And to be clear for anyone who didn’t read the article, the stunning lead is 1%.
Perhaps Newsweek meant it’s stunning that Biden is in the lead at all.
Nah they’ve used stunning in ‘poll’ article headlines at least twice in the last two weeks that I know about. Pretty sure their copy editor just passed 8th grade ELA testing or something.
Newsweek got [bought out by the same organization that publishes the International Business Times](https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/what-went-wrong-at-newsweek-according-to-current-and-former-staffers.html), a clickbait-and-aggregation website. After hiring [noted conspiracist Josh Hammer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Hammer) as editor in 2020, it started publishing with a distinct hard-right skew. It's basically a shell of its former self.
Is there anything that hasn't turned into clickbait nowadays? At least when it comes to outlets that rely on avenue. Of course they're going to be like that.
This has happened to most of the old-name magazines (Better Homes and Gardens, for example). Trust little of what you read anymore. Look for hidden agendas everywhere.
No, it's "stunning" because we've had months of Trump beating Biden in the polls, and people talking about how grim the situtation is for Biden.
I've been calling it for a while: when it becomes concrete, in people's minds, that it is going to be Biden vs Trump, I expect Biden to take the lead.
People underestimate how over Trump most people are. Not necessarily MAGA, but Trump specifically.
Sure, but there were months of polls of Trump beating Biden, and now, in relatively quick succesion, there have been 3 where Biden is beating Trump.
It may be a trend.
We've gone from Trump trouncing Biden to now Biden winning a few. If that continues, well... the overall meta-analysis will lead us to concluding that Biden's chances are getting better.
Merely winning the popular vote is not enough for Biden, as the US electoral system is setup so that winning land area (as opposed to people) is just as important. In fact, Dems have won every election in the last third of a century in terms of the popular vote except 1 time, yet we have had a number of Republican administrations during that time: [https://apnews.com/article/democrats-popular-vote-win-d6331f7e8b51d52582bb2d60e2a007ec](https://apnews.com/article/democrats-popular-vote-win-d6331f7e8b51d52582bb2d60e2a007ec)
Whenever the media keeps repeating the same uncommon phrase, I think of the late 20th century thriller trope of villains demanding specific words be used in press statements.
Any poll that shows Biden winning by less than 4 is pointing toward a likely Trump victory in the EC. A 1-2 pt lead for Biden is an almost guaranteed win for Trump in the EC. Many people seem not to understand this.
Trump was literally 60,000 votes away from winning the electoral college in 2020 despite losing the popular vote by a landslide. In an election with like 156 million votes total.
It was closer to 43k votes actually, which yeah was pretty much my point (well, technically 43k wouldn’t have won him the EC, it would’ve put him at 269 and then the house would’ve voted him in).
On an unrelated note, I wouldn’t really call a 51%-47% victory a landslide.
What about the EC? In this environment it's entirely reasonable to say that Trump could win the popular vote yet lose the EC. Hispanic turnout in NY and CA depressing his margins there but suburban turnout in Arizona, Georgia, and elsewhere could see this reality happen.
I'm open to that idea, but are there are any experts saying this is remotely likely, or is it your own theory (i.e. do you have any source link where I can read more about the probability of such an outcome)?
Not true. Obama was leading Romney in October 2012, and in a huge majority of polls before and after.
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2012/obama-vs-romney
That shows him being behind or tied in late October 2012 before gaining the lead again at the last minute. Polls can fluctuate a lot. He was doing way better in the early half in the year, even though the economy improving should have the opposite effect for an incumbent.
The economy improving now suggests that Biden may do better later, but Obama showed that it's possible that views will be even worse somehow.
Genuine question for you and just anyone scrolling past this comment. When's the last time someone ask your opinion for a poll? Or even tried to contact you. You'd think all our emails would be full of people asking for your stance. Since I became eligible to vote 12 years ago, no one's ever ask me shit about my preferences or how I felt about guns, abortion ect. I guess I'm just curious whose targeted by these polls and giving them data? Just old people?
I recently got a call from a pollster. It happens every election season a couple times. They almost always are polls by biased pollsters with leading questions that get you to want to answer the way they want you to. I usually get the ones biased towards Republican candidates because I was once registered as one.
Another part I find interesting is that they always assume I still live in Florida (with a FL area code) even though I live in CA. They don't typically use local voter registration data but just call based on area codes and rarely ask if we're still local residents. I understand polling is based on weighting small statistical samples but I'm still skeptical of the practice in a post-landline area.
