16 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Twenty-Fourth Analysis

16 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Analysis Are New Forms Coming? In a word, the answer is maybe. I'll show you Biden's chart next, and you'll see he broke support and broke it strong. And, steep as Trump's resistance line is, he's chasing it hard right now. Interesting.

2) There are some of elements of Biden's drop that are quite concerning. When you break support, you only want to do it by a little, and then bounce right back up. It is certainly possible Biden will do that tomorrow. But, this drop really did surprise me.

3) Now, look at what I drew as a possible plummet line. These monsters are bad, bad news. Part of the definition of a plummet line is that it takes straight from your resistance line right one down through support, and if it really is a plummet line, it keeps on going.

4) Even worse, we have to now see the resistance line above as massively confirmed, and, at least for today, the support line is broken. Not to smithereens yet, that would take a few more days. Besides, this really could just be an aberration and Biden will bounce back fast.

5) All that said, if I'm a Biden advisor, I'm taking this very seriously. For these weeks we've had a steady, safe lead. We were in a nice flag formation, and could well hope to break the flag to the upside. Breaking a flag to the downside is very bad thing. What to do?

6) Again, I'm a Biden advisor, I say, we have a problem. Our loud mouths are Marxists, and we've played to them. Our true base are patriotic Americans, and are NOT represented by the far left. We can't break to the middle utterly, we'd lose the far left. But...

7) We can integrate strong, American traditional values with the values of the far left. That integration brings the two disparate parts of our party together, if it succeeds. So, I recommend soaring speeches. The theme I'd recommend is something like: Our Higher Nature.

8) Oh, oh! And I'd jettison Bring Back Better viciously. Biden does not get to out-Trump Trump. That can't work. Listen to the word "better." Better than what? Better than Trump did. Our very slogan honors Trump as having brought America back. Now, we'll do it better?

9) I'd stare the team down and say, Let Biden Be Biden! He can't be responding to Trump. A president has his own agenda, not merely a reaction that actually honors his opponent. Soaring speeches. The theme would have the subtext: In Biden's America...

10) There are times in a campaign when you have to admit your strategy is, if not completely off, then heading that way. You have to change course. And, whether I believe personally believe in Dornsife or not, I'd take their data very, very seriously anyway. Word to the wise.

11) I don't think Dornsife wants us to have good news for the Trump team, but this is looking pretty good right now. Trump loves nothing more than coming from behind. Imagine, a sitting president and still an underdog. What could be better than that?

12) We don't yet know that this is a surge line, that would take a few more days to affirm. If it is, it'll have to break above the already steep resistance line. We certainly cannot predict that right now. We really do have to wait and see.

13) One of the things I loved about Dornsife back in 2016 was how often their data went in the exact opposite direction of all the reporting, and that included FOX. At their best, Dornsife monitors the deep flows of support, resistance and change as it really occurs.

14) Once again, here we see the exact opposite of just about everything being reported by everyone. Yes, Dornsife has, I fear, contrived to place Trump far beneath Biden in their forecasts. Yet, look at the forms. Biden's broken support. Trump is chasing resistance.

15) Who in the media will tell you that? No one. So, if I was advising the Trump campaign, here's what I'd say. We're doing great. Don't believe the fake polls. I'd say, we've done a great job with fake news. Now, we MUST obliterate the entire polling strategy of the Democrats.

16) I'd advise, hit hard, harder, and harder still on FAKE POLLING. Add Fake Polling to Fake News, as the current enemy of the day. And I'd sustain that attack between now and November 4. I have to expand on this point. It is that important.

17) In 2020, Fake Polling has become the center strategy of the Democrats. If it weren't for Fake Polling, no one would believe that Biden was ahead. Being ahead in the polls is the fundamental, and utterly essential message they build upon. Without it, there is no strategy.

18) Clearly, if we read Dornsife with credulity, we're far behind Biden, but, we've begun to rise. What accounts for that rise? My answer is about all things else, law and order. I'm far from alone in this assessment. If I'm advising the Trump team, I'd turn to safety.

