PA - Suffolk University/USA Today: Biden +7

[forza nocta]

https://twitter.com/davidpaleologos/status/1318869248735928320?s=21

[Rand]

P O C O N O   J O E

[Ljube]

Refused 3?

[wbrocks67]

Ah, its almost as if the high quality pollsters have had a solid high single digit lead this whole time, and yet everyone wants to keep focusing on the junk pollsters.

Also, Suffolk has had a slight R bias too.

[Podgy the Bear]

More evidence that the failing Trump strategy to make PA Ground Zero.  Not working.

[wbrocks67]

Favorabilities:
Joe Biden 49/44 (+5)
Donald Trump 42/52 (-10)

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Refused 3?

I hear what you're getting at, Ljube, but say that all of the "refused" were Trump voters.  That would still mean that Trump would need to win near-100% of the undecideds here to take the most narrow of leads. 

Of course, these numbers are based off a single poll, but if Trump needs to rely on a shy-Trump effect + undecideds almost entirely breaking his way, he's in trouble. 

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/21/pennsylvania-poll-joe-biden-leads-donald-trump-usa-today-suffolk-poll/5990219002/

500 likely voters
MoE: 4.4%

[Ljube]

Refused 3?

I hear what you're getting at, Ljube, but say that all of the "refused" were Trump voters.  That would still mean that Trump would need to win near-100% of the undecideds here to take the most narrow of leads. 

Of course, these numbers are based off a single poll, but if Trump needs to rely on a shy-Trump effect + undecideds almost entirely breaking his way, he's in trouble. 

This phenomenon first started showing up in polls about two weeks before election in 2016.
The number of people who refused was in the 2-3% range.

I was sure then, as I am sure now that these people are shy-Trump voters.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Refused 3?

I hear what you're getting at, Ljube, but say that all of the "refused" were Trump voters.  That would still mean that Trump would need to win near-100% of the undecideds here to take the most narrow of leads.  

Of course, these numbers are based off a single poll, but if Trump needs to rely on a shy-Trump effect + undecideds almost entirely breaking his way, he's in trouble.  

This phenomenon first started showing up in polls about two weeks before election in 2016.
The number of people who refused was in the 2-3% range.

I was sure then, as I am sure now that these people are shy-Trump voters.

But Trump-voter-refusal isn't enough to account for the current discrepancy between the two candidates.  Besides, there are quite a few marked differences between this election cycle's polling in the Keystone State and the polling in 2016.  

For instance, we're not seeing the same levels of third-party voters that we saw four years ago.  Scanning down the list of PA polls in October 2016, Johnson and Stein were carrying, at minimum, around 3-4 percent of the electorate.  And in a scenario where Trump needs every voter he can get, the decrease between then and now doesn't bode well for his chances.  

Trump is nowhere near finished in PA, but he's relying on factors that are largely out of his control -- especially at this point in the race. 

[Ljube]

Refused 3?

I hear what you're getting at, Ljube, but say that all of the "refused" were Trump voters.  That would still mean that Trump would need to win near-100% of the undecideds here to take the most narrow of leads.  

Of course, these numbers are based off a single poll, but if Trump needs to rely on a shy-Trump effect + undecideds almost entirely breaking his way, he's in trouble.  

This phenomenon first started showing up in polls about two weeks before election in 2016.
The number of people who refused was in the 2-3% range.

I was sure then, as I am sure now that these people are shy-Trump voters.

But Trump-voter-refusal isn't enough to account for the current discrepancy between the two candidates.  Besides, there are quite a few marked differences between this election cycle's polling in the Keystone State and the polling in 2016.  

For instance, we're not seeing the same levels of third-party voters that we saw four years ago.  Scanning down the list of PA polls in October 2016, Johnson and Stein were carrying, at minimum, around 3-4 percent of the electorate.  And in a scenario where Trump needs every voter he can get, the decrease between then and now doesn't bode well for his chances.  

Trump is nowhere near finished in PA, but he's relying on factors that are largely out of his control -- especially at this point in the race. 

I would only give Trump 10% chances to win the election, based on the current polls.
It's just that polls two weeks before the election are not necessarily indicative of the election results.

Therefore, Trump is behind in PA and unless something changes, he will lose.

[wbrocks67]

Republicans do not appear to be engaged in PA either yet, at least according to the mail returns. Their return rate is terrible.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Fuller release: https://www.suffolk.edu/-/media/suffolk/documents/academics/research-at-suffolk/suprc/polls/other-states/2020/10_21_2020_marginals_pdftxt.pdf

[KaiserDave]

Finally, good PA polls!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No R version of VA, PA is safe R, sorry Ljube

[Roll Roons]

This seems way more likely than a double-digit win.

[Badger]

Refused 3?

I hear what you're getting at, Ljube, but say that all of the "refused" were Trump voters.  That would still mean that Trump would need to win near-100% of the undecideds here to take the most narrow of leads. 

Of course, these numbers are based off a single poll, but if Trump needs to rely on a shy-Trump effect + undecideds almost entirely breaking his way, he's in trouble. 

This phenomenon first started showing up in polls about two weeks before election in 2016.
The number of people who refused was in the 2-3% range.

I was sure then, as I am sure now that these people are shy-Trump voters.

COOL STORY BRO!! 😎

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

That's more like it.

[Lief 🗽]

Horrible poll for Trump.