NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 07, 2021, 05:15:19 PM

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election
  2020 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Likely Voter, TJ in Oregon, YE, ON Progressive)
  NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Author Topic: NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States  (Read 3742 times)
GeorgiaModerate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,307


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #150 on: November 05, 2019, 09:42:47 AM »

How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

I don't particularly like either of them, but I believe the country would survive four years of their Presidency, especially as they will have difficulty getting more extreme programs through Congress.  I don't believe it will survive another four years of Donald Trump.

It's an either-or choice.  Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, rather than between good and bad.
Trump isn't proposing 27 trillion in new spending. How can you honestly say Warren or Bernie would be a better president? Trump is presiding over the best economy since the 60s. You may hate him as a person but there is no denying he is managing the country effectively.

Also I disagree with you slightly about the inside straight. I think if anything Trump is in a stronger position in the electoral college than even 2016. The advantage of incumbency is going to put other states possibly in his column: Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire. Trump could lose by 1-2 million votes and still win an electoral college mini landslide: 320-350 electoral votes. I also am not sure Biden is as great of a candidate as you think he is. I agree with a previous poster that the Trump campaign will dig up every bit of dirt on Biden and I think his strength in the polls is largely based off of name recognition. When Trump and his team really start spending then negative advertising on Biden (if he gets the nomination which looks less than 50% right now) I think his numbers would drop significantly nationally and in the state polls.

Trump and the Republicans are going to dig up all the dirt they can find on whoever his opponent is. 

Polls consistently show Biden running better against him than any other Democrat.  And no, it's not just name recognition; the NYT/Siena polls (which you tout highly) went into this question in depth.  They found that among voters who were familiar with both Biden and Warren, a strong majority preferred Biden.  To put it simply: there probably aren't a lot of persuadable voters left in the American electorate, but it looks like more of them can be persuaded to vote for Biden than Warren.

Also, "fiscal responsibility" is probably not a card that Republicans can play after the way they've zoomed up the deficit since Trump took office.
Logged
American2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,028
Côte d'Ivoire


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #151 on: November 05, 2019, 10:02:23 AM »
« Edited: November 05, 2019, 10:53:13 AM by American2020 »



Logged
SN2903
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,105
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #152 on: November 05, 2019, 10:52:05 AM »

How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

I don't particularly like either of them, but I believe the country would survive four years of their Presidency, especially as they will have difficulty getting more extreme programs through Congress.  I don't believe it will survive another four years of Donald Trump.

It's an either-or choice.  Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, rather than between good and bad.
Trump isn't proposing 27 trillion in new spending. How can you honestly say Warren or Bernie would be a better president? Trump is presiding over the best economy since the 60s. You may hate him as a person but there is no denying he is managing the country effectively.

Also I disagree with you slightly about the inside straight. I think if anything Trump is in a stronger position in the electoral college than even 2016. The advantage of incumbency is going to put other states possibly in his column: Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire. Trump could lose by 1-2 million votes and still win an electoral college mini landslide: 320-350 electoral votes. I also am not sure Biden is as great of a candidate as you think he is. I agree with a previous poster that the Trump campaign will dig up every bit of dirt on Biden and I think his strength in the polls is largely based off of name recognition. When Trump and his team really start spending then negative advertising on Biden (if he gets the nomination which looks less than 50% right now) I think his numbers would drop significantly nationally and in the state polls.

Trump and the Republicans are going to dig up all the dirt they can find on whoever his opponent is. 

Polls consistently show Biden running better against him than any other Democrat.  And no, it's not just name recognition; the NYT/Siena polls (which you tout highly) went into this question in depth.  They found that among voters who were familiar with both Biden and Warren, a strong majority preferred Biden.  To put it simply: there probably aren't a lot of persuadable voters left in the American electorate, but it looks like more of them can be persuaded to vote for Biden than Warren.

Also, "fiscal responsibility" is probably not a card that Republicans can play after the way they've zoomed up the deficit since Trump took office.
O please you can't compare Trump's deficit with proposing to basically bankrupt the nation and it's largely because no matter who is president you can't significant cut spending politically. That is a ridiculous argument.