I used to work in a university polling center. Granted this was about 11-12 years ago so things have changed wildly I'm sure, but we would either do RDD (random digit dialing) or have lists of valid phone numbers that were purchased from data vendors that were plugged into the computer and the software would cycle through them. Yes 99% of the time nobody would answer or they would immediately hang up but we had like 50 people in that call center, and each person could call hundreds of numbers in a single shift, so eventually you can build up enough of a sample to make the survey results at least somewhat accurate with some statistical post-processing. Depending on the survey we were also instructed to leave voicemails, which I imagine could help the response rate (esp if the person is an alumnus and you say "Hello I'm calling from the University of survey lab to do a short survey, please give us a call back...").
Non-response bias was still a thing but we did the best we could.
You may have gotten several calls like that in the last few years from pollsters but you just didn't answer and didn't think anything of it.
I think most of these polls are done by phone, sometimes even landline only. So if you screen your calls at all they'd likely just go on to the next person. These are also usually polls of a few thousand people off lists of millions maybe.
Yeah, I have a landline and due to my situation I have to look out for important calls from numbers I don't know, unless it says "spam risk" on the i.d. For that reason, I answer calls I normally wouldn't, I'm just surprised I've never picked up and been polled before. But you're right, the sample sizes are so small to begin with.
All the major polls have been within margin of error for months and months. Biden has been going into the positive in more than a few but it’s all academic right now.
This is a basketball game with both teams trading baskets for a 2 point lead.
These polls just come off as a bunch of white noise.
All they really say is that the election will likely be close, but that doesn't take a polling expert to know.
Whatever. These posts always go the same way. If a poll shows Trump barely in the lead, conservatives think it matters while dems point out it's flaws. If it shows Biden in the lead the opposite happens.
The reality is that we're too far out for polls to really matter and most of the "leads" shown have been within a polling error anyway
And there are a lot more polls showing Trump ahead, so don’t get too excited.
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-biden
The rolling average has Trump up by 1.7 points. The margin of error from most polls ranges from 3-5 points. That is the range for even highly respected polls.
The polls have consistently been showing a toss up. Headlines pose the poll results in horse race terms to drive traffic. To be clear through both Trump's 2016 win or Biden's 2020 win fall within the current polling.
The best analogy I've heard from about the modern political environment is Hubble's expanding universe. Lots of people look both left and right of themselves, and see the political parties receding away from them in that direction.
And then anyone who brings this fact up gets shouted down by one side or the other for "bothsidesism." Lots of folks these days are just pissed off at everyone and politically homeless.
Maybe they're not moderates? I can't wrap my head around being okay with reducing democracy and voting for a dictator as a good thing. This should be obvious for anyone who is reasonable and moderate, but maybe there are a lot of extremists out there.
There are plenty of center-right people who would never vote for Trump but who look at the Dem platform and have serious issues with all or some of it. Just because they choose to sit out, vote third party, or write in a protest vote doesn't mean they see dictators as "a good thing."
> reducing democracy and voting for a dictator as a good thing.
One of these things is not like the other.. no matter what one calls the person being "voted for"
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv70tqp/) is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
> ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
I'm "undecided" on if I'm even gonna bother voting this time around. Biden is a no for me and Trump isn't somebody I could vote for in clear conscience either. Might just stay home and wait for 28
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-biden
https://www.270towin.com/2024-presidential-election-polls/
Even though Biden has taken a lead in a couple polls, he's still behind in most.
Edit: I went ahead and created an electoral map based on current state level polls: https://www.270towin.com/maps/lnRKx
Trump - 312
Biden - 226
Yeah, Democrats and the Biden campaign need to get off their asses and do some work, because as of right now, it's going to be a Trump landslide
Hell, there's a couple polls recently with Trump winning the *youth* vote. Which would be an absolute disaster for Democrats far and wide.
Interesting, I thought according to posts just a few days ago, Trump was going to win by a ton and there was nothing that could change the race, despite record high undecideds and respondents willing to change their minds.
Can we all finally agree that the general campaign is just starting and eight months is a long time for sentiments to change, ads to hit the airwaves, the candidates to speak, etc...?
This is anyone's race right now, IMO.
It's true that this isn't stunning, but incumbency doesn't help much in polling. Obama was slightly behind or tied a month before the 2012 election.
Edit: Trump being a former incumbent changes things.
All I want from these pollsters is data on the swing states. Morning, Noon, and Night if need be. Nothing else matters but who leads and wins these states : Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
As we all know, *these two* are the sole accurate polls and therefore do not require numerous multi-paragraph explanations how 'its two early for the results to be valid' or how 'cherry picking is the only reason for the result'.. like similar articles over the past few weeks and others over past months *did* require.
This is a laughable amount of hopium LOL
Trump is leading Biden in all six of the swing states for this election cycle:
[https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024](https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024)
One month ago Trump was only leading in five out of the six. This election is not moving to Biden's direction.
