Is Arizona gone for Trump?

[ElectionsGuy]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

[Real Texan Politics]

Not necessarily, but I think the "losers and suckers" comment (whether it was real or fake) hurt him badly here. Plus this is basically John McCain country, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) but nearly all the McCain's endorsed Biden, so that could definitely help Biden here.

[Lognog]

Not gone, but steadily drifting out of the margin of error

[dunceDude]

Current Economist odds - 84% Biden
If AZ is blue = 96% Biden
If AZ is red = 65% Biden

Not gone but I want to see the polling on Nov 2.

[pbrower2a]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

That may exaggerate the reality -- but even a 6% lead for Biden (OH PI has 10%, and 4% is about the margin of error) is a near-killer at this stage of the Presidential race. Consider that Arizona has a fast-growing Mexican-American population, and that it has credibility in politics. If the Democrats are using one of their strongest assets from their convention, then it may be ads that have a young woman who looks like a high-fashion model lamenting the death of her father from COVID-19 and connecting that to Trump policies eloquently and coherently. That could explain much. (Anyone from Arizona?)  

As significant is that a CNN poll has Biden up 52-42 in Wisconsin today. That too is a killer at this stage.  At this point I would figure that either Arizona or Wisconsin seals a Biden win. A 10% lead for Biden in Arizona is now credible due to GOP bungling of COVID-19 at both the state and federal level. It is just as bad that Trump doesn't crack 42 in Wisconsin as that Biden is at 52. There was a FoX News poll that had Biden up 9% in Arizona...

A 10% lead gives one about a 91% chance of winning the state at this stage. Arizona and Wisconsin are different enough that they might not quite move in tandem.

Probability is multiplicative. Trump will need both Arizona and Wisconsin, and his chance of winning both is .09 x .09 = .0081, which is less than 1%.  So it's only 9%? Then it is .13 x .09 = .0107, which is just over 1%.

CNN also polled North Carolina, a state which Donald Trump absolutely, positively, must win. A 3% lead gives Biden a 64% chance of winning if nothing goes screwy. Things get worse for Trump with this result... and although he has a 36% chance of winning North Carolina, his position there in no way helps him. North Carolina is very different from both Arizona and Wisconsin, so between Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, Trump has this chance of winning all three (and, really, he must):

.09 x .09 x .36 = 0.002916  .. or one in almost 343 if you see the results in Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.

I can play other games with probability. Take two states in which Trump seems to have an edge. A couple days ago Nate Silver had Trump's probability of winning Texas at 68% and of winning Iowa at 67%. A two-thirds chance of winning both states separately is not the same as the chance of winning them together.

.67 x .68 = .4556.

As a Democrat who absolutely despises Trump, I would be biting my fingernails off if the election hinged on Iowa and Texas singly as chances for a Biden win, but even that combination (OK, Biden will win Wisconsin should he win Iowa) would have an even harsher effect on some Trump supporter who takes statistics and probability seriously. Regrettably for the quality of their lives, they don't take probability and statistics seriously. (At the college level, statistics is the easiest set of math courses). Trump would have slightly more than a 45% chance of winning.

"45" is a lucky number? Only fools believe in lucky numbers.      

I am slow to recognize the effects of events upon polling, but nothing that Trump has said recently better resembles what one might hear from a statesman than a madman. The has deprecated America's soldiers, which doesn't make friends even on what President Trump calls "the Left", and he has been exposed as a liar (and not simply wrong) about COVID-19.      

[MT Treasurer]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

More like people who care about the demographic and geographic realities of this state, which suggest an extremely unfavorable future for Republicans in our current alignment, people who acknowledge the shifts in the two parties' coalitions, and people who realize that there is no recent history of Democratic bias in pre-election polling in AZ, but okay.

In any case, if by "gone" you mean Likely D, then yes. I don’t think Trump's path to 270 runs through this state.

[Stuart98]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

That may exaggerate the reality -- but even a 6% lead for Biden (OH PI has 10%, and 4% is about the margin of error) is a near-killer at this stage of the Presidential race. Consider that Arizona has a fast-growing Mexican-American population, and that it has credibility in politics. If the Democrats are using one of their strongest assets from their convention, then it may be ads that have a young woman who looks like a high-fashion model lamenting the death of her father from COVID-19 and connecting that to Trump policies eloquently and coherently. That could explain much. (Anyone from Arizona?)  

As significant is that a CNN poll has Biden up 52-42 in Wisconsin today. That too is a killer at this stage.  At this point I would figure that either Arizona or Wisconsin seals a Biden win. A 10% lead for Biden in Arizona is now credible due to GOP bungling of COVID-19 at both the state and federal level. It is just as bad that Trump doesn't crack 42 in Wisconsin as that Biden is at 52. There was a FoX News poll that had Biden up 9% in Arizona...

A 10% lead gives one about a 91% chance of winning the state at this stage. Arizona and Wisconsin are different enough that they might not quite move in tandem.

Probability is multiplicative. Trump will need both Arizona and Wisconsin, and his chance of winning both is .09 x .09 = .0081, which is less than 1%.  So it's only 9%? Then it is .13 x .09 = .0107, which is just over 1%.