Biden is an overrated candidate. He is their best candidate but would still be a Mitt Romney type nominee that doesn't inspire anymore. You can't win that way. I totally disagree. Biden's corruption is being covered up by the media but if he was the nominee Trump would focus on it every day.
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,307


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #153 on: November 05, 2019, 11:51:02 AM »


The fact that people like you consistently try to run down Biden reinforces my belief that he's the strongest Democratic candidate.
Logged
Joe "I Have No Empathy" Biden
ShadowOfTheWave
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,759
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #154 on: November 05, 2019, 11:52:18 AM »

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

These are mostly pretty good polls for Trump, from a very good pollster.  Democrats shouldn't try to pick holes in them, but should recognize that Trump does have a realistic possibility of replicating his electoral inside straight from 2016.  However, neither should Republicans use these polls to assume that Trump is a strong favorite for reelection; he isn't.  It's possible to draw two inside straights in a row...but it sure isn't a good bet.

It's true that the election is still a year away.  There are one or two people here who routinely say "polls this far in advance are meaningless" -- at least when they don't like the results.  For those who really think polls are meaningless at this point, why are you wasting your time on a polling board?  Check back in July or so.

Polling this far in advance indeed has low predictive value for the state of the race a year from now.  But it's not zero, and the value is gradually increasing as the election gets closer. Also, although the polls don't tell us much about the November 2020 state of the race, they do tell us quite a lot about the state of the race now, especially when there are many polls that can be averaged together.

Those polls do tell us a story: Trump is the underdog at this point, but certainly not out of it yet.  And he does better against some candidates than others.  In particular, the large majority of polls show that Biden has the best results against Trump, and looking at the average (don't cherry pick individual polls) he does significantly better than Warren does.  

This is not just a matter of name recognition at this point.  Anyone who's following the campaign at all (and polls consistently show a record level of interest and enthusiasm for this election) knows who Warren is at this point.

Could Warren beat Trump?  Sure, it's very possible.  But at this point in the race, Biden looks like a significantly stronger candidate against Trump.  If this doesn't match your preferences, it's too bad; that's what the data says.  As an old poker buddy of mine once said: no matter how long you stare at a deuce in your hand, it will not transform into an ace.

Why is Warren running behind Biden?  Polls that probe this question, as the Upshot polls did, tend to show that she has specific weakness especially among the working class voters who, for better or worse, have a disproportionate electoral influence at this point in presidential politics.  Perhaps this isn't justified or fair, but it's the way that it is.  Again, look at the damn data.

Personally, I'll vote for any Democrat over Trump, but I'm rooting for Biden, and not just because I'm a moderate.  At this point, he has the best chance to beat Trump.  That's my ONLY concern right now, and I think it should be every Democrat's only concern.

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.
How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

Modern American capitalism is more radical than "socialism".
Logged
Cinemark
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 870


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #155 on: November 05, 2019, 01:28:01 PM »

I will say I'm a tad turned off by Nate Cohn trying to explain why his poll is better than everyone else's poll.

Logged
Sen. Mark Meadows
Haley/Ryan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,336
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: 1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #156 on: November 05, 2019, 01:43:15 PM »

I will say I'm a tad turned off by Nate Cohn trying to explain why his poll is better than everyone else's poll.



Why? Everyone else would attack him if he didn't
Logged
Cinemark
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 870


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #157 on: November 05, 2019, 01:50:59 PM »

I will say I'm a tad turned off by Nate Cohn trying to explain why his poll is better than everyone else's poll.



Why? Everyone else would attack him if he didn't

To an extent but let the numbers speak for themselves. Sienna is the second most accurate pollster in the country according to 538, he doesnt need to spend two days explaining why his poll shows better numbers for Trump then everybody else's. Its a good poll with sound methodology, but so are the ABC and Fox News polls.
Logged
American2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,028
Côte d'Ivoire


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #158 on: November 05, 2019, 02:11:14 PM »

The Democrats Need a Dual Strategy to Beat Trump

Quote
Judging by my social-media feed, a lot of people were shocked by the results of a newly released opinion poll from the New York Times and Siena College, which showed that Donald Trump remains highly competitive in the battleground states likeliest to decide the electionArizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The surprise is a bit surprising. Presidential elections are nearly always close, battleground states have earned the label for a reason, and Trumps approval rating has remained pretty steady since he was inaugurated. (So far, the impeachment process has only knocked it down a couple of points.) On the basis of these factors, you would expect the 2020 election to be tightly fought, particularly in swing states where, in 2016, Trump eked out a victory in the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote. The Times poll merely confirms this supposition.

