Exclusive — Breitbart/Gravis Polls: Trump Takes 4-Point Lead in Colorado, Maintains Lead in Ohio

Breitbart ^ | 25 Sep 2016 | MATTHEW BOYLE

[mandaladon]

NEW YORK CITY, New York — Republican nominee for president Donald J. Trump has taken the lead in Colorado and maintains his lead in Ohio, two new Breitbart News Network/Gravis Marketing polls released on Sunday show. The promising polls for Trump come just before the all-important debate an hour from here on Monday night, at Hofstra University on Long Island.

In Colorado, a swing state with 9 electoral votes, Trump leads Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton by 4 points—outside the survey’s 3.5 percent margin of error. Trump, at 41 percent, leads Clinton—who has just 37 percent. Libertarian Gary Johnson takes 6 percent and Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party takes 6 percent, and 10 percent of the voters polled are undecided. The poll, conducted from Sept. 22 to Sept. 23, surveyed 799 registered voters in Colorado.

[Nifster]

The graves poll is done by pat Caddell. Him I trust

[Nifster]

Then you are either being sarcastic or delusional

[ReaganGeneration2]

Registered voter polls have undercounted Trump support, compared to likely voter polls, right?

[SamAdams76]

Good points on the 2012 Nate Silver model. I remember four years ago we were all discounting it here. However Nate's model is scary accurate because he was correct in 49 out of 50 states in 2008 (missing one state by only 0.1%). Then he was 50 out of 50 in 2012.

In 2012, Nate had Romney at 14.3% just prior to the first debate and then, due to the strong debate performance, Romney improve to 38.9% but it was steadily downhill from there. By Election Day, Romney's chances were pegged at 9.1% (see graph below from 2012). The live link is here if you want to take a closer look at this and other graphs from that year.

This year, I believe Nate is "holding back" on us, trying desperately to preserve the "horse race" - and keep his audience in suspense. But in the end, he'll get it right so that his reputation is intact. He does seem to have a pretty reliable predictive model here. However, it probably won't be until much closer to Election Day that we see him move the states required to push Trump over the top, even though by then, it should be fairly obvious to the rest of us that Trump has this won.

Looking at 2012, he added 13.5% to Obama in the final few days. We will likely see a repeat this year only Trump will be the beneficiary.

[Maine Mariner]

So do I. He did an excellent job polling for Carter in 1976.
I did not like the fact that he worked for Carter but he certainly knows polling.

[Hieronymus]

Thanks for the post.

I would add that large moves at the end are also appropriate—there is a chance that something can be pulled out of a hat and change momentum, but the less time remaining the more immediate and total the change has to be.

Silver may have his finger slightly on the scale early on, but I doubt that he has it on at all at the end. I think he really is a stats guy first and a liberal second.

I’ve actually had the page you linked to open in another tab for several days. I’d be really curious to see the equivalent for 2008.

[laplata]

Personally, I think gun owners have woke up!!!!

---

I hope so and think you make a good point.

[HamiltonJay]

PA,MI and WI as well.

[Jet Jaguar]

There is one recent poll showing Trump up by about 4.

I cannot find a link.

It was a surprise for new Mexico.

[ConservativeDude]

Agreed

[FirstFlaBn]

Doesn't the MOE actually mean that the figures can swing +- 3.5% in either direction?

Welcome to the club. You and I appear to be the only two who understand this fundamental attribute of statistical analysis. Good job!

Also, consider that no point within that range is any more likely than any other - the midpoint is reported for ease of understanding. Where this usually matters is when a talking head says, "Candidate A gained 2 points this week." The fact is, even if the new reported number is 2 points higher than last week's, Candidate A could actually have dropped from last week.

It apparently never occurs to those misapplying MOE that, if, as they would have it, MOE had something to do with the margin between two candidates, then what happens when there are more than two candidates?

What this means is that no matter how hard you squint at a yardstick, you can't use it as a micrometer.

[af_vet_1981]

Nate Silver gives this pollster (Gravis) a B- and so does not give as great a weighting to the poll, in addition to adjusting the 4 point lead down to 3.

[KavMan]

If we win CO, does that mean we don’t need VA or PA?

[Jeff Chandler]

Take the RCP no toss up map, flip Colorado, and Trump wins.

[KavMan]

Nate Silver is an IDIOT! The reason he was so accurate last time was because he got polling data from the Obama admin!

Look what happens when he doesn’t? TRUMP has a 5% chance of being the Republican nominee! HAHAHAHAHAHA

[Hieronymus]

SIlver has it in now—good for a .8% bump in the overall odds to 43.2% Assuming the day closes on this number, it will be Trumps 2nd highest close after Sept. 20th (at least in the polls plus, which is what I follow). Hopefully tomorrow he can both close over 44.0%, his previous high, and have a good debate performance that keeps the numbers moving in the right direction for a week.

If he can get over 50% and Hillary becomes the under dog officially, the dynamic will likely change greatly.

[SweetPatriot84]

He needs NC too. I think he should get it.

[Ken H]

Deplorable!

[Hieronymus]

Yes, SIlver said that. But when? He was admittedly doubtful about Trump, but also eventually modified his position.

RIght now he has trump at 43.2% chance to win. Same date 2012 he had Mittens at 20.3% chance. He, or his model, thinks Trump is a great deal better off than Mittens.

[Red Steel]

I watched Silver fairly closely in this election cycle when a Never-Trumper early on told me he was better than sliced bread.

He's best at getting it correct making his final projections that are within 24 hours of an election. About all of us can do the same and be just as successful when the tea leaves are very easy to read. When Silver goes off the rails and in la la land when he has to prognosticate early spouting the usual leftist talking points feeding his followers of Dems what they want to hear.

Little Silver said Trump had a better chance of playing in the NBA finals than winning the Republican nomination. Well, Trump should play in the NBA too LoL. Silver thought or still thinks getting endorsements in this election cycle was the way to election nirvana. Silver was talking Yeb! v. Hillary - counting who's getting the "big or bigger" endorsements from some politico or from some Hollywood brainless, which was up front on his website's home page.

However, it probably won't be until much closer to Election Day that we see him move the states required to push Trump over the top, even though by then, it should be fairly obvious to the rest of us that Trump has this won.

Got to keep'em on the 538 plantation as long as possible.

Silver's flaws in his "methodology" is he can't or did not read or understand what the Republican electorate was seeing comparing candidate vs. candidate. Intangibles and qualities: leadership, smarts, likeness, ability, wisdom, record, truth, gamesmanship, energy, achievement, willpower, communication, job history, and winner...et cetera. It was obvious which presidential candidate had the edge early on. Trump is a new proto-presidential candidate who has exposed the flaws in relying on skewed and flawed polls that are essentially done by Democrats who run the liberal colleges and poli-sci departments, and a liberal media whose purpose is to defeat the Republican candidate as they are hysterically afraid.