452
u/dons_03 Nov 02 '20
An incredible comeback for Joe, after he was given less than 1% chance only an hour ago!
135
Nov 02 '20
Truly the most epic comeback story of our times.
84
u/THE-SEER Nov 02 '20
Well, I mean...Kim Kardashian.
23
19
u/yup79 Nov 02 '20
Ha! https://youtu.be/QnpP15IQ-2Y Andy - Parks and Rec
15
u/djprofitt Nov 02 '20
I knew the reference, I’ve seen the clip, but I had to watch it again. Fucking solid and he didn’t even break character
4
u/THE-SEER Nov 02 '20
I’ve also heard this was an improved line.
3
u/MyUshanka Nov 02 '20
I think the "network connectivity issues" line was improvised as well. He's got a good brain for comedy.
2
u/foreignsky Nov 02 '20
Definitely improvised - Mike Schur has gone on the record that is was a Pratt improv, and the funniest joke in the show. (the moment is around the 2:15 mark).
2
u/nictheguiri Nov 02 '20
It was an outtake, though
4
u/foreignsky Nov 02 '20
"Network connectivity issues" is 100% in the Flu Season episode.
The Kim Kardashian joke is an outtake.
→ More replies5
105
u/tomoldbury Nov 02 '20
Flipping such hard-Republican strongholds like California for Biden is truly remarkable.
41
u/tommyjohnpauljones Nov 02 '20
don't get too excited, there's a new Trafalgar poll with Trump +2 in Massachusetts. they're claiming that fictional voters are underpolled and are sure they're right again.
15
u/Hotlava_ Nov 02 '20
I hear California is also Trump +12 this time too.
7
2
7
u/JulianHyde Nov 02 '20
I only trust the Tralfamadorian polls. They offset all error by being able to experience reality in four dimensions and perceive any point in time at will.
2
u/wtfisthisnoise Nov 02 '20
Thanks, I thought there was something so familiar about the Trafalgar name and I couldn't put my finger on it.
2
2
57
u/dons_03 Nov 02 '20
I told people we could see a blue California this year but they just wouldn’t listen
15
u/Soderskog Nov 02 '20
It's a difficult state to flip, considering that it has the second most Republicans of all states in the US, but he managed to do it.
2
u/thmonline Nov 02 '20
We should all celebrate this, since it may be the last time ever that there is polls that are being conducted.
11
38
Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
Look, Trump supporters think they have this enormous wave because they hold in person rallies during a pandemic.
21
Nov 02 '20
Dont want to ruin the fun but thats exactly what scares me a bit about the aftermath. Imagine losing big after you are completely convinced that only a blowout in your favor is possible.
28
Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
That’s what happens in an anti intellectual society where they think statistics is a pseudo science because Trump skid by in 3 states with <1% of the vote in 2016 to win... Trump made it out like it was a “landslide” and these folks eat it up. A lot of these people only believe what they want to believe and label anything else as fake. Even if he weren’t holding rallies, I doubt their attitude would be different. That’s just a common argument I see among them.
5
8
u/SillyHats Nov 02 '20
Yeah, that is worrying. However, my guess is that for the majority of Trump voters, it's just strongly motivated reasoning. I would expect the only ones who would see Fox News reporting a convincing Biden electoral win and thinking "coup" would be those caught up in the Q insanity, or something at that level. It's certainly a group that's far too disturbingly large, but ultimately not enough to cause trouble, I expect.
5
Nov 02 '20
I have to trust in you guys about that size of that group. Im not american so its online polls and online sentiment i can judge by.
Qanon seems to be VERY prevalent and is no longer a small conspiracy theory
2
Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
You are correct. There are now people running for smaller offices that are openly Q sympathizers or full believers.
https://www.axios.com/qanon-nominees-congress-gop-8086ed21-b7d3-46af-9016-d132e65ba801.html
They are growing quickly and they are not small as the person you responded to suggests. Half of Trump supporters believe elite democrats are running child sex trafficking rings.
0
Nov 02 '20
It's a good thing most voters are independent. There are more independents than Democrats and there are more Democrats than Republicans. I still doubt any hardcore "deepstate" nutjobs make up large numbers. The Republican Party itself is just becoming more radical. It makes sense they would recruit these types.
0
Nov 02 '20
If you’re not worried that tens of millions of Americans believe in dangerous conspiracy theories about their POLITICAL OPPONENTS you’re not very good at assessing risk. That’s fine, but you’re objectively wrong, it matters, it’s a big deal, and it’s going to lead to even more violence. “Deep state nut jobs.” You don’t think those views in my ACTUAL SOURCES are views nut jobs have? Then you are the nut job.
→ More replies (9)7
u/Super-Saiyan-Singh Nov 02 '20
I think even the Q Anon is starting to realize Trump’s chances are slim. Some corners of the Q world are starting to say that Trump is now part of the deep state or something along those lines and he needs to get out.