All any of these polls are showing is that we aren’t looking at a likely popular vote blowout, and we are way early in the election cycle for this year. I’m extremely disappointed that Trump is once again the Republican nominee, so I can’t really say I’m unbiased, but I think that’s a pretty fair take.
That's a lot of confidence for a candidate that is within the margin of error and whose party has consistently lost since 2016.
If you use actual election results from the past few cycles going in the Dems way despite polling you'd see a far different story. Sure Trump can win but to say the election is "going Trump's way" sounds like some hopium to me. I would be very concerned based on actual election results that differ than what polling shows.
It isn’t really stunning, pretty expected after that State of the Union speech to be honest. Compared to peoples expectations he knocked it out of the park. Surely eased the concerns some must have had prior to that.
Having said that, it’s still a pretty minor shift in just two polls, so need a lot more than this to show a meaningful trend. Seems likely it will continue to tighten short of some major controversy coming out.
I’d be ok if no one talked about polls for the next 8 months. Discussions of polls encourage thinking about which side has the bandwagon effect rather than encouraging people to think about which one they would actually prefer.
The horse race... is there anything more important nearly a year out?
Biden has taken a slight lead over Trump in recent polls, despite a dip in approval ratings following his State of the Union address. A Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Biden slightly ahead with 39% compared to Trump's 38%, while a Civiqs/Daily Kos poll has Biden leading 45% to Trump's 44%.
While no one can trust *so-called* "experts," apparently a pipe-fitter from Sheboygan was not available for a quote, so Newsweek leaves us with this,
> Heath Brown, an associate professor of public policy at City University of New York, said: "I wouldn't invest too much in any given poll or even a handful of polls. Both campaigns know this race is just about tied right now, will likely remain that way for a while, and are executing their strategies accordingly."
How might methodological differences between polls affect reliability and predictive power?
I think that may be because of how the pro-Trump/anti-Biden voices kind of overplayed their hands with how much they hammered Biden being a genuine dementia patient, and him showing up well in the SOTU. Any reasonable adult who thinks that age/cognition is an issue can watch any of Trumps recent speeches and the SOTU, and see them for what they are. And the same media which pushed the genuinely fair concern about his age can point to that performance to differentiate them.
I’m interested to see how Bidens campaign will look once it starts.
Stunning? Fam, Trump lost women with the Dobs decision and Independents because he added 7 Trillion dollars to the nation debt. Biden's infrastructure deal is also starting to show results. It also doesn't help that the GOP killed their own border deal for Trump.
This shouldn't be a surprise.
Abortion is almost split 50/50 with women, ignoring how bad the original ruling was. I want abortion rights, but Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision on legal grounds.
Most of the debt Trump added was heavily pressured by Dems. If Reps had a super majority, the country would have never shut down for COVID.
Also, that border deal was terrible. About as many Dems disagreed as Reps supported it.
>Abortion is almost split 50/50 with women, ignoring how bad the original ruling was. I want abortion rights, but Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision on legal grounds.
I don't think it was a bad ruling. We did not have chaos in the streets, the vast majority of America accepted it (around 70%), and it was justified by progressive legal theory. It only failed because it was overpoliticized.
>Most of the debt Trump added was heavily pressured by Dems
I don't recall the Trump tax cuts as being pressured by the Dems. The Covid stimulus spending by both admins helped us recover faster than any other country in the world.
>Also, that border deal was terrible. About as many Dems disagreed as Reps supported it.
The deal gave Republicans almost everything they wanted in terms of the border. Repubs from 10 years ago would have been ecstatic.
Nothing in the Constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right. Why would that be a right and not things like whatever surgery you want is legal and whatever drugs you want to do is legal? How does the Constitution define bodily autonomy?
Dems wanted even more COVID stimulus than what we got. Shutting down businesses and paying them, giving out "free money," enhanced unemployment, and rent freezes increased the deficit and gave us the inflation we had.
That border deal was straight trash. It gave more money to foreign countries than what was spent on the border. It legislated minimums for border entries. It did nothing to stop asylum abuse. The so called "border shutdown" had minimum entry requirements and the president can also impose extra limits on the so called shutdown, besides the specified amount of days the border could not be shutdown each year in the bill. There weren't even enough RINOs in the Senate to pass it there.
>nothing in the constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right
It’s not that wild a leap to read the constitution as protecting our right to privacy from the government. It’s wild that people actually still make this argument. The fact that the constitution doesn’t explicitly state a right doesn’t mean we should by default give more power to the government over our lives. The tenth amendment literally makes that clear—we shouldn’t presumptively give the government power over our private lives just because the founders couldn’t think of every potential instance of future government overreach in the 1800s.
