November 8th: Trump +5

Conventional wisdom says that Trump's a dead duck, and we all know how prescient is conventional wisdom. Only two weeks left until election and RealClearPolitics (RCP) puts Clinton about 6 points ahead. So confident is Hillary (supposedly) that one newspaper now urges her to divert some from the presidential campaign and help Democrats in Senate and House races. We should be so lucky.

Back to the point. Presidential polls are split into two camps: MSM polls and non-MSM polls. They have starkly different characteristics and results. MSM polls come from those you already know, and the companies themselves have already shed their last shred of dignity and objectivity to throw in with Hillary. They also poll in discreet measure (i.e. release a poll whenever they want one to come out).

Non-MSM polls are not as well known but quite accomplished (e.g. Rasmussen, LA Times/USC, IDB/TIPP - the most accurate in 2012 election, btw). They also poll daily (actually an average of the last three days). Finally, MSM polls consistently show Hillary up by an average of 8%, whereas the non-MSM polls have shown variation based on events and a logical current tightening of the polls down to basically +/-1% or so per candidate (e.g. Trump in the lead right now by 2% in Rasmussen's poll).

What if the polls change more favorably for Trump? Great, but I'm not counting that here. What about the 2012 party sampling (or worse) adjustment to data? Have you seen the difference in the candidate's rallies? But so what? I'm not factoring that in either. No, I'm not talking about polls changes or the supposedly awoken silent majority giant. I'm talking about the Bradley Effect.

This was also discussed in the Podesta emails.

The Hillary folks noticed that Trump was performing better than his poll numbers in several early primaries.

They concluded that Trump supporters were more likely to be suspicious of pollsters (and therefore not respond) or weaker Trump supporters would try to tell the pollsters what they thought was “respectable”.

What I still can’t figure out is how you can accurately poll in this age of cell phones with caller ID. There has to be a minority of people who would even agree to take such a call, much less respond to the questions, and who knows how their voting patterns would compare to live respondents.

This stuff just seems like voodoo to me.

I don’t know if you know this, but in 1980 Carter’s internal polls had him winning the election, and Reagan’s internal polls had him winning the election!

How could this happen?

Well it turned out that the Carter people always started their poll with the Presidential preference question.

The Reagan poll asked a bunch of issue-related questions and saved the Presidential preference question for last.

So for low information voters (especially “undecided voters”) the Reagan poll was a simulation of what their experience would be at the voting booth. They were forced to focus on “issues” like the Iranian hostages (not good for Carter), energy policy and gas lines (not good for Carter), inflation (not good for Carter), etc. By the time they got done with that list new Reagan voters were born.

So today the first issue question should be: “Is Hillary Clinton corrupt?”

Then take your preference poll—and watch what happens next!

my prediction:

general election math: bring out your base (30%), either dispirit your opponents base (30%) or take some, and fight for more then half of the middle (40%).

1. Trump will bring out his base except for the ‘never trump’ people, if they exist and were on the right to begin with. Hillary’s personality attacks have been mostly to shake his support among women. Women on the right see this for what it is and don’t care. he’s also fired up a section of the base that rarely comes out... the silent majority. We’ve also seen an increase in GOP registrations and loads leaving the dems.
(may increase base; base energized; 30%+)

2. Trump’s also made inroads into the traditional democrat base; the unions, blacks, and hispanics. The dem base is also not as fired up as they could be and may stay home.
(10-20% stay home; 10% of the base vote for him; 3% of voters)

3. For the independents, he’s not an insider and is fighting the establishment. this is the key to appealing to independents. This is also a year for change and anti-establishment/anti-status quo. And his time with the WWE gained many fans and relates him to the average guy more than hillary ever could.
(60-65% of independents; 24-26% of voters)

Then we look at hillary... someone that has not campaigned much AT ALL over the last YEAR.
1. 40% of the base wanted Bernie.. which found out hillary rigged the game. that won’t sit well and they’ll stay home. How much of the base? unsure. but it’d at least match the NeverTrump types. She’s also not excited the base, so there won’t be a larger then normal dem turn out.
(10-20% will stay home; lost 10% to Trump; 21-24% of voters)

2. Hillary has made ZERO inroads into Trumps base. she is despised by the right. She’s got nothing here.
(0% of the right; 0% of voters)

3. As for independents, hillary IS the establishment. she is cronyism. she is rampant run-away unaccountable govt. i can’t imagine very many of the independents would find her refreshing.
(35-40% of the middle; 14-16% of voters)

popular vote final
—
Trump: base(30+) + opp(3) + ind(24-26) == 57-59%

Hillary: base(21-24%) + opp(0) + ind(14-16) == 35-40%

of course, playing with the electoral college is a different story. that’s where the gerrymandering of districts and ballot boxes comes in. the dems have a HUGE advantage there. on top of that, electronic voting is not verifiable or trackable; expect it to be rigged

apply my numbers to the registered voter totals on a per state basis and you’ll get an estimate how the electoral college would play out under my analysis

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.