CNN reporting an ABC News Poll: Harris up by 6 Points

[Pototan]

I think it's with likely voters. However, I can't find an online link. The report says that the 6-point Harris lead is 52% to 46%. The post-debate poll has the same spread as their pre-debate poll.

Some think that's bad news, I think it's good news. If Kamala can shore up a 6-point national popular vote win, I'll take my chances in the swing states.

Please don't reply that we have to work and get out the vote. There's no one on this site that doesn't know that. Almost all of us lived through 2016. No poll will make us less enthusiastic or have any degree of complacency.

On edit, here's the link. One comment. How the fuck can anyone interpret a 6-point lead as "slight"?

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/harris-debate-winner-maintaining-slight-lead-trump-poll/story?id=113673862

[bigtree]

1. god do I hate those 'reminders'

...as if we can't have a minute feeling good about where we stand in the polls.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

38. I think it might be a "good luck" thing.

Don't want to jinx good news.

[Sky Jewels]

41. Also:

"Act as if we're 5 points behind!"
"The only poll that matters is on election day!"
"I don't trust polls -- I've personally never been polled!"

[Doodley]

2. It is good news because Kamala's lead was narrowing before the debate.

[kansasobama]

5. I agree

It was indeed narrowing. So, it is okay if the lead of 5 or 6 points hold. That will be like a blowout. Sorry for the 46% of the screwed up countrymen who are okay with dictatorship.

[Lovie777]

3. With shithole, his comrades and his cult........................

we have been living a never-ending nightmare that is worsening by the minute. So yes, I myself will keep mentioning the imperative importance of voting 24/7 blue.

The GQP are relying on the courts to suppress the votes any means necessary. Hopefully the overwhelming population will saturate the polls, mailing and other voting means on 11/5/2024 in favor of Democracy.

The effing sad thing about this election, parents are considering not sending their children to school that week.

[kansasobama]

4. Here is the link

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/harris-debate-winner-maintaining-slight-lead-trump-poll/story?id=113673862

Well, there is a 1 point uptick in registered voters, no uptick in likely voters. Sorry, yes, we have to work to get out to vote.

I have to admit, if there was no 2-3 points uptick, the country is really screwed. This means 46% of the people are okay with mayhem and inhumane behavior.

[returnee]

6. what's the margin of error?

Yesterday I saw a you tube with Professor Sabato, an expert in politics at U of Virginia saying not to trust polls but if you want to have more confidence in them, double the margin of error.

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. +/-2% MOE

Although the same MOE is claimed for adults/RV/LV even though the full sample of adults had 1000 more respondents.

Sabato has said current polling methodology is very unreliable, but nevertheless, if a candidate has a lead larger than double the MOE, that’s nothing to sneeze at.

[Farmer-Rick]

21. I found this study of polls to be interesting

Though pollsters claim 95% confidence level, polls are usually accurate only 60% of the time and that's 1 week before the election. It gets worse as you move out from the election date.

Any they also agree that doubling the MOE, will give you a more accurate prediction.

"Most polls report a 95% confidence interval. But we found that the actual election outcome only lands inside that interval 60% of the time—and that’s just a week before the election. Further out, the hit rates fall even farther."

https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/polling-101-how-accurate-are-election-polls/

[BlueInID]

28. Misinterpretation of Confidence Intervals

TLDNR: A confidence interval is a measure of repeatability, not a measure of accuracy.

This is a bit stats-nerdy, but this is a misinterpretation of what a confidence interval is. It's based in frequentist statistics and addresses the probability of finding the same result were the experiment (in this case, sampling opinions) to be repeated. In the context of polling, and assuming a sample size of 2000, with a 52% favoring Harris. The plus/minus 3% defines the interval (49 - 55) that we would expect to contain the estimate derived from 95/100 independent samples of 2000 and _using the same methodology_.

So treating a poll's margin of error as a predictor of the true value, which would be the percentage of folks in the whole US who favor Harris at the time the sample was drawn (for a national poll like this one), is a misinterpretation of what the CI actually estimates.

[Farmer-Rick]

55. Yeah, I know

"Both the margin of error and the confidence interval capture “sampling error,” which represents how much the poll’s sample population might differ from the true population of voters. A confidence interval refers to how often the result is expected to fall within the range of the margin of error. It’s important to note, though, that the margin of error only reflects expected imperfections in random sampling, and ignores other sources of error."

