If we are talking presidential election, wouldn't you say that most informed voters know what party they support and why? Choice of candidate within party would be much more likely to shift, if people have a choice, but not party preference. Seems to me that the real game is turnout.
Yes, but most people are uninformed independents who vote based on vibes and other mysteries so you might expect some sort of shift based on the bad vibes? I guess this is a likely voter screen rather than registered voter poll though.
The Dem panic is not about whether a Biden admin would do good policy, it would. It is entirely about whether they can get infrequent Dem voters to the polls if Biden heads the ticket.
The view was that it was "so bad" it raises even deeper ?s about his capacities and moreso about the advisors around him that would have let this happen & his own hubris. Importantly, to me, it feels very much like an inside poliics elite Dem viewpoint. That may not be reflective of actual voters.
Pretty much. What bugs me is "Trump lies and is incoherent" seems uninteresting to the media. Presumably because Republicans already know that and have decided that having their party in power is worth putting up with Trump. Even if Biden is addled, his people are Dems doing good policy.
OK I'm not a political scientist and I don't study voting, so possibly wrong, but I believe most self-defined "independents" pretty reliably vote one party or the other if they vote regularly. (IMO rational informed voters should vote party over person)
Since we're discussing potential change in vote intention due to the debate, a reminder about polls and statistical power.
There's an old Jackman presentation that has a nice plot showing the sample size required to detect change in voter support. I think it assumes SRS.
Yes indeed. Reminds me of discussions with clients about their desire to investigate subgroup differential impacts. Very rare to have the sample size to investigate that with reasonable power.
