General Election 2024 Biden vs Trump (3 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

As we head toward the summer and the National Party Conventions, it might be handy to have a thread focused on the upcoming matchup of current President Biden vs Former President Trump.
As of April 28,2024 , CNN's poll shows Trump leading. Yet polls are not always accurate and they are constantly changing.
Feel free to use this thread for all things relating to Biden vs Trump.
*
*

CNN Poll: Trump maintains lead over Biden in 2024 matchup as views on their presidencies diverge

Donald Trump continues to hold an advantage over President Joe Biden as the campaign – and Trump’s criminal trial – move forward, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. And in the coming rematch, opinions about the first term of each man vying for a second four years in the White House...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Incumbent]

The trend in the polls for Biden is up, not down. Each poll is of limited significance, but at least get the trend correctly identified. He took a dip immediately after the debate in the few polls which came out, but has pulled even with Trump again in the average of polls.

He has pulled ahead in 2 swing states, MI and WI, if I am remembering correctly. All swing states are in the margin of error, BTW, this is the same as before the debate.

If you are seeing differently, I’d be interested to see it.

I think the part that has to be acknowledged is if Biden has another startling moment that can be attributed to age, his campaign very well might not survive.

That’s the part that worries me. I think he can still preside effectively in office, but he might not be able to overcome the damaging optics as a candidate if he stumbles badly enough again. Trump is teflon in that regard for reasons that make no sense to me.

I want to keep believing enough voters won’t let Trump return to the White House, under any circumstances, but that’s an enormous gamble.

Which doesn’t change my opinion that a candidate replacement could be even riskier. That’s the position I see us in.

 

[MT15]

I definitely agree here. There is risk either way. I judge less risk to stay the course. We may never know which way is the correct way, though.

 

[Lapaz]

I think the part that has to be acknowledged is if Biden has another startling moment that can be attributed to age, his campaign very well might not survive.

That’s the part that worries me. I think he can still preside effectively in office, but he might not be able to overcome the damaging optics as a candidate if he stumbles badly enough again. Trump is teflon in that regard for reasons that make no sense to me.

I want to keep believing enough voters won’t let Trump return to the White House, under any circumstances, but that’s an enormous gamble.

Which doesn’t change my opinion that a candidate replacement could be even riskier. That’s the position I see us in.

The hits keep coming. In the interview with Step, he couldn’t remember if he had watched the debate. I heard him speaking this morning, and a couple of times he said some incoherent things. I know Trump does it too, but it doesn’t affect him.

I’m starting to think the 25th amendment may have to be used which would promote Harris and propel her to victory.

 

[LA - L.A.]

You are citing Bloomberg polling which is not highly rated.

Emerson came out with polling today showing Biden down in every single background state.

Dig though every background state, and you will see that Bloomberg is an anomaly.

Emmerson, Bloomberg and all other polls have been unreliable since 2022, no matter how highly rated or considered they are.

I don't rely on polls to form an opinion, because they aren't reliable.

But since you rely on polls so heavily in forming and supporting your opinions, let me point out:

Do other Democrats actually poll better against Trump than Biden?

What the data says, and what it means.

www.vox.com

And after a dismal debate performance by President Joe Biden last week, is it possible that there is another Democrat better equipped to beat Trump than the sitting president? Polling gives us one way to answer that question. But it’s not as simple as looking at the topline numbers and deciding that it’s time to dump Biden.

“We won’t know for two or three weeks how all of this bakes into the numbers, and now we have the immunity case stacked on top of it, so it’s possible that we’re not ever going to really know how this one event played out,” she told me.

Next, we are dealing in hypotheticals. Any talk about how a Biden alternative would fare against Trump is purely imaginary at this point: we don’t really know how well any of these candidates would do among specific kinds of voters or in different states or regions. How would Whitmer do in the Sun Belt? How would Newsom do in the Midwest? Those questions are crucial to winning the Electoral College, and the polls we have don’t come close to answering them.

In short, we don’t know much. These are all hypotheticals we’re trying to game out from a very limited set of data. And we’re likely to get a bunch more data as we move further from the debate. As that happens, Jackson urged a word of caution. “I think we're in a position where there's so much going on that we haven't seen before that we should treat polling skeptically and as what it is: a snapshot of what opinion looks like in the moment that could change.”

 

[Taurus]

I guess we're going to start labeling folks DINOs next.

See: Manchin, Joe

 

[SamAndreas]

You see what you want to see. Keep your blinders on for all I care.