CNN also polled North Carolina, a state which Donald Trump absolutely, positively, must win. A 3% lead gives Biden a 64% chance of winning if nothing goes screwy. Things get worse for Trump with this result... and although he has a 36% chance of winning North Carolina, his position there in no way helps him. North Carolina is very different from both Arizona and Wisconsin, so between Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, Trump has this chance of winning all three (and, really, he must):

.09 x .09 x .36 = 0.002916  .. or one in almost 343 if you see the results in Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.

I can play other games with probability. Take two states in which Trump seems to have an edge. A couple days ago Nate Silver had Trump's probability of winning Texas at 68% and of winning Iowa at 67%. A two-thirds chance of winning both states separately is not the same as the chance of winning them together.

.67 x .68 = .4556.

As a Democrat who absolutely despises Trump, I would be biting my fingernails off if the election hinged on Iowa and Texas singly as chances for a Biden win, but even that combination (OK, Biden will win Wisconsin should he win Iowa) would have an even harsher effect on some Trump supporter who takes statistics and probability seriously. Regrettably for the quality of their lives, they don't take probability and statistics seriously. (At the college level, statistics is the easiest set of math courses). Trump would have slightly more than a 45% chance of winning.

"45" is a lucky number? Only fools believe in lucky numbers.      

I am slow to recognize the effects of events upon polling, but nothing that Trump has said recently better resembles what one might hear from a statesman than a madman. The has deprecated America's soldiers, which doesn't make friends even on what President Trump calls "the Left", and he has been exposed as a liar (and not simply wrong) about COVID-19.      

This is bad statistics; election outcomes between two states aren't independent events. A polling error in a certain direction in one state probably means polling errors in that same direction in other states, particularly demographically similar ones. Doing what you're doing is how people were under the wrong impression that Clinton was a 95%+ odds favorite in 2016.

[Calthrina950]

Arizona isn't completely gone for Trump; no state that voted for him last time is "completely gone" for him. But it is definitely moving farther out of reach, and it is looking like the likeliest Biden flip at this point, outside of the critical states in the Upper Midwest that put Trump in the White House last time. As of right now, Biden definitely has the advantage there, and the factors which have been identified-the leftward trend of college-educated suburbanites, the state's increasing demographic diversity, and the McCain factor, to say nothing of his improvements among seniors and retirees-are clearly fueling a movement towards him and the Democrats.

[Chips]

No. I do think he will be victorious here in the end, if narrowly.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

McCain, Gordan Smith, Coleman, Judd Gregg and George Vonoich were environmentalist Rs, they were against oil drilling in ANWR; consequently, AZ is a Wildfire state in the Pacific and so is OR; consequently, that's why AZ, which didn't allow Dr. King's Birthday will become a Populist state , not an R state, just like NV, CO, and VA did in 2006.

[redjohn]

AZ is not gone for Trump. The Senate race was D+2 in a D+9 national environment, but the state is trending left and I think Biden can win it with a popular vote victory of 4-5 points. Obviously, there's a chance Trump's base turns out in huge numbers (they will) and Democratic turnout just barely falls short. But if Trump wins AZ, it'll be a very close win. Biden, meanwhile, could win comfortably.

[ElectionsGuy]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

More like people who care about the demographic and geographic realities of this state, which suggest an extremely unfavorable future for Republicans in our current alignment, people who acknowledge the shifts in the two parties' coalitions, and people who realize that there is no recent history of Democratic bias in pre-election polling in AZ, but okay.

In any case, if by "gone" you mean Likely D, then yes. I don’t think Trump's path to 270 runs through this state.

How noble and knowledgable you must be good sir. I mean wow, the pretentiousness just reeks.

I'm not denying the "reality" of the way Arizona has gone and is going, I haven't seen many people deny that. What I'm suggesting is that the state is still close and Trump still has the possibility of winning it, and a poll that refuses to weight by education and has a host of other problems does not change that.

What I'm suggesting is it's not gone (aka: It's not Safe D, Likely D does not mean gone). But even saying that has now become too "Republican-friendly" for you to tolerate.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Of course not. Only people who believe every stupid OHPI poll that comes out would think that.

More like people who care about the demographic and geographic realities of this state, which suggest an extremely unfavorable future for Republicans in our current alignment, people who acknowledge the shifts in the two parties' coalitions, and people who realize that there is no recent history of Democratic bias in pre-election polling in AZ, but okay.

In any case, if by "gone" you mean Likely D, then yes. I don’t think Trump's path to 270 runs through this state.

How noble and knowledgable you must be good sir. I mean wow, the pretentiousness just reeks.

I'm not denying the "reality" of the way Arizona has gone and is going, I haven't seen many people deny that. What I'm suggesting is that the state is still close and Trump still has the possibility of winning it, and a poll that refuses to weight by education and has a host of other problems does not change that.

What I'm suggesting is it's not gone (aka: It's not Safe D, Likely D does not mean gone). But even saying that has now become too "Republican-friendly" for you to tolerate.

The OP stated that “obviously Trump still has a chance of winning it,” so I think it’s ok to take ‘gone’ as closer to likely D than any other rating.