Joyce, Love these very thorough directions. Reminds me of when I wrote very detailed instructions I had to write in my marketing job. I will be there, fired up and ready to go! Thanks!
I've been writing for months about the predictive limitations of polls comprised of a relatively small number of participants; let's say, 2000 responders interviewed to forecast this election in which ~165 million Americans may vote. The NYTimes latest effort to gaslight readers about the current "horserace" is to cherry pick a few current polls to explain the state of the race. Let's say a new polls shows Harris/Trump tied or Harris up + 5%. How many of the 2000 participants does it take to create this variation. 50!!
Which is to say, in the + 5% Harris poll, 100 more participants said they would vote for Harris vs Trump. However, if 50 fewer chose Harris instead of Trump, the poll would be a tie.
The scale is even worse in Swing States polls with 600 participants where either candidate may be up or down 2%. Here the number of participants it takes to create this variation is 6 (either way in their candidate choice).
Journalists can analyze these weak polls and come to an absolute conclusions of fact. For instance, that Black men are abandoning Harris (that factoid might be based on 4 black respondents) or young white males are 60% for Trump (that might be based on 8 white voters under the age of 26).
Why would any of us believe this trend is reality from just 4 or 8 voters.
Especially, in addition to small numbers, pollsters are "smoothing" out their numbers to reach more "logical" expectations.
So, as the grassroots, we will just continue to do what we're doing. Making our own luck!
Registering new voters and Getting Out The Vote. Statistics indicate that postcards mailed to low propensity Democratic voters, increases turnout by 1.5% to 2%.100 million postcards delivered this cycle will generate 1.5 to 2.0 million votes
Thank you so much for this clear explanation. I’ve heard the same conclusions (don’t listen, keep working) many times but your explanation of how sketchy the data is from which poll “results” are drawn is what I needed to be able to tune out the noise. Very grateful for this as we head into the last few weeks. Where are you writing?
Hi Joyce, I'm sorry not to be able to join you this evening, but maybe these questions could be addressed: 1)Where is the line between egregious misinformation and the law? 2) What could the Justice Dept/Law Enforcement be planning if Donald Trump loses the election and if he wins? 3) If DT wins, are there legal steps that can be taken to prevent him from taking office, ie., threat to national security, etc., etc.? Thanks for your hard work and expertise
Big BUMMER!!!! A lot of us older folks are very comfortable with the big screens that are a part of desktop computers. I suspect that a lot of folks are going to sit this out for the simple reason we don't want to watch it on the tiny phone screen. Disappointing that the effort to get this to desktop computers isn't being made.
Interesting format, but watching on a phone is too small for me; can't follow the chat. I think I like Ruth Ben-Ghiat's use of Zoom for her Lucid Q & As and guest discussions. She records her comments and discussions with guests and then stops recording when she takes questions from viewers. I can watch/participate on my laptop and easily see the chat.
Ditto. I really like and learn from a Grassroots pro Democracy group in SE Wisconsin. They use/record via Zoom, invite informative guests, and have the ability to share slides. Bonus points for ease of signing on.
If you need help watching from your cell, I’d suggest that you ask a young person. Most use this technology every day & could quickly show you how they do this. Maybe it could be an opportunity to invite them to join you tonight?
Ugh. Something that needs that level of explanation to use is not very awesome.... and only works on a tiny phone format. It's too bad there is no other way to broadcast this, dang it, such on as well-established modes on computers.
More good news out of GA today (10/16/2024). A second Fulton County Superior Court judge has struck down a series of draconian new election rules put into place by the pro-Trump majority of the state’s election board. Judge Thomas Cox Jr. blocked more than a half-dozen new rules, including one that allowed county election officials to launch investigations of irregularities, which critics feared would delay certification. The new rules “are contrary to the laws of the State of Georgia, the Constitution of the State of Georgia, and the Constitution of the United States,” Cox wrote in his order, and the State Election Board “had no authority to implement” them.
Joyce, Love these very thorough directions. Reminds me of when I wrote very detailed instructions I had to write in my marketing job. I will be there, fired up and ready to go! Thanks!
Thank you for allowing us to learn more about the upcoming election, in language that makes it easier to understand.
I've been writing for months about the predictive limitations of polls comprised of a relatively small number of participants; let's say, 2000 responders interviewed to forecast this election in which ~165 million Americans may vote. The NYTimes latest effort to gaslight readers about the current "horserace" is to cherry pick a few current polls to explain the state of the race. Let's say a new polls shows Harris/Trump tied or Harris up + 5%. How many of the 2000 participants does it take to create this variation. 50!!
