Polls (Page 5)

A few thoughts on the bolded part of your post (I removed the last couple Ps as they were not FL related)

• One can support border control + find Trump unacceptable
• Not sure what polls (plural?) you've seen that shows Trump polling better than Romney and Bush with hispanics. 
• A few days ago, a national poll of hispanic voters showed Trump polling 19%..
• In July, a different poll of hispanic voters showed Trump polling at 24%
• In 2012 Romney won 39% of FL latino voters and 27% nationally

Not to muddy the waters, but we should remember that black voters represent 13% of FL voters. Trump is polling 0% in PA and 6% nationally. Don't know how he's doing in FL; Romney got 5%* of that vote. Trump didn't really rouse enthusiasm with his "Your Lives are Poop" speech addressed to black Americans.

Hispanics + blacks represent 31% of FL registered voters.

Vote by mail ballots go out in 4 weeks in FL. In 2012, ~28% of voters voted by mail. There were numerous instances on election day of people waiting in line for many hours to vote; I expect the VBM % to increase this year as a result. Trump doesn't have much time to mend his hispanic bridges.

I don't think Florida will be easy for either candidate, but I don't think Clinton has much to fear about the hispanic vote in Florida.

Edit for comma, * and Poop (forgot about filter)

 * or maybe less. Obama got 95% but that doesn't mean Romney got the rest.

I think Florida will be competitive, but the trend has been heading Trumps way both nationally and in the respective states.  Clinton has had wave after wave of scandal hitting the airwaves and it's doubtful to let up.  Trump has spent virtually nothing and Clinton has spent hundreds of millions on attack adds and she continues to slide?

As for the polling, any poll that has anyone with zero percent in a demographic is a joke poll.  There were several that were putting Trump at 0% with blacks alongside other reputable outlets that had him into the 20%'s.  It's a little challenging to reconcile those two for any of us but 0% is just silly.

There are certainly polls that show Clinton in the lead, but there are also many polls that show Trump in the lead or tied.  This race is a dead heat right now no matter how you want to spin it.  Clinton is fading fast and doing nothing to help herself.  Seems like every time she tries to talk, she just starts coughing so it's going to be tough to keep the medical issues under wraps for much longer.  Don't forget the pollsters are mostly using turnout numbers from 2008 and 2012 for their models as well.  So, the Democrats will have to turn out in similar numbers to 2008/2012 in order for them to be accurate.  It could happen, but this is where our whole enthusiasm argument comes in. 

Here's a few recent national polls:
CNN/ORC Trump +2
LA Times/USC Trump +1
Reuters/IPSOS Trump +1
Foxnews Poll Clinton +3

Here's several blue states that have Trump in the lead or tied as well.  From the latest Reuters-Ipsos polls.

** Iowa – Trump 44% – Clinton 41%
** Maine – Trump 42% – Clinton 42%
** Michigan – Trump 42% – Clinton 41%
** New Hampshire – Trump 45% – Clinton 44%
** Ohio – Trump 46% – Clinton 43%
** Wisconsin – Trump 38% – Clinton 38%

I know the media is doing it's best to convince you and others that Trump has no chance, but it's nothing more than Baghdad Bob saying the same over and over again hoping it isn't true.

Why do you have to bring Baghdad Bob into this?  At least he was hysterically funny......what the media in this country does is more on the line of a bad joke.

This is is an interesting graphic that drives home my point I made earlier about using turnout models in polls.   MSNBC took the latest CNN poll and re-weighted it based on 2012 turnout models.  That's a pretty huge shift.

we obviously won't know whose right until November, but I know whose base is more excited.  

There were a lot of polls that came out today so I'll post a summary.  Not a lot of good news out there for Hillary today.

