More than 1.4 million have already voted in the presidential election, as battleground state polls show no clear frontrunner

More than 1.4 million people have now voted in the presidential election, as Kamala Harris and Donald Trump continue to crisscross the country in the final stretch of a neck-and-neck campaign.

Their vice-presidential picks, JD Vance and Tim Walz, also faced off this week in the only vice-presidential debate of this cycle. But initial polls suggested voters saw the debate as a draw, without clear impact on the race.

Harris earned her highest national polling average since July, though the presidential race remains extremely close in battleground states, according to the Guardian’s poll tracker. Harris is leading in five of seven swing states, according to the Guardian’s average of high-quality state polls aggregated by the polling analysis platform 538 over the last 10 days. But overall, both candidates continue to have about even odds of winning.


🗳️ Register to vote! https://vote.gov/

  • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The Guardian’s tracker is based on an average of high quality polls over the last 10 days compiled by 538. As of Friday, the forecasting site said the race was essentially a toss-up, with Harris having a 55% chance of winning and Trump having a 45% chance.

    Huh?

    Also, I’m a firm believer that liberals don’t answer phone calls from numbers they don’t know and conservatives are the type to send money to Indian call center scammers just because they called.

    • morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      the methodology isn’t good, they should ask if the respondent is a republican or a democrat before asking for whom they intend on voting, they could this way adjust the response rate according to the actual number of voters of each camp and compensate the tendency of the democrats to not answer the phone. /s

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      liberals don’t answer phone calls from numbers they don’t know

      Conservatives don’t signal when they are going to vote against their candidate.

      • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Asking pollsters to be mind readers is a bit much, in my book. Besides. How can we count on Conservatives not voting for Trump? In that polling place, with hopes for more Conservative judges, fewer abortions, and more ‘Real America’, the cagey Conservative can vote for the evil without having to own that vote. I’ve met plenty of Conservatives who say, “I don’t like the guy personally, but I do like my 6-3 court, and Liberals want to take that away from me.”

        If they vote for us, great! That’ll make a marginal victory into a landslide victory, and might push a marginal loss into a solid victory. But we can’t count on them. We need to do the work to make sure we get past that 50%+1 margin in at least 270 EVs worth of states and not count on other people to do it. I don’t want to wake up Wednesday morning and see that Stein got more votes in the state that we needed to get to 270 than Trump won that state by…

    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      They do use weights and adjustments to deal with this. I don’t know about US polling but in the UK there is a shy conservative factor. People don’t like to say or admit they are conservative, so the polls factor this in. They also factor who answers and responds and try to correct for it.