So, the Arizona audit results are in...

[Westside]

14 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

So, 200 out of 3.4 million.  That's a whopping .006%.  Trump would've only lost the state by by 10,257 votes.  God you people are paranoid.

 

 

That they’ve caught, but you keep playing ignorant. Why do you want corruption in our election system?

7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Fine.  Trump can have Arizona.

You’re such a child

[Westside]

4 hours ago, Tiberius said:

So sore losers are still sore losers 

Hypocrite 

[SCBills]

I’m basically at a place where I don’t know if Trump won, but I no longer feel I can say he definitely lost.  
 

The entire 2020 election was sketch and it’s ok to want answers, but also not insinuate that Trump will be restored to power.  
 

Edited July 17, 2021 by SCBills

[BillStime]

25 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

That they’ve caught, but you keep playing ignorant. Why do you want corruption in our election system?

You’re such a child

So we should endlessly investigate the Big Lie but not the 1/6 insurrection? 
 

Hypocrisy, right westside2?

 

6 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I’m basically at a place where I don’t know if Trump won, but I no longer feel I can say he definitely lost.  
 

The entire 2020 election was sketch and it’s ok to want answers, but also not insinuate that Trump will be restored to power.  
 

What’s left to convince you one way or the other?

 

The law suits failed you

The several partisan audits failed you.

 

Whats left? 
 

 

[Westside]

Just now, BillStime said:

So we should endlessly investigate the Big Lie but not the 1/6 insurrection? 
 

Hypocrisy, right westside2?

 

What’s left to convince you one way or the other?

 

The law suits failed you

The several partisan audits failed you.

 

Whats left? 
 

 

I think we should investigate 1/6. Right after we investigate the insurrection of the summer of 2020, right Sybil?

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Bidens_basement said:

I think we should investigate 1/6. Right after we investigate the insurrection of the summer of 2020, right Sybil?

Sure investigate whatever you want westside2

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

7 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I’m basically at a place where I don’t know if Trump won, but I no longer feel I can say he definitely lost.  
 

The entire 2020 election was sketch and it’s ok to want answers, but also not insinuate that Trump will be restored to power.  
 

It should be unifying to agree to increase security of elections moving forward with agreement that what’s done is done snd not to be revisited. unfortunately nobody wants compromise, and both parties are racing to rig the rules in their favor and polarizing the electorate as much as they can in the process. 
 

True moderates and independents have nowhere to turn. 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

It should be unifying to agree to increase security of elections moving forward with agreement that what’s done is done snd not to be revisited. unfortunately nobody wants compromise, and both parties are racing to rig the rules in their favor and polarizing the electorate as much as they can in the process. 
 

True moderates and independents have nowhere to turn. 

I favor having a uniform voter ID card easily accessible to all.  And with that we should have the goal of meeting our constitutional dictate and make sure the franchise is not blocked for any citizen by expanding ways to vote and not eliminating them.  And no state legislature should have the ability to cancel out votes deemed properly cast by local and state authorities in charge of elections.

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

I favor having a uniform voter ID card easily accessible to all.  And with that we should have the goal of meeting our constitutional dictate and make sure the franchise is not blocked for any citizen by expanding ways to vote and not eliminating them.  And no state legislature should have the ability to cancel out votes deemed properly cast by local and state authorities in charge of elections.

Agreed but even this approach will kills the Republican party.

[SCBills]

10 minutes ago, BillStime said:

So we should endlessly investigate the Big Lie but not the 1/6 insurrection? 
 

Hypocrisy, right westside2?

 

What’s left to convince you one way or the other?

 

The law suits failed you

The several partisan audits failed you.

 

Whats left? 
 

 

You must’ve missed where I said I am not declaring Trump the winner.    I just can’t say he definitively lost.  
 

That’s what happens when there are so many issues in an election. Which is why it’s important to transparently investigate, even if it doesn’t change the actual result.  
 

