- Bloomberg: 44-41
- CBS/NYT: 45-41
- NBC/WSJ: 44-40
- AP/Marist: 44-43
- FOX News: 45-43
- ABC/WashP: 47-43
- Ispos/Reuters 43-39
- UPI/CVoter 49-48
Ironically these eight polls on average show exactly a three point lead. Much different than the double digit leads they showed no more than a few weeks ago. I stated (last week) that I believed they would all be coming in the 3-5 point range. In fact, these have come in between 1-4 points, which is slightly stronger for Trump than I would have expected.
Meanwhile, my Demographic spreadsheet has also consolidated. The past twelve polls have shown Clinton receiving at least 84% of the Democratic vote, while Trump has at least 84% of the GOP vote in all but one of those same polls. The past 16 polls have all shown Trump leading Clinton with Independents. Right now these averages (all in all of 20 polls - weighted by age) are sitting approximately at:
- Democrats 88-6-4-2 (Clinton, Trump, Other, Undecided)
- Republicans 86-6-5-3 (Trump, Clinton, Other, Undecided)
- Independents 42-33-16-9 (Trump, Clinton, Other, Undecided)
These numbers would be well under the 92 and 93 percent of Democrats and Republicans that Clinton and Romney received. The nine point advantage for Trump would be better than the five point advantage that Romney garnered in 2012.
You can play with these numbers, and determine what you feel the Demographics might look like. Contrary to most popular opinions I am not sure that Democrats will enjoy the eight or nine point advantage that many of the other pollsters are looking at. That being said, the tipping point seems to be around a three point advantage. As long as these Demographics stay fairly close to the polling averages and the undecideds do not break substantially one way or the other, Clinton should win the popular vote as long as Democrats hold at least a three point advantage.
Herein lies the rub. Both 2008 and 2012 showed substantial Democratic advantages. 2000 and 2004 showed a very small Democratic advantage. The 2014 mid terms actually showed a Republican advantage. Do the 2008 2012 numbers show a new reality of changing demographics of Presidential elections, were those advantages created by the cult of personality that was Barack Obama, or was it a combination of the two? We should know within the next 48 hours.
27 comments:
Meanwhile,
US stock futures surge after Clinton cleared by FBI
Early gop voting up 10-20% based on state. Demx down from 2008 a nd 2012. The networks are still pushing the Clinton narrative of Hillary big win but real activity is saying the opposite.
The ECV landslide victory for Clinton is what we will see in 48 hours. Even if the polls are around 3%.
You're sure going out on a limb. You would think you learn something after 12 years of humiliation.
Common
Reagan won by landslide. Nixon won by landslide. They both won over 500 ECV.
Bill Clinton won twice without winning 50% of the vote. Bush won twice by small margins. Obama won 365 and 322 ECV and neither was generally considered a "landslide". Both considered more solid wins and 2008 offered at least the semblance of a mandate.
Hillary could win by two percent, pick up less ECV than Obama and Roger will call it a landslide... because like most liberals, he's obnoxious with his opinions.
Trump ahead of Romney by 120,000 votes in FL alone. This is the case across the board. There will be no Clinton landslide. If anything, Trump could have one.
Landslide is the term that numerous pundits will or will not use.
Balls, would you be willing to go away for six months if Trump does not win?
How about you, CS? Or you, Savage-etta?
Or any of you?
IF any one or more of you will bet me on that, I will make the same bet, and I will go away for six months if Hillary loses. :-)
(But only if someone makes the bet.)
Speaking of liberals obnoxious with their opinions.
How obnoxious is it to make the claims you make and yet put no "flesh" in the game?
I now see that Nate Silver has turned Florida and North Carolina blue (light blue) along with Nevada on all three of his casts (polls plus, polls only, and now-cast.
And his graphs now show a clear upturn for Hillary and downturn for Donald at the end.
IBD/TIPP, considered the most accurate over the last three elections, has Trump +2.
And no i would not do any betting when there is so much election fraud being exposed.
NEW YORK – Wall Street is celebrating the 2016 election results a day early.