National polls were
USC Trump 46.7 Clinton 42 Trump +4.7
PPD: Trump 45.1, Clinton 41, Trump +4.1

CO: Ipsos: Trump 43 Clinton 41 Trump +2

OH: Bloomberg, 4-way Trump +5 (44-39) 2-way Trump +5 (48-43)
CNN: likely voters, 4-way Trump 44 Clinton 39 Trump +5

FL: CNN 4-way likely voters Trump 47 Clinton44

MI: Fox, 2-way Clinton 47 Trump 42 Clinton +5, 4-way Clinton 45, Trump 39

Maine: Boston Globe/SurveyUSA 4-way Clinton 42, Trump 39, Clinton +3

Maine CD2: Boston Globe 4-way Trump 47, Clinton 37, Trump +10 = For 1 electoral vote

Kansas: KSN News/SurveyUSA 4-way T Trump 48, Clinton 36, Trump +12

North Carolina: Suffolk (unclear if two or fourway): Trump 44, Clinton 41 Trump +3

Nevada: Monmouth 4-way Clinton 44 percent to 42 percent

and in ALL these Trump is way up (often more than 20%) with Independent voters.  As the never Trumpers continue to come around it's not going to be pretty.

I heard a pollster on one of the news shows this morning.  He said the hardest thing about polling is figuring out who is actually going to turn out to vote.  I c an see where that would be hard to predict.

If you are leading 55 to 45.....but your opponent's voters are 2x more likely to vote,  you might still lose.....even though you had a 10 pt lead.

Obama had the young vote and the black vote in the bag and there was no keeping them from the polls.  I don't see that sort of commitment from any demographic this time....for either side.

You'll have a hard time keeping us deplorables from voting on the 8th. 

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy

Originally posted by Rogillio

I heard a pollster on one of the news shows this morning.  He said the hardest thing about polling is figuring out who is actually going to turn out to vote.  I c an see where that would be hard to predict.

If you are leading 55 to 45.....but your opponent's voters are 2x more likely to vote,  you might still lose.....even though you had a 10 pt lead.

Obama had the young vote and the black vote in the bag and there was no keeping them from the polls.  I don't see that sort of commitment from any demographic this time....for either side.

You do realize the Democrats have dominated the young vote and the black vote for multiple elections before Obama, right? President Obama didn't become president primarily based on either of those demographics. His tremendous advantage was with female voters. If the Rs are worried about the young vote and the black vote, they won't win in November. It's a good thing their nominee connects so well with women, in fact, according to him, women love him...they think he's terrific. Don't believe him? Just ask him!

I think Trumps strength isn't so much any one category moreso than it is a combination of broad support across many categories. 

There's no question the Democrats have been strong with younger voters for longer than just Obama, but he also turned them out because they were very excited about his platform and message.
I have yet to meet a person under 30 who is excited about Hillary in any way and I'd say that most genuinely can't stand her.  I'm not saying they're Trump supporters either, but to say she's going to get the same kind of turnout as Obama is a pipe dream.  That's why I feel the polls may genuinely be way off because most of the pollsters are still using the 2012 turnout model to seed their polls.

As I predicted long ago, this election is continuing to show every sign of a total landslide for Trump and the closer we get to the finish line the more confident I become.

As we've discussed before the electoral college is the only thing that matters.  I was a little curious as to what things were looking like based on the waves of good polls coming in for Trump.

I took all the latest polls from RCP for a snapshot in time.  These aren't averages because the state poll averages drag out for months and I don't feel they're very accurate representations of where things are today.
Anyways, I plugged in everything and here's where it's at today.  The only one that was tied was NC (15 electoral) so I gave that to Trump because he has better hair.  My ultimately point is that the race is anybody's game at this point assuming the polls are accurate.  If Hillary doesn't get an Obamalike turnout then she's already finished IMHO.

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy

Originally posted by tuwood

As we've discussed before the electoral college is the only thing that matters.  I was a little curious as to what things were looking like based on the waves of good polls coming in for Trump.

I took all the latest polls from RCP for a snapshot in time.  These aren't averages because the state poll averages drag out for months and I don't feel they're very accurate representations of where things are today.
Anyways, I plugged in everything and here's where it's at today.  The only one that was tied was NC (15 electoral) so I gave that to Trump because he has better hair.  My ultimately point is that the race is anybody's game at this point assuming the polls are accurate.  If Hillary doesn't get an Obamalike turnout then she's already finished IMHO.

