Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 05, 2016, 10:04:58 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 363
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Monmouth: 24% of Trump's supporters in IA stayed home at caucus night. on: Today at 08:38:08 pm
Quote from: Monmouth University Poll
Monmouth asked voters who changed their minds between the poll and Monday night why they did so.  The top concern of these vote-switchers was a candidate’s electability and the desire not to waste their vote (33%).

That doesn't bode well for the establishment candidates not named Rubio in New Hampshire.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Christie and Bush Double-Teaming Rubio on: Today at 06:42:50 pm
Kudus of Kasich for not being a part of this silliness.

Please.  Kasich has attacked Bush for raising fees on students and pet snakes in a web ad.  He's not taking the high road, despite his recent moralizing to the contrary.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots on: Today at 06:41:06 pm
Cruz SuperPAC Keep the Promise bought a Super Bowl ad in Augusta for $12,500 and a pregame ad for $4250.  Keep the Promise also bought 2 $33,750 Super Bowl ads on Spartanburg's WSPA, so Cruz will have a Super Bowl presence Upstate, too.

The Super PACs are starting to advertise next week on Augusta's CBS affiliate, WRDW.  Rubio's Conservative Solutions PAC also bought time starting next week.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: WBZ-UMass Amherst NH Poll: Trump 33, Rubio 14; Sanders 57, Clinton 33 on: Today at 04:35:42 pm
Looks like the poll is actually mostly pre-Iowa (conducted Jan. 29 - Feb. 2):

http://www.umass.edu/poll/pdfs/20160205_Toplines.pdf


The high MoEs must be due to the methodology, then.  It's not a pure random sample.  There is some weighing voodoo going on.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: NH-WBUR: Sanders and Trump ahead on: Today at 04:32:54 pm
I thought there was a WBUR NH poll from a few weeks ago.  Why does the graphic show their last poll as December?

Edit: I found the answer.  Their January poll was of independents only.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Moderate Pub voter strategy in NH on: Today at 03:32:33 pm
"Nevermind that such Republicans can (and do) have extremely right-wing views - especially on issues in which they have a vested interest in preserving the status quo (taxation, regulation, social spending, economic inequality, unions,and so on...)."

If the above is meant to characterize my views, it is not accurate, except for the unions bit if we are talking about public sector unions.

Anyway, not much help here in the thread for me or my ilk if NH voters. Smiley But it appears that the issue may be moot, since the Suffolk poll that just came out shows Cruz crashing down to 7%. So now it is much easier to vote for Kasich, which is what I would do if a NH voter, assuming other polls show Cruz out of the hunt for second place.

Most voters vote for someone to win, not to place or show.  Thus, I think if Rubio is within single digits of Trump in the polls come Tuesday, voters backing supposedly moderate candidates will flock to Rubio to try to put him over the top.

The Cruz poll at 7% is an outlier as of right now.  He still has a chance to come in second if the establishment backers split their votes four or five ways.  So even if you care about Rubio coming in second, moderates should still vote for him to get over Cruz.  Cruz has a good floor with very conservative Republican primary voters and, to a lesser extent, evangelicals who really have no other place to go.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots on: Today at 01:38:58 am
I'm surprised Ad Age didn't check them, especially the Augusta station since their studio and transmitter are both on the South Carolina side of the river.

Even the candidates sometimes forget or deliberately ignore the fringe markets.  Of the Republican candidates, Rubio's campaign seems to be most on the ball when it comes to TV advertising, but they didn't even bother much in the tiny Ottumwa-Kirksville market in Iowa, for example.  Only Trump and Cruz did - and Cruz was late to the game.

Ad Age didn't report on Democratic buys.  I, too, haven't checked the Democratic side in most markets, but I see that Bernie Sanders is buying a few ads on the pre-game show in Burlington and Clinton tried to buy on this Sunday's 60 Minutes there, like Kasich, which won't air this Sunday.

Note that this article was from February 1.  It's possible that more Super Bowl ad buys have been made since then, too.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / WBZ-UMass Amherst NH Poll: Trump 33, Rubio 14; Sanders 57, Clinton 33 on: Today at 12:39:47 am
WBZ U-Mass Amherst NH Poll
Republican
Trump 33%
Rubio 14%
Kasich 10%
Cruz 9%
Bush 6%
Christie 5%
Carson 3%
Fiorina 3%

(Unknown dates; 390 LV, MoE +/-7.1).  The high MoE makes me think they're using a post-Iowa subsample that's smaller than that - but the WBZ article doesn't give polling dates.

Democratic
Sanders 57%
Clinton 33%
(Unknown dates; 410 LV, MoE +-6.6)
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Inside an IA caucus on: Today at 12:05:49 am
Did the Cruz surrogates say anything about Carson allegedly dropping out of the race?
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots on: Today at 12:02:56 am
In the other New Hampshire markets:

-Best I can tell, nobody bought anything Super Bowl-related in Portland, ME.  The closest thing to a Super Bowl related buy was Rubio's Conservative Solutions PAC buying an ad on Colbert after the Super Bowl for $2,500.

