Trump's path to 270 Electoral Votes

[canceled.2021.3]

You can always play the "Nobody has ever won..." game, it happens every year for both candidates. You clearly do not understand what is correlated data vs anecdotal data.

The 56% of Americans saying they are better off is the only one I can see that is relevant. Remember that information comes from the same polls you do not believe in. It appears, a larger percent of those saying they are better off are also saying they are voting or did vote for Biden.

You see, not everyone is a selfish money obsessed jerk. Many of us vote based on something other than our own personal financial gain.

Some of those who say they are better off, do not necessarily give Trump credit. But I do see some correlation to that data and the idea that Trump has support and why. I find it interesting that you consider that polling data accurate, but other polling data inaccurate, it appears you have the mental defect of only giving creditability to data that supports you desire and feelings.

not at all, I have said that the polls are "accurate" as far as what they are measuring, but I think they are measuring the wrong thing.

History is history until it isn't. There are many headwinds facing Buyden right now. Has any presidential candidate stayed off of the campaign trail 8 days before the election? I can't think of any. That is a bold move and one I don't think will play well for Buyden

[Concart]

For Trump to win, he must win ALL the toss-up states (Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Maine 2, North Carolina and Ohio), and win some states in which Biden leads by five or more points. That's his path. If he wins the aforementioned states he must take 22 electoral votes from Minnesota (10), Michigan (16), Pennsylvania (20), Nevada (6), NH (4), Wisconsin (10). In other words, Trump has to sweep the toss-ups and win at least two states that are leaning Democratic. Can he pull that off? Not without an overall swing in his direction in the national polling. He has to gain somewhere in the neighborhood of five points nationally from his current position to thread that needle. Nothing has happened that could cause that kind of a swing nationally. Last time it was the Comey letter. There is no Comey letter. If anything, Trump lost ground yesterday with his surrender to the virus and his god awful 60 minutes interview.

[Jarod]

not at all, I have said that the polls are "accurate" as far as what they are measuring, but I think they are measuring the wrong thing.

History is history until it isn't. There are many headwinds facing Buyden right now. Has any presidential candidate stayed off of the campaign trail 8 days before the election? I can't think of any. That is a bold move and one I don't think will play well for Buyden

What are they measuring incorrectly?

[Jarod]

For Trump to win, he must win ALL the toss-up states (Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Maine 2, North Carolina and Ohio), and win some states in which Biden leads by five or more points. That's his path. If he wins the aforementioned states he must take 22 electoral votes from Minnesota (10), Michigan (16), Pennsylvania (20), Nevada (6), NH (4), Wisconsin (10). In other words, Trump has to sweep the toss-ups and win at least two states that are leaning Democratic. Can he pull that off? Not without an overall swing in his direction in the national polling. He has to gain somewhere in the neighborhood of five points nationally from his current position to thread that needle. Nothing has happened that could cause that kind of a swing nationally. Last time it was the Comey letter. There is no Comey letter. If anything, Trump lost ground yesterday with his surrender to the virus and his god awful 60 minutes interview.

I am not sure the people would fall for another Comey letter anyway. They learned that trick.

[Concart]

I am not sure the people would fall for another Comey letter anyway. They learned that trick.

Agreed, because he has already tried with 'the laptop'. He's pissed because no one will open an investigation into Biden and publicly announce it. He's trying to run the wing-T offense. Clinton emails, Biden/Ukraine, Obama spied on me. These issues have already been litigated by the voters. He has no clue.

[canceled.2021.3]

What are they measuring incorrectly?

turnout

[Jarod]

turnout

So your issue is, you believe they are not accurately measuring who is a likely voter? Interesting because we’ve had such huge early voting turn out, that should make it more accurate not less accurate.

When they encounter someone who says that they already voted, I assume they put them in the likely voter catagory. It becomes more of an exit poll than it used to be.

[canceled.2021.3]

So your issue is, you believe they are not accurately measuring who is a likely voter? Interesting because we’ve had such huge early voting turn out, that should make it more accurate not less accurate.

When they encounter someone who says that they already voted, I assume they put them in the likely voter catagory. It becomes more of an exit poll than it used to be.

it would be a fool's errand to try to make any judgements off of early turn out votes. If you want to talk about a lack of data with which to extrapolate, that is it.

I will give you an example of what I am talking about. After numerous rallies, the Trump campaign reports stats on attendees. In many many rallies, they are reporting that over 40% of attendees are not republican and over 20% have not voted in the last four elections. Now that last number is what tells me that the polls are not capturing turnout.

Now you can dismiss the Trump campaign numbers if you want. You will probably say that the "Trump campaign is going to lie" or "Just because they showed up to a rally doesn't mean they are going to vote". I would call BS on that analysis because I can't see someone standing in line for hours to see Trump and that not voting for him.

