Posted on 10/02/2016 4:26:47 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The 2016 USC Dornsife / LA Times Presidential Election Poll for October 2, 2016: Republican Donald Trump vs. Democrat Hillary Clinton. (Photo: THE USC DORNSIFE / LA TIMES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION “DAYBREAK” POLL)
After nearly a week of interviews conducted after the first presidential debate, Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton by roughly 5 points in the LA Times Poll, 46.9% to 42.2%. TV pundits have stuck to conventional political wisdom, despite the fact it has failed them at every turn this election cycle.
As a result, the LA Times Poll has been taking even more heat than it has in the previous several weeks, which is really saying something.
Last week, during an appearance on Fox News, Larry Sabato, whom we respect (so save your emails), insinuated “random sample polls” have shown an impact from the debate that favors Mrs. Clinton. It was an indirect dig at the LA Times Poll–and, the People’s Pundit Daily U.S. Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll for that matter–a dig that has been repeated on Twitter by others like Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics.
But there’s something pretty damn significant missing from the conventional wisdom-based argument, something I think readers and election-watchers should know....
(Excerpt) Read more at peoplespunditdaily.com ...
Sabato is a #nevertrumper. I don’t listen to anything he has to say anymore. He wants Trump to lose and lose badly. He’s trying to protect the GOPe.
“Because we recognized that pollsters in 2012, and again in 2014, seemed to be having a difficult time reading the electorate, specifically participants who were most likely to vote.”
Important statement from the article. Basicallly enthusiasm.
The money quote:
“In 2012, the model and methodology they are using, which was designed by the team behind the RAND Continuous Presidential Election Poll, or the “Daybreak Poll,” was was right when most other traditional random sample polls were wrong.”
This is its successor. They got it right in 2012 when every other poll erroneously pointed to a win for Mitt Romney. Liberals are doing the same things we did in 2012, playing fast and loose with party ID, ignoring the evidence in front of us and believing Obama could be beaten by a terrible GOP candidate. Our side then suffered from massive confirmation bias. Look at what the other side is doing now. Trying to drag Hillary over the finish line even though everything shows she will lose. Look at the trend since September.
MSM pollsters are discounting Trump voters actually turning out to vote.
In 2012, they predicted Obama voters would not come out to vote. They did.
Sounds like they’re overreacting and trying to compensate for their failure to accurately call the election 2012 by doubling down on denying reality.
I hope they keep it up until November 8.
Appears the Witch’s poll numbers collapsed on 9-11 when the Witch physically collapsed.
Yep. Not just because it had Trump up, but early on I began to suspect that this poll was the closest to accurate. That was in part because, lo and behold, the other polls looked just like it if they took their ridiculous D+10 samples out, especially Reuters.
Until Reuters decided it had to go Full Cankles, it was very much in line with this poll in its margins if not its percentages-—but it did swing much more wildly.
Trump has been leading since Labor Day.
Dismiss it all you want. Cooking the polls for Hillary harms her by leading her to believe she’ll win when its not supported by the evidence.
And fantasy D + turnout of 8 + etc. won’t happen. Neither party has ever had such a lopsided turnout in the entire history of American elections.
Yet Hillary is history’s exception, exactly what people should expect with junk science polling.
Sabato is a dyed in the wool Democrat not a Never Trumper. He’d never be a Trumper at all.
Sabato is a dyed in the wool Democrat not a Never Trumper. He’d never be a Trumper at all.
WOW! Read the whole article and was impressed. If you go down the poll list between Obama and Romney you see the closest poll institute that nailed it was the NBC/WashPost...scary! I believe they have the 666beast 6pts ahead of trump. Let’s pray she’ll faint again!!
If Trump really is five points ahead of Hillary this close to the election, he is the likely winner.
Sean Trende from RCP is mentioned in this article. I have been following elections on ECP since 2000. RCP has its own bias of which polls count and when they are posted and.or pulled from the current average. They are very Pro Hillary, They wer wrong in 2014 also.
Sabato is a democrat, not “GOPe”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.