I did not say otherwise. Just classifying according to objective criteria.
Is Texas blue yet? Is that an example of your âcritical thinking?â If so, I can think of reasons to criticize, but Iâm coming up empty on seeing any âthinkingâ
Plus the whole assumption about Texas turning blue is fundamentally flawed anyway. They base it entirely on Hispanic population growth. Which totally ignores how Hispanic people tend to vote once they age a little bit and the disparity between local elections and federal elections in that ethnic group. Younger Hispanics tend to vote democratic from top to bottom but older Hispanics have a habit of voting blue in local elections and red in federal elections.
Gods man, I know youâre (d)efensive of NJ, but this obstinance is ridiculous.
Biden is ahead in NJ by 7 pts and has not broken 50% in any poll. That criteria puts it in the âMarginal playâ states along with TX and FL. As things stand, does Biden have any chance in TX or FL? No. As things stand, does Trump really have a chance in NJ? No.
It would take a miracle for either one of them to win those states. But if the stars align, the planets are all in place, the earth burns, and everything we know changes⌠it could happen.
What difference would that make? The point is, the numbers you are dismissing as wrong would produce the exact same result as the last time ⌠14 votes for Biden.
not a huge pool to swim in. From the numbers however, it appears there are more undecideds in marginal or contested blue states than in others. This tells me Bidenâs support is soft.
because the list isnât about where I would spend money, or where Trump should. Itâs simply objective criteria using polling data to describe the current state of the race as polling shows it to be. Like TX and FL show Trumps lead under 10% NJ shows Bidenâs lead under 10%. Thus they all are categorized as âmarginal playâ. Unlike NJ, in TX and FL Trump has polled over 50%, while in NJ Biden has not. Trumpâs lead in TX and FL is 9%, while Bidenâs in NJ is 7%.
Itâs not just NJ, EVERY state were the polls show a lead under 10% but more than 5% is categorized as âmarginal playâ. The categorization is objective. Completely removing anyoneâs âcritical thinkingâ (should be read as "wishfull thinking). As time nears the election, and the numbers change, so will the categorization. I will likely also add some other objective criteria like polling over 50% in more than 1/2 of the polls, or the challenger in the state failing to poll within the MOE in successive polls. Why? because if one candidate is up 45-37 and the trailing candidate has never broken 40%, the chances for the trailing candidate would be even more marginal.