Don’t worry, I won’t be declaring Trump to the true President..  I’m not a Georgia Dem pretending Stacy Abrams is Governor. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

When they say "most secure election in history" I can't tell if they are practicing the comedy art of satire or just feeding us more BS.  How do they know for a fact that 2020 was the most secure ever?  Is that even possible to prove or know?

 

Did they conduct extensive and detailed research into each and every Presidential election since George Washington?  Analyze statistics and things like voting patterns and registered voter records, ran a bunch of audits and statistical models?  And then out jumped all the insights and analytics that put the result of the 2020 Presidential election at the top of the list of all the Presidential elections in the history of our nation?

 

Yeah I'm sure they've gathered all kinds of documentation to back up that statement with facts.  As they have no self-awareness they don't realize how utterly stupid they sound making these statements of absolute fact.  What it really comes down to is making up bull crap and then keep repeating it.  The only people dumber than the people making such outlandish and unprovable statements are the idiots that believe them. 

Elizabeth Warren, Amy Kloboucher and other prominent dens express serious & significant concern about election security, it’s news.  No hand wringing about the death of democracy, the chilling effect of a political leaders words on the ability to trust election officials.  
 

11 months later, the same sentiment is echoed by the other party and its reported as the most egregious affront to humanity since New Coke. 
 

The only difference is the concern that Donald Trump might continue to upset the apple cart of painfully entrenched ruling class. 
 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, SCBills said:

You must’ve missed where I said I am not declaring Trump the winner.    I just can’t say he definitively lost.  
 

That’s what happens when there are so many issues in an election. Which is why it’s important to transparently investigate, even if it doesn’t change the actual result.  
 

Don’t worry, I won’t be declaring Trump to the true President..  I’m not a Georgia Dem pretending Stacy Abrams is Governor. 

I can.  Multiple experts in electoral law and policies, multiple courts, multiple Secretaries of State and such have declared so.  The only, I repeat ONLY, reason some are questioning it is because Trump started crowing about it way in advance of the vote to give himself an excuse.  

[BillStime]

10 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I can.  Multiple experts in electoral law and policies, multiple courts, multiple Secretaries of State and such have declared so.  The only, I repeat ONLY, reason some are questioning it is because Trump started crowing about it way in advance of the vote to give himself an excuse.  

We gotta winner

[John Adams]

25 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I can.  Multiple experts in electoral law and policies, multiple courts, multiple Secretaries of State and such have declared so.  The only, I repeat ONLY, reason some are questioning it is because Trump started crowing about it way in advance of the vote to give himself an excuse.  

You’re a salmon swimming against the fecal tsunami here. 

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Bidens_basement said:

That they’ve caught, but you keep playing ignorant. Why do you want corruption in our election system?

You’re such a child

I was being facetious and there's always going to be fraud in our election system in each state.  Only .006% ballots suspected of fraud is laughable though after they spent all that money on an audit.

[Governor]

1 hour ago, SCBills said:

I’m basically at a place where I don’t know if Trump won, but I no longer feel I can say he definitely lost.  
 

The entire 2020 election was sketch and it’s ok to want answers, but also not insinuate that Trump will be restored to power.  
 

I’m not sure why anyone thought he would win. He was down 6 percentage for the entire year leading up to the election and lost by 5 points. Why did anyone think he would hit an inside straight twice? Who were these outlets/pollsters saying he could win? There were none.

 

You guys understand how hard it was to win the first time correct? The chance of that happening again were probably 1 percent. He had to win every single state he won in 2016. Was it just blind faith that he’d pull a rabbit out of a hat a second time? There were no surprises other than Georgia. The election went exactly how everyone knew it would.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Governor

[Frat-Train]

54 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Elizabeth Warren, Amy Kloboucher and other prominent dens express serious & significant concern about election security, it’s news.  No hand wringing about the death of democracy, the chilling effect of a political leaders words on the ability to trust election officials.  
 

