The US Election Polling / Data Thread

[troutman]

Seems to me it is not about Trump or Clinton anymore. People are gravitating to their normal red and blue corners.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by troutman

Seems to me it is not about Trump or Clinton anymore. People are gravitating to their normal red and blue corners.

Overton window closing in.

[White Out 403]

it would be very interesting if Trump won the election but lost the popular vote. That'd be the last 2 republican presidents. That has to be some sort of statistical anomaly.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

it would be very interesting if Trump won the election but lost the popular vote. That'd be the last 2 republican presidents. That has to be some sort of statistical anomaly.

seems more likely the way the map is, with the Dems getting the largest states, CA and NY.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

it would be very interesting if Trump won the election but lost the popular vote. That'd be the last 2 republican presidents. That has to be some sort of statistical anomaly.

Interesting in a depressing sort of way.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

seems more likely the way the map is, with the Dems getting the largest states, CA and NY.

One thought is that there's a few states where the Democrats are actually up in support over previous years, but these are western and sourthern states that are either impossible (Texas) or unlikely (Georgia) to flip this cycle, making for a very inefficient vote (inefficient in terms of E.V.s gained per vote cast).

On the other hand, ground-game is the most targeted, efficient tactic out there in terms of impact, and Clinton may have already established an insurmountable lead in several swing states in terms of ground-game, and needs only to battle Trump to a polling draw in order to capitalize on her superior field efforts.

[troutman]

Swing States [538]

Clinton's weakest link (below 60%) is Colorado.

Trump has Nevada and Florida below 60%.

[Senator Clay Davis]

These numbers are mostly post debate. Overall consensus everywhere is Hillary won it easily and Trump's temperament is a problem. All from PPP

National: Clinton 44, Trump 40, Johnson 6, Stein 1
CO: Clinton 46, Trump 40, Johnson 6, Stein 2
FL: Clinton 45, Trump 43, Johnson 3, Stein 1
NC: Clinton 44, Trump 42, Johnson 7
PA: Clinton 45, Trump 39, Johnson 6, Stein 2
VA: Clinton 46, Trump 40, Johnson 7, Stein 1

[Caged Great]

They had Clinton up 5 at the end of August nationally, so with all the crap that she went through this past month, to be up 4 is probably a win all things considered.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by nik-

I think a lot of Trump's polled support is just poll support. I have a feeling a significant portion of independents that poll Trump will have a "I just can't do it" moment at the actual ballot box. Pragmatism will win lots of these people in the end.

There is reason to believe that current polling is under-representing Trump's support. 'Social desirability bias' will push respondents away from shameful, but true responses.

Relevant reading, on this topic and Trump's popularity in general;
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424...thoritarianism

[Flash Walken]

Great article Gozer

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Overton window closing in.

I actually think this election cycle, and Trump in particular, has been very promising for widening the Overton window.

(The Overton window is the range of possible changes that could happen)

The GOP really shot themselves in the foot in this regard, with their incoherent, inconsistent, and inane policy positions over the last decade.

[troutman]

Betting Odds:

Clinton up 4.8% to 68.7%, in last week.

https://electionbettingodds.com/week.html

Clinton favored to win COL, FLA, NC. Ohio a dead heat.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I actually think this election cycle, and Trump in particular, has been very promising for widening the Overton window.

(The Overton window is the range of possible changes that could happen)

The GOP really shot themselves in the foot in this regard, with their incoherent, inconsistent, and inane policy positions over the last decade.

agree, after Trump more radical candidates should have an easier time in the primary process.

More so I mean after the conventions the music starts to slow down and everyone starts looking for the chair they are going to sit in once the music stops.

Before the conventions there are Bernie chairs and biden chairs, even Michelle Obama chairs but now there are only two chairs and no one wants to get stuck on the outside looking in.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

...no one wants to get stuck on the outside looking in.

I'm rather comfortable on my 'smug hipster d-bag' chair.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Gozer

There is reason to believe that current polling is under-representing Trump's support. 'Social desirability bias' will push respondents away from shameful, but true responses.

Relevant reading, on this topic and Trump's popularity in general;
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424...thoritarianism

In the primary's trump consistently under performed his polling providing no evidence of a shy trump affect. Though he does perform better in online polling then live which could be an indication.

There was a book written by a UofM prof called the Authoritarians just before the 2nd bush election that discussed a lot of whats in that article. It would be an interesting but dated read now.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I'm rather comfortable on my 'smug hipster d-bag' chair.

Edit: wrong thread, this is for polling only, my bad

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by GGG

In the primary's trump consistently under performed his polling providing no evidence of a shy trump affect.

That's very explicable; the primary demographic is much less likely to be confident in their answer (vague preference among ten != dichotomy) and more likely to have their views reinforced in their peer group (i.e. less likely to be influenced by Social Desireabilty Bias)

[troutman]

Polls might underestimate Clinton's strength too.

In California, polls had Clinton leading Sanders 48-44 on June 1st (undecided 4%).

Clinton won California 56-43.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...mary-5321.html

[Izzle]

Pretty nifty article on why different forecasts are so fart apart. I quickly perused it, but will give it a detailed read through over lunch.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/30/up...far-apart.html