politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I agree with your general view that it's not actually time to relax.
But I will point out that you can't just assume the electoral college advantage stays the same from election to election.
In 2020, Biden won by 4.5% in the popular vote, but he won the tipping point state of Wisconsin by 0.6%. In other words, the electoral college was worth roughly a R+3.8% advantage in 2020 (yes, 4.5% minus 0.6% is 3.9% but when you use unrounded numbers it's closer to 3.8%).
Is 2024 going to be the same? Probably not. The New York Times ran an article about this last month, and the tipping point state in the polling was Wisconsin, where Harris was polling at +1.8%, only 0.7% lower than the national average at the time of 2.6%. The article noted that national polling has Trump shrinking Harris's lead in non-competitive blue states like California and New York, or expanding his lead in places like the deep south, while not gaining in actual swing states compared to 2020.
Note, however, that as of today, Harris's lead in Wisconsin has shrunk to just under 1%, so we are seeing a shift towards Trump in the actual electoral college.
Right now, Harris is showing a lead in the national polling averages, by aggregator:
It's a close race, according to the polls. But whether the polls are actually accurate remains a huge unknown. So everyone should vote, and those with the means should volunteer.
I generally agree with you here, and I think we're expressing a similar point. And the general sentiment that the electoral landscape can shift from one election to another is true, but I think it's worth underscoring that the changes you’re discussing haven’t yet led to a significant break in the tightness of the 2024 race. The fact that Harris’s lead in Wisconsin has shrunk from 1.8% to just under 1% recently is exactly the point. This shows momentum shifting toward Trump, not to mention the same trend in other swing states.
You’re correct that the Electoral College advantage may change slightly in 2024, but as of now, the fundamentals we’re looking at are pointing toward a very close contest in the key battleground states. It’s not just the national polling averages that matter here—it's the state-level dynamics that determine the outcome, and recent polls show the swing states tightening, which is why it’s reckless to assume Harris is in a secure position. Even Nate Silver's model, which tends to account for some unpredictability, has downgraded Harris’s chances since the end of September.
National polling averages like the ones you cited (538, NYT, etc.) paint a picture of a close race, and while they show a lead for Harris, the recent shifts we’re seeing in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, among others, indicate that Trump is gaining ground. The fact that Harris’s national lead is shrinking in traditionally blue states like New York and California actually emphasizes her vulnerabilities in the swing states, where the race is most critical.
Bottom line: There’s no data right now that suggests a significant shift in the electoral college advantage for 2024. In fact, if anything, Trump’s recent gains are pushing the tipping point states even closer. With polls this tight and the Electoral College looking like a replay of 2020’s knife-edge margins, it's exactly the wrong time to get complacent. Everyone should be treating this as an all-hands-on-deck situation.
There's a ton of uncertainty in the data now.
2016 and 2020 polls missed Trump popularity, and about 2/3 of pollsters have decided to use recall vote weighting (that is, making sure that their sample is representative of the vote ratios in the actual 2020 results). Historically, that method has overstated the previous losing party's support (people are more likely to remember voting for the winner, so reweighing the results the other way ends up favoring the loser), but 2 presidential elections in a row have caused some pollsters to try to make up for past mistakes. Then again, does Trump himself being on the ballot change things?
Throw in the significant migration patterns of the pandemic era where many voters might not be voting in the same state that they were in 2020, and increasing difficulty at actually getting statistically representative poll respondents through spam filters, and there are real concerns about poll quality this year, perhaps more than previous years. Plus ballot access being uneven also might translate to actual voting biases that aren't captured in the polling methods, either.
I just wouldn't trust the polls to be accurate. Volunteer and vote.
Yeah. Looks like we read similar things.
My gut tells me Trump is going to win. I don't think voter suppression, shenanigans, and armed militia members patrolling polling sites can be factored into polling predictions, and with razor-thin margins, that in aggregate might make the difference. Combined with the mild Trump surge... but that's all feels not reals. And, of course, I hope I'm wrong.