search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
EU BYTES


GC: Just to clarify what battleground states are. As a President is voted in the US on a state-by-state and winner-takes-all basis it is about the states where the race is very close. If I am not mistaken, a typical one is Florida. JM: Correct.


GC: So, let us look a bit closer at the fallacy of polls. Indeed, the inaccuracies are significant especially when the margins are very close. One poll though that stuck out was the one which innovatively asked: “what would your neighbours vote”. It actually hit the nail on the head. But, looking at the overall picture, what are some key elements that lead to this fallacy of “polls” when using the US as an example? JM: The differences usually mostly depend on the sampling of Republicans, Independents and Democrats. When US citizens register to vote they register either as a Democrat, Republican or Independent. You will find that most polls have a higher Democrat sample, and many argue that they are often oversampled. So, the polling problem isn’t just which way the independents will break, but also to what extent Republicans and Democrats actually show up to vote. The way you weight these samples against each other essentially is a prediction in itself regarding Republican/ Democrat-specific turnout, which can lead to these wild differences and inaccuracies. Now it’s also interesting to note that both campaigns have their own internal polling, and sometimes you can get a glimpse of what that looks like because sometimes there are certain tells. Biden for example had a change in strategy just now, indicating that his campaign feels they


needed to act - this suggests that his internal numbers aren’t as rosy as those of most polls. Furthermore, we can deduce from the campaign focus on certain key battleground states where they believe the race is close, this isn’t always in line with public polling. Also take note when either campaign talks about election fraud - initially this happened more on the side of the Trump campaign, but this has shifted lately. I believe talk about election fraud is an indicator as to which campaign believes it’s behind according to the internal polling numbers. Because in essence, winners don’t talk about losing.


GC: If you can’t beat them, join them? Or at least in terms of strategic thinking it seems. So, what has happened that we see a shift in the polls and the betting odds? JM: Biden tried to run out the clock not engaging Trump while he was leading comfortably in the polls (leading to his nickname “Basement Biden”, or as Trump recently tweeted: “Joe Hiden”). It’s not a bad strategy to not give Trump anything to work with as he tends to self-destruct at times and


struggles with invisible enemies. GC: But things have turned around for Biden. JM: The Biden strategy seems to have been to not acknowledge the violence and act as if it was all peaceful protests. Biden’s strategy may have worked if the protests had died down, but they are still ongoing with Portland approaching Day 100 and the recent horrific events in Kenosha, Wisconsin, which is a battleground state. The Biden campaign now has to acknowledge the rioting and looting, which gives them a big strategical disadvantage.


GC: So, two months to go. What should we be looking out for? JM: Well one thing is for sure: October will be full of surprises, manufactured and real. Just remember, October 2016 brought us the famous All Access Tapes and yet another late investigation of Hillary’s Email scandal.


GC: Interesting times ahead. Thanks Joachim.


Greetings from Brussels and #StaySafeStayTuned


3desc/Adobe Stock


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86