It was just too cumbersome to say everything you just said to describe what the article was really saying.

Next time, I'll just say go to the link.

[Maru Kitteh]

7. It's only a "slight" lead because we are Democrats. 6pts for an R is a nuclear lead.

Because electoral college because slavery.

[BoRaGard]

8. yay America

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. Odd that the 2% MOE is unchanged between Adults/RVs/LVs

Even though the full sample of adults had over a thousand more respondents than the RV/LV subgroups.

But if accurate, a 6 point lead among LV’s with a +/-2% MOE is not “slight”, it is statistically significant.

[Wounded Bear]

10. Most polls shift to "likely" voters after Labor Day, so probably...nt

[Indykatie]

12. This is Excellent News if it's Based on "Likely Voters"

I say that because all the pollsters will end up undercounting "likely voters". They will miss all the newly registered voters and none of the enthusiasm Dems have for the Harris/Walz ticket. Pollsters have also missed the Post Dobbs effect that has been evident in the mid-term and special elections held since Dobbs. Democrats have overperformed in every one of those elections even the ones in deep red districts where they lost.

[kansasobama]

13. MSM will focus on the least favorable poll

If RV is lower than LV, they focus on RV. If LV is lower, they focus on LV.

Reverse is true if it is Trump.

[kansasobama]

22. Aha, just as I expected

RealClearPolitics reports ABC News RV poll that shows Harris lead by 4. Conveniently ignored her lead by 6 among LV.

[Martin Eden]

14. Is there a link to polls in the key battleground states?

Hillary won the popular vote by nearly 3 million.

National polls are a general barometer of public sentiment, but not necessarily the key metric.

[Pototan]

17. Hillary won the PV by 2.3% and lost the ECV

Biden won the PV by 4.5% and won the ECV.

A 6-point PV win gives Harris a 93% chance to win the ECV according to betting markets.

[groundloop]

30. I guess I don't hold our "founding fathers" in such high regard as many people.

They gave us the electoral college to placate slave owners, and they gave us that damned 2nd Amendment which is allowing guns to be the leading cause of death for our children.

The fact that 45* was able to slither into the White House despite losing by 3 million votes has given fascists and racists the green light to come out from under their rocks and infect vulnerable people with their hate.

[Martin Eden]

35. In the late 18th century, it was necessary for actual Electors to convene.

Two senators per state may or may not have been a comprise to the slave interests, but counting slaves as 3/5 of a person which gave those states more Representatives most certainly was.

Also in the 19th century our fledgling nation didn't keep much of a standing army after the Revolutionary War. It was necessary for citizens, especially in the far flung frontier, to form militias.

Today, both 2A and the EC are anachronisms which do a lot more harm than good.

[Pototan]

40. I was discussing that with a person this morning

In order to avoid a Civil War in 1787, which we may not have survived, the men who had morals had to compromise with slave owners. Now, remember, there was no previous Democracy in a thousand years. White men who owned land were the only stake holders. They got that from the Magna Carte. America was a rural agrarian society. The second amendment has been misinterpreted. The first words are (A well-regulated Militia...). Now, either only the militia can have guns, or everyone is considered in the militia. I believe the original intent was that all citizens were considered part of the state's militia. After all, there was no standing army. Therefore, citizens can own guns, but they must be "well-regulated".

Anyway, I digress. Since the passage of our Constitution, many countries have used that document as a guide. Scores of countries. Yet not one of them has implemented anything like an "Electoral College". Every direct national election of a chief executive (Parliments excluded) declares the person with the most votes wins.

[Emile]

15. It's amazing to me that someone who tried to

overthrow our government and stolen top secret documents is within six points of getting back into power.

Still at the sametime a six point lead in the polls of likely voters is better than six points behind.

[mucholderthandirt]

16. My guess is, he's not. I don't trust the pollsters, nor their methods.

I'm not so concerned with the numbers but with the trend. Harris is trending higher in polls over the last two months. Despite cheating polling methods, she is moving further ahead. She's had to do a hell of a lot in two months, basically build an entire campaign from scratch. And she's doing it. She's filling huge rallies. She's getting positive media coverage. She's getting more and more people registering to vote. Trump is doing none of those things.

