Posted on 09/15/2016 5:50:38 AM PDT by Redmen4ever
Over a month ago, they weren’t showing the polls that had Trump ahead, so Hillary was ahead by around 13 points.
RCP is not really biased. What I think they’re missing is that with social media, and a hyper news cycle, having a poll from 2-3 weeks ago count as part of the average is useless.
This methodology was fine in 2000 and 2004, even 2008. But as we saw in 2012, the averages showed Romney much closer than they actually were, but if you discounted the polls and looked at only polls within a one week period, it showed a fairly big Obama win.
I can’t believe that 9% of the public is willing to pi$$ away their votes on fringe candidates.
Unless the fringe candidate is VERY high profile, like Perot or George Wallace, fringers get a couple of percent.
Notice they don’t cite FiveThirtyEight any longer.
That site uses a more sophisticated poll averaging methodology that has been correctly showing the Trump surge.
Nate Silver and his team are progressives, and thus not to be trusted, but to their credit, their adjustment/averaging methodology is transparent and fully disclosed.
The number of undecided in a poll depends on whether the poll-taker presses people into a choice. Some polls do not press likely voters into making a choice, and not many polls report leaners.
In the Bloomberg poll released yesterday, in the four-way, WITHOUT leaners, 1 percent volunteered they would not vote, and 6 percent said they were not sure. (This is kind of funny because this was a likely voter poll, and 1 percent of likely voters said they would not vote for President. Presumably, they’d still vote for Gov., Sen., and Cong. and whatever other offices are on the ballot.) Bloomberg than asked a follow-up, to whom do you lean? And, 1 point shifted from not sure to each of Hillary and Trump. So, the percentage of undecideds we can say is 4 to 7 percent, depending on whether you include leaners and abstainers, in addition to true undecideds.
Speculatively, if Trump is 2 points ahead, and if he picks up a net of 4 points from undecideds and net of 4 points from peel-off from the third-party candidates, he would amass a 10 point lead. There are a lot of “ifs” in this statement. It’s kind of a best case scenario for Trump.
I do wish Trump could get up to 45% in a 3-way race.
RCP shows both cuts. In a 4-way, she’s up by 1.1. That includes the ridiculous ABC/WashPost, which is Clinton +5
I may be surprised, but I don’t think it’s possible at this time to have a landslide any longer, especially not a GOP landslide. The Rat candidate has such a built in electoral college advantage with huge winner take all states like NY, CA, PA (”always a bridesmaid, never a bride”), NJ and the Pacific NW states (where population is growing).
Several reliably red states in the 1980’s are purple now, if not trending blue (VA, OH, NC, FL, CO, NH).
So the Rat only needs to pick off a couple of those “periwinkle” states to get to 270, while the GOP needs to basically run the table.
But with Clinton sitting at 41-45% of the popular vote, that’s not going to get the job done.
We are blessed that we have such a likeable, hard working, charismatic candidate who has an almost pathologic desire to win. If he were not out on the trail almost every day being seen and getting coverage, the hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads and obvious media bias would have taken him down long ago. After this incessant character assassination it is incredible that his negatives are not higher.
In direct contrast, on the other side Hillary feels that she is “entitled” to be president. Her followers are incensed by even the least amount of pushback... take the hapless liberal Matt Lauer for instance. The liberals want are beside themselves that he wasn’t able to quash any dissent from the audience. Trump expects to be treated badly by the mainstream media, so when it happens he is able to minimize the damage. Hillary does not know how to respond to even softball questions. She can get defensive if someone asks how her weekend went.
Hillary is on a downward trajectory. I expect some kind of dead cat bounce as the media comes to her defense and 100s of millions more dollars are spent propping her up, but the whole situation is still crumbling.
You make a sad point. I’m going to amend my thought. I believe a popular vote landslide could be coming that may shock the media. All while the electoral college slides the election to a close race due to the point you made. Do you not think Pennsylvania could be in play for Trump? Sorry I did not check your profile for a location and I’m in Texas with only one contact in PA. He is my son-in-law’s brother, a veteran and Conservative. His wife however is as liberal feminist as they come.
I think Mr. Trump’s energetic campaign schedule compared to Hillery’s is winning us a few votes as well. He may be seen as one of the rich entitled elite but he is working hard like tbe rest of us poor or middle class. It makes a difference I think, tho I wouldnt vote for Hillary if she arrived at my door with the publishers clearing house grand prize.
I lived in northeastern PA for 32 years. It is really tough for the GOP to overcome the Philly and Pittsburgh metro area even though the remainder of the state is conservative. The Reagan Democrats of yore have by and large died off or moved south. The Philly burbs used to be fiscally conservative but socially liberal but now they’re mostly just liberal on all counts.
PA is not impossible but it would take the big city suburbs to go largely Trump and a lower than usual turnout in the city limits.
My two cents only and I’m no expert.
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.