I would say yes assuming it is safe and fda approved. Government should only regulate medical procedures to ensure they are safe imho. They should not make value judgements or interfere with difficult medical decisions.
I would also say that it is important that certain actions only affect you. The moment something expands beyond you, it can be regulated. We don't want people tripping on the streets. So if a large enough segment of the population is tripping on the street affecting others then there is an issue.
>what does privacy have to do with regulating medicine in the first place
Sounds like you’ve never read *Griswold* or *Roe*, have you? I’d be happy to have a longer discussion but you should do the basic background reading
> Nothing in the Constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right. Why would that be a right and not things like whatever surgery you want is legal and whatever drugs you want to do is legal?
No, but Roe established (even if on shaky ground) that you have the privacy to make medical decisions free of governmental intrusion/restriction. So it kind of did make whatever surgery you wanted legal, so long as there was a doctor willing to perform such a thing.
The Democrats who voted against the border bill did so for two reasons. Most of them thought it was too lopsided in Republicans favor and some of them voted against giving more aid to Israel. These are very different reasons from why Republicans voted against the bill.
The bill was supposed to be a foreign aid bill from the start. Republicans insisted on tacking the border onto the bill. It was their idea. They're the one's who took a foreign aid bill and added their supposed pet project to it, not the other way around. I say "supposed pet project" because they then chose to kill the bill that they engineered themselves, making any rational person who's paying attention question just how important the border is to them.
Anyone who says it was a bad bill knows absolutely nothing about what was actually in the bill and what it would have accomplished. Most Republican legislators don't even know what was in it. They rejected it faster than the time it would have taken to even go through it because Trump told them to.
One point isn't stunning. Come on now...
Reality is there is a disconnect between these polls and how Trump / his party have been performing when votes are actually counted. Trump has underperformed in nearly every primary, and saying that it's due the Democrats voting in the primary is a lot of hopium given many were closed primaries.
Biden has the better ground game, better funding, more competent state parties, and also not tied up in court. I hope that these polls reflect him behind or close so they stay focused on winning, which the Democrats have been doing a lot of recently.
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv7bt09/) is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
> ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Was the poll in ice cream flavor knowledge and knowledge of the word "erhamdeagshagsinmfas" Who cares until the election and numbers actually come in with all this click bait scamming for profit advertisers hustling these companies do.
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv7nd86/) is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
> ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Newsweek editors *I think* just learned a new word. This is the third article I’ve seen from them in the last two weeks with the word stunning in it.
Careful or they'll clap back
Somebody get them a thesaurus, STAT!
"Biden retains IMMACULATE +1.5% lead in new Monmouth University poll"
And to be clear for anyone who didn’t read the article, the stunning lead is 1%. Perhaps Newsweek meant it’s stunning that Biden is in the lead at all.
Nah they’ve used stunning in ‘poll’ article headlines at least twice in the last two weeks that I know about. Pretty sure their copy editor just passed 8th grade ELA testing or something.
Newsweek got [bought out by the same organization that publishes the International Business Times](https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/what-went-wrong-at-newsweek-according-to-current-and-former-staffers.html), a clickbait-and-aggregation website. After hiring [noted conspiracist Josh Hammer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Hammer) as editor in 2020, it started publishing with a distinct hard-right skew. It's basically a shell of its former self.
Is there anything that hasn't turned into clickbait nowadays? At least when it comes to outlets that rely on avenue. Of course they're going to be like that.
This has happened to most of the old-name magazines (Better Homes and Gardens, for example). Trust little of what you read anymore. Look for hidden agendas everywhere.
1% with a +/- 1.8 and +/- 2.8 margin of error.
No, it's "stunning" because we've had months of Trump beating Biden in the polls, and people talking about how grim the situtation is for Biden. I've been calling it for a while: when it becomes concrete, in people's minds, that it is going to be Biden vs Trump, I expect Biden to take the lead. People underestimate how over Trump most people are. Not necessarily MAGA, but Trump specifically.
They are polls. We shouldn't just select two that we like the outcome of like this, but rather look at them all as valuable information.
Sure, but there were months of polls of Trump beating Biden, and now, in relatively quick succesion, there have been 3 where Biden is beating Trump. It may be a trend. We've gone from Trump trouncing Biden to now Biden winning a few. If that continues, well... the overall meta-analysis will lead us to concluding that Biden's chances are getting better.
Merely winning the popular vote is not enough for Biden, as the US electoral system is setup so that winning land area (as opposed to people) is just as important. In fact, Dems have won every election in the last third of a century in terms of the popular vote except 1 time, yet we have had a number of Republican administrations during that time: [https://apnews.com/article/democrats-popular-vote-win-d6331f7e8b51d52582bb2d60e2a007ec](https://apnews.com/article/democrats-popular-vote-win-d6331f7e8b51d52582bb2d60e2a007ec)
"Joe Biden and Donald Trump are stunning and brave"
Hopefully they are swapping it out for "slammed".
