RCP Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

[U2Edge]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Propaganda is very effective. The idea that anyone would toss out a thriving economy for biden is mind boggling.

In 2020, we have 1st Quarter GDP contraction of 6%. 2nd Quarter GDP contraction of 33%, which is the worst quarterly contraction of GDP in United States history, worse than any quarter in the Great Depression! Third quarter numbers won't be out until October 30, just four days before the election.

Over the last 75 years, this is only the second time that a sitting President has had two consecutive quarters of economic contraction, a Recession, in the year he was running for re-election! Trump in 2020 and Jimmy Carter in 1980. How did Jimmy Carter's run for re-election turn out in 1980?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I think Trump will probably eke out another electoral win.
That will not mean he is any less of an ... asshole.

If Biden does win, even if he wins by a large amount...
He will still be a doddering old fool and at best ...
a transitional President.

 

[U2Edge]

Hey U2, we've all seen this movie before, here is what the 2020 version will look like

Actually, the movie your really watching is 1980 and Jimmy Carter running for re-election in a year, 1980, with two consecutive quarters of economic GDP contraction, a recession. Over the past 75 years, there have only been two election years, where a sitting President has run for re-election in the year of two consecutive quarters of economic contraction, the definition of a recession. 1980 and 2020. We know what happened to Jimmy Carter in 1980 and the recession he experienced and the unemployment were not as bad as what Trump is experiencing in 2020.

Like Jimmy Carter in 1980, Trump's ship is sinking to the bottom. Trump will lose, but not by the same margin as Carter thanks to the much deeper political partisanship in 2020 as opposed to 1980.

 

[U2Edge]

I think Trump will probably eke out another electoral win.
That will not mean he is any less of an ... asshole.

If Biden does win, even if he wins by a large amount...
He will still be a doddering old fool and at best ...
a transitional President.

The only thing old about Biden is his technical age which is 77, soon to be 78. Biden will put the country on the road to recovery and finally defeat the pandemic which Trump has done nearly nothing about.

Over the past 75 years, there have only been two ELECTION years when a technical recession occurred which is two consecutive quarters of economic contraction, 1980 and 2020. In 1980 Jimmy Carter was the incumbent President running for re-election. In 2020, its Donald Trump running for re-election in the middle of a recession.

 

[BluesLegend]

There has yet to be a single presidential debate where Biden will be forced to defend his record, policies, and statements. Trump has yet to rip Biden a new one so these polls are utterly worthless at this point.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

The polls, both in states and nationally significantly narrowed for Hillary Clinton. I would say that is unlikely to happen for BIDEN. The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that. There are less undecided voters this time, and no significant third party candidates. Two months from now, its likely Biden will still be at the same points in these states and nationally which will be significantly better than where Hillary was at that time.

The polls, both in states and nationally significantly narrowed for Hillary Clinton.

No kidding. They wouldn't want to say Hillary up by 8%, they day before Trump wins Michigan.
They'd be a complete laughingstock instead of just mostly a laughingstock.

I would say that is unlikely to happen for BIDEN.

Of course you would say that.

The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that.

Well, if you think Trump is responsible for my fat governor and moron mayor shutting down the Illinois and Chicago economy, of course you'd blame him.

Now when Hillary was incoherent, at least she'd be sober (briefly) the next day.
There is no sobering up for Biden's mental infirimity.

There are less undecided voters this time

And more who just won't tell pollsters who they support.

Two months from now, its likely Biden will still be at the same points in these states

We'll see.

 

[U2Edge]

There has yet to be a single presidential debate where Biden will be forced to defend his record, policies, and statements. Trump has yet to rip Biden a new one so these polls are utterly worthless at this point.

Biden's record is not on Trial, its Trumps Record that is on trial. Trump has defend putting the country in the worst recession since the 1930s and killing 175,000+ Americans, and all of that is just in 2020. Lets not forget the Presidents actions in 2019 that got him impeached and serving Vladimir Putin from the time he ran for President right up through his time as President today.

Trump is going the way of Jimmy Carter in 1980. All the markers are there, steep economic contraction, high unemployment, plus a terrible pandemic murdering 175,000 Americans, something Carter did not have to deal with in 1980.