While saying that I wanted Biden to step down, I've also said MULTIPLE TIMES that I was voting for him if he didn't. But you keep your blinders on.

No one, not one, in other words ZERO Democrat that has asked Biden to step aside have said they weren't voting for Biden. They've all said the same thing that I've said MULTIPLE TIMES.

No one is subverting anything because Biden isn't being forced to do anything. And as valid as the primary is, it means nothing when it is the incumbent and bunch of nobodies. BTW, I voted for Biden in the primary as well. I wonder what the numbers would look like if folks were allowed to change their minds. But guess what, nothing is being taken away because Biden is being asked to step away.

But you do you and keep your blinders on. But don't take them off if Trump is elected in November. You keep them on.

I guess we're going to start labeling folks DINOs next.

I don't mind if someone calls me a DINO. I probably am part dinosaure. I'm certainly part dragon.

My concern is you are degrading him before the election, don't be a fool, don't do that. That's not going to help him.

Why must you do that? Is it something you got stuck down in your craw?

 

[LA - L.A.]

The media has pointed these things out for years. It doesn’t matter to the fence sitters.

What about the flagpole sittas? I kid.

Sincerely, I don't there's as many fence sitters as polls show there is. We know pollsters have been making adjusts to their polls to make them more inline with accepted assumptions about polling outcomes.

In simplified words, if a polling result is way out of whack with typical historical results, they assume there's a flaw in their results and do some mathematical alchemy to come up with a formula that tells them what adjustments to make in the out of whack polling results. Pollsters don't conduct pure math or pure science.

I don't think there are many undecided voters and I think pollsters are getting results that confirm that. I think that's one of the results they adjust higher than the results they get, because their past experiences and assumptions tell them it has to be an error.

It's anecdotal and not proof of anything, but this this first, out of 8 or so presidential elections, time that everyone I talked to has already definitively made up their minds about who they are voting for. That includes friends, family, co-workers, and a whole bunch of casual acquaintances. That's another thing that is very different. Almost everyone is talking about the election. In the past, most people weren't so quick and open in talking about who they were going to vote for.

Everyone seems to be really invested and concerned about this election and almost everyone seems to have already made up their minds.

No doubt their are some undecideds, but I don't think there's enough of them at this point to swing the election one way or another in any state.

What's going to determine this election is the voter turnout of women and pro-women's rights men. If they turn out to vote like they have in every election since 2020. Biden is winning this election.

It seems that to most voters this election isn't Biden vs Trump, it's democracy and decency vs. fascism and fraud. If that's the case, the majority of Americans are going to vote for democracy and decency over Trump, just like they did in 2020 which was before Trump try to pull off a coup. That lost Trump votes, it did not gain him any and he keeps doing stuff that loses him votes.

 

[SamAndreas]

The media has pointed these things out for years. It doesn’t matter to the fence sitters. Everyone knows what Trump is about. What is swaying the few undecideds is the belief that Biden is incapable of serving another term. You can criticize the electorate’s stupidity, but it’s the electorate we have. I’m convinced that Biden is one of the few Democrats that would lose to that traitorous, draft dodging, blasphemous, criminal, immoral, self-interested fool.

I don't care what you fear, it still will be Biden.

Why don't you help him? You're not helping him now. There is no way to describe your position as helpful.

 

[MT15]

Meanwhile Trump world do this to the US Treasury

 

[Lapaz]

I don't mind if someone calls me a DINO. I probably am part dinosaure. I'm certainly part dragon.

My concern is you are degrading him before the election, don't be a fool, don't do that. That's not going to help him.

Why must you do that? Is it something you got stuck down in your craw?

I think he meant that you would call him a DINO. I think the fools are those that refuse to see the evidence before them. Fools denied tobacco dangers. They are denying climate change. They are now denying that Biden is losing badly. We're not politicians that have to lie to support the party line, since they believe it's their only option. It may be too late, but denying the obvious is foolish.

 

[Lapaz]

I don't care what you fear, it still will be Biden.

Why don't you help him? You're not helping him now. There is no way to describe your position as helpful.

I contribute and will vote for the democrat, but I'm helping far more than any person that thinks the fence sitters are going to be convinced by denying the obvious. People see through the lies. It would be more convincing to admit that Biden has declined, and may not survive another term, but we have a capable VP that will finish the term, and that person won't destroy democracy.

 

[Lapaz]

What about the flagpole sittas? I kid.

Sincerely, I don't there's as many fence sitters as polls show there is. We know pollsters have been making adjusts to their polls to make them more inline with accepted assumptions about polling outcomes.

