You also can't add completely different polling errors together.  

>CA has an average of +19 Biden on 538, and +21.7 in RCP

One of the biggest polling errors in 2016, was that California went substantially more blue than expected. 

2016 forecast for California

Most polls had Clinton to win about 20 points in California, she ended up winning by just over 30 points.  

And you can't take an average polling error and start adding it to specific polls.  

Your lack of faith is why God doesn't talk to you.

It did talk about ballot access. Isn't the Democrat National Committee a Political Body, and wouldn't that make Kamala Harris (if she is chosen) the Political Body Nominee?

If that is not the case then I apologize for the confusion.

The "honeymoon" phase is based on generalized human emotion. When something is new, it gets lots of hype, news, and positive reviews. We see this happen when a new restaurant opens in the city, or when there is a new leader in a company (like Furuwaka for Nintendo).

And I do understand that no one else is talking about the DNC's delegates choosing someone else. And yes given that she is raising funds and got the delegate support as of now it does seem to appear she could be the official presidential nominee. This is a personal hunch of mine.

Ok.

My statement of the shift is not a polling error (though adding the bias did), it was about how the general population is snapshotted to vote at the time of the polls (and polling aggregate). If we look at the polls, we see a national shift. Every election cycle has a national shift, some shift more than others and some shift more to the left or more to the right. This time according to the average raw polls (Trump +2.45) we are seeing around a raw shift of +6.95 to the republicans.

(Edit: I just saw you other post regarding CA and adding other errors). Wouldn't we consider this an aggregate since we are using the average polls from two aggregate poll sites?
Also CA had the final prediction at 58.5% Clinton to 35.5%% Trump, Clinton +23. So yes, CA had a +7 underestimation on Clinton. In 2020 they had +29.2% Biden which was actually spot on. 
RCP had +29.4 Biden, which was overestimated by 0.2, which is rather impressive.
Looking at the data they had Biden before he dropped at +21.7 Biden, I will make the change for CA to return to safe blue on my next prediction (unless future data proves otherwise). Thanks for pointing that out.:)

Your source https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/24/politics/cnn-poll-kamala-harris-donald-trump/index.html talked about her increase in Black and Women voters. You are correct about that, but I also mentioned other demographics that this specific poll does not address (there could be others and if there are pardon my words).

Hmm, I see. I guess that is true that I am comparing Kamala's approval rating to President's running for a second term's approval rating, is that she is running for re-election. She is the right-hand women of President Biden at the moment (apart from his wife). It might not be the most sound logic. So I do understand your position. I'll find VP running for President approval ratings and include only the ones that got the nomination from their party. Numbers in bold won the Presidency. I've learned that polls were not commonly accessible like they are now, or they were never done for the VP.

† John Adams: 1796 Approval N/A → 1796 Vote Share 53.4%
† Thomas Jefferson: 1800 Approval N/A→ 1800 Vote Share 61.4%
† Martin Van Buren: 1836 Approval N/A→ 1836 Vote Share 50.8%
*† John C. Brekenrigde: 1860 Approval N/A→ 1860 Vote Share 18.1%
*† Henry A. Wallace:  1948 Approval N/A→ 1948 Vote Share 2.37%
† Richard Nixon: 1960 Approval N/A→ 1960 Vote Share 49.55%
† Hubert Humphrey: 1968 Approval N/A→ 1968 Vote Share 42.7%
† Richard Nixon: 1969 Approval 59%→ 1968 Vote Share 43.4%
Walter Mondale: 1984 Approval N/A→ 1984 Vote Share 40.6%
George H. W. Bush: 1989 Approval 61%→ 1988 Vote Share 53.4%
Al Gore: 2000 Approval (Favorability) 52% → 2000 Vote Share 48.4%
Joseph R. Biden Jr.: 2009 Approval (Favorability) 49%→ 2020 Vote Share 51.3%

*Ran as 3rd Party
†No Approval or Favorability Ratings for Vice Presidents existed until 1977 as far as I can search. And I am unable to find any polls regarding Walter Mondale.