 

Tony, check those 3-D glasses of yours...either the blue lens was replaced with a red one, or you've got your one eye shut that's supposed to see through the blue lens. That's an extremely optimistic projection you've got on your handcrafted map there. You really see Trump taking just about every swing state this November?

You might want to re-read my post.  None of this was my projections or opinions.  I simply put to the map what the current state of all the latest state polls are.  Obviously they will shift and turn between now and November.  Several of the states are within the margin of error on both sides so it could go huge landslide in either direction, but the Trend has been all Trump for over a month.

Why do they poll just Trump vs Clinton?  Are Johnson/Stein not on the ballot in every state?  Is there a chance they will drop out?  Seems like they hurt Clinton.

I'm pretty sure Johnson is on the ballot in every state, but Stein is lagging quite a bit.  Honestly the national polls are a bit of an indicator overall, but obviously mean nothing.  Hillary could win CA and NY by 40 points and win the popular vote by 10%+ and still lose the election in a landslide as an example.

What I find more interesting is how the polls seem to be holding onto the turnout models from 2012 to justify their Hillary numbers.  There's no possible way Hillary gets Obama numbers this year so any polling based on those turnout models are severely flawed. 

Quinnipiac had a poll a few days ago that has Hillary capturing only 31% of the vote among voters 18-34 which was only 5% more than what Trump was capturing.  She had a 24 point lead in that same poll just last month.  But, the pollsters still think she'll do as well as Obama with turnout in that group?  yeeeaaahhhh suuuuure 
she's even in the margin of error with solid blue states such as Rhode Island and Pennsylvania which couldn't be a more troubling sign.  She desperately needs a good debate performance.

There is only one thing that can save Hillary now.....and that is Trump.  As long as he doesn't show crazy Trump, he will win. Polls show him up in CO and only down by 1 in PA.  If he flips PA, and keep FL and OH and NC, it's over.

I realize there is 6 weeks to go before the election, and I realize that Trump hasn't won anything yet........but the fact that this campaign is so close says volumes about how screwed up the Dems are.  LMAO

The country really is a conservative country and the Obama/Clinton type of politicians are severely out of touch.  You can see it with the congressional races and governors races.  Liberals are getting waxed left and right.

I saw an article a few weeks ago that was interesting.  If we used electoral votes based on congressional districts versus per state Romney would have won in 2012.  Meaning nationally, even in 2012 with Obama the country wasn't as on board as everyone likes to think. 

The part that is most encouraging to me overall is how the younger generations are reacting to the ridiculous levels of political correctness and snowflakes that have come out of the progressive millennial generation.  It's driving the kids to be much more conservative than previous generations because they see how stupid the alternative is.  

I have no clue about the credibility of this poll, but it's kind of funny considering Hillary's global experience is one of her biggest assets:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/wow-trump-leads-global-poll-77-vote-saudia-arabia-iran-pakistan-go-clinton/

At least Hillary is leading in Saudi, Iran, and Pakistan...

Well, since 11 people from North Korea have voted, and we just found out that North Korea only has a total of 28 websites (and I highly doubt this site made the cut), I'd say this poll is not the most accurate or credible. LOL

As humorous as the poll was, I tend to agree with you.   

I think that statement is out of touch, have you met us?

In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.

I'm  not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35

That pendulum swings just like any other elected office due to redistricting, population changes, immigration, etc.

You're overlooking the fact that the population density in this country is not evenly distributed.  The large population centers are more liberal while rural areas are more conservative.  This generally favors the Republicans in the House of Representatives.  But looking at the population of the U.S. as a whole, we're pretty close to 50-50 split in political spectrum.  You see it in every recent presidential election.

And then there's the whole social vs fiscal policy which breaks us down into even more categories, even though we don't have enough competitive parties to represent them.

Then you'd go down to about 15 years old right?  Isn't it usually about 20 years that separates generations?  Sorry bro.......you're gonna have to take the twins.