IL-14's margin is up, and is now D +0.67%
Biden's lead is slowly increasing in GA (+0.29%) and slowly decreasing in AZ (+0.39%).
Why a Trump Loss May Be No Match for Rupert Murdoch’s Realpolitik - The New York Times - Fox News will outlast Trump's Presidency
Does Trump’s Defeat Signal the Start of Populism’s Decline Globally? - The New York Times - "Populist leaders may have lost their most prominent champion, but their economic, social and political grievances remain potent."
Not that Trump ever did anything helpful.
False Claims That Biden ‘Lost’ Pennsylvania Surge - The New York Times - social-media companies like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have been smacking them down, labeling them and even sometimes shutting them down
What Went Wrong With Polling? Some Early Theories - The New York Times - "Pollsters thought they had learned from the errors of 2016. It’s possible that they did, and that this election reflects new problems."
For now, there is no easy excuse. After 2016, pollsters arrived at plausible explanations for why surveys had systematically underestimated Mr. Trump in the battleground states. One was that state polls didn’t properly weight respondents without a college degree. Another was that there were factors beyond the scope of polling, like the large number of undecided voters who appeared to break sharply to Mr. Trump in the final stretch.
This year, there seemed to be less cause for concern: In 2020, most state polls weighted by education, and there were far fewer undecided voters.
"The polls were off in 2020 in almost the same ways they were off in 2016."
Then lots of theories of why the polls failed. Theories based on imperfect correction for sampling, the sort of thing that sank
The Literary Digest. In 1936, it ran a massive poll and found that Republican Alf Landon would win the Presidency that year. But FDR won, causing a lot of embarrassment. The poll involved car-registration lists and the like, and this sampling effect was uncorrected for in that poll.