And MI and WI?

There’s a lot of time left in the election, so nothing is certain yet

But I can tell you that if the election were held tomorrow, trump vs any of the top 5 dems, trump would lose

He just doesn’t have the margin to bleed support like he has

PA, MI and WI are still swing states because no candidate has a definite answer to their problem

Trump didn't "fix" anything there

Looking at 2018, they might qualify as solidly blue

Nothing's written in stone

yet

Although they have shifted blue

The D governor of MI won by 10% in 2018

By contrast, trump won there in 2016 by .3%

Here are some other fun facts:

Trump got fewer votes in MI, WI & PA (each individually and as a whole) in 2016 than George Bush got in those states in 2004 when he lost all three

Also one of “the squad” is from MI, so that doesn’t exactly help trump there

the squad?

And shitting all over AZ doesn’t help him there, which is another swing state

I also think Virginia's cooked

yeah it's not looking good

The squad is AOC, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tliab and Ilhan Omar

Trump good

Democrats bad

hilarious

I go watch louder with crowder now

Yeah I mean Clinton won VA in 2016 I don’t think there’s any real chance Trump could take it in 2020

Who cares about va

Edgar Allan Poe

*Not Allen

Learn your classics

Ahhhhh

smh

@Platinum Spark You know that Trump insults the squad to make sure more people take notice of it

Basically, his plan is to get people to focus on the squad and then link the entire Democrat party to the Squad, which is good for Trump

Makes it easier to appeal to people who are less on the extremes

Not shocking that when your elections become like a reality tv show, the guy who wins it is a reality tv star

I mean AOC (for example) is going with the Trumpian view that any publicity is good publicity (even if it makes her seem like a pretentious teenager)

Well, it fires up his base

But it fires up the progressive base too

And when your margin in mi is .3%, you can’t afford to fire up people in Ann Arbor and flint

https://71republic.com/2019/09/11/andrew-yang-make-history-debate/

@Platinum Spark I know the article is about approval ratings, what I said was that he was simply gaining more minority support in a general sense. Also I do not see how the article synonymized approval ratings with vote total, I'm pretty sure it does make a distinction between the two. These two things also tend to correlate, however, so it isn't wrong to say that if these numbers hold the very well can land him a second term, especially given the other things in his favor this time.

Unless there is something that I missed in the article

I will say though that it shouldn't have claimed that Trump has a certain victory, because it's still too early to tell for sure.

It really doesn't suggest that he's gaining minority support

it's also not a legitimate news source

It makes no claim on how many points it went up by

it straight up says those polls are considered outliers

and the numbers it cites are STILL very low approval ratings

It does though, it explains that both black and Hispanic approval ratings now have increased relative to the votes respective to these groups, and although these two things are obviously not synonyms they are still indicators of increased support.

I don't think it's a wild claim to suggest that if a person is receiving support then given things go smoothly this will be more or less reflected in the polls. But again, I do disagree with the declarative language in the article.

Also what exactly constitutes a "legitimate" news source?

it actually doesn't say they increased

it implies it

unbiased and, when you're talking about polls, statistically sound

you can tell from the beginning something's off with this article:

"despite shrill denunciations of the president by the Democrats for his alleged racism"

that's not something that a real news organization would write

that's what a conservative blog would write

and they totally have their place, don't get me wrong

but what they're doing here is trying to cherry-pick polls

look at this part:

"this, of course, which is why they have worked so diligently to discredit polls that confirm the president’s gains among minority voters."

GG @Platinum Spark, you just advanced to level 13!

Then not many things can be considered legitimate news, including CNN, Fox, and MSNBC

sure

I disagree with you, but sure let's throw out all three of those

when it comes to polling, 538 is probably the gold standard

but AP, WaPo, WSJ, NYT

these are real news organizations

CBS, ABC

here:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/

you can take a look at how media bias affects different news organizations

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/

better link

anyway, lets go back to the article

in January of this year, Marist found that Trump’s approval rating among Hispanics had reached 50 percent. Then, in February, a Morning Consult poll showed Hispanic approval of the president at 42 percent. This was followed by a March poll from McLaughlin & Associates that found Hispanic approval for the president at 50 percent.

now notice

he's not talking about gain over one poll

that would be something you could compare across time like that

he's taking 3 poll results across 3 different polls

that show approval at or below 50%

with no comparison to where they were before

so he's not saying trump gained support with minorities, he's just saying this is the minority approval rating at 3 different points in time according to 3 different polls

You left out the detail of the article giving the months that the polls were taken in

I didn't actually

I included it

Oh then my mistake.

so there was a poll in January that shows 50%

a different poll in feb that shows 42%

But with that then you can see that the most recent poll shows 50%

then a different poll in march taht shows 50%

how does that equate to gaining support?

Because it had increased from the last poll?

he lost 8% support in Feb and regained it in March?

it's the same in March as it was in Jan

tbh, whatever that thing is, is very confusing

looks like that website is rated "Selective or Incomplete Story/Unfair Persuasion" on the reliability axis

I can barely read anything on it even with my glasses

and "Hyper-Partisan Right" on the political bias axis