2016 Electoral College polling thread

[printcraft]

If I can get to the County Clerk's office, I'm voting today. Voting should not be about what everyone else thinks or opinion polls. I can vote for someone I know doesn't have a chance to win. My vote is the expression of my desire. I knew that Al Bundy didn't have a chance to win, and I was willing to vote that way. I know that Trump doesn't have a chance to win, and even if he did, it's a longshot to get him impeached. But here we are. I'm voting straight-ticket Republican.

To borrow a slogan, Pence '17!

Double check you vote. Strange happenings with straight ticket voting around the country.

 

[jamil]

Rand Paul '20

Perhaps by then Paul can mature more. He needs to. And he needs to stop groveling to donars. I saw an article about him, Cruz and I think Rubio being invited to speak in front of the Koch brothers and other libertarian minded donars. He kinda fought to get the first say and then went on about how he would protect their bottom line. That wasn't the message they were looking to hear so they wrote him off. And they pretty much wrote off the other candidates as well, Cruz and Rubio. It was funny to hear Reid, Obama, and the Democratic candidates during the primaries talking about the influence of the Koch brothers. Hell, they mostly sat this one out.

Point is, Paul is probably the closest chance we'll ever get to having a libertarian leaning POTUS, in my lifetime anyway. He needs to learn a lot before he tries again. He needs to better understand his audience, and most importantly, he needs to be much more reluctant to sell out his values, especially when he so miserably misread the values of potential donars.

 

[jamil]

Double check you vote. Strange happenings with straight ticket voting around the country.

I know. I'll report back after it's said and done. I think I should probably start thinking about getting on with it.

 

[printcraft]

I know. I'll report back after it's said and done. I think I should probably start thinking about getting on with it.

I'm going this Saturday.

 

[T.Lex]

The demoncrat oversampling is a optics tool.
It works to drive down early voting. No chance for Trump, why bother to vote?
The polls have to tighten up closer to the actual election....... if Trump wins they still get to claim "margin of error".
"See, we are conducting responsible polling!"

So I don't understand your point.

If they are manipulating the polling, why would they manipulate it so that it is within the MOE? As long as it is within the MOE, both sides have a chance. If "your" candidate still has a chance, "you" are more than likely to vote.

Rand Paul '20

I could probably get behind that.

But... what party will he be caucusing with?

 

[BugI02]

GOPt

 

[printcraft]

So I don't understand your point.

If they are manipulating the polling, why would they manipulate it so that it is within the MOE? As long as it is within the MOE, both sides have a chance. If "your" candidate still has a chance, "you" are more than likely to vote.

Self preservation for the polling organization..... media has already **** the bed on how many people trust them.
Previous polls a couple of weeks ago were double digits..... now they are in a virtual tie.... (if you believe them)....
It swung that a week out with basically nothing substantive out there?

 

[T.Lex]

Self preservation for the polling organization..... media has already **** the bed on how many people trust them.
Previous polls a couple of weeks ago were double digits..... now they are in a virtual tie.... (if you believe them)....
It swung that a week out with basically nothing substantive out there?

So, there's actually some data behind these kinds of swings. The coursework is called "Political Science" but even I (who majored in it) wondered how much "science" was in it.

The thing is, for the national stuff, there are still double or near-double digit polls out there. The exact number isn't important. If it is outside the MOE, chances are good that the person leading is "winning." If it is inside the MOE, then it is statistically a tie.

That's why I'm having trouble understanding what you're trying to say. If the goal is to suppress the vote, then the polls would be big in favor of HRC. And, the outliers would be the ones showing within the MOE or a Trump lead. They would all be scrutinized until the differences were understood.

There are people that make their living doing this stuff the right way. Even more people make their living analyzing it.

There's another issue: if Trump really had internal polling showing he was leading, he should release it. There's no reason to keep it private at this point.

(As an aside, it was unrealistic to think his campaign wasn't paying for polling for the last year. At least once a month, then 2x during the primaries, then at least weekly since the convention. IMHO.)

HRC is winning. She may not yet win, but she is winning where it counts.

 

[jamil]

GOPl

Fixy

 

[ArcadiaGP]

New Quinnipiac polls out now show tight races in GA, NC and IA.

GA: Trump 44-43%
NC: Clinton 47-43%
IA: Tie 44-44%
VA: Clinton 50-38%

 

[BugI02]

Not sure where they got this. RCP average still shows The Hag at +5% with an MoE around mid 3's. Might be because they now show it as a toss-up on the electoral map

But what the heck, it fits my narrative so I'm posting it

http://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2016/10/27/whoa-realclearpolitics-says-pennsylvania-now-toss/

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Orange County blue for the first time.

good job

California - Benchmark Politics

 

[T.Lex]

Not sure where they got this. RCP average still shows The Hag at +5% with an MoE around mid 3's. Might be because they now show it as a toss-up on the electoral map

But what the heck, it fits my narrative so I'm posting it

Can we get some sort of INGO consensus on what the MSM "narrative" is? I mean, in one thread, it is HRC +bazillion to suppress turnout. In another, it is they-have-to-keep-it-close. Or is it both? Or is it in the eye of the beholder?

Orange County blue for the first time.

See, to me that's not a big deal. CA was never going to go any direction other than blue in this cycle. If you're looking for a barometer of GOP strength, I can think of other counties.

 

[T.Lex]

As the big day approaches, things appear to be settling in. Conceding the possible tossups (FL, OH, NC, GA, AZ, UT, IA, NV) to DJT, it still leaves 273 going to HRC.

Anyone see any other states as possible DJT victories?

 

[Ericpwp]

IL

 

[T.Lex]

IL

Color me curious.

You are suggesting that a majority of Illinois voters (living, dead, and undead) would vote for Trump? You realize that the closest he's gotten in the last 2 months is 3x the MOE in a poll, right?

 

[jamil]

IL

Dude, there are too many dead people voting in Chicago alone. Ain't no way IL is going red.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

As the big day approaches, things appear to be settling in. Conceding the possible tossups (FL, OH, NC, GA, AZ, UT, IA, NV) to DJT, it still leaves 273 going to HRC.

Anyone see any other states as possible DJT victories?

How about if McMullin wins UT? He's been polling pretty well there I think (though my information is rather stale).

 

[T.Lex]

How about if McMullin wins UT? He's been polling pretty well there I think (though my information is rather stale).

Doesn't change HRC's number. She's at 273 if all of those states I listed go to McMullin/Trump/Bundy.

BTW, Nate Silver thinks the narrative is that its a horse-race, so the networks can drive eyeballs and build excitement.

Election Update: The Polls Disagree, And That?s OK | FiveThirtyEight

 

[Ericpwp]

They elected a R governor. I just think it is more in-play than people think. So I'm going out on a limb, I may be sawing on the wrong side, but I'm putting it out there.