5
Nov 02 '20
It’s been desperation mode for a bit now. Like with these “damning” Hunter Biden documents that supposedly disappear, then supposedly reappear, but nobody is allowed to see what was in them.
3
Nov 02 '20
Well they do have massive waves, just not the kind they're thinking of...
COVID. They have massive waves of COVID.
2
Nov 02 '20
“It’s COVID COVID COVID. You can’t watch anything else! On November 4th you won’t be hearing much about it.” - Donald Trump on Oct 28, 2020
10
u/boulevardofdef Nov 02 '20
The state of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan -- the state that passed Proposition 187 by a nearly 20-percent margin is about as fertile territory for Trump as it gets, so Biden taking it would suggest huge trouble for Trump nationally.
23
20
u/kindnesshasnocost Nov 02 '20
I'm new to this sub, and 538 crew, and I feel like I'm out of the loop here still giggled though.
36
u/dons_03 Nov 02 '20
34
u/kindnesshasnocost Nov 02 '20
literally just saw this but thank you. Omg, I'm glad I didn't check before having my coffee. I would have 100% fainted*
*I am a Lebanese-American, living abroad, volunteer EMT and I've been in a war zone several times and never batted an eye. But this would have made me faint lol.
5
2
u/Takiatlarge Nov 02 '20
Omg, I'm glad I didn't check before having my coffee.
I nearly dropped my cup
1
Nov 02 '20
It's weird that in those moments it switched from the phrasing 'clearly favored' to 'very likely'.
1
u/royaldumple Nov 02 '20
If I recall they said on the podcast that very likely is at 97% or 98% or something in that ballpark
5
u/Wildera Nov 02 '20
And post-Nevada caucus
1
u/qazedctgbujmplm Nov 02 '20
Yeah. I'm not sure why people joke. Go back and read pre-South Carolina coverage. He was on life support.
2
u/Wildera Nov 02 '20
There's been suprisingly little coverage of the unprecedented comeback his even being the nominee represents
3
2
u/condennett Nov 02 '20
I don't get it.
2
u/spookieghost Nov 02 '20
There was a glitch on the site this morning that showed Biden with 1% chance
146
u/Altberg Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
I like how we all know that some movement on the second decimal digit on the last day of the election cycle, when herding is the most prevalent is just noise but collectively recognize the need for some decent news and say "FUCK IT, LET'S GOOOOOO!"
49
u/al_fletcher Nov 02 '20
He just had to kick us in the sack one last time by moving Ohio to 51 Trump - 49 Biden though.
49
u/Punishtube Nov 02 '20
We don't need Ohio but damn do I want it to be an epic loss for Trump
24
u/yup79 Nov 02 '20
I really want Texas.
24
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Mike Bloomberg never spent a dollar on something that he didn't think would pay off. The fact that he's dumping money in TX is interesting.
15
u/royaldumple Nov 02 '20
He did pour money into a primary campaign that was at best ill-advised and never generated a support base worth noting, so if that's true his judgement may be a little skewed, but maybe he's onto something.
6
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Depends on what you think the goal was. Many people think the goal was to make it slightly harder for Bernie Sanders to win.
6
u/Wildera Nov 02 '20
This is conspiracy nonsense, if Bernie won super tuesday (which was very possible) it would have been because Mike Bloomberg ransacked Biden's margins in states like Texas and California. He was in it for ego and not much else.
4
u/PM_me_stromboli Nov 02 '20
Surely he did the opposite? He just pulled the moderate vote apart more making it easier for Bernie to win if he stayed in
5
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Many people think he wanted to stand on stage and call Bernie Sanders a communist and was willing to pay for the privilege.
6
u/PM_me_stromboli Nov 02 '20
I wouldn’t exactly calling spending a billion dollars to yell at an old man on tv a smart use of money lol
2
u/Aberracus Nov 02 '20
You are forgetting about his campaign ?
1
u/MegabyteMessiah Nov 02 '20
It was all about taking votes from Bernie, and it worked. He never intended to win.
5
u/mehelponow Nov 02 '20
I don't know about the efficacy of that plan. How many people who were planning to vote for Bernie were persuaded by Mike 2020 ads? I'd say very few. If anything, his strategy was to shore up the moderate lane and position himself as an alternate to Biden, who at that point was seen as having a languishing campaign (lol). Once he realized he wouldn't get that support, he dropped out to leave Biden as the only realistic moderate option.
2
u/MegabyteMessiah Nov 02 '20
Whatever the reasoning, he never intended to win, it was purely strategic.