19) I'd do it two ways. Internal and external. I'd hit the rioting hard - and Trump already is, and I'd recognize that - but I'd hit it even harder. How so? I'd instantly build up the surrogate team, and get them everywhere, always sounding off about a safe America.

20) My second move would be - and again, Trump is already doing this! - to hit the COVID virus as the China Virus. No response at all to Woodward and their blah, blah, blah. I'd blow that off. Rather, China is an external enemy. And, they love seeing our cities burn.

21) As we give up safety in our cities, as protests loot and burn across our land, what do you think our enemies are seeing? They're seeing the end of American greatness. They're seeing an enemy ripe to be attacked. They are emboldened by every weakness we show.

22) Last, for now, I'd advise continued, but deepened and enhanced attack against Biden. I'd define Biden as corrupt. I'd be hitting on the Hunter Biden scandal every single day, relentlessly. I'd make Air Force 2, with both Biden's in it, the image to burn on America's mind.

23) At the same time, and this is to both camps, while I'd fight hard on either side, I'd be careful to find a core set of American principles that we all agree on. Yes, we fight, and we fight hard. We do. But under it all is a set of principles that define America Herself.

24) No matter how wrong I think this side is, or that side, this person, or that person, I'd work hard to find a set of principles that are unarguable, and dedicate myself to those. And, I'd have each side challenge the other to draw ever closer to those core principles.

25) The term for those principles, those core American principles, is: Sacred. I'd charge each team with the mission of being the better team to draw America closer to those. That's a competition worth joining, worth winning. I say, let the best American team win.

Thread ends at #25.

15 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Twenty-Third Analysis

15 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Analysis The Forms Are Holding...For Now... Today's analysis was fun! But, as you'll see, I caused myself some grief, as well as rediscovered my soft case of dyslexia. And no, much as I lean that way, I can't quite reject Dornsife yet.

2) Put aside all my obsessive details. This chart is fun. Here's why. The thing I love MOST about Dornsife is that they often show the EXACT opposite of all the stories you see everywhere else. Why in tarnation is Trump rising, Biden falling, right now? Why?

3) As I always say, all I need is for one, the other, or both to enter into the Insignificant Difference Range, and I won't care what happens after that. That is, before I'm a partisan, I'm a data man. I have to be able to believe in the data.

4) As an honest partisan, I am absolutely happy that Biden is falling, Trump rising as is easy to see. As an honest data man, as much as I TOTALLY DISAGREE with Dornsife's change from 95% confidence, back in 2016, as their gray area, I am able to grant their new method.

5) It's worth a moment's notice to be able to flip things round in your visual field of imagination. This 95% confidence range was how they did it back in 2016. It was a far more honest method of data representation. It was awesome and I miss it, deeply.

6) To be completely honest, good as I am with data, even I can't quite visualize their method today inverted back to their method of 2016. Actually, I can't do it to visual satisfaction. I can almost do it. What's more, I'll ask my data team for help in restoring it, if we can.

7) Let's turn to the formations as they're evolving now. I chose NOT to extend Joe's form very much forward for the following reason. The way one drawls lines, from day to day, includes minute, but critically important variations. Today's chart is narrower than previous. Why?

8) The way you draw a line through a point really does vary. You can call the point high, low, or smack in the middle, as best as your eye and ruler and pen can do. Human variation is an art, NOT a science. The location of your line absolutely reflects your own leanings.

9) I try to be more than just aware of these leanings of my own. I try to be completely cognizant of them, and make my conscious choices to include that awareness, and to include, also, the awareness of how wrong I may be in any given moment, and over time as a trend.

10) Still, for all that, Joe's resistance line has been tested more often than his support line, and he looks to be headed back toward support. If he breaks to the downside that will be bad. Very bad. If he bounces back up, that will be good, very good.

11) Just as a fundamental instinct, I suspect that Dornsife's many changes have set poor old Uncle Joe up for too high expectations. If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Biden will break support to the downside. But, no matter, the data will tell all.