11 months later, the same sentiment is echoed by the other party and its reported as the most egregious affront to humanity since New Coke. 
 

The only difference is the concern that Donald Trump might continue to upset the apple cart of painfully entrenched ruling class. 
 

How dare you sully the good name of

Coke II…

😂

[Orlando Tim]

8 minutes ago, Governor said:

I’m not sure why anyone thought he would win. He was down 6 percentage for the entire year leading up to the election and lost by 6 points. Why did anyone think he would hit an inside straight twice? Who were these outlets/pollsters saying he would win?

 

You guys understand how hard it was to win the first time correct? The odds of that happening again were probably 1 percent.

 

 

 

I know you were not here for the discussions last year but it was discussed many time over exactly how poor the polls are for these elections. 2016 was actually not clearly the worst, it just was the most shocking because people saw the 10 pt Hilary lead in Sept and believed it was real. I know you believe the polls but a lot of people realize the polls are done to create news not report it.

[SCBills]

20 minutes ago, Governor said:

I’m not sure why anyone thought he would win. He was down 6 percentage for the entire year leading up to the election and lost by 5 points. Why did anyone think he would hit an inside straight twice? Who were these outlets/pollsters saying he could win? There were none.

 

You guys understand how hard it was to win the first time correct? The chance of that happening again were probably 1 percent. He had to win every single state he won in 2016. Was it just blind faith that he’d pull a rabbit out of a hat a second time? There were no surprises other than Georgia. The election went exactly how everyone knew it would.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The polling re: Trump has been erratic af… and that’s putting it nicely and not assuming a deliberate bias. 
 

A GOP Presidential nominee can easily win the electoral college if they stay within 3% of the popular vote.  
 

COVID did a number on Trump though… I think he would’ve easily won re-election if not for the pandemic, and I do think he’ll be President again if the Dems are foolish enough to run Kamala in 2024. 

[Governor]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I know you were not here for the discussions last year but it was discussed many time over exactly how poor the polls are for these elections. 2016 was actually not clearly the worst, it just was the most shocking because people saw the 10 pt Hilary lead in Sept and believed it was real. I know you believe the polls but a lot of people realize the polls are done to create news not report it.

Hillary had a 1 point lead nationally heading into Election Day.

 

Team Trump knew this one was over by 10am on Election Day. They saw that turnout wasn’t high enough in Pennsylvania.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Governor

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, Governor said:

Hillary had a 1 point lead nationally heading into Election Day.

 

Team Trump knew this one was over by 10am on Election Day. They saw that turnout wasn’t high enough in Pennsylvania.

Can you show me the 1%? She was 70+% to win, favored in several states she was beaten badly, and only a few had within the margin of error, which means they suck at their job. 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

Edited July 17, 2021 by Buffalo Timmy

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Elizabeth Warren, Amy Kloboucher and other prominent dens express serious & significant concern about election security, it’s news.  No hand wringing about the death of democracy, the chilling effect of a political leaders words on the ability to trust election officials.  
 

11 months later, the same sentiment is echoed by the other party and its reported as the most egregious affront to humanity since New Coke. 
 

The only difference is the concern that Donald Trump might continue to upset the apple cart of painfully entrenched ruling class. 
 

I think a lot of posters such as yourself understand the point I was attempting to make.  But some do not and they go to the usual place with the argument.  Which disappoints me.  But my insight applies to almost everything we hear coming out of the government or the media today.  

 

My point is not to express concerns about who won or who lost the election.  Nor to it to express my viewpoints on whether or not the election was fair.  Or is it about being a supporter or detractor of Trump.  Or to judge the claims on threats to democracy.

 

My point is to call out BS when I see BS. And my alarm at how easy people accept statements of political and media actors that are unprovable and unsupported by any solid evidence.  Transforming subjective opinion to truth and fact without the necessary facts or truth to back it up.  