In Burlington:
-Rubio's Conservative Solutions PAC bought two Super Bowl ads in Burlington, VT at $18,000 a pop x2.  They also bought a $3,200 ad during the pre-game.
-The Trump campaign bought 2 very early pre-game ads at $300 a piece, a closer-in 4-5PM pregame ad at $3,000, and an ad during the post-game at $5,000.
-Bush's Right to Rise PAC and the Kasich campaign tried to buy ads during the programs that would otherwise air during the Super Bowl at a much lower rate.  That won't be honored.  It's unclear if they are now going to buy the Super Bowl.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots on: February 04, 2016, 11:03:23 pm
I'm slightly surprised at no ads for the Augusta, Savannah, or Charlotte markets.  Each covers a significant chunk of South Carolina Republican voters.  Certainly would seem to be cheaper and more effective than a $300K Boston market ad.

Cheaper?  Yes.  More effective?  Perhaps not.  The establishment candidates need to do well in New Hampshire to fight on in South Carolina.  Especially Bush.

I'm more surprised that the Cruz PAC isn't on-air in Spartanburg.  Upstate is where Cruz really needs to clean up to win the state.

Edited to add: I checked the ad buys for the CBS stations in the South Carolina fringe markets.  Ad Age didn't check them. 

-The Rubio campaign itself is buying 1 Super Bowl ad in Augusta, GA for $12,500.  In fact, only Rubio is listed as advertising at all on Augusta's CBS affiliate - no PACs are even on air there yet.   
-In Savannah, Rubio is spending $6,000 for 1 Super Bowl ad.  Bush's Right to Rise is countering with a $30,000 ad of their own.
-Nobody is up on CBS in Charlotte.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: Overtime Politics thread on: February 04, 2016, 10:58:56 pm
Democratic AL Poll: Clinton 54-43 (Huh)
http://overtimepolitics.com/clinton-leads-sanders-by-11-points-in-alabama-54-43/

Blacks: 69-29 Clinton
Hispanic: 58-37 Clinton
White: 53-44 Sanders

Sample was 58% white. Is that too much for Alabama?

This really seems off.


The 2008 Democratic Primary exit poll in Alabama was 45% white, 51% black.  So unless you think black primary turnout will be significantly down without Obama on the ballot, 58% white is too high.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots on: February 04, 2016, 09:24:51 pm
GOP Groups Spend More Than $1 Million on Super Bowl TV Spots
AdvertisingAge/Kate Kaye
Quote
During election season, the Super Bowl typically is a respite from the scourge of political ads in early primary states. Not this year. At least four presidential advertisers are plunking down serious cash for 30-second spots before and during the big game in the New Hampshire and South Carolina markets. Whether those ads garner the same water-cooler chatter as the ones from the Hondas and Pepsi-Colas of the ad world remains to be seen.

Jeb Bush backer Right to Rise, Marco Rubio supporter Conservative Solutions, Ted Cruz PAC Stand for Truth and the Rubio campaign itself have all purchased spots set to run pre-game and in-game.

--Snip--

Some 2016 Political Super Bowl Ad Buys

Right to Rise (Jeb Bush)

    WCSC Charleston, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot, $20,000
    WLTX Columbia, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot, $40,000
    WSPA Spartanburg, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot, $60,000
    WBZ TV Boston: One in-game 30-second spot, $300,000
    Total 2-minute Super Bowl TV Spend: $420,000

Conservative Solutions PAC (Marco Rubio)

    WCSC Charleston, S.C.: Two in-game 30-second spot, $40,000
    WSPA Spartanburg, S.C.: One pre-game 30-second spot, $13,000; 2 in-game 30-second spots, $100,000
    WLTX Columbia, S.C.: Two pre-game 30-second spots, $16,000; 1 in-game 30-second spot $40,000
    WBZ TV Boston: One in-game 30-second spot, $300,000
    Total 4.5-minute Super Bowl TV Spend: $509,000

Stand for Truth (Ted Cruz)

    WBTW Myrtle Beach, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot, $25,000
    WCSC Charleston, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot, $40,000
    WLTX Columbia, S.C.: One in-game 30-second spot $40,000
    Total 1.5-minute Super Bowl TV Spend: $105,000

Rubio for President

    WCSC Charleston, S.C.: Two in-game 30-second spots, $15,000
    Total 1-minute Super Bowl TV Spend: $15,000

As I've said before, much of New Hampshire is in the Boston TV market, so advertising on WBZ is designed to reach New Hampshire.

Spending $300,000 for one political ad is a lot.  Most SuperPACs aren't spending that much for ads on one Boston TV station for a whole week.  But the Super Bowl is guaranteed to get the most eyeballs, so it may be cost-effective to advertise there.