The poll has also drawn attention because of what it shows about head-to-head matchups between Trump and the three leading Democratic candidates: Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders. The poll showed Biden leading Trump among registered voters in four of the six states: Arizona, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. It showed Sanders ahead in three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Warren was leading Trump in just one state: Arizona. However, she was running level with him in two others: Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

These findings confirmed what other polls have found: in head-to-head polling against the President, Biden fares the best of the Democrats. Sanders is popular in the Midwest. Warren has work to do. But the numbers were too bunched up to support any definitive conclusions or predictions about next years election. In fifteen of the eighteen matchupsthree for each battleground stateTrump was either leading or trailing his Democratic opponent, among registered voters, by three percentage points or less. Taking the six states together, Trump was losing to Biden by two points, running even with Sanders, and beating Warren by two points. All of these results were within the polls margin of error.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-democrats-need-a-dual-strategy-to-beat-trump
Logged
slothdem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 441


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #159 on: November 05, 2019, 02:27:29 PM »

The Democratic meltdown over this poll is especially something given that they show a close Biden win, a razor thin Bernie win, and a razor thin Warren loss, with the incumbent in the mid-40's against all. Trump may win re-election, but this is his rosiest legitimate poll and it shows a toss-up race.

And the popular vote may well be Safe D.
Logged
Speak No Evil for one month
Scott
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,016
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #160 on: November 06, 2019, 03:47:09 AM »

The result out of Methtucky last night definitely warrants a second look at these numbers.

Even putting that aside, polling "likely voters" a year from the actual f#cking election is lol.
Logged
Annatar
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 842
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #161 on: November 06, 2019, 04:04:52 AM »

Republicans ran 1.5% ahead of trump in the Virginia senate and basically even in the Virginia house, those results would suggest this poll is to pessimistic on trumps numbers.
Logged
Cinemark
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 870


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #162 on: November 06, 2019, 07:57:48 AM »

Republicans ran 1.5% ahead of trump in the Virginia senate and basically even in the Virginia house, those results would suggest this poll is to pessimistic on trumps numbers.

What in the world?
Logged
Hindsight was 2020
Hindsight is 2020
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,012
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #163 on: November 06, 2019, 11:32:13 AM »

Broke: both this and the abc poll are just polls and lets throw them into the average
Woke: Either this poll or the abc poll is lying
Bespoke: Theyre both right. Trump is going to win all the swing states while losing the popular vote by 15%
Logged
Annatar
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 842
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #164 on: November 06, 2019, 11:54:57 AM »

Republicans ran 1.5% ahead of trump in the Virginia senate and basically even in the Virginia house, those results would suggest this poll is to pessimistic on trumps numbers.

What in the world?

https://twitter.com/ryanmatsumoto1/status/1191948895926063105
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,666
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #165 on: November 14, 2019, 01:37:29 PM »

Republicans ran 1.5% ahead of trump in the Virginia senate and basically even in the Virginia house, those results would suggest this poll is to pessimistic on trumps numbers.

The State Senate election is of course on issues more local than those on which the President is elected. Candidates for any State Senate are not running on such issues as foreign policy and national security. Donald Trump has been the quarterback, and he has fumbled those two issues to the Democrats about as badly as George McGovern did in 1972 to Nixon.

Virginia is anti-populist, which has usually hurt Democrats in Presidential elections. This said, Obama showed what a non-populist can do in Virginia. Virginia voters pay much more attention to defense and foreign policy. You can trust that senior military officers generally ill fit the old image of those in Doctor Strangelove. They are too sophisticated for that. The military used to be indifferent to college education, but it now promotes it. The disciplinary problems used to be heavily concentrated among the high-school dropouts that it used to get in large numbers.


   
Logged
gracile
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,318


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -7.65

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #166 on: November 22, 2020, 05:54:47 PM »

I've been thinking about this specific poll a lot since the election, and it's significant how close the Biden LV numbers (aside from FL) ended up being to the final result. Granted, all those states being close isn't exactly surprising given how they voted in 2016, but it's still notable that a poll a year out from the election basically nailed the final result when many other pollsters showed much rosier numbers at the time (and subsequently in the cycle). This poll also proves just how overlooked GA was as a potential flip this cycle given it ended up voting a few points to the left of two of these states and a fraction of a tenth of a percent to the right of another.

Oh, and the Democrats really dodged a bullet by not nominating Warren.
Logged
VAR
VARepublican
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,553
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.39, S: -1.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #167 on: November 22, 2020, 05:58:04 PM »

wbrocks tried to unskew this one too?!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 14 queries.