Atyno

The polls are wrong as long as they keep clashing with electoral reality. Nate Copper's article is heavy on poll data but flimsy on electoral anecdotes: a county election in 2020 and New York Elections with inconvenient data lopped off (The recent elections to replace George Santos).

The shift the polls are claiming are so seismic that it begs the question why this unprecedented shift is non-existent in basically every post-dobbs election. And let's not forget the fact that these polls present other, nonsensical trends to like the elderly shifting hard to Democrats too: a shift that can't easily be waved off by the usual "The shift is only in voters that only vote in presidential elections" excuse.

Question: what party is Sinema in now?

It's pretty evident now Sinema could not be bullied if she was willing to immolate her career over even the soft demands made of her.

There was actually some news recently that these polls might actually be wrong here: apparently there's a large amount of people lying that they're Hispanic/young in online polls. This was discovered both because: 1. The "20% of youth are Holocaust deniers!" Poll that made the waves wasn't reproducible and 2. There's some BIG inconsistencies being found in many polls too, like some polls somehow managing to have a cohort of Hispanics that are 20% nuclear submarine engineers.

Basically, we might have a vicious cycle making polls wildly inaccurate here: youth (and Hispanics?) are harder to poll -> pollsters value the data more vs other demographics-> people lie to obtain the rewards being offered to get this data -> youth/Hispanics become harder to poll.

Polls usually can handle some "lizard man's constant", but everything falls apart if there's significant lying.

I was reading exactly that actually: 81% of them refuse to vote for Trump if Haley isn't the nominee. It's surprisingly doable just from the primary numbers.

Edit: Also, Republicans nominated a literal Holocaust denier for the governor candidate. That's gonna make that race A LOT easier and maybe effect the entire ballot there.

I think the biggest lesson tonight is it'll be political malpractice if Biden doesn't pour a bunch of resources into NC. For a closed primary, those exit polls are suggesting a huge amount of Haley voters are persuadable.

That is admittedly why I also said "or make a show about it"...

I'm actually not sure if Texas actually did stop the Feds from cutting the razor wire. I actually checked and it seems like the entire story just disappeared from all news after they made a lot of noise on it.

They won't, but Colorado should still keep him off the ballot. The ruling was clearly made in fear of chaos instead of what was correct, so they deserve chaos irregardless.

Or at least make a show about it, like all those states did when Texas was told to let the fed agents cut the razor wire.

You'd think that, but humans can be weird with what actually causes introspection.

The hospital thing they just took the official line for. They actually mocked Aaron, or were actually grateful he took his own life thinking he was a disturbed individual.

Edit: If you want to understand the logic: they're willing to turn a blind eye if they can "both sides" incidents so they can simply keep their position of "Israel has a right to defend itself, regardless if they're not saints about it".

The humanitarian aid story is getting them because Bibi won't even let them do that! Hence why I mentioned the story sharing, since they know Bibi had made it clear he wants to starve Palestinians.

I feel like it was that gunning down incident with the humanitarian aid that ultimately tipped the scales.

I know I've been going on defense for Israel a lot recently, but I am kinda playing messenger boy as a neutral for being both here and some pro-Israel groups. The Michigan vote didn't really phase them, that incident did. Seen them even sharing more info about how ridiculously strict Bibi is with aid in general.

Hell, people don't want to admit it but he can end up losing Michigan too for taking up an anti-Israel stand. There's very clearly an "anti-protest" vote that kept uncommitted at only 10% of the vote despite getting 100k of them. About 400k voters that are at risk if Biden changes course.

But you did say 2008, you said it was a "similar" result. I'm not going to contest the anomalous nature, but the result itself is not similar at all!

My point is that I don't agree, the numbers are only consistent for 2016/2020 (because turns out most people won't waste time with an uncommitted vote when there's a viable opposition candidate: Bernie). 2012 is a deviation and in the same way this primary did. The only thing different is the absolute number of votes altogether (in a state that has had insignificant population growth mind).

You can't honestly tell me 39% is closer to 13% than 10%. 3% is not significant, it's an error margin on a poll.

The significant part is the absolute numbers, but that comes with caveat that the Biden vote was 3x Obama's in 2012 (and is 80% of the vote, which is a little less because of unviable candidates so unfortunately there's a little muddying).

Honestly, the whole thing is kinda proving to me the pro-palestine movement still isn't really big in the US despite the optics. Or, at the very least, there's still a large pro-Israel contingent that dwarfs them. And probably why Biden's been ignoring them.