The USC Dornsife / LA Times Presidential Election "Daybreak" Poll (T: 45.4, C: 43)

cesrusc.org ^ | 9/21/16

[PapaBear3625]

see chart at site

[BlueStateRightist]

This poll also reflects a normalization after some responded emotionally to the Crook’s “seizure/collapse”. This is to be expected. This is why the effects of specific events shouldn’t be measured until they are “baked into the cake” and a few weeks have passed.

[djpg]

We are having the polling obsession that we always seem to get this time of year. At this point, all we can say is that both candidates have a roughly equal chance. That’s the best that Trump could have expected for now.

[NYC-RepublicanCT]

With $145mm in ads, plus a media that’s non-stop in overdrive trying to destroy Trump and spin every Hillary negative into a positive, takes its toll.. Surprised he’s still standing . Of the 16 candidates, no one else would be within 10 points of her... He needs to blanket the airwaves with ads already to stay competitive

[ReaganGeneration2]

5. Hillary can’t let a day pass without screaming and throwing something ceramic. Bring out the ex-Secret Service agents.
6. Hillary launched an impulsive and illegal war to overthrow Libya and destabilize an entire nation, also leading to 4 dead Americans

[Ray76]

Need a bigger lead

[TheConservativeBanker]

Media have to have polls which create the impression of a “horse race” between the major candidates. Otherwise, no clicks on article links, viewers for cable news or listeners to radio news and comment. The purpose of the polls is twofold: 1. Shape voter opinions and 2. Attract readers, viewers or listeners to MSM outlets.

[tennmountainman]

Agree. Clinton is AWOL from the campaign trail.
Trump is working his butt off, as he always does.

[Robert A Cook PE]

True.

[jpeg82]

This is the reason for the decline. They decided to change their methodology.

Update: As of Monday September 19th, the Daybreak Poll’s charts will reflect a change in the way we compute the “area of uncertainty” represented by the gray band in each chart. This change means that candidate votes that are about 5 or 6 percentage points apart will be shown to be statistically significant (depending on sample size and how much variation there is in the voting). Our previous calculations required an interval of +/5.5 percentage points for significance in our election forecast, which we have determined was too conservative. We have adjusted the interval in the charts, and in the data provided in the poll’s csv files accordingly.

[utahagen]

I'm not going to dismiss polls — that would be foolhardy — but here's something to keep in mind. I watched HRC’s rally in Florida yesterday. The WashPo actually wrote a fair article about the rally, noting the “unusual” choice HRC made in making people with disabilities the focus of the rally. It was an unusual rally, alright, for someone within a few weeks of running for President of the USA. It seemed clear to me that HRC’s handlers wanted to stand her next to a profoundly handicapped woman for the whole rally to contrast HRC herself with the woman, as in: look how strong and healthy HRC is! The content of HRC’s remarks was all estrogen-drenched lefty stuff: black people are mistreated by police, disabled people are undervalued by everybody, rich people hog up all the resources. I don't recall any talk about terrorism. And this rally follows one she cancelled in NC and is after a weekend of terrorism in NY and NJ. My point is that the polls may show a tight race or even show HRC in the lead, yet why is she NOW pandering to groups that she surely has in the bag? And doing so, knowing that she is going to alienate men? (I'm a woman and nearly threw up watching this treacly rally; no guy would have made it through the whole thing.) I think HRC’s campaign is nervous...so keep that in mind when you read about some of these polls. I suspect people simply aren't telling pollsters the truth. Between the recent terror attacks in NYC and this state of emergency in NC, I have a hard time believing most voters want to elect someone who is choosing to focus on hugging people in wheelchairs right now.

P.S> I have a special needs child, so I am NOT mocking the handicapped. If anything, I thought HRC’s use of them yesterday was exploitative.

[CAluvdubya]

At this point, there appears to be no way to get the thumb suckers and bed wetters here at FR to ever understand or admit that the polls are pure unadulterated bullshiite. Trump is not now, nor has he ever been, behind in this race, since the beginning of the primaries to this very day. Any poll that asserts otherwise is complete and utter bullshiite.

I believe the feeling comes from the terror of a Hillary presidency. There are days I am confident that Trump will win. Other days, doubt creeps in as I picture what could happen if the Benghazi Butcher cheats her way to the White House.

It's all fear based.

[hopespringseternal]

Its risky for a pollster to get too far from the pack or show some sort of tremendous blowout. With Trump showing up 7 points ahead previously they will change things. The polls represent the odds of each candidate winning. It isn’t safe for the pollster to allow his polling to heavily favor one candidate.

[jokemoke]

Yikes!!! Numbers are going the wrong way

[xzins]

The closer we get to the election, the less time we have after an attack to respond to it.

[ballplayer]

She has disappeared that’s why

[ScottinVA]

It’s all good, folks.

Trump is +5 in the Rasmussen today! :-)

[wbill]

This morning’s news put Trump at +5 in NC. Which is more in line with what I’d expect.

[Beeman]

Rasmussen has Trump up by 5. His biggest lead there.

[Tanniker Smith]

The most troubling part of this poll is the question "Who do you think will win?" Hillary has always been far ahead in that measure, meaning that a large number of Trump voters don't think he will win.

I don't want that perception to become the reality.

[BlueStateRightist]

The sad fact is that about 5% of the population votes emotionally. So events that occur close to Election Day have outsized effect. I truly believe that Storm Sandy had a large effect on the 2012 election. Natural disasters and terrorist attacks strangely prompt the populace to rally around the current party in leadership. So, in fact, the terrorist attacks, while the result of Obama and Democrats failed policies, actually (short term) help the party in power. That’s partly why Clinton has recovered in this poll (and People’s Pundit) this week.