Big money is against us. But we're still ahead, still getting the message out. If we keep working this hard, we got this. There will be no bloodbath, no civil war, no new Jan6 event. Those jokers have already been warned that sort of thing won't fly this time. And they know it won't. Expect lots of whimpering and crying about stolen elections, but very little actual action.

[et tu]

18. total agreement

i still have a very hard time understanding the extreme rw's appeal.
just baffling and i do know racism is a major factor but for so many???
depressing

[Johonny]

32. Inside the cult, Trump is Jesus

The unreality bubble exists and Trump survives based on it. Trump voters have no idea of reality.

[Buckeyeblue]

19. The polls are definitely trending in the right direction

Looking back to 2016, Hillary Clinton struggled to poll above 50%. That Harris is polling at 52% at this point is good news.

But national polls are just comfort food. The real meat is in the swing state polls.

I'm cautiously optimistic.

[William Seger]

20. Speculators on predictit.org disagree

[Emile]

24. ? What does your chart say?

[William Seger]

34. Those are "yes" share prices, Harris on top, currently $0.57 to $0.47

Share prices on predictit.org range from $0.01 to $0.99 with a correct prediction paying $1.00, so roughly it corresponds to the percentages bettors are guessing. Harris took a big lead in the betting right after her nomination, but it had been dwindling up until the debate, closing to only $0.01 difference right before the debate. Now, her lead has been restored.

[William Seger]

50. I was probably too brief

Predicit.org offers "yes" or "no" shares on proposition questions such as, "Will Kamala Harris be the next President?" A share is a contract that pays $1.00 if it proves to be correct, or nothing if it's wrong. Shares are traded by users in a market with buy and sell orders, similar to a stock market, at a price between $0.01 and $0.99. The price of a share, therefore, reflects what the bettors (in aggregate) currently perceive to be the odds of a correct prediction.

[Pototan]

25. RCP odds before ABC poll

Betting Odds Data
BETTING ODDS





HARRIS 51.3 TRUMP 47. RCP Average
Betfair 50 45
Betsson 52 48
Bovada 52 49
Bwin 53 48
Points Bet 54 48
Polymarket 48 47
Smarkets 50 45

[AZLD4Candidate]

23. Six point lead for Trump, the MSM, would call insurmountable. We know who they are in the tank for

[Pototan]

29. Well, to be fair

The Dems could lose the Electoral College with a 4-point Popular Vote win. Most analysts believe a 3-point Popular Vote spread in favor of the Dems is not enough. So, because our archaic system makes us go into an election spotting the other side 4 points, 6 points is only really 2 points ahead for us to win. Remember, Biden won by 4.5% and it was razor thin in the swing states.

So, a 6-point Trump lead is like 10 points. A 6-point Harris lead is like 2 points.

Our system of electing a President is closer to an Apartheid system of government rather than a modern Democracy.

[ificandream]

26. I think Kamala's poll numbers will keep going up ...

With Trump and J.D. Dunce continually making incredibly stupid comments, I don't see it any other way.

[crud]

27. That is my take also, that Kamala's numbers won't go backwards

So reaching better than 50% is a good place to be.

[TBF]

31. "I'll take my chances in the swing states" -

You may not want to hear it, but I'm going to say it anyway. Popular vote does not determine the presidency. Yes, it's instructive and I love seeing 6 points up.

But do not count out the swing states - we all know they determine this election. We do NOT want this thrown to the courts because we know who they work for & it's not democrats.

[RidinWithHarris]

42. This has nothing to do with the popular vote *determining* the presidency, but it does *strongly correlate*

Yes, we've been burned twice in recent memory by the EC, but the EC differing from the popular vote has only happened four times in all of our history.

The bigger the popular vote margin, the higher the chances the EC won't go the other way.

Swing states are swing states after all because the elections there are close, which means they are more like an average snapshot of all of the US, not less. Often when people caution that "only the swing states matter" they speak about this problem almost as if the swing states were an entirely different political universe, wildly and randomly independent of the rest of the country.

[TBF]

43. Correlation does not imply causation. nt

[RidinWithHarris]

44. And?

How is that remark at all germane to what I posted?

[TBF]

45. You posted your argument relying on correlation -

but that has been upended twice recently (as you admitted).

