In order to avoid having a system where a handful of states have outsized influence over who becomes president, we created a system where a handful of states have outsized influence over who becomes president...

Time Marches on and the age of a new president grows nearer.

Grain of salt for recent polling shifts:

Weak video. He claims GoP polls are skewing data but in his own video Quinn (non partisan) has trump leading in swing states. Which is why betting firms have Trump with the advantage.

Biggest reason to stay optimistic is the influx of new registered voters that likely are not accurately represented in the polls.

Granted I still think there is plenty if reason to be concerned.  

🙃

Yeah I’m really not following his logic. I would like a detailed explanation why the extra ~500 votes Bush got in Florida should count more than the extra ~500,000 votes Gore got in the other 49 states or why the extra ~80,000 votes Trump got in Wisconsin, Michigan & Pennsylvania should count more than the extra ~3,000,000 votes Clinton got in the other 47 states.

Even in 2004 & 2020, Bush & Biden won the PV but were extremely close to losing the EC. Bush had ~3,000,000 more votes and only won because of ~120,000 in Ohio and Biden had ~7,000,000 more votes and only won because of ~42,000 votes in Arizona, Georgia & Wisconsin.

I just don’t think there is a logical explanation for how the EC is a better system than the PV.

If the race is going to be decided by less than 3% in swing states, which seems likely, then we would expect some polls to show Donald Trump with a lead. In the set of polls from Quinnipiac I believe they show Harris at +2 in PA and -2 in WI, which is a strange result if taken at face value. But if you consider margin of error, those results are consistent. In theory, other polls should balance things out to correct whichever of those two numbers is off.

But if there is indeed a flood of low quality polls, which seems to be the case as some polls Show Donald Trump winning black voters 60-40, then the overall average would be artificially skewed towards Trump. I would say it's more likely that betters are basing their decision off the aggregate. If they are basing it off of one particular poll, that is simply a misunderstanding on their part of how polls work. 

As for the reason to stay optimistic, this may be nitpicky, but it's not just newly registered voters, but also voters who didn't vote in the last election. Most polls considerer "likely voters" as voters who voted in the last election. If for instance there were people who were registered to vote but did not last year, but now will because they feel strongly about a certain issue... say abortion, then they would also be not counted. 

I'm still very concerned but I'm not sure my concern is based on rationality. Rationally, I think we're going to see an inverse of 2016. In 2016, the polls were off because Trump drove a lot of people that typically do not vote to the polls. They were much closer in 2020, and by now, I think there's a better chance that Harris will be driving non-habitual voters to the polls. Probably not to the same extent, but I do think she is being underestimated. 

Adam Schiff more dangerous than Putin who is currently directing his army to pillage and rape Ukraine. C'mon Americans. 40% of America seemingly supporting a straight up fascist, dudes rhetoric the past few weeks has been horrific, I don't care if Harris was running a poor campaign (she isn't), the fact that 40-46% of Americans are supporting this dude says more about America than it does Harris.

But I understand screaming about immigrants being to blame for all of life's problems is the easy route that far-right parties take and it unfortunately works because hate is so good at selling to the masses, then they get into power, and do nothing about it, then crash the economy, then pass it over to left-wing parties to fix while blaming them. The cycle repeats itself. I do think Harris might lose AZ solely down to the immigrant rhetoric.

The famous war dove, Donald Trump.