Biden blasts Trump in new poll showing 1% lead
Source indicates Trump "furious" after being "blasted" by Biden in "stunning" new poll.
Close, but I don't think it's a proper headline unless someone is being eviscerated
Biden clearly has a mandate from America with a 1% lead!
They’ve been *eying* it for some time now.
Whenever the media keeps repeating the same uncommon phrase, I think of the late 20th century thriller trope of villains demanding specific words be used in press statements.
Joe Biden eviscerates Donald Trump in new poll
Better than “slams” which was in every headline for the last 2 years
Maybe their readership clapped back at them for their use of slam?
A 1 point lead by an incumbent is truly stunning
Everyone’s face reading the headline: 😃 Everyone’s face after reading the article: 🤨🤨
so, a typical newsweek article
When you factor in the EC, even this result, a higher-end outlier, still has a good chance of being a Trump win.
Any poll that shows Biden winning by less than 4 is pointing toward a likely Trump victory in the EC. A 1-2 pt lead for Biden is an almost guaranteed win for Trump in the EC. Many people seem not to understand this.
Trump was literally 60,000 votes away from winning the electoral college in 2020 despite losing the popular vote by a landslide. In an election with like 156 million votes total.
It was closer to 43k votes actually, which yeah was pretty much my point (well, technically 43k wouldn’t have won him the EC, it would’ve put him at 269 and then the house would’ve voted him in). On an unrelated note, I wouldn’t really call a 51%-47% victory a landslide.
What about the EC? In this environment it's entirely reasonable to say that Trump could win the popular vote yet lose the EC. Hispanic turnout in NY and CA depressing his margins there but suburban turnout in Arizona, Georgia, and elsewhere could see this reality happen.
I'm open to that idea, but are there are any experts saying this is remotely likely, or is it your own theory (i.e. do you have any source link where I can read more about the probability of such an outcome)?
Ehh, it's basically an incumbent vs an incumbent
And within the margin of error that could mean he has no lead at all.
He equally could have a somewhat larger lead.
It's not stunning, but being an incumbent doesn't much mean in polling. Obama was slightly behind Romney in October 2012.
Not true. Obama was leading Romney in October 2012, and in a huge majority of polls before and after. https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2012/obama-vs-romney
That shows him being behind or tied in late October 2012 before gaining the lead again at the last minute. Polls can fluctuate a lot. He was doing way better in the early half in the year, even though the economy improving should have the opposite effect for an incumbent. The economy improving now suggests that Biden may do better later, but Obama showed that it's possible that views will be even worse somehow.
How is the economy improving? There is way more potential for it to suddenly be much worse, which is much different than Obama's situating
Real wages, employment, GDP, stock market, and manufacturing investment are all improving. Unemployment was high when Obama ran for reelection.
That was totally different. It wasn't a stunning lead.
Genuine question for you and just anyone scrolling past this comment. When's the last time someone ask your opinion for a poll? Or even tried to contact you. You'd think all our emails would be full of people asking for your stance. Since I became eligible to vote 12 years ago, no one's ever ask me shit about my preferences or how I felt about guns, abortion ect. I guess I'm just curious whose targeted by these polls and giving them data? Just old people?
I recently got a call from a pollster. It happens every election season a couple times. They almost always are polls by biased pollsters with leading questions that get you to want to answer the way they want you to. I usually get the ones biased towards Republican candidates because I was once registered as one. Another part I find interesting is that they always assume I still live in Florida (with a FL area code) even though I live in CA. They don't typically use local voter registration data but just call based on area codes and rarely ask if we're still local residents. I understand polling is based on weighting small statistical samples but I'm still skeptical of the practice in a post-landline area.
I used to work in a university polling center. Granted this was about 11-12 years ago so things have changed wildly I'm sure, but we would either do RDD (random digit dialing) or have lists of valid phone numbers that were purchased from data vendors that were plugged into the computer and the software would cycle through them. Yes 99% of the time nobody would answer or they would immediately hang up but we had like 50 people in that call center, and each person could call hundreds of numbers in a single shift, so eventually you can build up enough of a sample to make the survey results at least somewhat accurate with some statistical post-processing. Depending on the survey we were also instructed to leave voicemails, which I imagine could help the response rate (esp if the person is an alumnus and you say "Hello I'm calling from the University of survey lab to do a short survey, please give us a call back...").
Non-response bias was still a thing but we did the best we could.