 

And there are a lot of ridiculous statements and assertions made by a lot of politicians and people in the media that is plain BS.  Statements like this was "the most secure election in history".  There is simply no way anyone can prove this to be true or false given 200+ years of history, the number of Presidential elections, and the information available to verify this claim.  As I said earlier in order to lie you first need to know the truth.  Nobody can possibly know the truth about such a statement or create a forensic evidence trail to back it up.  Its a belief, pure and simple.  And perhaps an uninformed belief too.  Ultimately the problem is we are in short supply of critical thinking across the entire social and political spectrum and that shortage allows these idiots to express these outlandish views and statements.  And go their merry way unchallenged.

 

Personally, over time, I have developed a quite cynical attitude toward the government and the media.  My base assumption is they lie about whatever they have to and make crap up to support everything else when the need arises.  Good or bad it a view defined by observation of their behavior.  And like somebody from Missouri I will ask "show me".   

Edited July 17, 2021 by All_Pro_Bills

[Frat-Train]

3 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think a lot of posters such as yourself understand the point I was attempting to make.  But some do not and they go to the usual place with the argument.  Which disappoints me.  But my insight applies to almost everything we hear coming out of the government or the media today.  

 

My point is not to express concerns about who won or who lost the election.  Nor to it to express my viewpoints on whether or not the election was fair.  Or is it about being a supporter or detractor of Trump.  Or to judge the claims on threats to democracy.

 

My point is to call out BS when I see BS. And my alarm at how easy people accept statements of political and media actors that are unprovable and unsupported by any solid evidence.  Transforming subjective opinion to truth and fact without the necessary facts or truth to back it up.  

 

And there are a lot of ridiculous statements and assertions made by a lot of politicians and people in the media that is plain BS.  Statements like this was "the most secure election in history".  There is simply no way anyone can prove this to be true or false given 200+ years of history, the number of Presidential elections, and the information available to verify this claim.  As I said earlier in order to lie you first need to know the truth.  Nobody can possibly know the truth about such a statement or create a forensic evidence trail to back it up.  Its a belief, pure and simple.  And perhaps an uninformed belief too.  Ultimately the problem is we are in short supply of critical thinking across the entire social and political spectrum and that shortage allows these idiots to express these outlandish views and statements.  And go their merry way unchallenged.

 

Personally, over time, I have developed a quite cynical attitude toward the government and the media.  My base assumption is they lie about everything.  Good or bad it a view defined by observation of their behavior.  And like somebody from Missouri I will ask "show me".   

It’s an amazing thing, taking that stance.  This was the right way of thinking in America, just 20 years ago.  Everything that’s transpired since 2016 is just alarming.  Not just Trump being elected, but the response to it (which is still being pushed by the same familiar faces).  We can blame Republicans and/or Democrats for arriving here, though when you look around the field, not one person is owning what they’ve contributed to this sad state.  And we’re ALL guilty in some form.  But, I think you’ve got the secrete sauce, in your statement.  Trust nothing sponsored by media, Hollywood and politicians and do YOUR OWN due diligence, which includes thinking passed our safety places.  That means keeping an opened mind to everything, which is what the majority refuses to do right now.
 

And most importantly, within this new season of accepted bullying (if the cause is deemed worthy) don’t let the people in your party, family or circle bully you into being as gullible as they choose to be.  This is something that should truly surpass party perspectives.  We’re handing a dangerous amount of hurt to our children with all of this nonsense and game playing.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

28 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think a lot of posters such as yourself understand the point I was attempting to make.  But some do not and they go to the usual place with the argument.  Which disappoints me.  But my insight applies to almost everything we hear coming out of the government or the media today.  

 

My point is not to express concerns about who won or who lost the election.  Nor to it to express my viewpoints on whether or not the election was fair.  Or is it about being a supporter or detractor of Trump.  Or to judge the claims on threats to democracy.