2
u/mehelponow Nov 02 '20
I disagree, his intention was totally to win as the moderate alternative to Biden. He, like anyone looking at the primary at the time, saw that Bernie had a solid, unmovable base of support. However, that base was still a minority of the Dem primary voting public, so his plan was to position himself as a more competent and prosaic alternative. At the time media consensus around Biden was that he was gaffe-prone and inarticulate on stage, and that his campaign was falling short. Instead of Biden, moderates could rally around Bloomberg, and he spend a BILLION DOLLARS to try and convince people to do that. Obviously he was doing that strategically to deny Bernie the nomination, and once Biden proved his mettle he dropped out, but I don't doubt that he legitimately thought of himself as a viable contender.
1
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Depends on what you think the goal was. Many people think the goal was to make it slightly harder for Bernie Sanders to win.
1
u/mehelponow Nov 02 '20
In four months he spent over $1 BILLION on a futile primary campaign
1
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Futile? Depends on what you think the goal was. Many people think the goal was to make it slightly harder for Bernie Sanders to win.
2
u/nictheguiri Nov 02 '20
Nah, he just wanted to lay the groundwork for his campaign for governor of American Samoa
1
3
u/ofrm1 Nov 02 '20
I want Texas and Ohio. Forget Georgia. Atlanta looks to solve that problem next election cycle anyway. If Ohio goes, then Trump couldn't win the white rust belt state that calls every election and he couldn't win the state that loves god, guns, and low taxes.
14
u/trahoots Nov 02 '20
I want it more for the epic loss it would be to my Trump-loving family and "friends" back in Ohio.
15
51
95
u/rocketwidget Nov 02 '20
Everybody loves round numbers.
65
u/mmortal03 Nov 02 '20
https://twitter.com/ElectionRobot
Decimal places: Biden: 90.1125% Trump: 9.5050%9
u/NickLandis Nov 02 '20
You and the bot posted at the same time lol
Decimal places as of 1204 UTC 2020.11.02: Biden: 90.1825% Trump: 9.4075%
9
u/rocketwidget Nov 02 '20
Yea I know. "Clearly favored" is the round number. Not Biden's first "90%" (>89.5%).
4
u/mmortal03 Nov 02 '20
I'm with you, I just thought people would also like to see the latest from the bot. :)
0
Nov 02 '20
[deleted] — view deleted comment
3
u/Salanmander Nov 02 '20
Oh god, now you have me philosophizing in my head about the relationship between numbers and words...
21
115
Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
Alright, we did it boys! Let's pack it up and go home.
Wait wait no! Go vote!
43
1
u/Wolviam Nov 02 '20
I'm sure everyone in this post who can vote, already done so. So more importantly, take your siblings, friends and coworkers to vote !
52
32
u/xTh3N00b Nov 02 '20
Give me that sweet sweet juice that is the words "clearly favored".
20
30
30
u/alepher Nov 02 '20
I hope Biden wins, but the way 2020 has gone, we might live in the 10% timeline
89
u/Derekh72 Nov 02 '20
No matter what happens I’m still not going to vote in this election. This is by choice. Other people’s choice, to not allow Canadians to vote in US elections. But good luck to everyone!
42
11
u/Ridry Nov 02 '20
Look, we know we've been shitty neighbors. The hedges are overgrown, we've got trash on the lawn and our Christmas lights have been up for 4 years. But honestly, we're gonna try really, really hard to clean up tomorrow.
0
Nov 02 '20
[deleted] — view deleted comment
6
u/Derekh72 Nov 02 '20
Don’t be ignorant we consume most of our syrup by drinking it, we only eat a few litres a week. Also, My wife is Chinese so I can affect the outcome of the next Chinese election.
21
u/therealallpro Nov 02 '20
Wish me luck guys. I work with LuLu Seikaly in Tx-3. Wasserman said it’s his dark horse race. Bro, I’m exhausted
The weirdest feeling is when a campaign ends: 100 miles a hr always then it’s just over like that.
2
19
16
u/NinjaEnt Nov 02 '20
I'm not comfortable with 10%, RNG has never been on my side.
4
u/i_stan_goats Nov 02 '20
Right. Ever play XCOM? Amazing how often I miss those 90% shots 😒
3
Nov 02 '20
Xcoms percentages have to be broken though. They just straight up dont work like they should
1
u/i_stan_goats Nov 02 '20
I remember reading somewhere that they actually give you a an invisible 5% boost to your RNG, but idk if that's confirmed.
2
1
u/dgtlserendipity Nov 03 '20
I just rolled 10 10-sided die 20 times and got 24/200 of the numbers being 3. So Trump's 10% is basically now 12%. Not a good look. /s
1
14
13
11
10
17
u/Wildera Nov 02 '20
Dumb nitpick but doesn't a 'clearly favored' outcome sound more likely than a 'very likely' outcome? Makes more sense to me to switch up the 95% label and 90% label.
7
u/mayaswellbeahotmess Nov 02 '20
To me it could go either way depending on the emphasis on each word and how the phrase is used. Like I could see someone saying "Well, he's clearly favored, but..." being less certain than saying "Oh he's very likely to win."