12) Happily for me, as a Trump supporter myself, Trump's support line has been tested exactly as many times as his resistance line, and he's heading up right now, clearly, over the past 4 days. In political time, 4 days is an eternity. And his channel holds strong and well.

More to come much later today. My business day strikes, and I'll be engaged for many hours. So... Thread suspends for now at #12.

Thread ended at #12 yesterday, good intentions to the contrary. It was a very good day, however, and a long one. Time marches on, and we have new data to analyze. So, off to today's charts I go...

14 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Twenty Second Analysis

14 September 2020 #BetweenTheLinesDotVote Analysis Saving Dornsife? The Continued Question of Insignificance Wow! Look how busy I've been this morning. Frankly, I hate charts with TOO MUCH analysis represented. I don't hate the chart below. Still too much, right?

2) If you go slowly with me, though, over the chart, you might end up agreeing that this time, more was actually needed, whereas normally we wish to employ the less is more philosophy. Let's start with the Insignificant Difference Line (IDL). That's a better name for it!

3) The Dornsife geniuses (and they really are!), simply did an abysmal job naming this thing of theirs. To call it an Insignificance Area simply misleads. Nothing could be more significant than whether the two campaigns are too close to call, and we can't quite predict.

4) Done rightly, this factor would be the greatest testament to the integrity of their method. The name they've chosen indicates the opposite. Our numbers don't matter, they're saying, I imagine unwittingly. So, and I think I'll stick with this, I'm calling the IDL.

5) If you care to watch Dornsife's output with me, this may end up being one of the most significant elements of our analysis. On that basis, I've decided to include an image like this every day that I choose to analyze Dornsife. Check this out.

6) So what you see on today's great chart is focused on that factor, more than any other. First, I list out where Dornsife originally assessed themselves. You see this over on the left, with their original numbers from 17 August, at 42.67 and 49.29 as the lower and upper limits.

7) Next you see that, for the first time, I've mapped out the full trajectory of their current upper and lower limit trend lines. The great test I offer Dornsife is to allow the candidates to arrive in the IDL area. My great attack is that they won't do it. I hope to be wrong.

8) In science, a predetermined outcome is the worst possible attack that can be made. I hate digressing here, but I must offer an example. The entire Climate Change question has nothing to do with data, data truth or distortion. It has everything to do with an agenda.

9) The predetermined outcome of Climate Change Pseudo Science is found in the term "Anthropogenic." It's just a latinized version of the term "man made." The predetermined agenda is that man is causing the rise in temperature, assuming you accept that data.

10) There was a great hoax over the fact that white men's craniums were larger than black men's, proving racial superiority. You can check out the history on that hoax, here, if you're interested. jstor.org/stable/pdf/108…

11) The bottom line was that the measurements ended up being driven by the scientist's racism, his personal beliefs caused the manner in which he recorded his data and "proved" his position. This is the profound nature of my potential attack against Dornsife.

12) If my sad theory is correct, they started out with the outcome of Biden's victory as their starting point, and, it was their Insignificance Range where they found their avenue of false proof, supporting their desired outcome. As I always say, I hope to be wrong.

13) In all my wanderings around their website, I have never found an explanation of why their margin of error (MOE) is so much larger than the standard claim of most pollsters, which runs between 3 & 3.5% or so. No clue. Yet, doesn't that begin to look like play room?

14) We'll talk about this more when we look at the Trump campaign's current data. Here, big picture, I do NOT - I say again - need Dornsife to call for Trump's victory in order to believe in them. I just need to break the prediction that his numbers are always below IDL.

15) Turning to Biden's numbers, you can plainly see here that his support line, as I call for it, stretches through the entire campaign, and never falls beneath the upper limit of the IDL. Understand, any formation can be broken at any moment, and all will eventually be.

16) I have to admit, one of the things that makes me love Dornsife is that I'm able to find interpretive formations such as Biden's flag form, shown above. That he's hit and bounced off his resistance line throughout the polling period so far strengthens that line.

