chakan2 ,
@chakan2@lemmy.world avatar

This way the expert can go 10 for 11 by picking Trump.

ACEUSA ,

[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the moderator]

    •
    GladiusB ,
    @GladiusB@lemmy.world avatar

    Are you promoting an article?

    nyctre ,

    Seeing as how the name of the site and the user match, I'm gonna go with yes.

    jordanlund Mod ,
    @jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

    I went through their history, it was all self promotion, either to their website or their instagram.

    All removed and banned.

    werefreeatlast ,

    It's Biden all the way. Fortunately unfortunately.

    OldWoodFrame , (edited )

    I actually think you had a flawed process if you were projecting a Trump win in 2016, getting that "right" doesn't impress me. Comey re-announcing new emails was 11 days before the election, there wasn't time to see what people thought of it.

    Edit: The downvoters don't remember the election. Clinton was winning basically every poll, her numbers peaked after the Access Hollywood tape and dropped from that peak, she was still winning polls by 4 points on election day. There are vagueries of voting behavior based on weather in different locations and the vote was super close in the swing states. Even with perfect state by state information adjusted by poll error, it was less than 50/50 Trump would win. It was a bad prediction.

    It happened to happen, because things with 40% odds happen 40% of the time, but predicting the 40% outcome is bad process.

    jeffw OP ,

    Except polling isn’t what this guy relies on

    OldWoodFrame ,

    So he would have been wrong if the Comey announcement didn't come out and turn people off from voting for Hillary. Bad process, right result.

    anticolonialist ,

    Hillary was winning every poll because the only polled middle aged white women.

    jordanlund Mod ,
    @jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

    First, he didn't get 2000 wrong, Gore won.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jan/29/uselections2000.usa

    2nd though... 2024 is a lose/lose no matter what the Democrats do at this point.

    A weakened Biden can't win.
    A replaced Biden changes the dialog to "See! Even the Democrats know they can't do the job!" which is a losing strategy.

    The only way to pull out a win would be for Biden to die in office and have his successor get the sympathy vote, a la Johnson in '64.

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    There's still plenty of room for a senile fumbling corporate puppet to be retained in office, assuming mass media and the party continue to back him.

    But quite a bit of mass media is owned and operated by ultra-conservative ghouls and wanna-be fascist demagogues.

    The real fear is that they cash out Biden and start running an endless train of hit pieces, like they did against Hilary and Bernie. Biden's senility seems to be acceptable to majority of Dem voters, on the grounds that "Trump is worse". It's all the low info Indies who are yet to be swayed. And they're only interested in the news cycle a couple weeks outside the general election.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    I disagree 100%. Having Biden step down and put his support behind a solid candidate many can agree on (not just corporate Dems) while saying he has given it thought and realizes it is best for Democrats & America means not only does he get to do so gracefully, but people can emphasize with honesty and not having and old man spend his final days being abused by those around him.

    systemglitch ,

    If he stepped down and endorsed Bernie, I have ould say there is a chance. Short of that, you guys are heading for a second Trump.

    timewarp , (edited )
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    I wish Jon Stewart would accept endorsement. Bernie isn't the only candidate though. Trump didn't start out cause he was well liked. He got popularity cause he was polarizing. He gets infinite free media coverage. The Democrats could pick AOC and the right would have a meltdown. She'd get consistent media coverage. She is good looking and would do good for pressers.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Trump is (or was) a billionaire, a TV celebrity, who shat on his GOP rivals during the 2016 primaries and was content enough to threaten to run as an independent and allow Clinton to win if he wasn't nominated. That he regarded politicians from both parties with contempt was part of the attraction.

    If Canada can't elect a female PM or have a Liberal (or NDP) female PM, what makes you think that the US will elect a woman as President?

    While a lot would like her more leftist positions—she might have to reiterate that the US should stop funding Israel and that what's happening in Gaza is a genocide, and her view on a 100% tariff on EVs—the GOP and party centrists would have a field day.

    But yeah, it might be a good thing.