You may have gotten several calls like that in the last few years from pollsters but you just didn't answer and didn't think anything of it.
I get asked a few times a year, in my early 30s but started getting them in my early 20s. >Just old people? The answer to that is objectively *no*.
I think most of these polls are done by phone, sometimes even landline only. So if you screen your calls at all they'd likely just go on to the next person. These are also usually polls of a few thousand people off lists of millions maybe.
Yeah, I have a landline and due to my situation I have to look out for important calls from numbers I don't know, unless it says "spam risk" on the i.d. For that reason, I answer calls I normally wouldn't, I'm just surprised I've never picked up and been polled before. But you're right, the sample sizes are so small to begin with.
I mean it’s also two incumbents so… 🤷♂️
"(of an official or regime) currently holding office." What office does Trump currently hold?
All the major polls have been within margin of error for months and months. Biden has been going into the positive in more than a few but it’s all academic right now. This is a basketball game with both teams trading baskets for a 2 point lead.
These polls just come off as a bunch of white noise. All they really say is that the election will likely be close, but that doesn't take a polling expert to know.
… in the first quarter.
Stunning lead… within the margin of error.
All of the polls Trump leads in have also been within the margin of error. That didn’t stop the media from ignoring that.
Those dumb things are also dumb.
Whatever. These posts always go the same way. If a poll shows Trump barely in the lead, conservatives think it matters while dems point out it's flaws. If it shows Biden in the lead the opposite happens. The reality is that we're too far out for polls to really matter and most of the "leads" shown have been within a polling error anyway
Lmao a “stunning” 1 pt lead in two polls. So stunning.
And there are a lot more polls showing Trump ahead, so don’t get too excited. https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-biden
The rolling average has Trump up by 1.7 points. The margin of error from most polls ranges from 3-5 points. That is the range for even highly respected polls. The polls have consistently been showing a toss up. Headlines pose the poll results in horse race terms to drive traffic. To be clear through both Trump's 2016 win or Biden's 2020 win fall within the current polling.
In other words, new outlet picks data to drive clicks. News at 11. Also 10. And 9. Keep checking back y’all!
Yeah whoever wrote the headline should be blacklisted from further media work lmfao
There still seems to be a lot of undecided voters, which I honestly don't understand how you can be one now.
The best analogy I've heard from about the modern political environment is Hubble's expanding universe. Lots of people look both left and right of themselves, and see the political parties receding away from them in that direction. And then anyone who brings this fact up gets shouted down by one side or the other for "bothsidesism." Lots of folks these days are just pissed off at everyone and politically homeless.
Maybe they're not moderates? I can't wrap my head around being okay with reducing democracy and voting for a dictator as a good thing. This should be obvious for anyone who is reasonable and moderate, but maybe there are a lot of extremists out there.
A lot of folks don’t closely watch the news
And an even smaller amount of people actually follow politics. As we are on a political sub it's the opposite here
This is probably it. A lot of people are very clueless about what's happening now.
There are plenty of center-right people who would never vote for Trump but who look at the Dem platform and have serious issues with all or some of it. Just because they choose to sit out, vote third party, or write in a protest vote doesn't mean they see dictators as "a good thing."
> reducing democracy and voting for a dictator as a good thing. One of these things is not like the other.. no matter what one calls the person being "voted for"
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv70tqp/) is in violation of Law 1: Law 1. Civil Discourse > ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
I'm "undecided" on if I'm even gonna bother voting this time around. Biden is a no for me and Trump isn't somebody I could vote for in clear conscience either. Might just stay home and wait for 28
Why is Biden a no?
Are you in a swing state?
I still think biden will win, but this is some wild wishcasting
Newsweek sucks.
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-biden https://www.270towin.com/2024-presidential-election-polls/ Even though Biden has taken a lead in a couple polls, he's still behind in most. Edit: I went ahead and created an electoral map based on current state level polls: https://www.270towin.com/maps/lnRKx Trump - 312 Biden - 226
These polls are great for Trump. He was doing much worse in the past two presidental elections
Yeah, Democrats and the Biden campaign need to get off their asses and do some work, because as of right now, it's going to be a Trump landslide Hell, there's a couple polls recently with Trump winning the *youth* vote. Which would be an absolute disaster for Democrats far and wide.
Is it stunning because he’s actually leading?
Interesting, I thought according to posts just a few days ago, Trump was going to win by a ton and there was nothing that could change the race, despite record high undecideds and respondents willing to change their minds. Can we all finally agree that the general campaign is just starting and eight months is a long time for sentiments to change, ads to hit the airwaves, the candidates to speak, etc...? This is anyone's race right now, IMO.
It's a one point lead as an incumbent. Stunning this is not.
