- Reaction score
- 2,541
- Points
- 1,190
Yes I was very careful to use Licthman as example of the hostile climate, and not as a reference for why I think Harris will win.Polls are just measurements; so, yes, they are inaccurate and subject to human orneriness. They're more useful than motivated hope.
A problem with Lichtman's method is operator bias. Someone has to make a judgement call on each question. If bias sways judgement, the output is untrustworthy/indeterminate.
There's also Nate Silver's model. Included here is a chart of win probabilities for ranges of national popular vote polls. You have to use his polling average; looking up the RCP average in the Silver Bulletin chart would be close to meaningless.
Silver has the average at D+1.3 as of yesterday; in the D+1 to +2 bracket that gives Harris a 26.3% chance. (At D+0 to +1 her chance is 7.7%.)
The RCP average today is at "tied".
I doubt two weeks of "Trump is approximately Hitler" is going to sway voters; people have found instances of "the Republican is practically Hitler" going back to Goldwater (60 years). And I see that the Cheney endorsements have aroused reactions from nausea to ire among far left progressives. If Harris loses, the recriminations circus is going to be exceptional this year.
I also doubt comparing Trump to Hitler will sway any voters. In fact, I think it will be detrimental to the Democrats as it will fire up Trumps base and encourage more of them to vote.