General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPolls Tightening....Frightening.
Hillarys substantial lead has diminished, it seems over the past week
Nate Silvers Poll had her in the low 60s% is today down to to close to 52 while Trump is at 48.
Why? who the hell Knows.. My gut tells me it was the the N.Y. Bombing...Frightening events like the Chelsea Bombing frighten so many people into looking for a Great Protecter. They dont care about his lies, his history, or anything else which should disqualify him from running for President.
They just care about protecting themselves from foreign Terrorists... Doesnt matter if the terror is perpetrated by Naturalized Citizens.. If there is a foreign SOUNDING Muslim Name attached to the violence,.......thats all they need to hear and then cower towards Trump.
By the way Nate Silvers 538 called 50 out of 50 states ion 2012..
skylucy
(3,740 posts)criteria etc. I also think Hillary's ground game and GOTV will prevail big time.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)As of September 26, 11:34AM EDT:
Snapshot (149 state polls): Clinton 292, Trump 246 EV Meta-margin: Clinton +1.5%
RSS Clinton Nov. win probability: random drift 69%, Bayesian 79%
Senate snapshot (47 polls): Dem+Ind: 49, GOP: 51, Meta-margin: R +0.7%, Nov. control probability: Dem. 55%
http://election.princeton.edu/faq/
Read down the left column, too...Wang's explanation of how other pollsters operate...good read..be well..
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Even simple models like TPM's polltracker could get close to that.
Easy elections are easy to call.
LeftInTX
(25,504 posts)She can explain how quickly intelligence sources were able to identify the subject etc.
Also, she can emphasize that the suspect was born in the US.
She also needs to say that that bomber is a terrorist because that is what voters want to hear. (I heard this from my husband)
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)LeftInTX
(25,504 posts)Atman
(31,464 posts)Bookies have Hillary taking it easily. Not really even close. They have money involved, so they're more thorough. The networks and big polling organizations have money involved, too, but in all the wrong ways -- advertising dollars. It is good business to have the race extremely close. You'd never tune into a football game that you knew would be a total hopeless blowout.
skylucy
(3,740 posts)maryellen99
(3,789 posts)I wouldn't be surprised if Nate Silver has Trump leading in California and New York soon.
LiberalLoner
(9,762 posts)Starbuck2239
(29 posts)Yes, some polls' directions are scary.
Yes, keep hammering Drumpf for being racist, unstable, and a liar.
But doesn't it seem time for Clinton to run as many positive ads about her as negative about Drumpf?
She could start with her first year agenda of policy proposals, in the article below, which media has mostly ignored. And yes, I know it's been posted here at DU before.
In the middle of the article is a chart of bullet points on her policies. For those who say Clinton is "too detailed" this is a good list of brief(er) points.
http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/hillary-clinton-policy-agenda/
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Halls a day. No more days off...she has taken off more then just sickness. Trump hasn't taken a day off at all.
Response to busterbrown (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Foggyhill
(1,060 posts)He misuses stats and collates polls that each are garbage individually.
And yes, got a lot of experience in stats (engineering, mgt and comm degrees) and some experience on polls in Canada.
Good polling is hard and most of those snap polls are simply B.A.D.
Seemingly, not one of these polls is interested in determining truth,
they're more interested in selling themselves (so, just like the media).
With the few good polls being flooded out by 20 bad polls, there is no incentive anymore to create good ones.
A part of this is that it is increasingly hard and expensive to get a representative sample of the voting population (with landlines disapeering and response rates plummeting) and less incentive to do so (since the media report all of them as cash regardless).
The underpolling of the under 35 and minorities compounded by basically expecting them not to vote, means
a good GOTV could easily make a 5 points difference with what Clinton is getting.