    Pandantic ,
    @Pandantic@midwest.social avatar

    content enough to threaten to run as an independent and allow Clinton to win if he wasn't nominated. That he regarded politicians from both parties with contempt was part of the attraction.

    Okay guys, I know this sounds crazy but, Jon Stewart could play one from the Trump playbook. AOC flips her position on Gaza, Jon is a Jew against the genocide, locking in the leftists. All the gen z-ers and millennials are in from the get go because perfect nostalgia points, and then Biden steps down and endorses him locking up the dem votes! What a life that would be. A d*sney ending!

    chiliedogg ,

    The biggest argument the Republicans have against Biden is his age.

    Bernie is older than Biden.

    It doesn't matter at this point that he'd be better. The only way to combat the "too old" argument is to nominate someone younger than Trump. And there's plenty of people younger than 78.

    jordanlund Mod ,
    @jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

    Bernie also has a heart condition and I say this with all love for Bernie, but also as someone who has had two heart attacks... you don't want someone with weakened health in that job.

    Physically, there are days when I struggle with "walk down a hallway". Forget doing a job.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Harris can cover.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    And there’s plenty of people younger than 78.

    Which one's can beat Trump in the election?

    Magnergy ,

    Obama.

    nyctre ,

    Literally can't by law. He's already had two terms.

    Pandantic ,
    @Pandantic@midwest.social avatar

    He literally can’t endorse Bernie, because that doesn’t solve the problem unless Bernie were to prove his mental acuity. They’re going with Newsome because he’s like young Biden. It’s an easy swap.

    Furbag ,

    The problem is he would never put his support behind anyone other than a corporate approved neoliberal. If he does step down, the person he picks is 110% going to be contentious among base Democrat voters especially among the younger voters. We're not getting Bernie or AOC, full stop.

    I also think Democrats are the worst about their purity tests and will turn their noses up at anyone for the slightest reason. When put into that perspective, I'll take the chances with Biden.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Win first, hand power to Harris, then step down.

    Hello_there ,

    I'm calling it. 9 of 11. That's a good number for America.

    corsicanguppy ,

    Thats some broken Windows on the World there.

    SoGrumpy ,

    I'd say that was a lot of broken windows.

    skeezix ,

    Will this election be a tales from the crypt?

    Cosmos7349 ,

    Hey math people, if they all selected 1 of the 2 main candidates for every election, and they all selected different candidates, how many historians would it take to cover every combination for 10 years? (bonus points to see how many would take before guaranteeing someone could get 9/10)

    Sami , (edited )
    @Sami@lemmy.zip avatar

    1024 historians assuming they all pick different combinations at random. Probability of randomly guessing at least 9 of 10 goes up to 1.075% or 93 historians (on average to get one person with 9/10 predictions right) or like the other commenter mentioned 1024-11= 1013 to guarantee a 9/10 but that's a little overkill.

    steventhedev ,

    Where does the 93 come from? The percentage is almost correct, but it should be 11 (1.074%)

    Sami ,
    @Sami@lemmy.zip avatar

    93 for 1/0.01075

    Zaktor ,

    Note that many of those elections were easier to guess than just flipping a coin, so you don't really need to cover every potential combination to cover like 95% of the likely outcomes.

    Stanley_Pain ,

    Just let Bernie fuckin' giv'er...

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices ,

    as much as I may love Bernie (as we all do), he's a year older than even Biden.

    Old white man schtick can only take us so far.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Every President in US history has been a man and all but 1 was white.

    ShinkanTrain ,

    I want to hear the opinion of the octopus that predicted the world cup results first

    Blackout ,
    @Blackout@kbin.run avatar

    Died. Now they are using a turtle but he always votes Nadar

    ShinkanTrain ,

    Let him cook, it'll get there eventually

    JimSamtanko ,

    Holy shit this was funny!

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices ,

    * stares in confused Mitch McConnell *

    disguy_ovahea ,

    I hear there’s a groundhog in Pennsylvania that’s a pretty good meteorologist.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    How good is it at delegating tasks?

