Access to this page has been denied
thehill.com
px-captcha

Democratic strategist David Axelrod wrote on social media after President Biden’s Thursday night press conference that his odds of winning the presidential race this fall are “very very slim.”

Axelrod said Biden’s team “has not been very candid” with the president after Biden at the presser said no poll or person is telling him he cannot win in November.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    233·
    4 months ago

    Currently very true. He’s down in PA and he can’t win without them. Bad sign for the “son of Scranton”.

    Michigan is a toss up, which he also HAS to win.

    Down in Wisconsin. Minnesota is a toss up.

    It’s not looking good right now.

    Can he change it at the Democratic convention next month? Maybe. Even odds that something happens to make it worse though.

    • AlbertSpangler@lemmings.world
      4·
      4 months ago

      And if it’s even slightly close, the SC hands it to the GOP.

      Also, it should in no fucking way whatsoever be 50/50 , but here we are.

      • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
        41·
        4 months ago

        If it’s 50/50 in a national poll, Biden will lose by several states in the EC. No SCOTUS intervention required.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      41·
      4 months ago

      I don’t understand how this is possible with the current polling consistently showing a Trump edge and his structural advantage in the EC. Worth noting that ABC inexplicably laid off Nate Silver and he took his model system with him. I imagine they’ve built something similar to replace it but it remains untested compared to their past predictions.

      That said, Biden clearly has a chance to win, so I think Axelrod may be overstating it here. But Trump does seem to be a clear favorite from the available information.

      • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        4 months ago

        You’re not going to change my mind on fashion models. Even when they’re wrong, you’re better off just shutting your mouth so they let you in the club. (Or clüb for my continental friends.)

        I think Nate Silver is clever but not a rigorous intellectual. His “model” is not even open source, and predicting presidential elections has 50ish data points and fewer than 10 that are uncertain. He made a good model but it is what it is: a model of the last election. (Nothing has changed. We can assume it’s the same as last time, right?)

        I also just assume he’s gonna get on the right wing grift circuit before too long. One last score is saying “woke is bad.” And he can justify anything to himself.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
          31·
          4 months ago

          (Nothing has changed. We can assume it’s the same as last time, right?)

          I’m hoping you dropped the /s,

          Immigration voters (well the dem-base immigration voters,) the Muslim vote. He’s always been soft with women and the black vote.

          And he barely squeaked it out last time. Anyone who’s telling him he’s likely to win is lying through their teeth. Probably because of there’s a new pres, they’re likely to lose their jobs.

          Details.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          1·
          4 months ago

          All good points, I’m not necessarily saying Nate’s is better, just that the fivethirtyeight model is probably different from past years.

          There’s also the economist which shows Trump a 3/4 favorite. I have little knowledge of their methods or history so take that with a grain of salt but it’s worth considering.

  • hddsx@lemmy.ca
    3·
    4 months ago

    Fuck it is… I don’t like Biden, but my vote is anti-Trump so….