 

My point is to call out BS when I see BS. And my alarm at how easy people accept statements of political and media actors that are unprovable and unsupported by any solid evidence.  Transforming subjective opinion to truth and fact without the necessary facts or truth to back it up.  

 

And there are a lot of ridiculous statements and assertions made by a lot of politicians and people in the media that is plain BS.  Statements like this was "the most secure election in history".  There is simply no way anyone can prove this to be true or false given 200+ years of history, the number of Presidential elections, and the information available to verify this claim.  As I said earlier in order to lie you first need to know the truth.  Nobody can possibly know the truth about such a statement or create a forensic evidence trail to back it up.  Its a belief, pure and simple.  And perhaps an uninformed belief too.  Ultimately the problem is we are in short supply of critical thinking across the entire social and political spectrum and that shortage allows these idiots to express these outlandish views and statements.  And go their merry way unchallenged.

 

Personally, over time, I have developed a quite cynical attitude toward the government and the media.  My base assumption is they lie about whatever they have to and make crap up to support everything else when the need arises.  Good or bad it a view defined by observation of their behavior.  And like somebody from Missouri I will ask "show me".   

You’re done a good job swimming upstream on these issues.   I enjoy your posts. 
 

A couple things were obvious to me from this past November:

 

1.  Once the ship sailed, Biden was going to be president.  
 

The reasoning was simple…not enough time, not enough money, not enough facts/evidence readily available to convince enough the average American, and whole buncha ra’tards repeating the talking point “most secure ever”.  As you said…. Based on what?  Career insiders/folks with the ability to put the thumb on the scale telling us so?   To boot, after the govt came for Trump, it was highly unlikely a hero would emerge to spill the beans.  Too dangerous to ones health and family. 

 

2. The notion that rank and file govt agencies have access to state of the art gold standard voting software and that no corporation or special interest might influence the outcome is silly.  Govt is notoriously behind the curve on such things.  
 

3. As I said, Sens Warren et al raised serious concerns in December 2019.  You’re telling me the govt fixed all the issues she was concerned about in the 11 mos that followed, with the vast majority of govt workers staying home?  At a minimum, you’d think political leaders would be out reassuring Americans that her concerns, and those of DJT were addressed and the steps undertaken to fix the issues.  You’d think a major media outlet would do the expose, but that’s a lot to ask. 
 

 

I have no doubt—zero, none, nada, zilch that actors (foreign, domestic,  public and private) sought the influence the outcome and likely did.  
 

That said, when all is said and done, the old geez in steep cognitive decline is the prez.  He’s been a player in the game for 50 years, but all that really happened was after a glitch in the machine in 2016, the program was corrected and the insider installed. 

[frostbitmic]

8 hours ago, Doc said:

 

It's obvious to anyone with a few functioning neurons that it was the least secure election in modern history.  But again, there's no way to prove fraud when there's no way to prove fraud so we can't overturn the election.  Instead we need to enact voting security laws, which 70% of the country is in favor of doing.

And that was the least secure audit in the history of audits. Seriously an audit done by republicans without any watchdogs allowed and you want to believe it.

 

There is no way to prove fraud because it just didn't exist. Just because your friends over at Q-Anutz says it's so, it almost certainly is not.

11 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Fine.  Trump can have Arizona.

Nah, don't give him anything he didn't earn. No reason to satisfy his ridiculously large ego.

[Doc]

15 minutes ago, frostbitmic said:

And that was the least secure audit in the history of audits. Seriously an audit done by republicans without any watchdogs allowed and you want to believe it.

 

There is no way to prove fraud because it just didn't exist. Just because your friends over at Q-Anutz says it's so, it almost certainly is not.