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    I saw a groundhog this weekend for the first time by my home. In point of order it was not afraid of its shadow.

    FuglyDuck ,
    @FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

    the only way another candidate can be successful is if Biden himself drops out and endorses (and indeed continues to campaign for) them.

    But Biden's ego won't allow that, so the party's choices are either to forcibly remove him and split the vote or take the flaming, burning ship down into the ocean.

    hope people can swim.

    golli ,

    the only way another candidate can be successful is if Biden himself drops out and endorses (and indeed continues to campaign for) them.

    And he had 4 years to decide on and build up a successor, but chose to not do so. And neither did the democratic party.

    His age and the related issues can't be a surprise to anyone, so i really don't see why there should be a sudden change in direction.

    JoMiran ,
    @JoMiran@lemmy.ml avatar

    Duh

    SirDerpy ,

    Drop him for who?

    They'll not nominate a Justice Democrat as that won't make corporate donors money. I don't see how anyone or anything could recover the resultant shitshow except the Justice Democrat platform.

    Kamala seemingly the only one with some name recognition, is the same vague bullshit with some identity politics, which would be inadequate.

    Who else is there?

    Elextra ,

    Would love Pete Buttigieg over Newsom but honestly will take anyone that can beat Trump

    Anyone they pick from now will get name recognition no matter who they are from media presence alone. Changing candidates at this stage will be significant news.

    givesomefucks ,

    When pressed about whether the questions surrounding Biden’s age and mental acuity are “fundamentally different” than his metrics as president, Lichtman doubled down.

    “Debate performances can be overcome,” he said. “At the first sign of adversity the spineless Democrats want to throw under the bus, their own incumbent president. My goodness.”

    So, he refuses to factor anything in if it doesn't fit his system... Literally refusing to acknowledge any health concerns

    His system is this:

    Lichtman is best known for the "Keys" system, presented in his books The Thirteen Keys to the Presidency and The Keys to the White House. The system uses thirteen historical factors to predict whether the popular vote in the election for president of the United States will be won by the candidate of the party holding the presidency (regardless of whether the president is the candidate).

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Lichtman

    And it doesn't account for specific candidate...

    So by his own argument that his system can't acknowledge a candidates fitness would come into play, logically I don't understand why he is speaking on who the specific candidate should be.

    FlowVoid ,

    His hypothesis is that elections are mostly not about individuals. People vote for Team Blue or Team Red. And given the embrace by evangelicals of a criminal who has never read the bible, I think he may have a point.

    The only individual characteristic that matters is incumbency, which is why Democrats shouldn't throw that advantage away.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    The only individual characteristic that matters is incumbency,

    The incumbent lost in 2020. There may be other factors.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    The other factor is that the incumbent lost in 2020, to the 2024 incumbent.

    Like wtf. People saying he can't do it. He already did it once.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    Since then, his signature legislation has failed to pass as intended, he's broken a strike, he's supported a genocide, he's moved to the right on immigration, and he's claimed to have defeated Medicare. He's alienated his base and demonstrated that people who were fretting about his age might have been on to something after all.

    He beat Trump in a nail-biting squeaker of a contest in 2020, and centrists have been pretending he's invincible ever since.

    JustZ ,
    @JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Oh boohoo, my team didn't win everything it wanted so I'm going to take my ball and go home.

    Still by far the most progressive president in my lifetime.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    Oh boohoo, my team didn’t win everything it wanted so I’m going to take my ball and go home.

    Your team didn't? Did Biden not move far enough to the right for you?

    Still by far the most progressive president in my lifetime.

    I see. He really isn't far enough to the right for you. Well you should vote for him anyway. No matter who and all that.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Some might want to play ball with West, Stein, or JFK Jr.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    I've never met a single person who thinks any of them could actually get the popular or electoral vote, at this point replacing Biden with another Democrat would be far more likely.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    How likely is Biden, or his possible replacement, to be elected?