In simplified words, if a polling result is way out of whack with typical historical results, they assume there's a flaw in their results and do some mathematical alchemy to come up with a formula that tells them what adjustments to make in the out of whack polling results. Pollsters don't conduct pure math or pure science.

I don't think there are many undecided voters and I think pollsters are getting results that confirm that. I think that's one of the results they adjust higher than the results they get, because their past experiences and assumptions tell them it has to be an error.

It's anecdotal and not proof of anything, but this this first, out of 8 or so presidential elections, time that everyone I talked to has already definitively made up their minds about who they are voting for. That includes friends, family, co-workers, and a whole bunch of casual acquaintances. That's another thing that is very different. Almost everyone is talking about the election. In the past, most people weren't so quick and open in talking about who they were going to vote for.

Everyone seems to be really invested and concerned about this election and almost everyone seems to have already made up their minds.

No doubt their are some undecideds, but I don't think there's enough of them at this point to swing the election one way or another in any state.

What's going to determine this election is the voter turnout of women and pro-women's rights men. If they turn out to vote like they have in every election since 2020. Biden is winning this election.

It seems that to most voters this election isn't Biden vs Trump, it's democracy and decency vs. fascism and fraud. If that's the case, the majority of Americans are going to vote for democracy and decency over Trump, just like they did in 2020 which was before Trump try to pull off a coup. That lost Trump votes, it did not gain him any and he keeps doing stuff that loses him votes.

That is wishful thinking. CNN had a panel of sitters after the debate, and most of them moved away from Biden afterwards. Where is the contrary evidence, besides the belief that professionals whose careers depend on their accuracy are performing alchemy to alter the results? Are we to believe that it is a conspiracy of most pollsters? Democrats are always admonishing people about believing in conspiracies, but that is what we would have to believe.

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[SFIDC3]

The reason I attack the media is exactly that. Trump *still* can't pull together a coherent speech. Everything out of his mouth during the debate was a lie. Some of them just comically insane yet The Media isn't saying diddly about it.

Yup.....I can completely understand the media criticizing Biden's performance, he wasn't sharp, he is old, he was under the weather.....

I can disagree with some it, but I understand it.....

But the fact that they don't criticize Trump nearly to the same extent when all he did was constantly lie and never really answered any of the questions asked? Inexcusable and reeks of just getting dollars and clicks, not legitimate journalism....at all....

 

[LA - L.A.]

That is wishful thinking.

It's hard to take this analysis seriously when it comes from someone doing some serious next level wishcasting.

CNN had a panel of sitters after the debate, and most of them moved away from Biden afterwards.

People really don't know how the TV sausage is made. CNN didn't randomly pick some people at random, point a camera at them, and ask them questions without a clue as to what they would say. That's not how anyone in TV operates, not even the news. Those segments cost money to produce and ain't throwing their money away on a segment they can't or don't want to go to air with. So, they make sure they get something they want to air for the money they spent.

CNN decided ahead of time they were going to do that segment. They put out a casting call looking for specific types of people with specific opinions. They decided the questions they were going to ask and the answers they wanted to get. Then they asked each person in the large pool of people who responded to the casting call the questions they were going to ask in the segment. Then they chose the people who fit the demographic, biographical and personality types they wanted who also answered the questions how they wanted them to answer. Then they shot the segment.

That's how it works and it's hard to believe, until you see it for yourself or hear it from someone else who has seen it. I've both seen it myself and heard it from others. There's a reason that no one talked about news "narratives" until after cable network news got going. To get an audience and survive, they realized they couldn't just report the news, instead they had to spin stories, "narratives," out of the news. That was the beginning of the death of journalism and news.

Where is the contrary evidence, besides the belief that professionals whose careers depend on their accuracy are performing alchemy to alter the results?

Where's the evidence they are not? Polls are not evidence. Anyone that thinks polls are evidence, doesn't truly understand polls and how to use them. Pollsters careers are not based are not dependent on them being accurate, otherwise they'd all be unemployed since 2022. The pollsters themselves tell us the judgement call corrections that make based on formulas they create.

The margin of error that posters tell us about comes from the fact that if they run the same poll multiple times, they get different results each time. Someone who's taken statistic classes can explain it better than I can.

Are we to believe that it is a conspiracy of most pollsters?

