[LS]

There is no question the “polls” show Cankles ahead.

What do you expect when you routinely-—and I mean every single poll-—oversamples Ds by anywhere from 5-10 points? If you let me do a R+10 oversample, I’ll have Trump winning CT, MI, WI, MN, and so on.

An article out today said that if you just restrict polls to “likely” voters, it’s a 2 point Cankles lead-—but even THAT article admitted it didn’t adjust for D oversamples.

Now, as to social media, it’s just like what they always said about Russia: “Russia is never as weak as she looks, Russia is never as strong as she looks.” This data doesn’t mean a great deal by itself, but it cannot be ignored, either. In 2008, Obama had a massive social media lead over McCain that was completely ignored.

[zzeeman]

An article out today said that if you just restrict polls to “likely” voters, it’s a 2 point Cankles lead-—but even THAT article admitted it didn’t adjust for D oversamples.

Another thought: how difficult is it to predict what a "likely" voter is for this 2016 contest? I believe that there are factors in play that are likely to render the existing categorization of a "likely" voter obsolete.