    Bernie_Sandals , (edited )
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    About 25 to 50 percent, depending on which Polling Aggregate source you're using for Biden currently. Which would presumably improve with another candidate.

    25% From the economist

    40% From The Hill

    50% From 538

    Meanwhile, RFK Jr., the highest polling of the third party candidates, has less than 1% chance of winning enough electoral votes.

    However, my original point wasn't that a Biden replacement would do better than RFK or a third party in the general (though they certainly would), but that if you dislike Biden, him being replaced is more likely than a third party candidate ever winning.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    Before the debate, I wasn't sure who'd win: Biden or Trump.

    Even Allen Lichtman was unsure.

    After the debate, I figure Biden will lose.

    I'm not saying it's an absolute certainty—we have 4 months and many things could happen. If someone offered to bet me their $500 that Trump will win to my $100 on Biden winning, I'd take it.

    If Biden is replaced, I think he'd be more likely to lose.

    If he was elected, Biden needn't serve all 4 years: he could resign a few months later, make Harris President, and AOC, Sanders, Newsom, whatever, as VP.

    As I think Biden will lose, one might want to vote their hearts.

    Keep in mind, it might be dependent on states.

    wp:2020 United States presidential election#Results by state

    If 2.5 million Californians who voted for Biden instead voted for RJK Jr, Stein, and West in 2024, Biden (or his replacement) would still probably win all 55 Electoral College votes of that state.

    If the 5 million Texans who voted for Biden, also, instead voted RJK Jr, Stein, and West in 2024, Biden would lose no more Electoral College votes.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    There's also the 100% tariff on EVs that he supports.

    FlowVoid , (edited )

    The only individual characteristic that matters is incumbency.

    Most other factors mostly do not depend on the individual who is running. For example, recession, military victories/losses, results of midterm elections, significant third party challenger, etc. The party can run anyone and it would not affect those points.

    However, I overlooked another individual characteristic: there is an extra point if the incumbent is a victorious military leader or has significant appeal to members of the opposing party. The only person to get that point in this century was Obama, and only in 2008.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    The only person to get that point in this century was Obama, and only in 2008.

    The only one to win the Democratic primaries, at least.

    FlowVoid ,

    This system is only meant to predict the general election. It ignores any primary candidates who were not nominated.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    Seems to me that the model has some blind spots.

    FlowVoid ,

    It does what it means to do.

    Ensign_Crab ,

    Until it doesn't.

    Democrats used to trust polls, too. Now they only trust them if they confirm existing biases.

    nilloc ,

    And the popular vote means fuck all for the election anyway, so who cares about this system if it didn’t factor in the electoral college?

    FlowVoid , (edited )

    The system is currently meant to predict the electoral college winner, not the popular vote winner.

    DMBFFF ,
    @DMBFFF@lemmy.world avatar

    I don't think it means fuck-all. IIUC to win the necessary Electoral College votes, one has to win at least 37% of the popular vote in a 2-way (or mostly 2-way) race.

    lennybird , (edited )
    @lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

    Meaningless considering he still hasn't predicted whether or not Biden will win this election. He says he needs another month lol.

    Edit: As a bonus he can't even apply his own rubric to a new potential candidate. So the real questions are: How could he possibly know they'd be worse, and why the fuck is he even saying anything?

    FlowVoid ,

    Not meaningless, his prediction system always gives the incumbent an advantage over anyone else in his party.

    lennybird ,
    @lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

    And yet, he hasn't predicted yet because there are many other "keys". Case-in-point: see how incumbency worked for Trump.

    Also should be noted other reputable science-based algorithm designers like Nate Silver advises Biden to step down.

    Finally, the unprecedented nature of an open convention also means this guy has nothing to go on for extrapolation.

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    Also should be noted other reputable science-based algorithm designers like Nate Silver advises Biden to step down.

    Nate's algorithm is just a poll of polls. And his reasoning is incredibly short term and superficial.

