Quote (Black XistenZ @ Oct 22 2020 05:23pm)
You're imho making a big mistake if you dont take the wide spread in the polls into account. Yes, if we go by polling averages, the gap is probably too large. But this year, there is just a huge variation in the numbers between different pollsters. Just over the last 2 days, we've had one poll from A/B-rated pollster 'IBD/TIPP' (who btw nailed it in 2016) saying it's a 4-5 point race nationally, and at the same time A-rated SurveyUSA saying it's a 10 point race. Same story in Pennsylvania, where even the non-crapster polls range from Biden+3 to Biden+10.
Different pollsters are seeing a vastly different race/electorate this year, much more so than in previous cycles. If the better non-crapster polls for Trump turn out to be true (and I'm not talking about Trafalgar or Rasmussen here!), he's well within striking distance and only needs a normal-sized polling error in his favor to win the EC. Does that sound familiar? ;)
I still think that he's a big underdog, but his chances are definitely substantially greater than zero. Of course all of this is contingent on him holding it together in tonight's debate and not blowing it like last time.
There would have to be systematic polling error in A LOT of states with varying demographics. Undercounting the white vote in PA is VERY different than undercounting the white vote in AZ. My gut tells me that there's only about a 5% chance of winning the election without any funny business. It's possible but it's just extremely unlikely. Frankly, there's probably something systematic that the models are missing that will surprise everyone i.e. Gen Z turning out much higher than expected or Hispanics pulling for Trump in numbers similar to GWB. I think people focus too much on 2016 when evaluating 2020 when the landscape is very different.
Honestly, my biggest fear is a massive popular vote gap (5%+) and states throwing out ballots by following the law to the T.