisingly 🙄? HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania, Oct 20 (Reuters) - Pennsylvania's Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, on Sunday called on law enforcement to investigate billionaire Elon Musk for his promise at a weekend pro-Trump rally to give away $1 million each day until Election Day. Musk on Saturday gave a $1 million check to an attendee at the rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which was hosted by America PAC, a political action group the Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab CEO set up to back Republican Donald Trump in the Nov. 5 presidential election. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Shapiro said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that Musk’s plan to give money to registered voters in Pennsylvania is “deeply concerning” and “it’s something that law enforcement could take a look at.” The money is the latest example of Musk using his extraordinary wealth to influence the tightly contested presidential race between Trump and his Democratic rival Vice President Kamala Harris. Pennsylvania is a must-win state for both Trump and Harris. Not sure why I should comment...but since you asked so nicely... Is it legal? No idea, some say yes, others no - I'm sure the courts will decide and decide quickly. Is it unprecedented? In this specific way yes but plenty of other people and organisations have funded plenty of schemes to get people to register to vote and even helping them to physically cast a postal or in-person ballot - where do you draw the line? Thanks for the reply and I know you’re a stickler for the rules . You didn’t answer my question previously, who do you want to win ? It obvs breaks the rules but too close to election to hold him to account and justice in America is not on guilty or innocent it’s on how big your bank account is. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 22, 2024 11:01:16 GMT
Fifteen days to the election and Trump continues to make ground....if the election was today and the polls are correct he would win the electoral college with at least 281 votes (it takes 270 to win) whatever way Michigan and Wisconsin go - at the moment they are both dead-heats... Nevada ( 6 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.1% (-0.4%) Trump 49.9%Arizona (11 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.9% (+0.3%) Harris 49.1%
Georgia (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 51.0% (+0.5%) Harris 49.0%
Pennsylvania (19 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.3% (+0.7%) Harris 49.7%
Michigan (15 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.9%) Trump 50.0%Wisconsin ( 10 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 50.0% (-0.8%) Trump 50.0%
North Carolina (16 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 50.5% (+0.1%) Harris 49.5%
Virginia (13 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Harris 53.7% (-0.4%) Trump 46.3%
Florida now looks to be safe for Trump as Harris has fallen back...
Florida (30 electoral college votes) Nate Silver average: Trump 52.9% (+0.9%) Harris 47.1%
Listened to that whole podcast today, not sure what your point is...? Should I critique every error they made with citations? In regards to the part I assume you're referencing, 538/Nate Silver and his team produce multiple forecasts and explain in detail how they calculate their predictions based on the quantity and quality of polls involved. Alex Andreou is correct that several low-quality pollsters dump lots of low-quality polls. But the 538 model weights them massively down based on both historical accuracy and the large volume of results in a short space of time meaning the more accurate polls still play the largest part in their forecasts. Nationally to win, a Democratic candidate needs at least a 2% lead because of the way the states/Electoral College works. Early Oct high-quality polls have Harris up by 2-3% (ABC News/Ipsos +2%, Marquette University Law School+3%, YouGov/CBS News 3%, Fairleigh Dickinson University 3%). Most of these polls have been giving very similar results since mid-August and the deep dive (gender, race, age) also show no major moves with any block of voters. When the polls give you the same numbers week after week after week that normally means they have got their methodology right and in reality little is changing. Their latest forecast (the poll of polls if you like) has Harris up by 1.8%... They do the same thing at state level as well, adjusting all polls (not just the overtly partisan ones) so that the data can be used but allowances are made for known issues. Hence why they get closer than most predictions most of the time... |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 22, 2024 11:18:47 GMT
Not sure why I should comment...but since you asked so nicely... Is it legal? No idea, some say yes, others no - I'm sure the courts will decide and decide quickly. Is it unprecedented? In this specific way yes but plenty of other people and organisations have funded plenty of schemes to get people to register to vote and even helping them to physically cast a postal or in-person ballot - where do you draw the line? Thanks for the reply and I know you’re a stickler for the rules . You didn’t answer my question previously, who do you want to win ? It obvs breaks the rules but too close to election to hold him to account and justice in America is not on guilty or innocent it’s on how big your bank account is. Why does it 'obviously' break the rules? Some say it does, others say it doesn't - as far as I can see if you interpret the rules one way you can't pay people to vote, let alone which way to vote - but that's not what he's doing. Can democrats sign the petition and win? As to who I want to win, in order of what's best for America it's 1) none of the following, 2) Harris, 3) Stein, 4) Kennedy, (R) 5) Trump. Since '1' isn't an option and 3/4 have no chance I have to root for Harris. If she does take it the Democrats need to run a strong process in 2028 as there are far better candidates in the party. |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 22, 2024 11:37:53 GMT
Listened to that whole podcast today, not sure what your point is...? Should I critique every error they made with citations? In regards to the part I assume you're referencing, 538/Nate Silver and his team produce multiple forecasts and explain in detail how they calculate their predictions based on the quantity and quality of polls involved. Alex Andreou is correct that several low-quality pollsters dump lots of low-quality polls. But the 538 model weights them massively down based on both historical accuracy and the large volume of results in a short space of time meaning the more accurate polls still play the largest part in their forecasts. Nationally to win, a Democratic candidate needs at least a 2% lead because of the way the states/Electoral College works. Early Oct high-quality polls have Harris up by 2-3% (ABC News/Ipsos +2%, Marquette University Law School+3%, YouGov/CBS News 3%, Fairleigh Dickinson University 3%). Most of these polls have been giving very similar results since mid-August and the deep dive (gender, race, age) also show no major moves with any block of voters. When the polls give you the same numbers week after week after week that normally means they have got their methodology right and in reality little is changing. Their latest forecast (the poll of polls if you like) has Harris up by 1.8%... They do the same thing at state level as well, adjusting all polls (not just the overtly partisan ones) so that the data can be used but allowances are made for known issues. Hence why they get closer than most predictions most of the time... The point was and as you point out…. The polls are not always to be trusted. It’s going to be mightily close and id bet now we don’t get to know the result for at least a month after the election. Trump is already planning on litigating all results that he loses . |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 22, 2024 11:38:18 GMT
Listened to that whole podcast today, not sure what your point is...? Should I critique every error they made with citations? In regards to the part I assume you're referencing, 538/Nate Silver and his team produce multiple forecasts and explain in detail how they calculate their predictions based on the quantity and quality of polls involved. Alex Andreou is correct that several low-quality pollsters dump lots of low-quality polls. But the 538 model weights them massively down based on both historical accuracy and the large volume of results in a short space of time meaning the more accurate polls still play the largest part in their forecasts. Nationally to win, a Democratic candidate needs at least a 2% lead because of the way the states/Electoral College works. Early Oct high-quality polls have Harris up by 2-3% (ABC News/Ipsos +2%, Marquette University Law School+3%, YouGov/CBS News 3%, Fairleigh Dickinson University 3%). Most of these polls have been giving very similar results since mid-August and the deep dive (gender, race, age) also show no major moves with any block of voters. When the polls give you the same numbers week after week after week that normally means they have got their methodology right and in reality little is changing. Their latest forecast (the poll of polls if you like) has Harris up by 1.8%... They do the same thing at state level as well, adjusting all polls (not just the overtly partisan ones) so that the data can be used but allowances are made for known issues. Hence why they get closer than most predictions most of the time... The point was and as you point out…. The polls are not always to be trusted. It’s going to be mightily close and id bet now we don’t get to know the result for at least a month after the election. Trump is already planning on litigating all results that he loses . Good man , there’s hope for you yet 😜 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 23, 2024 8:01:19 GMT
The point was and as you point out…. The polls are not always to be trusted. It’s going to be mightily close and id bet now we don’t get to know the result for at least a month after the election. Trump is already planning on litigating all results that he loses . Good man , there’s hope for you yet 😜 ...did you just congratulate yourself...?!? |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,568
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 23, 2024 8:10:19 GMT
Good man , there’s hope for you yet 😜 ...did you just congratulate yourself...?!? No one else will. 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 23, 2024 8:21:29 GMT
Listened to that whole podcast today, not sure what your point is...? Should I critique every error they made with citations? In regards to the part I assume you're referencing, 538/Nate Silver and his team produce multiple forecasts and explain in detail how they calculate their predictions based on the quantity and quality of polls involved. Alex Andreou is correct that several low-quality pollsters dump lots of low-quality polls. But the 538 model weights them massively down based on both historical accuracy and the large volume of results in a short space of time meaning the more accurate polls still play the largest part in their forecasts. Nationally to win, a Democratic candidate needs at least a 2% lead because of the way the states/Electoral College works. Early Oct high-quality polls have Harris up by 2-3% (ABC News/Ipsos +2%, Marquette University Law School+3%, YouGov/CBS News 3%, Fairleigh Dickinson University 3%). Most of these polls have been giving very similar results since mid-August and the deep dive (gender, race, age) also show no major moves with any block of voters. When the polls give you the