    Nate wasn't suggesting Biden drop out back in January when other candidates could run to replace him. He's only saying it now, because Biden's polling is at an all time low.

    If Biden recovers (likely, as the memory of the debate fades behind other current events) the pundits will start singing a different tune quickly enough.

    lennybird ,
    @lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

    Nate's algorithm is just a poll of polls. And his reasoning is incredibly short term and superficial.

    That isn't true. Far more involved than that.
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/

    Nate went further post-debate performance, knowing where Biden stands in a variety of polling and that this was the worst debate perhaps in the history of debates they was a make-or-break moment for the campaign desperate to reach a widespread audience. Biden capturing the attention of 50 million people will not happen again between now and November. For many Americans this debate, which Republicans will never let anyone forget, will be the last thing they remember.

    More importantly there will be no major positive event that overrides it. That event, if it existed, already passed with Trump's conviction.

    Nobody can provide me a single data-point where Biden isn't performing significantly worse than his 2020 race where he won by merely 40,000 votes across 3 battleground states. Time to face hard truths.

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    That isn’t true. Far more involved than that

    Step 1: Collect, analyze and adjust polls

    The entire baseline for his predictions, plus or minus some additional adjustments. Everything after that is rooted in the original poll-aggregate foundation.

    Nate went further post-debate performance, knowing where Biden stands in a variety of polling and that this was the worst debate perhaps in the history of debates

    He was not telling Biden to drop out the day before the debate. He was telling Biden to drop out the day after, but before he actually inserted "bad debate performance" into his model and rerun a thousand model elections. This is what always gets Nate in trouble. He shoots from the hip on hot-button issues, rather than remaining academic.

    More importantly there will be no major positive event that overrides it.

    Trump tanked two debates against Hillary and still squeaked through on election day. Nobody is going to be thinking about this debate by the time the Olympics are over.

    Nobody can provide me a single data-point where Biden isn’t performing significantly worse than his 2020 race where he won by merely 40,000 votes across 3 battleground states.

    2020 had some of the highest turnout in US history, thanks to mail-in voting and quarantine. 2024 is going to see a huge drop off in participation. It isn't immediately clear which candidate is going to suffer the worst from the deficit in support, as Biden has banked hard on appeasing moderate conservative voters while Trump trundles further and further out into right-wing.

    They're both deeply disliked candidates.

    lennybird , (edited )
    @lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

    lol my guy, you are reaching for some serious straws. If you're not going off of this data, what ARE you going off, exactly...? Vibes? This is more denial than I can handle.

    He was not telling Biden to drop out the day before the debate. He was telling Biden to drop out the day after,

    Well no fucking shit! That's called adapting to new information. Any good scientist or analyst does it. When an unprecedented event like THAT debate performance occurs, then yes, that means you must go back and readjust the model. Models only work if they actually factor in the latest information — you get this, right? Have you SEEN the post-debate polling coming out? It's TERRIBLE:

    Post-Debate: "72 Percent Say Biden Unfit Mentally, Cognitively."

    Post-Debate: "64% of Independents want Biden replaced on the ballot"; that's more than they want Trump replaced on the ballot by 1%, by the way.

    Post-Debate: "Undecided voter focus group leans toward Trump after debate"

    Trump tanked two debates against Hillary and still squeaked through on election day. Nobody is going to be thinking about this debate by the time the Olympics are over.

    You live in this magical fairy-tale world where Trump is held to the same standard as Biden when he clearly is not. If voters were as informed as you and me then we wouldn't have either of these fucking candidates. Neither of those poor debates come remotely close to what we saw yesterday from the person espousing to be the fighter to take on Donald Trump. It doesn't change the reality reflected in every single piece of data we have in battleground states. Now you can choose to bury your head in the sand and go off vibes if you want, but good luck with that.

    affiliate ,

    i bet you i could predict it with 100% accuracy if you give me another 4 months

    batmaniam ,

    Yeah you say that and should be right but I'm more worried about January than I am November...

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • politics@lemmy.world
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •