Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
In other news: Trump is demanding that Biden do a drug test before the next debate
. Why? Apparently Trump suspects Biden used drugs to boost his performance in his TV debates, because he seemed to be doing noticeably better than in his first debates.
Apparently he made similar accusations against Hillary in 2016.
Considering how this guy's mind often seems to work, I wonder if he is the one occasionally using drugs before rallies or such.
Edited by Redmess on Aug 26th 2020 at 4:33:20 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesTrump, meanwhile, seems to be experiencing something of a convention bounce if the polls on Five Thirty Eight are to be believed. Their assessment of Biden's odds of winning have gone down from "favored" to "slightly favored".
![]()
![]()
We covered this, it's solely because of Rasmussen. They're a polling company that always releases ridiculously pro-Trump polls, it's a sketchy outlier.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 26th 2020 at 8:34:42 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangConsidering people suspect him of constantly being hoppef up on something during his live appearances, that's a pretty stupid road to go down.
Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Aug 26th 2020 at 6:56:27 PM
We learn from history that we do not learn from historySo speaking of FiveThirtyEight, here's something else I found on Nate Silver's Twitter account:
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1298805722621370370
I'm actually pretty confused about it. It says that "polling and priors now support a Trump E.C. edge", which I'm not getting at all from looking at the polls we have now. In fact, earlier that same day, Silver said he thought Trump might "suffer the worst incumbent loss since Carter." What's going on here?
Edited by ElSquibbonator on Aug 26th 2020 at 1:18:49 PM
What is going on here is that you are taking a relative statement (Trump is better off than in 2016) as an absolute statement when it isn't. 538 has always emphasized that we don't know what the effect of COVID-19 on polling errors etc. will be and since the base state has Trump as the underdog (because polling) more uncertainty means less bad situation for Trump.
Some interesting discussion of how migration patterns might turn Alaska and Montana competitive. The idea is that such small states do not need a big demographic shift to change their politics
. It'd be irrelevant in presidential elections given their small size but would help immensely in Senate elections.
I think you’re confusing two different things, an electoral college edge is not the same as an edge in the election.
So an electoral college advantage means that in the tipping point state (the state that moves the electoral collage from one winner to the other) he will do better than he does nationally.
So if Trump looses nationally by 6 points, but looses in the tipping point state by 4 points he has a 2 point electorate college edge/advantage, even though he just lost.
There is also just having an electoral college path that delivers more than it should. So getting 51% of the popular vote and receiving 60% of the electoral college votes would be another thing you could call an electoral college edge. The two are obviously tied together though.
Also I think Nate Cohn is associated with 538, I think he might be an alumni of them or something.
I’m not sure it is, 538 account for house effects (unlike real clear politics). Also their model seems to have shifted only very slightly, it seems to expect Biden to win by 6 instead of 7, that could easily be noise. I think the change to slightly favoured is just crossing a line on the probability yardstick.
Edit: Quick look at the 538 model, it currently has Wisconsin as the tipping point state, Biden leads there by 3 points, he leads nationally by 6 points. That’s a 3 point electoral college advantage for Trump.
Edited by Silasw on Aug 27th 2020 at 7:43:49 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
It's funny since I remember proposals (whether made seriously or not) that Democratic voters should just migrate en masse to red states to turn them blue in future elections. Turns out it's happening anyway thanks to work opportunities. There was an article talking about this, but I can't find it right now.

My gut take on the Lincoln project is that while it is great they are targeting Trump, I don't have the confidence that they have the commitment to follow through should he lose. It's not enough to just defeat Trump - the GOP and the right wing in general needs to be thoroughly disinfected of all Trumpist elements. It's a project that could take ten years or more, given that these elements took root in the aftermath of Obama's first election victory in 2008.
If the Lincoln project people are up for that task then more power to them. But I get the feeling that all they hope to do is remove Trump and then try and ride the far-right tiger once again. In other words all they want is to return to 2012 - sure, that primary was a bit of a clown show but in the end Romney won it. But returning to 2012 just gives us 2016 again in four years time, and no-one wants that to happen.