Stocks soared on Monday morning while the Mexican peso rallied as investors bet the latest news out of the FBI and early voting results would help Hillary Clinton cruise to victory in the presidential election over Republican nominee Donald Trump.
The gains came as markets shook off an anxiety attack suffered in recent days over the increasing possibility of a surprise Trump win, a result investors fear would crush stock prices and lead to global financial instability given Trump’s unpredictability on economic and foreign policy.
“The Comey announcement turned the tide on what had been a bad week for Clinton,” said Steve Massocca, managing director at Wedbush Equity Management, referring to the announcement from FBI director James Comey on Sunday that the bureau would not change its recommendation of no charges against Clinton over her use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State. “And it sounds like turnout on the Democratic side in early voting will be enough to win the day. Add it all together and it looks like a Clinton win and that’s what markets want to see.”
Some individual(s) will "go away" anyway if his candidate loses, having too much emotional investment and to much bragging to live down. Others of us, being objective about the qualities of these candidates, aren't going to be particularly happy either way.
FWIW, it's not particularly insightful to keep predicting the same thing that about 75% or more of all American voters predict.
Final day Bloomberg poll puts them within the statistical margin of error, 46-43 +/3.5.
Which to statisticians means tied, since we cannot describe a probability distribution function within the error margin. (Think about it: if we could, you'd see probability breakdowns inside of that 3.5% range.)
If any of you are betting men, take the 5-1 odds that some of the prognosticators are claiming. If you can find a sucker to take that bet.
And his graphs now show a clear upturn for Hillary and downturn for Donald at the end.
Which is interesting, because a bulk (but not all) of the state polling coming out this morning has been better for Trump that Clinton. Including a poll from New Mexico that shows the race within 2 points. If New Mexico is in play, that means Trump probably wins Arizona (and I wouldn't bet against him winning Nevada in spite of all of the collective demands that it's over there).
Of course, that's only one poll and a "big if"... but a promising sign for that area of the country.
Meanwhile some are touting two polls that show Clinton plus 2 and tied in North Carolina. Only problem is that those two polls "had" showed Clinton plus 7 and plus 3 previously. Hardly a good sign for her.
ABC/Post
NBC/WSJ
NBC/Survey Monkey
UPI/CVOTER
CBS/Times
IBD/TIPP
Fox
Monmouth
Bloomberg/Selzer
Clinton +4
Clinton +5
Clinton +7
Clinton +3
Clinton +4
Clinton +1
Clinton +4
Clinton +6
Clinton +3
Gee Roger...
Are you not able to read the sidebar?
(and you wonder why so many people think you are such a tool)
There's something wrong with him.
It's over now.
Where is the party going as the changing demographics will give the Democrats control for a generation?
Gee, how do you ignore reality and give Trump a chance.?
Roger -
How do you ignore the fact that all of the polls are already on my website, and you continue to post them anyways?
Brain damage?
Actually IBD/TIPP is Trump +2
And la times is Trump +5
But you just keep posting the left wing polls that you like.
One election night fireworks show cancelled.
Ruh roh
Roger Amick said...
Gee, how do you ignore reality and give Trump a chance.?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
well alky, it's like this:
as it has been explained to you multiple times on this blog, the race is one big fat statistical tie.
margin of error
phrase of margin
1. an amount (usually small) that is allowed for in case of miscalculation or change of circumstances.
the reality is trump HAS A FUCKING CHANCE.
is he guaranteed, especially by one of your hilarious and faulty landslides?
nope. but he definitely has more of a chance than you're giving him credit for at this point.
considering the way you're behaving as we close in on election day, i stand by my opinion that you are suffering from a very severe mental illness. healthy rational adults simply don't behave the way you've been behaving. like the left has been known to say about blacks - you're fucked in the head.
In Roger's world... here is how it works.
- Trump "was" ahead in Ohio.
- Two new polls show him up by five and seven.
Roger moves the Ohio race to Clinton because LeBron James showed up at a rally with her.
No, Mr Blocked me on Facebook. I just think that there is going to be a last moment, oh MY God, I can't vote for that lunatic moment. I may be wrong on that, but the rest of them? I'm sure.
Post a Comment