same numbers week after week after week that normally means they have got their methodology right and in reality little is changing. Their latest forecast (the poll of polls if you like) has Harris up by 1.8%... They do the same thing at state level as well, adjusting all polls (not just the overtly partisan ones) so that the data can be used but allowances are made for known issues. Hence why they get closer than most predictions most of the time... The point was and as you point out…. The polls are not always to be trusted. It’s going to be mightily close and id bet now we don’t get to know the result for at least a month after the election. Trump is already planning on litigating all results that he loses . The way I look at polls (and this is just my view not any particular polling company or polling analyst now) is that if you watch them closely for a couple of months you get a good feel for where the various candidates are and then over time you watch for patterns (mostly general trends up or down). I've been watching as much as I can since June/July (when it was still Biden/Trump). Back then the Electoral College was pretty even and the swing states broke evenly. Harris got a bump up when she was confirmed as the nominee, Trump got a boost after the Republican Convention/assassination attempt and Harris got a boost after the Democratic convention. Aside from those events, Trump is gaining ground and Harris is losing it in nearly every poll over recent weeks - national or state, reliable or not. That's why unless Harris does something significant to shift momentum in her direction (or Trump does something with the same effect) Trump will win and the margin will probably be quite large. |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 23, 2024 8:36:43 GMT
...did you just congratulate yourself...?!? No one else will. 😁 Oi |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 23, 2024 8:37:08 GMT
The point was and as you point out…. The polls are not always to be trusted. It’s going to be mightily close and id bet now we don’t get to know the result for at least a month after the election. Trump is already planning on litigating all results that he loses . The way I look at polls (and this is just my view not any particular polling company or polling analyst now) is that if you watch them closely for a couple of months you get a good feel for where the various candidates are and then over time you watch for patterns (mostly general trends up or down). I've been watching as much as I can since June/July (when it was still Biden/Trump). Back then the Electoral College was pretty even and the swing states broke evenly. Harris got a bump up when she was confirmed as the nominee, Trump got a boost after the Republican Convention/assassination attempt and Harris got a boost after the Democratic convention. Aside from those events, Trump is gaining ground and Harris is losing it in nearly every poll over recent weeks - national or state, reliable or not. That's why unless Harris does something significant to shift momentum in her direction (or Trump does something with the same effect) Trump will win and the margin will probably be quite large. Nah |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 23, 2024 9:28:20 GMT
The way I look at polls (and this is just my view not any particular polling company or polling analyst now) is that if you watch them closely for a couple of months you get a good feel for where the various candidates are and then over time you watch for patterns (mostly general trends up or down). I've been watching as much as I can since June/July (when it was still Biden/Trump). Back then the Electoral College was pretty even and the swing states broke evenly. Harris got a bump up when she was confirmed as the nominee, Trump got a boost after the Republican Convention/assassination attempt and Harris got a boost after the Democratic convention. Aside from those events, Trump is gaining ground and Harris is losing it in nearly every poll over recent weeks - national or state, reliable or not. That's why unless Harris does something significant to shift momentum in her direction (or Trump does something with the same effect) Trump will win and the margin will probably be quite large. Nah Couple of days ago I had a $25 bonus bet that had to be placed inside 24 hours. There was no sport I felt strongly about so stuck it on Trump to win $15. A few days later the same stake only wins $13. Harris needs to change the narrative and quickly because I will win that bet unless she does something significant in the last two weeks.. |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 23, 2024 9:30:17 GMT
Couple of days ago I had a $25 bonus bet that had to be placed inside 24 hours. There was no sport I felt strongly about so stuck it on Trump to win $15. A few days later the same stake only wins $13. Harris needs to change the narrative and quickly because I will win that bet unless she does something significant in the last two weeks.. You lost one bet to me and bottled on the other . 😜 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 23, 2024 9:47:42 GMT
Couple of days ago I had a $25 bonus bet that had to be placed inside 24 hours. There was no sport I felt strongly about so stuck it on Trump to win $15. A few days later the same stake only wins $13. Harris needs to change the narrative and quickly because I will win that bet unless she does something significant in the last two weeks.. You lost one bet to me and bottled on the other . 😜 I cashed out on Harris at a huge profit and will now win a free bet. What's not to like? Follow me for more top tips  |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 23, 2024 10:01:36 GMT
You lost one bet to me and bottled on the other . 😜 I cashed out on Harris at a huge profit and will now win a free bet. What's not to like? Follow me for more top tips No thanks 😂 |
|
