For Agitprop purposes, I’m asking comrades to help aggregate any and all effortpost responses, critiques, or general thoughts that you have seen or written pertaining to yesterday’s U.S. election that you think have standalone value for discussion either online or IRL.
I made a post for that purpose here, and ideally it can be used not only for general discussion, but as a reference for well thought out responses in discussions about the election to save all of us some brainpower.
No shitposts please, as we’d like to highlight some comrades’ actual effort in constructing responses or analysis, but humor is 100% welcome to help make your point!
People always treat polls like an almost divine revelation or like they're horse crap. They're just a ballpark estimate based on calling people. They'll be roughly correct +/-3% so they can't tell you one way or the other unless it's a damn near certainty and even then with the electoral college they don't really matter nationally. They're a flawed tool but they can still be a useful one under the right conditions. Just don't treat them like they come from God like newscasters do.
Truly, how do they even do these polls in the clusterfuck state of information transversal? Landlines, text messages, online shit?
Depends on the polls really. Mostly calling people and having nerds figure out the best way to call people. How many in this or that zip code and trying to keep track of the response rate. Online polls do happen but aren't as reliable because on the internet nobody knows you're a dog.
I would be very curious to compare the accuracy of polls pre-21st century to what we’re dealing with today
I would too. I remember on the 538 website they had the favorablility tracker for Trump/Biden and you could see other presidential terms. It seemed like there were barely any polls for like Truman so it was really blocky for the first few post war presidents. It probably just took time for people to get phones and for pollsters to get setup. Regardless, they were probably about as reliable if they had good methodology.
It’s weird because a rational part of me is saying it’ll likely be Kamala with a slight lead but another part of me is saying Trump will surprise again. I said Trump would win 2016 and Biden in 2020 but this one is just so much harder to predict.
My prediction right when they chose Harris was that it will be a coin flip, and it seems like I'm mostly correct. I also felt like any other Democrat (except for Clinton lmao) would beat Trump pretty hard. But they chose Harris, which means she has to deal with Biden's administration as baggage. No amount of "distancing" means anything since she didn't invoke the 25th amendment. A big brain move would be if she actually did invoke the 25th amendment or put on a staged performance of threatening to invoke the 25th amendment.
Yeah I think it'll be trump as well. Kamala is the incumbent no matter what anyone says. Americans will blame her for how things are at the moment and she will suffer for that. Changing the face on the poster doesn't change the color of the party.
I'm not even prognosticating. It's not worth it. There's no way at this juncture to tell who will be "worse" or what they'll even do with an absolute mandate to exterminate anyone and everyone.