- The Harris campaign is showing new strength in must-win states ahead of the party’s convention.
- In Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, Harris leads Trump 50% to 46% among likely voters.
- It’s a reflection of the continued reset of the 2024 race after Biden’s exit.
Don’t care - vote. 🗳️
It is possibly to do both
Vote! Complacency loses every time.
I’m so happy this message is making it’s way to the top
It needs to not be close. Biden was polling way ahead in 2020 but he only won effectively by like 85k votes. Yes, he got 7 million more votes total but in the closest states that could have seen him lose, only about 85k people was the difference between Biden winning the presidency vs Trump winning.
2020 was decided by even less than that! Closer to 43,000 votes across Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin.
It needs to become a nation-wide single-issue to revamp our campaign finance and election system.
That means abolishing the Electoral College and FPTP, addressing Gerrymandering, implementing ranked choice voting, and publicly-funded elections. This is the only way we fix our democracy at the root of the problem.
A path only open by Republicans losing this election, which is a critical point that can’t be missed.
Crazy idea: How about the person who gets the most votes wins?
yOu MeAn MoB rUlEs?!?1?
First past the post isn’t a good system, no.
Vote like your and your loved ones’ lives depends on it, because they probably do.
Let’s make sure the ballot box reflects that. Vote, get active, and get involved. Even if you don’t live in a swing state, the down ballot races matter far more than you think
In Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, Harris leads Trump 50% to 46% among likely voters.
That’s within the margin of error. That doesn’t really count as a lead.
No, but Trump’s leads were also within the margin of error, so it’s encouraging to see a swing, even if it might just be noise.
She’s only been campaigning for a few weeks. The DNC hasn’t even happened yet. I would call this pretty phenomenal.
Jfc people went ape shit when 1-2% was called within the margin of error a few days ago and now folks complain when it isn’t called out at 4% lmao
Most people have a really, really awful understanding of how statistics work.
Preach.
Yes it’s all margin of error. But what I’m seeing personally is Biden was consistently 2-4% down (conservatively) in every state that mattered (which was within the margin of error) and Harris is up 2-4% in every state that matters now (which is also within the margin of error).
I’d rather be the Harris campaign right now than the (now defunct) Biden or (panicking) Trump campaigns. Qualify it all you want folks 🤷♂️
No I’m not complacent. I’m excited to vote.
We don’t know the sample size; so we don’t know the margin of error.
I mean, click a couple links and it’s right there
MI: 619 PA: 693 WI: 661 All of registered voters
Using the amount of total registered voters in each respective state and a 95% CI, we get the following margins of error MI: ±3.939% PA: ±3.723% WI: ±3.811%
Depending on the exact lead (NYT only shows round percents, not specific numbers for each response), all of those are potentially within the top end of that margin of error.
Am I trying to claim that a swing from being down by ~4% to being up by ~4% means nothing and is indicative of nothing? Of course not. But man, most people really do not at all understand how statistics work, and I really wish people would stop talking out of their ass about it.
So which links did you click? The one that goes to NYT is paywalled.
If I remember this correctly, the square of the error for the sum of (or difference between) two independent measurements is the sum of the squares of the individual errors. Gauss something.
That would make the error for the 8 point swing be sqrt(2×3.8²) or about 5.4. So at least the swing is significant in each state.
Also, the error for the average of 3 variables is sqrt(e1²+e2²+e3²)/3 or 2.2 so the average lead in the 3 states is significant.
But we can’t make a significant claim about the lead in each state.
It was paywalled for me 🤷♂️
“I don’t see it” =/= “the information doesn’t exist and you don’t know so I’m right”
Next time try this asking.
It’s easy. When Kamala is down we say that polls don’t matter as much they used to, but when she’s up polls are obviously right. The margin of error is just a thing we use after the fact to justify whether the polls are useless (Kamala losing) or absolutely correct (Kamala winning)
I love how any time someone wants to argue about stats they act like this information can’t possibly be obtained and talk as if the sample size must be like 7 people.
Are they the same people?
You are aware that different people can think different things, right?
Wow you aren’t all the same people!? You aren’t all one person!? Man yeah that is literally the only way my comment could be interpreted. There are clearly no largely shared opinions here ever so I’m clearly living in a fantasy and just need to remember everyone is completely unique and no one agrees. Thanks for your concern you can move on now.
Sure, be a dick about it. Why not.
Look I’ll back off. You’re right, I’m going off for no reason. I don’t need to be another person pissed off pissing off other people. I’m sorry. Taking out some mild frustrations on you isn’t cool.
This is a good comment and we should all try to think like this.
Better to not behave how I did in the first place lol but I’m glad it had an impact regardless
You’re right I should behave more like your previous comment and ask sarcastic, disingenuous qiestions. That’s a way better way to communicate.
Should I be like you? Is that preferred?
By all means, keep going. Get the nasty out.
Not sure if you saw my other comment but tldr sorry
Which people? I don’t recall seeing any comments like that on Lemmy, at least.
You want me to dig up posts from when the first polls came out after Harris was nominated?
Maybe not, but it’s encouraging! Harris/Walz are stoking enthusiasm because they want to actually improve people’s lives, not just repeat the same tired culture-war bullshit…
You don’t know the margin of error unless you know the sample size. I didn’t see the sample size mentioned in the article.
Business Insider - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Business Insider:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
She’s doing her best to throw Michigan already.
Go vote. Only we can throw the election. They have no say.
My private corporation run a pool the other day and it turns out a third party has 60% of the votes.
Source: Trust me
You are trusting same other corporations for the pool in the article so i don’t see why you shouldn’t trust me
Well for starters, you’re spelling “poll” wrong.
Because who are you? What was your sample size? What was your methodology?
I’m not saying polling is always right just pointing out that they’re usually based on more than one random persons word.
Because who are you? What was your sample size? What was your methodology?
I’m someone on lemmy just like you who does pools for fun. Who are they and what’s their methodology?
Here’s the polling with all the relevant data if you actually wanted it and aren’t just being snarky.
Have a great day friend!
edit: broken link
I interview myself 2000 people and 60% of them are voting for a third party.
