Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NYT: Tied, Rasmussen: Trump +7

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #2
    In a related story, Nate Silver is "freaking out"... And this was before today's poll releases.
    Election Update: When To Freak Out About Shocking New Polls
    Trump has gained in our forecasts on stronger swing state polling.


    By Nate Silver

    At 6 this morning, Quinnipiac University released a set of surveys of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania with the best polling news Donald Trump has gotten in a long time. In the version of the polls that includes third-party candidates — that’s the version FiveThirtyEight uses — Trump led Hillary Clinton by 5 percentage points in Florida, 1 percentage point in Ohio and 6 percentage points in Pennsylvania.

    The results run in contrast to the preponderance of national polls, which show Clinton ahead by roughly 5 percentage points, on average.

    [...]

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...ing-new-polls/

    Trump's 7-point lead in the Rasmussen poll is right in line with the Quinnipiac results.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

    Comment


    • #3
      My take away from reading Nate Silver's article is that individuals (you) shouldn't place too much emphasis on individual polls nor should they dismiss outliers either, but should instead take a wait and see attitude.

      Ordinarily, this is the point at which I’d urge a little patience. There’s been a lot of news over the past two weeks — the conclusion to the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s emails and the Dallas shootings of police officers, in particular — and it would be nice to see how the polls settled in after a couple of slow weeks on the campaign trail. However, we’re entering a period of rapidly moving political news. Bernie Sanders endorsed Clinton only Tuesday. Trump is expected to name his VP later this week. And then we’ll have the party conventions. The prospects definitely look better for Trump than they did a week or two ago, but the landscape also looks blurrier, and it may not be until mid-August that we have a chance to catch our breath.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gorque View Post
        My take away from reading Nate Silver's article is that individuals (you) shouldn't place too much emphasis on individual polls nor should they dismiss outliers either, but should instead take a wait and see attitude.
        The polling of just the past few days, has moved Trump from a 3:1 underdog to nearly a 3:2 underdog in the "polls plus" forecast. It even gives him a narrow lead in Ohio.

        The Clinton collapse is just beginning. That said, she could very easily eke out a narrow electoral victory with leas than 44% of the popular vote.
        Attached Files
        Last edited by The Doctor; 14 Jul 16, 13:27.
        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
          The polling of just the past few days, has moved Trump from a 3:1 underdog to nearly a 3:2 underdog in the "polls plus" forecast. It even gives him a narrow lead in Ohio.

          The Clinton collapse is just beginning. That said, she could very easily eke out a narrow electoral victory with leas than 44% of the popular vote.
          This early, anything is possible, including the highly probable self-inflicted wounds by Trump. It should be an interesting and entertaining few weeks.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Gorque View Post
            This early, anything is possible, including the highly probable self-inflicted wounds by Trump. It should be an interesting and entertaining few weeks.
            One thing that is almost a certainty, is that the winner will get less than 50% of the popular vote.

            While Trump is a master of self-inflicted wounds, he is the only candidate with some upside potential. He could become a better candidate and improve his poll numbers. Her Hagness' ceiling is about 48%.
            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
              One thing that is almost a certainty, is that the winner will get less than 50% of the popular vote.
              True. There'll be some bleed-off to the 3rd party from those disaffected by the nominees.

              While Trump is a master of self-inflicted wounds, he is the only candidate with some upside potential. He could become a better candidate and improve his poll numbers. Her Hagness' ceiling is about 48%.
              I'm not enamored of the Hildebeest myself, but at the moment, to me she is the lesser of two pi$$-poor choices.

              Comment


              • #8
                If the protests, violence, and general social malaise continues in high gear, like it is at the moment, advantage Trump. People will blame it on the current administration and party in power... They always do.

                So, Obama in "Community organizer" (aka agitator) mode will just cripple Hillary's election chances.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  If the protests, violence, and general social malaise continues in high gear, like it is at the moment, advantage Trump. People will blame it on the current administration and party in power... They always do.

                  So, Obama in "Community organizer" (aka agitator) mode will just cripple Hillary's election chances.
                  Trump could follow Nixon's 1968 law and order pathway to a very divisive victory.

                  This will not likely be a "healing" election.
                  Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                    This will not likely be a "healing" election.
                    And I really couldn't be happier. I get one heck of an electoral show and the promise of a more politically disjointed American nation. That's a win-win.

                    Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.
                      How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                        And I really couldn't be happier. I get one heck of an electoral show and the promise of a more politically disjointed American nation. That's a win-win.

                        Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.
                        We, as a nation, probably need a fair bit more of political tear-down before any meaningful healing can begin.
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Gorque View Post
                          How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.
                          I think the "Revolution of 1800" might be a good historical analogy.
                          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gorque View Post
                            How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.
                            Naw, the two major parties wouldn't combine since they are already centrist status quo parties and have no reason to merge due to a few minor social differences. It makes people think their choice has more impact than it really does.

                            After all, Americans just want business as usual. Otherwise they wouldn't be voting for the same two parties who have led business as usual for centuries. The only people who may differ are those who have fooled themselves into thinking the candidates in this election offer real "hope and change".

                            Now somebody voting for the CPUSA - that's an American who wants some real change!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                              I think the "Revolution of 1800" might be a good historical analogy.
                              Forgive me, but wasn't that more a conflict within the government bureaucracy and the politicians themselves surrounding flawed electoral mechanics?

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X