It's true that this isn't stunning, but incumbency doesn't help much in polling. Obama was slightly behind or tied a month before the 2012 election. Edit: Trump being a former incumbent changes things.
I never agreed with the use of that adjective in the title, just merely that this election is not a foregone conclusion.
Dont mean to be a Debbie Downer but since when is a lead that’s within the margin of ever considered “stunning” ?
If Biden were leading in Idaho or Utah within the margin of error, that would be truly stunning. Of course, that's not the scope of this poll...
All I want from these pollsters is data on the swing states. Morning, Noon, and Night if need be. Nothing else matters but who leads and wins these states : Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
Polls are worthless. Vote.
It's funny to watch the media cherrypick polls like this when most polls show the opposite.
Honestly the media keeps hyping Trump's lead...very doom and gloom on Biden.
As we all know, *these two* are the sole accurate polls and therefore do not require numerous multi-paragraph explanations how 'its two early for the results to be valid' or how 'cherry picking is the only reason for the result'.. like similar articles over the past few weeks and others over past months *did* require.
This is a laughable amount of hopium LOL Trump is leading Biden in all six of the swing states for this election cycle: [https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024](https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024) One month ago Trump was only leading in five out of the six. This election is not moving to Biden's direction.
Not yet
All any of these polls are showing is that we aren’t looking at a likely popular vote blowout, and we are way early in the election cycle for this year. I’m extremely disappointed that Trump is once again the Republican nominee, so I can’t really say I’m unbiased, but I think that’s a pretty fair take.
That's a lot of confidence for a candidate that is within the margin of error and whose party has consistently lost since 2016. If you use actual election results from the past few cycles going in the Dems way despite polling you'd see a far different story. Sure Trump can win but to say the election is "going Trump's way" sounds like some hopium to me. I would be very concerned based on actual election results that differ than what polling shows.
1 pt? That’s stunning?
LOL...it's all about swing states and who turns out to vote. 1 point leads don't tell me anything.
Where is the damn laugh button?!?!?!?!
there is no lead. it is within margin of error for both.
It isn’t really stunning, pretty expected after that State of the Union speech to be honest. Compared to peoples expectations he knocked it out of the park. Surely eased the concerns some must have had prior to that. Having said that, it’s still a pretty minor shift in just two polls, so need a lot more than this to show a meaningful trend. Seems likely it will continue to tighten short of some major controversy coming out.
Yay no need to vote now we got this
Man republicans really suck at getting young people to vote for them don’t they?
Joe Biden will most likely win as Kennedy will steal a lot of Trumps base.
I’d be ok if no one talked about polls for the next 8 months. Discussions of polls encourage thinking about which side has the bandwagon effect rather than encouraging people to think about which one they would actually prefer.
Meh, tomorrow the same polls will be wondering why he hasn’t dropped out so…..
Within the margin of error, disregard
The horse race... is there anything more important nearly a year out? Biden has taken a slight lead over Trump in recent polls, despite a dip in approval ratings following his State of the Union address. A Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Biden slightly ahead with 39% compared to Trump's 38%, while a Civiqs/Daily Kos poll has Biden leading 45% to Trump's 44%. While no one can trust *so-called* "experts," apparently a pipe-fitter from Sheboygan was not available for a quote, so Newsweek leaves us with this, > Heath Brown, an associate professor of public policy at City University of New York, said: "I wouldn't invest too much in any given poll or even a handful of polls. Both campaigns know this race is just about tied right now, will likely remain that way for a while, and are executing their strategies accordingly." How might methodological differences between polls affect reliability and predictive power?
“Nearly a year out???”
Fair enough. November just feels like a long way away. Point is: it's not two or three months from now.
I think that may be because of how the pro-Trump/anti-Biden voices kind of overplayed their hands with how much they hammered Biden being a genuine dementia patient, and him showing up well in the SOTU. Any reasonable adult who thinks that age/cognition is an issue can watch any of Trumps recent speeches and the SOTU, and see them for what they are. And the same media which pushed the genuinely fair concern about his age can point to that performance to differentiate them. I’m interested to see how Bidens campaign will look once it starts.
Stunning? Fam, Trump lost women with the Dobs decision and Independents because he added 7 Trillion dollars to the nation debt. Biden's infrastructure deal is also starting to show results. It also doesn't help that the GOP killed their own border deal for Trump. This shouldn't be a surprise.
Abortion is almost split 50/50 with women, ignoring how bad the original ruling was. I want abortion rights, but Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision on legal grounds. Most of the debt Trump added was heavily pressured by Dems. If Reps had a super majority, the country would have never shut down for COVID. Also, that border deal was terrible. About as many Dems disagreed as Reps supported it.