I do hope Harris is so far ahead that states end up flipping that we don't even expect! But in the interest of not suppressing the vote I think we need to be focused on making sure we have the EV's.

YMMV.

[RidinWithHarris]

47. If the subject is polling, the subject is automatically correlation, not causation

After all, polls, be they national or state-by-state, don't cause people to be elected.

That doesn't change the fact that the better the national polls look, the more likely we are to win. The bigger the nationally polling gap, the less likely swing-state polling matters as much.

As soon as you say "But in the interest of not suppressing the vote..." you're admitting you aren't talking about statistics, correlation, or causation. You're purely in the realm of games you believe you need to play for supposed motivational benefit.

[TBF]

48. Talk about games

Academic thrills aside, we need to win the electoral college, and the focus on swing states is imperative (if it wasn't the campaign wouldn't be doing it).

[RidinWithHarris]

49. Thanks...

[TBF]

58. no problem,

friend. When the conversation comes to a low like this, I know exactly what I'm dealing with. Enjoy the election.

[obamanut2012]

51. 6% means she would win rhe EC

[Oopsie Daisy]

33. It's a mistake to overestimate what people know (or ought to know.)

>> Please don't reply that we have to work and get out the vote. There's no one on this site that doesn't know that.
Perhaps. But some may need more motivation to get out and DO the things they already know they NEED to do.

[ananda]

36. And remember this poll is from a compromised rightwing msm.

...

[peggysue2]

37. If you're a Democrat, specifically the Democratic candidate for president . . .

Any lead is slight. If you're Agent Orange a 2-point lead is MASSIVE.

What we have is a trend with all pointers/polls giving Kamala Harris the advantage. Add that to the spike in registrations in Dem demographics, and the under-performance of Republicans in special elections and 2022 (Red Wave) and we're in a good place at the moment.

All of which makes me very happy!

[edisdead]

39. Listen we DO have work to do but

WE ARE GOING TO WIN THIS FUCKING ELECTION.

These motherfuckers just can’t help but step on theor own dicks repeatedly. Just today Trump attacked another woman, by posting that he hates her. The real problem is that he said it about one of the most influential women in America from a pop culture perspective.

And here is the thing, after we win this fucking election top to bottom the work begins to rid and ridicule the bullshit toxic masculinity in this country into non-existence. I am so fucking tired of stupid dip shit men saying the dumbest fucking things and actually trying to drag us not just back to the 70’s, the 50’s or even the 1800’s. These fucking braindead assholes want to boil society down to caveman principals. And I am not even joking. We have to do better as a species and it starts with the fucking moronic men and their ignorance and anti-intellectualism.

[angrychair]

46. In sure CNN couched it

As a "tight, narrow race" or "close to the margin of error"
I'm sure when she is 10 pts up they will update the description to "small lead" or "tenuous lead" or "barely ahead" and a 15 pt lead would be "worrisome lead" or "small big lead"
Anything to keep the narrative going.

[C_U_L8R]

52. Time for another Trump distraction

.... oh wait.

[VMA131Marine]

53. As many of these reliable polls as there are ..

There seem to be a bunch by pollsters nobody has ever heard of and they mostly lean towards Trump.

https://www.270towin.com/2024-presidential-election-polls/national

AtlasIntel (who?) came out with a poll yesterday showing Trump with a 3 point lead and a 2% MOE. It’s an obvious outlier but all these questionable polls that are favourable to Trump keep the VP Harris’ lead in the polling averages from getting too large.

[J_William_Ryan]

54. "...racism is a major factor but for so many???"

There’s a great deal of fear, ignorance, and stupidity in support of Trump; much of it willful ignorance.

There’s the unwarranted fear of immigrants and immigration, manifesting as white grievance politics and racist replacement theory.

The ridiculous, wrongheaded belief that America is ‘in decline,’ where middle America has been ‘hollowed out.’

And there’s the delusion that voting for Trump is an ‘act of defiance,’ the outlaw myth, a blow against the ‘political establishment.’

Historians and political scientists refer to it as reactionaryism – the fear of positive, beneficial change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty; the rise of authoritarianism to compel conformity and silence dissent; the desire to return America to an idealized past that never actually existed.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

56. This polling makes me smile

[iemanja]

57. That's very good considering the margin of error is only 2%