You're the only one that thought and said conspiracy. Nothing I said requires a conspiracy and there isn't a conspiracy. Pollsters admit they are struggling to find new polling methods that are reliable. They're old methods of polling aren't reliable anymore. They aren't conspiring, they are fighting for survival. One of the things they are all doing is trying to stay in the same range of results, because none of them want to be considered the most inaccurate. They'd all rather be equally inaccurate, so they can keep selling their services.

Democrats are always admonishing people from believing in conspiracies, but that is what we would have to believe.

First off, I'm not a Democrat, Republican or any other party member. I belong to the me party and it's a tribe of one. Second, nothing I said requires any conspiracy to believe.

You're the same cat that said you believe the speculations and rumors about what people think over the what the person actually tells you they think and you're accusing what I'm saying as being conspiracy?

 

[Lapaz]

It's hard to take this analysis seriously when it comes from someone doing some serious next level wishcasting.


People really don't know how the TV sausage is made. CNN didn't randomly pick some people at random, point a camera at them, and ask them questions without a clue as to what they would say. That's not how anyone in TV operates, not even the news. Those segments cost money to produce and ain't throwing their money away on a segment they can't or don't want to go to air with. So, they make sure they get something they want to air for the money they spent.

CNN decided ahead of time they were going to do that segment. They put out a casting call looking for specific types of people with specific opinions. They decided the questions they were going to ask and the answers they wanted to get. Then they asked each person in the large pool of people who responded to the casting call the questions they were going to ask in the segment. Then they chose the people who fit the demographic, biographical and personality types they wanted who also answered the questions how they wanted them to answer. Then they shot the segment.

That's how it works and it's hard to believe, until you see it for yourself or hear it from someone else who has seen it. I've both seen it myself and heard it from others. There's a reason that no one talked about news "narratives" until after cable network news got going. To get an audience and survive, they realized they couldn't just report the news, instead they had to spin stories, "narratives," out of the news. That was the beginning of the death of journalism and news.


Where's the evidence they are not? Polls are not evidence. Anyone that thinks polls are evidence, doesn't truly understand polls and how to use them. Pollsters careers are not based are not dependent on them being accurate, otherwise they'd all be unemployed since 2022. The pollsters themselves tell us the judgement call corrections that make based on formulas they create.

The margin of error that posters tell us about comes from the fact that if they run the same poll multiple times, they get different results each time. Someone who's taken statistic classes can explain it better than I can.


You're the only one that thought and said conspiracy. Nothing I said requires a conspiracy and there isn't a conspiracy. Pollsters admit they are struggling to find new polling methods that are reliable. They're old methods of polling aren't reliable anymore. They aren't conspiring, they are fighting for survival. One of the things they are all doing is trying to stay in the same range of results, because none of them want to be considered the most inaccurate. They'd all rather be equally inaccurate, so they can keep selling their services.


First off, I'm not a Democrat, Republican or any other party member. I belong to the me party and it's a tribe of one. Second, nothing I said requires any conspiracy to believe.

You're the same cat that said you believe the speculations and rumors about what people think over the what the person actually tells you they think and you're accusing what I'm saying as being conspiracy?

Polls are evidence, even if they aren't perfect. Our observations are evidence. The debate was evidence. If you believe all pollsters are applying alchemy equally to produce the same result, then you believe in a conspiracy. Also, I guess you also believe CNN is part of that conspiracy to help Trump or hurt Biden.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Polls are evidence, even if they aren't perfect.

They aren't definitive or conclusive evidence. They are only a snapshot of what probable percentage of people might probably being thinking right at the moment the poll was conducted. They tell us nothing about future probability and they aren't designed to tell us about future probability.

People who use them for that don't understand what polls are useful for and what they are not.

Our observations are evidence.

Yes and as I told you my observations for this election show that not very many people seem to be fence sitters or undecided.

The debate was evidence.

The debate was only evidence of Biden having a bad debate.

If you believe all pollsters are applying alchemy equally to produce the same result, then you believe in a conspiracy.

Just because you can only see it as conspiracy, doesn't make it conspiracy. I've explained why it's not. You have not explained why it has to be conspiracy. You're just saying it is.

Also, I guess you also believe CNN is part of that conspiracy to help Trump or hurt Biden.

Nope. Never thought or said any such thing. You're the only one of us that his hung up on conspiracies.

The only thing CNN is doing is trying to save their arses by increasing their viewership to increase their revenues. The result is that they are hurting Biden and helping Trump, but that's not the intention, that's just the side effects of their desperation to increase their revenues. They are trying to draw in more conservative viewers, because that's the only place for them to grow their audience. They've taken a right turn to do that, but it's not politically motivated. It's profit motivated.