Posted on 07/19/2016 9:20:46 PM PDT by brookwood
No. It’s meaningless til you get “likely” voter polls, which I think is ONLY Rasmussen so far.
That’s cause you aren’t seeing “likely” voter polls and because of 3D and 4th party candidates that eat up 5%.
I am hoping her polls firm up. If she crashes too quickly the Dems will get wise to it and dump her at the convention.
My sense is that Reuters has still over sampled women and seriously under sampled independents.
I’m sensing a larger lead for Trump out there than is being captured when I go into the details of their numbers.
He’s leading big time among seniors, conservative Christians, retired, married, and straight.
Any “pwoof”?
Their own numbers in their filters at their site:
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1
Of 928 likely voters 517 were female. Using the rule of thumb of 52/48% among likely voters, these numbers show 56% female. http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1,SEX:2|1
Thanks!
Bubba may croak before November just to give Hilarity the sympathy vote.
Of 928 likely voters, 407 were democrat, 384 were republican, 101 were independent, and 36 were other party.
Gallup says it’s 31 democrat, 28 republican, and 39 independent. If we group the ‘other party’ group into the independents, we still have
43% democrat
41% republican
15% independent
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.