17) If he hits, and bounces upward off of his support line, we'll then see it strengthen too. The funny thing about this flag form, that I did NOT see back in 2016, is that it might actually be sustained from start to finish throughout the entire election period. Wow.

18) Then, if you look at the virtually parallel relationship between Biden's support and the upper limit of the IDL, you see where Dornsife is laying down its stake. If that holds, and then, on 4 November he loses, they will have humiliated themselves.

19) Before turning to Trump's chart, I'll say this again, one more way. I can't buy that Biden is that much ahead, and that Trump has no chance to win, which is what their numbers are shouting. Can't buy it. They may be right, but it looks hinky to me.

20) So how might they win back my full support? NOT by putting Trump ahead of Biden. Rather, if they allowed the IDLs to get transgressed, and then sent the data back the other way again, I'd begin to have less doubt. And, let's call for drama! Trump rises over Biden, then falls.

21) If, after allowing Trump to rise over Biden, and then, Biden retook the lead, I'd be quite tempted to believe they did NOT tilt the scales the way I'm fearing they are, right now.

22) Here are Trump's numbers for today. Maybe I'll have to go find it, but this reminds me so much of the 2016 cycle. It just feels like Trump to me. And I want to play with that thought a bit. Follow me out.

23) Let's put forward another theory, a counter-theory. Let's imagine that the Dornsife people continue to be honest scientists, albeit obviously affected by their funding source, the LA Times. That pernicious influence accounted for, imagine they're doing their best anyway.

24) As we've analyzed extensively, they've changed the fundamental nature of their method. So, imagine this much more. The formations are right. That is, Biden's numbers are moving in an accurate manner. Trump's also. The only thing is, due to bias, they're inverted.

25) As a biased Trump supporter, I have long called for a massive landslide in November, for Trump. I won't get into any of the fundamentals, today. I am simply confessing my bias, and my hoped for call. That said, I still have my "what if?"

26) What if Dornsife is polling well, just having inverted who's on top, who's on bottom? It's readily possible. That, in fact, is how I'm going to analyze today's Trump numbers. And the first thing to notice is velocity and momentum.

27) The first thing to note is his widening channel. Resistance rises at a higher slope that support. A wide open channel is the very best possible formation we might ask for. Now, look closely at exactly HOW Trump bounces upward, off his support line.

28) Oh, my goodness, I have to go draw you another chart to illustrate this even more significantly. Oh, holy cow, I have a couple of consulting sessions coming up, now, and I have to break off analysis for the moment. I'll be back later this afternoon, and finish up!

Thread interrupts at #28, and will resume later this afternoon.

29) Joe's chart form, a very traditional, if somewhat extended flag form from today, has stood solid for 36% of the days of the contest period. Both its top slope, and its bottom slope appear to be be 100% in tact. Not to mention the underlyinging IDL. This is phenomenal!

30) It was one of the things I most profoundly noted upon completion of my 2016 analysis, that there were lines that might seriously be drawn across the entirety of the campaign. Here's their final visual post.

31) As you can see, it was the two competing resistance lines that told the entire story in 2016. Even now, it amazes me that an entire election might show itself revealed so powerfully on just two lines.

32) I haven't decided to redraw 2016's lines in color, the way I do them now. Perhaps I will, but for now, just look at the retrospective clarity of their lines. Amazing. I don't know when we'll find lines with that much credibility and force. We may not this season. We'll see.

33) I hasten to remind you that I called for Trump, by Dornsife's numbers and my charts, on 15 October 2016. You know, just looking at these wonderful, old charts, I realize I'm going to have to redraw them in color. I shall. But the thing is, try to imagine just two lines...!

34) Oh my again. This is what I've been looking for, but couldn't remember where to find it. Look at this zoomed in image! Note the phrase "95-percent confidence interval." They have inverted their representation. BAck then, the entire campaign occurred within it.

35) As you can tell, I'm going to have to really let all this sink in. 2016, 95% area of confidence covers the majority of the election. Now, in 2020, we're given this new approach, an Insignificance Range. I'm amazed it took me this much time to see it. More to come...

36) Thread ends at #35.