Which is to say, in the + 5% Harris poll, 100 more participants said they would vote for Harris vs Trump. However, if 50 fewer chose Harris instead of Trump, the poll would be a tie.
The scale is even worse in Swing States polls with 600 participants where either candidate may be up or down 2%. Here the number of participants it takes to create this variation is 6 (either way in their candidate choice).
Journalists can analyze these weak polls and come to an absolute conclusions of fact. For instance, that Black men are abandoning Harris (that factoid might be based on 4 black respondents) or young white males are 60% for Trump (that might be based on 8 white voters under the age of 26).
Why would any of us believe this trend is reality from just 4 or 8 voters.
Especially, in addition to small numbers, pollsters are "smoothing" out their numbers to reach more "logical" expectations.
So, as the grassroots, we will just continue to do what we're doing. Making our own luck!
Registering new voters and Getting Out The Vote. Statistics indicate that postcards mailed to low propensity Democratic voters, increases turnout by 1.5% to 2%.100 million postcards delivered this cycle will generate 1.5 to 2.0 million votes
Thank you so much for this clear explanation. I’ve heard the same conclusions (don’t listen, keep working) many times but your explanation of how sketchy the data is from which poll “results” are drawn is what I needed to be able to tune out the noise. Very grateful for this as we head into the last few weeks. Where are you writing?
Looking forward to it.
Could you update us on the stolen classified docs case? Wasn’t the whole BS case against Hilary was that she had classified docs on her computer?
Thanks
Is there a way to watch it on delay? Or receive a transcript? I'm in France & won't have access (I'll also be asleep) at 4 a.m. local time.
Judd said there would be a transcript.
Hi Joyce, I'm sorry not to be able to join you this evening, but maybe these questions could be addressed: 1)Where is the line between egregious misinformation and the law? 2) What could the Justice Dept/Law Enforcement be planning if Donald Trump loses the election and if he wins? 3) If DT wins, are there legal steps that can be taken to prevent him from taking office, ie., threat to national security, etc., etc.? Thanks for your hard work and expertise
Big BUMMER!!!! A lot of us older folks are very comfortable with the big screens that are a part of desktop computers. I suspect that a lot of folks are going to sit this out for the simple reason we don't want to watch it on the tiny phone screen. Disappointing that the effort to get this to desktop computers isn't being made.
Roe, Roe, Roe the Vote!
At 60 minutes in 3,604 are watching/listening.
Interesting format, but watching on a phone is too small for me; can't follow the chat. I think I like Ruth Ben-Ghiat's use of Zoom for her Lucid Q & As and guest discussions. She records her comments and discussions with guests and then stops recording when she takes questions from viewers. I can watch/participate on my laptop and easily see the chat.
Ditto. I really like and learn from a Grassroots pro Democracy group in SE Wisconsin. They use/record via Zoom, invite informative guests, and have the ability to share slides. Bonus points for ease of signing on.
Me, too, RE Zoom.
If you need help watching from your cell, I’d suggest that you ask a young person. Most use this technology every day & could quickly show you how they do this. Maybe it could be an opportunity to invite them to join you tonight?
I don't have an ipad, and do not want to watch anything on my phone. It is too small. Sorry. Can you record it and post it please?
Judd said there will be a transcript.
Ugh. Something that needs that level of explanation to use is not very awesome.... and only works on a tiny phone format. It's too bad there is no other way to broadcast this, dang it, such on as well-established modes on computers.
Somehow I could not log into the live discussion.
Judd said there will be a transcript.
search for Judd Legum on the app.
It’s 5:09 in Seattle and no video. Boo!
Have you found it yet? Look for Popular Information.
I’m paid there, too. Didn’t show up. 🤷♀️
I got a notification that Judd was live but it didn’t click through. Bad UI/UX.
This is a hassle. Should be an easier way. Sorry I'll miss it
Search for Popular Information Judd Legum on the app.
More good news out of GA today (10/16/2024). A second Fulton County Superior Court judge has struck down a series of draconian new election rules put into place by the pro-Trump majority of the state’s election board. Judge Thomas Cox Jr. blocked more than a half-dozen new rules, including one that allowed county election officials to launch investigations of irregularities, which critics feared would delay certification. The new rules “are contrary to the laws of the State of Georgia, the Constitution of the State of Georgia, and the Constitution of the United States,” Cox wrote in his order, and the State Election Board “had no authority to implement” them.
Anyone watching fox news?