Posted on 10/07/2016 2:24:24 PM PDT by Quicksilver
The Republican National Committee provided new voter registration numbers to Breitbart News:
Florida Net: +261,715
Iowa Net: +38,913
Nevada Net: +12,720
North Carolina Net: +173,785
Pennsylvania Net: +223,552
The Pennsylvania number is especially significant. Republicans signed up 30,000 people there in September alone. The Trump campaign in Pennsylvania is fired up but did not want to go on record at this time, in part because Generals MacArthur and Patton would not telegraph to the enemy their next moves.
Absentee ballot requests are going up for the GOP Florida: 335,000 more requests for absentee ballots among Republicans
Iowa: The Iowa Trump Train is going day by day with their number collecting. On Wednesday, Republicans put in 5,000 more requests for absentee ballots than Democrats, who are seeing a 51 percent drop in their ballot requesting numbers.
Michigan: Republicans are beating Democrats in absentee ballot requests by 59,000. Republicans are leading the daily race by 1,642 ballot requests per day over the last two weeks.
North Carolina: Republicans are beating Democrats by 1,902 ballot requests in the last three days, pointing to hopeful signs in the immediate future.
Pennsylvania: Republicans are losing to Democrats in absentee ballot requests by less than 1,000, but Republicans have “posted gains 11 of the past 14 days,” according to the RNC.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Usually the + means more Republicans than Democrats (as in the FL numbers).
Sometimes it means an increase over 2012 numbers so you’d have to look at context.
But normally if someone says, when discussing absentee ballots, Rs +30,000, that means so far the Republicans have 30,000 more absentee requests than Democrats.
As to your second question, absolutely no insight as to how a pollster would describe these people. Actually, I doubt they’d ever ask “when did you register?” They would likely say, “are you a registered Democrat or Republican or independent?”
LOL!!!
Even the funky msm polls are turning again. Trump is clawing his way back up and tied in Florida, tied in Virginia and so on.
Recall we heard nothing about polls for days and days and knew then that Hillary was down. So now she gets even and allegedly leads by 3 or 4 points and all we hear is about her superiority.
The media wants to latch on to that and proclaim the race “over” in favor of HRC.
I try to remember an article I read recently on polling the margin of error. Basically it concluded that a 3% MOE, could mean a swing of actually 7%! and in either direction for EITHER candidate.
In other words they have not a clue who is going to win in 2016, in this electronic age, vs land lines and message recorders, and demographic transformations and the movement of people everywhere to somewhere else.
You know what a Hollywood career looks like?
“Who’se Larry Schweikart?”
“Get me Larry Schweikart”
“Get me a young Larry Schweikart”
“Who’se Larry Schweikart?”
Surely the pollster would ask that question to the person being polled. But if the poll was designed to include only LIKELY VOTERS, they would have to ask a few screening questions to classify the interviewee as likely or not likely. Just wondering whether a newly registered voter would fail that "likely" test, simply because he or she doesn't have an established record of voting in the past.
>>(1) What is the meaning of the numbers after the plus signs in the registration figures for each state? (In other words, what is the base to which the new number of GOP registrations is being compared?)<<
The article uses the word “Net,” so I would say the “+” means net gain (including D losses) versus 2012 registered voters. I would ask the author but I couldn’t find any way to contact him.
>>(2) I know it may vary from poll to poll, but in general, would newly registered voters be counted by pollsters claiming to be polling and reporting on LIKELY VOTERS? (In other words, if you are a newly registered voter who has never voted before in your location or at all, are you thrown out of the poll results because you don’t have a voting history, and therefore thought to be unlikely to vote by the poll’s definition?)<<
Typically a newly registered voter wouldn’t be considered a likely voter. Likely presidential election voters are usually ones that have voted in the last 1, 2, sometimes 3 presidential elections. Some pollsters will simply ask something like “How likely are you to vote in the upcoming election? Not likely, somewhat likely, likely, very likely?”
Correct
Good questions. I’m sure you all know since the MSM have written about it from time to time, that pollsters do have concerns that they are not able to reach people who may be first time voters, newly energized voters who have stayed out of many past elections because they feel disenfranchised by the system itself regardless of who they voted for in the past. I gotta think that if there is a grouping of newly energized voters that the group would favor Trump, only because Hillary represents the establishment, and she is not new, and voters have already had a chance to vote for her in 2008.
As we get closer to November at what point to pollsters start considering absentee/mail ballots? It’s becoming big enough to matter, you can’t just count registered voters and likely voters, you have to start counting “already voted” (AVs). An interesting thought experiment at the least, but would you blend LVs with AVs, or run a poll of just AVs entirely. This would present a set of new problems, particularly trying to figure out if AVs are representative of the body politic or if they are imbalanced in some way that they can’t even try to correct for in the weighting. Additionally, in what way is this edge for Rs among AVs suggestive of voter enthusiasm, and does it project likely turnout to the polls in November. Lots to consider for those of us who enjoy watching and dissecting these polls.
I feel very calm about this election for some reason. I look at it as in God’s hands. We have been praying to him about this but if it is to be hillary, then I feel it is God’s will but I do think he will answer our prayers. To many people are praying about this for him to turn his back on us.
The big news is not even Donald (or Hillary). It’s Jesus.
If Jesus is ready to make a move, which He will if the Father has lined up to-be-willing souls for Him, then He will make a move. The Holy Spirit will breathe on the land and there will be many salutary consequences that accompany salvations. Generations that committed great iniquity in decades past are passing away and new generations are appearing.
What we are seeing here in the vote is the process of choosing what will be most advantageous to the Lord. This is what people ought to be looking for. I think any honest person can see who’s most advantageous to the devil and it isn’t Donald.
The interesting thing is that there doesn’t have to be any formal change to the laws of America before this can begin. People first become aware of the Lord, then they toss away their idols. There is no other reason for them to grasp as a reason to be done with the idols otherwise.
A lot of reluctant people will greatly dread at first, but it will be only a passing dread as the desire of the Lord to establish love among them becomes clear and they find more and more the ability to exercise this love. The dread will give way to the differently dimensioned fear of the Lord.
Many of us will already have been through schools of hard knocks and will be able to share wisdom that God has taught us through experience.
Bookmark
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.