 

LOL!  Not that I follow them but I'd take Q-Anutz over Dumbocrat anyday.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Doc

[Governor]

2 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Can you show me the 1%? She was 70+% to win, favored in several states she was beaten badly, and only a few had within the margin of error, which means they suck at their job. 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

https://www.investors.com/politics/trump-clinton-in-dead-heat-as-race-hits-final-two-week-stretch-ibdtipp-poll/

 

The difference in 2016 was that there was movement late in Trump’s direction after the Comey announcement. Polling couldn’t catch up with that movement before Election Day. Ed Rendell and others were sounding alarm bells in Pa. They saw what was happening. There wasn’t enough time to poll those states again.

 

There was no movement in Trump’s direction vs. Biden other than the normal race tightening that occurs a week out. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Governor

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, Governor said:

https://www.investors.com/politics/trump-clinton-in-dead-heat-as-race-hits-final-two-week-stretch-ibdtipp-poll/

 

The difference in 2016 was that there was movement late in Trump’s direction after the Comey announcement. Polling couldn’t catch up with that movement before Election Day. Ed Rendell and others were sounding alarm bells in Pa. They saw what was happening. There wasn’t enough time to poll those states again.

 

There was no movement in Trump’s direction vs. Biden other than the normal race tightening that occurs a week out. 

This poll moved 2 points over the last two weeks, this poll was the outlier the entire time and is complete contradiction of your your tightening because it only changed two points. This is easier to admit that most polls over sample to help push their agenda and few are concerned with accuracy.

[Governor]

30 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

This poll moved 2 points over the last two weeks, this poll was the outlier the entire time and is complete contradiction of your your tightening because it only changed two points. This is easier to admit that most polls over sample to help push their agenda and few are concerned with accuracy.

You’re supposed to oversample based on Dem registration and likely voter advantages. 
 

This is a tracking poll. It tracks movement.

 

Have you ever had 4 to a flush with 2 cards to come and hit that flush? We’ll, that’s what Trump did in 2016. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Governor

[SCBills]

24 minutes ago, Governor said:

You’re supposed to oversample based on Dem registration and likely voter advantages. 
 

This is a tracking poll. It tracks movement.

 

Have you ever had 4 to a flush with 2 cards to come and hit that flush? We’ll, that’s what Trump did in 2016. 

You continue to act like Trump winning was some one in a million feat.   Do you think Kamala would beat him in 2024?.. I don’t. 
 

Also, it’s really hard to view anything that happened in 2020 as being 100% legitimate when we re-arranged voting for a pandemic and had a media/tech onslaught - not only against Trump - but, in the most glaring example of information suppression we’ve ever seen, a coordinated effort to take down/not report/falsely descredit the Hunter Biden laptop.  
 

I certainly wouldn’t go as far as to say he won, but I would say that wheels were put in motion to make sure he’d lose. 

[Governor]

12 minutes ago, SCBills said:

You continue to act like Trump winning was some one in a million feat.   Do you think Kamala would beat him in 2024?.. I don’t. 
 

Also, it’s really hard to view anything that happened in 2020 as being 100% legitimate when we re-arranged voting for a pandemic and had a media/tech onslaught - not only against Trump - but, in the most glaring example of information suppression we’ve ever seen, a coordinated effort to take down/not report/falsely descredit the Hunter Biden laptop.  
 

I certainly wouldn’t go as far as to say he won, but I would say that wheels were put in motion to make sure he’d lose. 

I don’t think you’re following our conversation. Kamala isn’t going to be the nomination so you guys should get that out of your heads.

[Doc Brown]

10 minutes ago, SCBills said:

You continue to act like Trump winning was some one in a million feat.   Do you think Kamala would beat him in 2024?.. I don’t. 
 

Also, it’s really hard to view anything that happened in 2020 as being 100% legitimate when we re-arranged voting for a pandemic and had a media/tech onslaught - not only against Trump - but, in the most glaring example of information suppression we’ve ever seen, a coordinated effort to take down/not report/falsely descredit the Hunter Biden laptop.  
 

I certainly wouldn’t go as far as to say he won, but I would say that wheels were put in motion to make sure he’d lose. 

