All the polls said that Trump would lose last time. The problem with polls is that people lie to themselves and the pollsters. Or the pollster never reaches them in the first place. And there is no effective way to predict turn out. This is particularly true in the COVID era which will change behavior significantly.
Trump as a majority in the only place it counts given that the election will end up in court most likely the Supreme Court. BTW I am a bible thumper (or certainly would like to be).
(CNN) Six in 10 debate watchers said former Vice President Joe Biden did the best job in Tuesday's debate, and just 28% say President Donald Trump did, according a CNN Poll of debate watchers conducted by SSRS.
So, in the ratio of “best job” in the debate, Biden had about twice as many approvals (60%/28%, or 2.1X).
Another technique being used is to make voting against Trump the default option if you wish to escape the insanity of 2020. Many states, for example, have promised to end the Covid restrictions after the election. The media is injecting the term “return to normalcy” when discussing a Biden victory. In other words, having created a highly unpleasant environment for the public, they are now talking about the one door through which people can escape the madness of the current year.
With nonlinear odds-to-probs conversion, the Democrats’ lead in probability is considerably more substantial: D: 74.9%, R: 25.0% (based on Betfair decimal odds: D: 1.5, R: 2.5, I: 201). This is an almost a +50% advantage for Biden, vs the linear RCP edge of +16%, if one uses this (unadvised) linear metric. For the more-meaningful nonlinear ratio metric, see below the chart.
NOTE: From a ratio standpoint, these odds imply that Biden is now 3X more likely to win the election than Trump. Just a day before, pre-debate, Biden was only about 1.6X more likely (Betfair, R/D odds-ratio of 1.2/0.73).
President Trump and the First Lady are diagnosed with COVID-19, which confounds the oddsmakers … only one betting house, Smarkets, has a line on Election 2020 at press time.
Like Real Clear Politics, Smarkets helpfully calculates -- linearly -- the implied probabilities from their odds, which understates the likelihood of the favorite.
UPDATE (10/2): Just a few hours later, the Smarkets odds are now D:0.51, R:2.2, I:299 ... which implies over an 81% probability of the Democrats winning the Election. (Other betting houses still have suspended wagering on this event with all the uncertainty, what a bunch of weenies.)
NOTE: From a ratio standpoint, these odds (R/D = 2.2/0.51) imply that Biden is now 4.3X more likely to win the election than Trump.
The Tale of Two Women (10/16) … perhaps we’ve reached a crossroads, and maybe a turn is preferable to just barreling straight ahead. Forward!Speaking of barreling-straight-ahead, business-as-usual … an unfortunate historical analogy, re: passively accepting oblivion (10/16).
With President Trump out of the hospital and back in the saddle, let’s revisit the odds-implied probabilities ... Smarkets is now joined by Betfair and four other betting houses in providing odds on Election 2020.
RCP uses the linear odds-to-probs conversion in determining the average implied probability: 61.8% for Biden, and 37.0% for Trump. These linearly-derived percentages can be corrected into nonlinear probabilities with the simple formula, for two-outcome events (see post):
This algorithm translates RCP’s linear probabilities into the proper nonlinear odds-to-probs: about 74% for Biden, and 26% for Trump … or a 2.8Xadvantage in likelihood of election (this is calculated from the average of six inputs, not just Smarkets, as the above post).
Then again, the Trump campaign has been here before, at the same juncture -- in 2016 -- but then even more so ... see below a chart on RCP’s probability of a Trump victory in both 2016 and 2020 (linearly derived, so overstate the underdog’s implied probability) plotted against the number of days until the Elections.
NOTE: Just before the 2016 Election, RCP's linear probability for Donald Trump was about 13%, which had converted to a nonlinear probability of only 2.2%... which translated to more than a 44X advantage for Hillary Clinton in odds-implied probability.
Vicereported on Monday that the Zoom call, which was described as an "election simulation," featured Toobin's New Yorker colleagues Jane Mayer, Masha Gessen, Andrew Marantz, Jelani Cobb, Evan Osnos, Sue Halpern and Dexter Filkins playing various roles including President Trump, Joe Biden, "establishment Republicans," 'establishment Democrats," and "the military." Toobin was playing "the courts." [How fitting]
Concerned about a possible future backlash from disgruntled Americans if this conspiracy natural chain-of-events plays out, just as projected? Well, don’t worry … the Department of Homeland Security has that potential ‘extremist scenario’ already covered (9/4, more here and also here), and has identified a domestic group that poses a threat “more significant than the immediate danger from foreign terrorists.” [from earlier post]
THAT CERTAINLY DIDN'T TAKE LONG Category (Part 1):
Just a few weeks ago, the Department of Homeland Security declared that ‘white supremacists’ are the biggest domestic terrorist threat. Well, through “the efforts of more than 200 state and federal law enforcement officials”, we finally can see what these nefarious types look like, as the FBI uncovers an armed militia plot to abduct Michigan Gov. Whitmer (10/9; more here, including reference to ‘FBI handlers’ in the plotting, similar to what's been done to snare Muslim wannabe domestic terrorists).
Their 'supremacy' appears to be covert ... but not for eager news outlets...
THAT CERTAINLY DIDN'T TAKE LONG Category (Part 2): 'White Supremacist' Narrative Unravels(10/11): Whitmer kidnap suspect attended BLM rally, another called Trump a 'tyrant'.
Something that should bring Americans together, in these trying times ... "it appears that the FBI busted an anarchist, anti-government militia which plotted violence against elected officials - yet hated both sides of the aisle."
UPDATE (10/18): Why Facebooksuppressed Hunter Biden revelations ... that FBI FB decision was made by an ex-advisor on Ukraine to VP Biden, of all places and people. Gee, what a small cozy world, at least at the top.
However, the nonlinear odds-to-probs conversion method has the implied probabilities as Biden 81.8% and Trump 18.2% (10/12), or a 4.5X advantage for Biden.
As has been noted, the conventional linear odds-to-probs conversion overstates the longshot’s chances, while understating the favorite’s, so Biden's implied-probability advantage is considerably more significant than what's reported by Oddschecker. In this case, there is a relative advantage understatement of 2.2X (4.49/2.08). Or, maybe that should be the inverse: 0.46X (2.08/4.49) with this abstract tangential metric.
Everything is designed to affect the election, and if Biden wins, he’ll need a strong economy to win again (or Harris will); thus, everything will return to normal and America will treat COVID just like Biden and Obama treated the Swine Flu…like it never existed.
With the dust settled, we find that odds-implied probabilities now stand at Biden 76.7% and Trump 23.3% (nonlinear correction of Real Clear PoliticsAverage, 10/23; updates frequently), or a 3.3X advantagefor Biden.
You say you want a revolution..?!?
Well, this Brit says we can't pull off thatsh*t nowadays (10/17), thanks to our dependence on government and separation from tangible production (agriculture, industrial; see chart below). The critical skillset of self-sufficiency is not who-we-are.
Despite most Americans no longer having the skills and capability to farm nor manufacture goods, our nascent industry of 'PREEMPTIVE DEBUNKING' is very healthy and growing (10/20, video; perhaps that's our 'revolution').