I am giving your my analysis as I see it based on what I am seeing going on in the country. Any simpleton can look at the existing poll numbers and say they know who will win, but as you yourself have pointed out the polls are not predictive. They are frequently wrong.

One major flaw with polling is that the pollsters have no idea of who is lying to them. For the first time ever, I answered a political poll the other night. I lied about everything. Told the pollster I was voting for Buyden. I of course am not voting or Buyden. What is a pollster to do with that answer?

[Jarod]

it would be a fool's errand to try to make any judgements off of early turn out votes. If you want to talk about a lack of data with which to extrapolate, that is it.

I will give you an example of what I am talking about. After numerous rallies, the Trump campaign reports stats on attendees. In many many rallies, they are reporting that over 40% of attendees are not republican and over 20% have not voted in the last four elections. Now that last number is what tells me that the polls are not capturing turnout.

Now you can dismiss the Trump campaign numbers if you want. You will probably say that the "Trump campaign is going to lie" or "Just because they showed up to a rally doesn't mean they are going to vote". I would call BS on that analysis because I can't see someone standing in line for hours to see Trump and that not voting for him.

I am giving your my analysis as I see it based on what I am seeing going on in the country. Any simpleton can look at the existing poll numbers and say they know who will win, but as you yourself have pointed out the polls are not predictive. They are frequently wrong.

One major flaw with polling is that the pollsters have no idea of who is lying to them. For the first time ever, I answered a political poll the other night. I lied about everything. Told the pollster I was voting for Buyden. I of course am not voting or Buyden. What is a pollster to do with that answer?

The only judgment I would make about early vote count, is to put them in the category of likely voter, since they are pretty damn sure to vote..

Yes some people are liars. And I’m willing to bet that it is more likely Trump supporters are liars than the general public. That would not account for enough to make the difference, in my opinion. I do think that the data you gave me regarding the Trump rally‘s might be significant, do you have a link to that information? Did you just make it up? I am very interested in where that data came from... I’ll understand when you can’t back it up.

[canceled.2021.3]

The only judgment I would make about early vote count, is to put them in the category of likely voter, since they are pretty damn sure to vote..

Yes some people are liars. And I’m willing to bet that it is more likely Trump supporters are liars than the general public. That would not account for enough to make the difference, in my opinion. I do think that the data you gave me regarding the Trump rally‘s might be significant, do you have a link to that information? Did you just make it up? I am very interested in where that data came from... I’ll understand when you can’t back it up.

it came from the Trump campaign

I don't have the links any longer. They tweeted it out and it was posted to Gateway Pundit. I am fine if you don't believe it. It matters little to me. You are free to go look for it if you so choose. I don't feel like looking it up

[canceled.2021.3]

last thing I would point out is the voter registration gains that Republicans have made in states like Pennsylvania and Florida. They have made HUGE gains. Now I guess people could have taken the trouble to register as Republicans and vote democrat, but that would seem odd wouldn't it?

Someone would have to show me data to show proof of that

[Concart]

The only judgment I would make about early vote count, is to put them in the category of likely voter, since they are pretty damn sure to vote..

Yes some people are liars. And I’m willing to bet that it is more likely Trump supporters are liars than the general public. That would not account for enough to make the difference, in my opinion. I do think that the data you gave me regarding the Trump rally‘s might be significant, do you have a link to that information? Did you just make it up? I am very interested in where that data came from... I’ll understand when you can’t back it up.

Here are the characteristics of message board Trumptards:

All rich successful businessmen
All married supermodel wives
All served in the military
All have been surveyed multiple times by national polls and lied about their positions.

LOL. National surveys generally contact in the neighborhood of 1,000 likely voters. That means in any national poll, you have a 1 in maybe 160,000 to participate in any given poll. So your odds of participating in even ONE poll during an election cycle is probably less than one in one thousand, but somehow they are ALL contacted MULTIPLE times. It's total bullshit.

[Jarod]

it came from the Trump campaign

I don't have the links any longer. They tweeted it out and it was posted to Gateway Pundit. I am fine if you don't believe it. It matters little to me. You are free to go look for it if you so choose. I don't feel like looking it up

Its funny to me that you are so desperate you are making shit up.

[Jarod]

last thing I would point out is the voter registration gains that Republicans have made in states like Pennsylvania and Florida. They have made HUGE gains. Now I guess people could have taken the trouble to register as Republicans and vote democrat, but that would seem odd wouldn't it?

Someone would have to show me data to show proof of that

Do you have any citation for the voter registration data?

[canceled.2021.3]

Do you have any citation for the voter registration data?

there has been plenty and it has been posted on the site. Additionally you can look it up yourself, particularly in your home state. I am not your research assistant.