A ham sandwich could beat Harris in 2024.  Not sure about Trump though.

 

If it was down to one state within hundreds of votes like 2000 then I'd give more credence to Biden possibly being an illegitimate president.  Not having to reverse three out of five states by thousands of votes.  

[Governor]

Basically, the problem pollsters have is that there’s a huge number of traditionally reliable Republican voters now calling themselves Independents because they’re embarrassed to call themselves Republicans. Trying to figure out exactly how many there are at any given time and how many are your normal “lean” Republicans you would normally see, how many lean Dem, isn’t easy at all. 
 

When you see the recent polls with huge over- sampling favoring Dems, that’s why it’s happening. It isn’t some pollster conspiracy to make Donald sad.

[SCBills]

10 minutes ago, Governor said:

Basically, the problem pollsters have is that there’s a huge number of traditionally reliable Republican voters now calling themselves Independents because they’re embarrassed to call themselves Republicans. Trying to figure out exactly how many there are at any given time and how many are your normal “lean” Republicans you would normally see, how many lean Dem, isn’t easy at all. 
 

When you see the recent polls with huge over- sampling favoring Dems, that’s why it’s happening. It isn’t some pollster conspiracy to make Donald sad.

This doesn’t seem to indicate that there should be some huge discrepancy in polling.  Slight over-sampling of Dems, perhaps, but that’s not what we consistently see in some of these polls. 
 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

 

Edited July 18, 2021 by SCBills

[Governor]

4 minutes ago, SCBills said:

This doesn’t seem to indicate that there should be some huge discrepancy in polling.  Slight over-sampling of Dems, perhaps, but that’s not what we consistently see in some of these polls. 
 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

 

If you use Voter ID from 2008, Dems should have between 6-7 point advantage.

 

What is that number right now today? Dunno. You’d have to ask Nate Cohn.

https://newrepublic.com/article/107813/no-the-polls-arent-oversampling-democrats

[Orlando Tim]

5 minutes ago, SCBills said:

This doesn’t seem to indicate that there should be some huge discrepancy in polling.  Slight over-sampling of Dems, perhaps, but that’s not what we consistently see in some of these polls. 
 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

 

He keeps moving the goal post- when 90% of the polls had Hillary with a 95% chance of winning he believed it so therefore it had to be some miracle. Trump was always more popular in Florida then the polls showed but he will not simply admit the polls are poorly done

[Governor]

Gallup has it at 9 right now. I don’t trust gallop but we can get a general idea.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/07/gallup-survey-shows-largest-increase-democratic-party-affiliation-decade/7114860002/

 

Now remember, that doesn’t mean that all of those voters regularly vote. You look to “likely voter” polls for that.

 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Governor

[Governor]

19 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

He keeps moving the goal post- when 90% of the polls had Hillary with a 95% chance of winning he believed it so therefore it had to be some miracle. Trump was always more popular in Florida then the polls showed but he will not simply admit the polls are poorly done

You’re confusing national polling with state polling. Some state polling was bad in 2016 and it improved in 2020. Some states are notoriously hard to poll or only poll a few times per cycle. Every state has its own quirks. Florida hasn’t mattered since Obama/McCain. They’ve become irrelevant to the process.

[Governor]

What was new in 2020 was this:

 

Lots of new fly by night pollsters starting releasing polls late showing the race tightening or Trump winning. They were hoping that their polls would get added to the RCP averages to make the race appear closer. It didn’t really work. The race never got close.

[Orlando Tim]

25 minutes ago, Governor said:

You’re confusing national polling with state polling. Some state polling was bad in 2016 and it improved in 2020. Some states are notoriously hard to poll or only poll a few times per cycle. Every state has its own quirks. Florida hasn’t mattered since Obama/McCain. They’ve become irrelevant to the process.

Hard to poll? What you mean is the process of selecting the write balance gives you the wrong outcome so you poll who you need to get the "right" answer.