- The Harris campaign is showing new strength in must-win states ahead of the party’s convention.
- In Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, Harris leads Trump 50% to 46% among likely voters.
- It’s a reflection of the continued reset of the 2024 race after Biden’s exit.
That’s within the margin of error. That doesn’t really count as a lead.
No, but Trump’s leads were also within the margin of error, so it’s encouraging to see a swing, even if it might just be noise.
She’s only been campaigning for a few weeks. The DNC hasn’t even happened yet. I would call this pretty phenomenal.
Jfc people went ape shit when 1-2% was called within the margin of error a few days ago and now folks complain when it isn’t called out at 4% lmao
Most people have a really, really awful understanding of how statistics work.
Preach.
Yes it’s all margin of error. But what I’m seeing personally is Biden was consistently 2-4% down (conservatively) in every state that mattered (which was within the margin of error) and Harris is up 2-4% in every state that matters now (which is also within the margin of error).
I’d rather be the Harris campaign right now than the (now defunct) Biden or (panicking) Trump campaigns. Qualify it all you want folks 🤷♂️
No I’m not complacent. I’m excited to vote.
We don’t know the sample size; so we don’t know the margin of error.
I mean, click a couple links and it’s right there
MI: 619 PA: 693 WI: 661 All of registered voters
Using the amount of total registered voters in each respective state and a 95% CI, we get the following margins of error MI: ±3.939% PA: ±3.723% WI: ±3.811%
Depending on the exact lead (NYT only shows round percents, not specific numbers for each response), all of those are potentially within the top end of that margin of error.
Am I trying to claim that a swing from being down by ~4% to being up by ~4% means nothing and is indicative of nothing? Of course not. But man, most people really do not at all understand how statistics work, and I really wish people would stop talking out of their ass about it.
So which links did you click? The one that goes to NYT is paywalled.
NYT polls aren’t pay walled
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/08/10/us/elections/times-siena-poll-likely-electorate-crosstabs.html
If I remember this correctly, the square of the error for the sum of (or difference between) two independent measurements is the sum of the squares of the individual errors. Gauss something.
That would make the error for the 8 point swing be sqrt(2×3.8²) or about 5.4. So at least the swing is significant in each state.
Also, the error for the average of 3 variables is sqrt(e1²+e2²+e3²)/3 or 2.2 so the average lead in the 3 states is significant.
But we can’t make a significant claim about the lead in each state.
It was paywalled for me 🤷♂️
“I don’t see it” =/= “the information doesn’t exist and you don’t know so I’m right”
Next time try this asking.
Next time try to not take a statement as an insult.
It’s easy. When Kamala is down we say that polls don’t matter as much they used to, but when she’s up polls are obviously right. The margin of error is just a thing we use after the fact to justify whether the polls are useless (Kamala losing) or absolutely correct (Kamala winning)
I love how any time someone wants to argue about stats they act like this information can’t possibly be obtained and talk as if the sample size must be like 7 people.
Are they the same people?
You are aware that different people can think different things, right?
Wow you aren’t all the same people!? You aren’t all one person!? Man yeah that is literally the only way my comment could be interpreted. There are clearly no largely shared opinions here ever so I’m clearly living in a fantasy and just need to remember everyone is completely unique and no one agrees. Thanks for your concern you can move on now.
Sure, be a dick about it. Why not.
Look I’ll back off. You’re right, I’m going off for no reason. I don’t need to be another person pissed off pissing off other people. I’m sorry. Taking out some mild frustrations on you isn’t cool.
This is a good comment and we should all try to think like this.
Better to not behave how I did in the first place lol but I’m glad it had an impact regardless
You’re right I should behave more like your previous comment and ask sarcastic, disingenuous qiestions. That’s a way better way to communicate.
Should I be like you? Is that preferred?
By all means, keep going. Get the nasty out.
Not sure if you saw my other comment but tldr sorry
No worries. I know the feeling.
Which people? I don’t recall seeing any comments like that on Lemmy, at least.
You want me to dig up posts from when the first polls came out after Harris was nominated?
Maybe not, but it’s encouraging! Harris/Walz are stoking enthusiasm because they want to actually improve people’s lives, not just repeat the same tired culture-war bullshit…
You don’t know the margin of error unless you know the sample size. I didn’t see the sample size mentioned in the article.