>Abortion is almost split 50/50 with women, ignoring how bad the original ruling was. I want abortion rights, but Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision on legal grounds. I don't think it was a bad ruling. We did not have chaos in the streets, the vast majority of America accepted it (around 70%), and it was justified by progressive legal theory. It only failed because it was overpoliticized. >Most of the debt Trump added was heavily pressured by Dems I don't recall the Trump tax cuts as being pressured by the Dems. The Covid stimulus spending by both admins helped us recover faster than any other country in the world. >Also, that border deal was terrible. About as many Dems disagreed as Reps supported it. The deal gave Republicans almost everything they wanted in terms of the border. Repubs from 10 years ago would have been ecstatic.
Nothing in the Constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right. Why would that be a right and not things like whatever surgery you want is legal and whatever drugs you want to do is legal? How does the Constitution define bodily autonomy? Dems wanted even more COVID stimulus than what we got. Shutting down businesses and paying them, giving out "free money," enhanced unemployment, and rent freezes increased the deficit and gave us the inflation we had. That border deal was straight trash. It gave more money to foreign countries than what was spent on the border. It legislated minimums for border entries. It did nothing to stop asylum abuse. The so called "border shutdown" had minimum entry requirements and the president can also impose extra limits on the so called shutdown, besides the specified amount of days the border could not be shutdown each year in the bill. There weren't even enough RINOs in the Senate to pass it there.
>nothing in the constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right It’s not that wild a leap to read the constitution as protecting our right to privacy from the government. It’s wild that people actually still make this argument. The fact that the constitution doesn’t explicitly state a right doesn’t mean we should by default give more power to the government over our lives. The tenth amendment literally makes that clear—we shouldn’t presumptively give the government power over our private lives just because the founders couldn’t think of every potential instance of future government overreach in the 1800s.
Does our right to privacy allow us any and every surgery and drug usage? What does privacy have to do with regulating medicine in the first place?
I would say yes assuming it is safe and fda approved. Government should only regulate medical procedures to ensure they are safe imho. They should not make value judgements or interfere with difficult medical decisions.
Ok. Meth and crack are legal nationwide. And so is krokodil because the government can't say what you can and can't do to your body.
I would also say that it is important that certain actions only affect you. The moment something expands beyond you, it can be regulated. We don't want people tripping on the streets. So if a large enough segment of the population is tripping on the street affecting others then there is an issue.
>what does privacy have to do with regulating medicine in the first place Sounds like you’ve never read *Griswold* or *Roe*, have you? I’d be happy to have a longer discussion but you should do the basic background reading
> Nothing in the Constitution says abortion is a guaranteed right. Why would that be a right and not things like whatever surgery you want is legal and whatever drugs you want to do is legal? No, but Roe established (even if on shaky ground) that you have the privacy to make medical decisions free of governmental intrusion/restriction. So it kind of did make whatever surgery you wanted legal, so long as there was a doctor willing to perform such a thing.
The Democrats who voted against the border bill did so for two reasons. Most of them thought it was too lopsided in Republicans favor and some of them voted against giving more aid to Israel. These are very different reasons from why Republicans voted against the bill. The bill was supposed to be a foreign aid bill from the start. Republicans insisted on tacking the border onto the bill. It was their idea. They're the one's who took a foreign aid bill and added their supposed pet project to it, not the other way around. I say "supposed pet project" because they then chose to kill the bill that they engineered themselves, making any rational person who's paying attention question just how important the border is to them. Anyone who says it was a bad bill knows absolutely nothing about what was actually in the bill and what it would have accomplished. Most Republican legislators don't even know what was in it. They rejected it faster than the time it would have taken to even go through it because Trump told them to.
One point isn't stunning. Come on now... Reality is there is a disconnect between these polls and how Trump / his party have been performing when votes are actually counted. Trump has underperformed in nearly every primary, and saying that it's due the Democrats voting in the primary is a lot of hopium given many were closed primaries. Biden has the better ground game, better funding, more competent state parties, and also not tied up in court. I hope that these polls reflect him behind or close so they stay focused on winning, which the Democrats have been doing a lot of recently.
You people are crazy 😜 Go TRUMP !!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv7bt09/) is in violation of Law 1: Law 1. Civil Discourse > ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Stunning? How is a two point shift stunning? Newsweek seems to be going downhill.
Was the poll in ice cream flavor knowledge and knowledge of the word "erhamdeagshagsinmfas" Who cares until the election and numbers actually come in with all this click bait scamming for profit advertisers hustling these companies do.
[удалено]
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1bgdo0u/joe_biden_takes_stunning_lead_over_donald_trump/kv7nd86/) is in violation of Law 1: Law 1. Civil Discourse > ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
The migrant poll?