 

[U2Edge]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

The polls, both in states and nationally significantly narrowed for Hillary Clinton. I would say that is unlikely to happen for BIDEN. The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that. There are less undecided voters this time, and no significant third party candidates. Two months from now, its likely Biden will still be at the same points in these states and nationally which will be significantly better than where Hillary was at that time.

The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that.

Well, if you think Trump is responsible for my fat governor and moron mayor shutting down the Illinois and Chicago economy, of course you'd blame him.

Now when Hillary was incoherent, at least she'd be sober (briefly) the next day.
There is no sobering up for Biden's mental infirimity.

History shows that when it comes to economic recessions, it only matters who is sitting in the White House. They get the blame whether they deserve it or not.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

The polls, both in states and nationally significantly narrowed for Hillary Clinton. I would say that is unlikely to happen for BIDEN. The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that. There are less undecided voters this time, and no significant third party candidates. Two months from now, its likely Biden will still be at the same points in these states and nationally which will be significantly better than where Hillary was at that time.

The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that.

Well, if you think Trump is responsible for my fat governor and moron mayor shutting down the Illinois and Chicago economy, of course you'd blame him.

Now when Hillary was incoherent, at least she'd be sober (briefly) the next day.
There is no sobering up for Biden's mental infirimity.

History shows that when it comes to economic recessions, it only matters who is sitting in the White House. They get the blame whether they deserve it or not.

History shows advanced Alzheimers makes it harder to get elected.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Here we go again with the FAKE POLLS.

Sure, until they show something positive for The Donald and then you guys are falling all over yourselves to get here and post them.

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

 

[kyzr]

I think Trump will probably eke out another electoral win.
That will not mean he is any less of an ... asshole.

If Biden does win, even if he wins by a large amount...
He will still be a doddering old fool and at best ...
a transitional President.

The only thing old about Biden is his technical age which is 77, soon to be 78. Biden will put the country on the road to recovery and finally defeat the pandemic which Trump has done nearly nothing about.

Over the past 75 years, there have only been two ELECTION years when a technical recession occurred which is two consecutive quarters of economic contraction, 1980 and 2020. In 1980 Jimmy Carter was the incumbent President running for re-election. In 2020, its Donald Trump running for re-election in the middle of a recession.

The economy is good enough.
What you can't correct for is that the people will either vote with the police, or with the criminals.
This will be a "law and order" election above all else.

 

[Indeependent]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Since Biden is going to win, there's no need for you to post anymore.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Since Biden is going to win, there's no need for you to post anymore.

Or vote......

 

[TemplarKormac]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

I knew you would disagree. When you poll registered voters, you cannot predict if they are certain to vote at all.

Likely voters are people who have a high likelihood of voting.

Which is a better indicator? Likely or Registered?

Like I said, polls that take registered voters are not reliable indicators of the actual final result.

 

[Toro]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

I knew you would disagree. When you poll registered voters, you cannot predict if they are certain to vote at all.

Likely voters are people who have a high likelihood of voting.

Which is a better indicator? Likely or Registered?

Like I said, polls that take registered voters are not reliable indicators of the actual final result.

Most polls are accurate.

That's why companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars every year to pollsters for product analysis.

What is your empirical evidence?

 

[Toro]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

Based on what?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

Based on what?

I meant they generally aren't unreliable

 

[TemplarKormac]

Polls are generally unreliable, no matter who they favor.

No, they generally aren't.

I knew you would disagree. When you poll registered voters, you cannot predict if they are certain to vote at all.

Likely voters are people who have a high likelihood of voting.

Which is a better indicator? Likely or Registered?

Like I said, polls that take registered voters are not reliable indicators of the actual final result.

Most polls are accurate.

That's why companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars every year to pollsters for product analysis.

What is your empirical evidence?

I will cite internal campaign polling that cogent campaigns use, who poll likely voters.

 

[Toro]

I meant they generally aren't unreliable

But most of them are reliable. That's why they exist. Companies literally pay pollsters millions of dollars to assess markets and products.

The problem is that every Trump supporter who references 2016 doesn't understand probability and methodology. They just assume that because the pollsters were incorrect in predicting who would win in 2016, they are "all wrong."

Polls are right 90%+ of the time. But they aren't correct 100% of the time. Because Trump's victory fell into the <10% of the time they are wrong, they assume they are all wrong. But that conclusion is wrong because they don't understand math.