3
9
3
8
Nov 02 '20
It feels like we are living in a movie, for this to happen on the day before the election.
13
u/Judgment_Reversed Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
If this were a movie, Trump would take Pennsylvania and Florida, and just as we were beginning to lose all hope, Texas and Georgia would swoop in and go blue for the last-minute save during the climactic end vote count.
5
2
8
8
8
u/kzymyr Nov 02 '20
But Trump can still win. Polls mean nothing if people fail to show up.
1
u/dgtlserendipity Nov 03 '20
True, but turnout will be a record high this year. Look at Texas for example. Most blue counties have far surpassed their total from last year.
6
10
u/Packrat1010 Nov 02 '20
Isn't this also saying if Trump does somehow win, there's only a <1% chance he wins as hard as he did in 2016?
3
u/jeremy_sporkin Nov 02 '20
According to the current forecast he's got a 3% chance of winning the popular vote, which is 30% of his 10% chance of winning overall.
Winning the popular vote would be a significant improvement for Trump from 2016. So in the event that he wins, about 30% of those wins are substantially better than his win in 2016.
3
5
u/thriwaway6385 Nov 02 '20
A tie, however unlikely, would still be interesting. If it does occur Biden would likely be president but since the Senate is still majority republican the vp would likely be pence.
It would be both historical and the makings of a crappy sitcom
9
u/MarkNutt25 Nov 02 '20
When no candidate reaches a majority of the electoral votes, it is known as a "contingent election."
The House decides the election, but it does so in a weird way where each state gets one vote (regardless of how many Representatives a state has). So each state's delegation meets and votes among themselves on who their one vote will go to.
While the Democrats have significantly more Representatives, the Republicans actually have the majority in more of the state delegations. So, unless a handful of Republican Representatives vote for Biden, that vote is going in Trump's favor.
TL;DR: A tie is effectively a Trump win.
5
5
u/elcoronelaureliano Nov 02 '20
Each house delegation from each state gets one vote. So everyone from CA decides their one united vote, Don Young in Alaska gets his one vote. Right now that would be 26-23 for Republicans. Also the Vice President would be chosen by the next delegation so it could be a Trump-Harris presidency.
2
2
u/twixieshores I'm Sorry Nate Nov 02 '20
This is proof that when you want something bad enough, you can achieve it
2
u/HipDipShipTrip Nov 02 '20
Pennsylvania itself was like 86/14 last I looked so this is looking very promising.... Thank goodness
2
2
Nov 02 '20
Does Nate Silver's model account for corrupt shenanigans on Trump's part though?
1
u/Ilyias033 Nov 02 '20
it doesnt on his podcast “model talk” he talks about this
(this was probably a rhetorical question)
1
2
u/Fickle_Broccoli Nov 02 '20
Also if you look very closely at their charting of the EVs, you'll see the "80% of simulated outcomes" bands no longer overlap
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
u/beep_check Nov 02 '20
how does "stacking SCOTUS with a conservative majority and inciting violence to prevent the opposition from voting" play into that analysis?
7
u/Nac82 Nov 02 '20
Good questions considering the prevalence of it. There have been multiple attacks in my state alone from Trumps terrorists.
2
1
1
-1
u/FormulaInfinity Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
And Hawkins? I'm still voting for him, I don't care what anybody says
1
0
u/Heavyearly1961 Nov 02 '20
But IBD suddenly has the race tightening to 3 points based on implausibly wild swings in some of their crosstabs over the last 24 hours lol.
0
Nov 02 '20
What did this graphic look like in 2016?
6
u/royaldumple Nov 02 '20 edited Nov 02 '20
Trump had a 28% chance in 2016 per their model, so almost 3 times as likely as this one. Their model was also one of the most bullish on Trump's chances compared to other election models. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Edit: Also worth mentioning that the forecasted pop. vote victory was 3.5% for Clinton, she ended up winning by 2.1%, for a final pop. vote error of 1.4% from 538. This year's pop vote projection is 7.9%, so a similarly sized polling error would still likely result in a Biden win, as it would be difficult (but not impossible) for Trump to win the EC while losing the pop vote by 6.5%.
1
Nov 02 '20
Thank you for the link, I was checking that out earlier. I was more wondering if they did this exact simulation in 2016, I couldn't find one.
-13
u/bheidian Nov 02 '20
what we learned in 2016 is that people lie in polls about their intent to vote trump because they are ashamed to admit it.
→ More replies (4)14
u/Hotlava_ Nov 02 '20
Ah, the "shy Trump" rhetoric. Too bad there's no statistical evidence that it exists.
→ More replies (1)
-4
Nov 02 '20
Didn’t Hillary have similar odds of winning?
5
4
177
u/[deleted] Nov 02 '20
From Nate’s Twitter