At least from 1969 with Richard Nixon to 1989 with George H. W. Bush it looks like the approval was vastly greater than their vote share. And President Biden's vote share was greater than the approval over a decade ago within this 3% margin of error. I can only make the same conclusion that either Kamala Harris (if nominated) will either have the same vote share as her approval or favorability rating, or her vote share will be vastly smaller than her approval or favorability rating (though this second half I seriously doubt).

Thanks for the suggestion. :)

You responded before I corrected my comment. I said the last articles have nothing to do with Georgia.

The first one specifically talks about "independent" candidates. 

And again, Georgia says she will be on the ballot.

I know what a honeymoon phase is. I didn't even comment on the honeymoon part. 

I was specifically asking what you were basing DNC picking someone else on.

Most of us prefer to engage with facts and not baseless hypotheticals.  

I'm talking about this part here:

You're adding a bunch of things together that can't be added, you're literally adding an "average bias" of 4.18 in favor of Trump. 

It's extremely problematic to assume that an average bias of a previous election will be remotely accurate to a new election.

None of these numbers particularly mean anything.

Sorry, I missed this comment earlier. 
This is completely wrong.

Older voters tend to be both conservative/Republicans and they tend to be the ones that show up at elections.

Contrary to your claim, Republicans overperform during midterm elections.

Here's an article from 2014.

>it’s still unclear the extent to which Republicans’ advantage in voter engagement will translate into more actual House and Senate seats

>s. In 2008, for instance, 57.1% of the voting-age population cast ballots — the highest level in four decades — as Barack Obama became the first African American elected president. But two years later only 36.9% voted in the midterm election that put the House back in Republican hands. For Obama’s re-election in 2012, turnout rebounded to 53.7%.

Similar things happened in 2022, when Republicans on a rare occasion had more votes overall.

Democrats seem like they have to get excited to vote for a candidate, whereas Republicans usually seem happy to vote for anything that happens to have an R next to it. 

Republican Gains in 2022 Midterms Driven Mostly by Turnout Advantage

GOP Has Midterm Engagement Advantage

Pi-guy already explained that the margin for error is 3%, and that the result ended up within that range.

I think the reason some people don't notice this when they talk about this subject is that they forget that the % only reflects the amount of votes they would get. Not how the electoral college would turn out.

1. Based on what?  Please elaborate.  Can't be just a hunch.  This seed of doubt has to have been planted from somewhere.

2. This is another lie propagated by the right.  Clinton had an average spread of just 2.1 points. That's it.  Not the landslide blowout that right wing media always claims or the left-leaning bias you are now suggesting.  A bias requires intent to mislead the poll which is ironic because polls are vetted out specifically for their accuracy, not bias.  And lets not forget that FBI director James Comey re-opened the Clinton email case just a few days before the election.  The Republican party doesn't seem to give a damn about the criminality of their own candidates but we give a damn about ours.

https://newrepublic.com/post/184330/trump-loses-mind-devastating-fox-news-poll-kamala-harris

Kamala seems to have a huge lead in Michigan. 

Those are favorability ratings, not head-to-head polling. While you'd think they would correlate, I don't believe there has been a single head-to-head (or five-way) poll, showing Harris with a lead in Michigan at this time.

Kamala Harris surging, enthusiasm for her is now +88% for her among Democratic Party voters, this puts her popularity ahead of Trump's smaller Republican voter base.

Interesting how Democratic Voters are literally voting for the candidate for law and order, while the Republican voters have chosen the biggest criminal US Presidential history as their candidate.

Another thing is how these so-called Christians pick a guy who virtually opposes Jesus and the so-called Christian values in every single way. I believe Jesus had a word for people like the Republicans: hypocrites. Sanctimonious hypocrites.

Perfectly normal take.