Note also how much cheaper the actual Rubio campaign's Super Bowl Ads on WCSC Charleston are compared to the PACs.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Christie drop out after NH? on: February 04, 2016, 08:47:21 pm
Christie doesn't have the money to continue if he doesn't win or come in second in New Hampshire.  I doubt he will do either, so yes, Christie will drop out after New Hampshire.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Cruz wins New Hampshire on: February 04, 2016, 08:23:14 pm
Cruz hasn't even been advertising on TV in New Hampshire until today and doesn't have the ground game there that he had in Iowa.  He's not winning New Hampshire.
And yet even without both of those things, he is in a competitive third place and could benefit from a Trump collapse.

I'm not saying it's likely; I just wondered if there was any plausible scenario where it could happen.

Like I said, Cruz would need a Trump collapse with most Trump voters flocking to him, followed by Bush, Kasich and Cruz taking support from Rubio.  That's not very likely to happen.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Cruz wins New Hampshire on: February 04, 2016, 08:17:59 pm
Cruz hasn't even been advertising on TV in New Hampshire until today and doesn't have the ground game there that he had in Iowa.  He's not winning New Hampshire.  You'd need a further fragmentation of the establishment vote and Trump implosion.  The establishment is coalescing around Rubio and Trump hasn't quite imploded yet - though he's hurt himself in the past day or so.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: NH-CNN/WMUR Poll: Trump leading, Rubio in 2nd on: February 04, 2016, 07:10:05 pm
Based on MoE:

it could be from 36% Trump  - 11% Rubio to 24% Rubio - 22% Trump. Nerve-racking

Unless I'm an idiot, I'm not a stats person so I may be completely wrong lol.

Margins of error shrink as a candidate's support moves away from 50%.  I don't remember how to calculate specific error bands, but Muon or someone else has done so in other posts.

Edited to add: If I've done the math right and Wikipedia has the correct formula (i.e. the margin of error at a 95% confidence interval is equal to 1.96 times the square root of (p*(1-p)/n), where p is the candidate's percentage and n is the sample size), the possible results end up as follows:

CandidateLowHigh
Trump22.8%35.2%
Rubio12.8%23.2%
Cruz8.4%17.6%
Kasich7.6%16.4%
Bush5.9%14.1%
Christie1.3%6.7%
Fiorina1.3%6.7%
Carson0.1%3.9%

So there's a very low probability that Rubio is ahead of Trump given this poll, but it's probably not more than 10%.  Someone better at math can calculate it.  And there's a 5% chance that the results could exceed the highs and lows, anyway (2.5% on each side, except for Carson, since you can't get negative votes).  We're also assuming that the candidate received exactly his percentage instead of something like 28.4% rounded down to 28%.  The bands would slightly move if we lol decimaled the poll.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who do you think won the popular vote of the Democratic caucus? on: February 04, 2016, 05:28:02 pm
Clinton, the networks have access to the popular vote and on TV I saw Hillary had something like a 200 vote lead (with 99% in).

No, the media doesn't have access to the popular vote on the Democratic side.  Only the Iowa Democratic Party might.  What you likely saw was the state delegate equivalent numbers times 100, which is what some in the media were reporting as results.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rubio PAC puts up ad slamming Jeb on: February 04, 2016, 05:21:00 pm
It's OK, but not great. I am not sure it is worth anyone's time slamming Jeb. Folks know him too well, and have seen his negative PAC ads, and all the rest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRyh5Z5MOow&feature=youtu.be

It's worth Rubio's time attacking Bush in New Hampshire.  He needs to pull votes from Bush, Kasich and Christie to have a chance of winning or coming in a close second.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: NH-CNN/WMUR Poll: Trump leading, Rubio in 2nd on: February 04, 2016, 05:15:15 pm
CNN/WMUR UNH NH Republican Primary Poll
February 2-4 (Post-Iowa)
Trump 29%
Rubio 18%
Cruz 13%
Kasich 12%
Bush 10%
Christie 4%
Fiorina 4%
Carson 2%
Other 2%
Gilmore 0%
Undecided 8%

January 31-February 1 (Pre-Iowa)
Trump 29%
Cruz 12%
Rubio 11%
Kasich 10%
Bush 9%
Christie 9%
Other 6%
Fiorina 4%
Carson 2%
Gilmore 0%
Undecided 9%

Sample sizes were small: 362 pre-Iowa and 209 post-Iowa.  MoE are +/-5.2 and 6.8, respectively.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rubio PAC puts up ad slamming Jeb on: February 04, 2016, 04:58:20 pm
this is the definition of circular firing squad - Christie and Jeb firing at Rubio, Rubio firing back, Kasich firing somewhere, Cruz firing all ways, meanwhile Trump escapes free and probably wins New Hampshire.

Cruz isn't really on the air in New Hampshire, so he's not firing any way yet.  He did attack Rubio in Iowa, though.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nevada and South Carolina Polls on: February 04, 2016, 04:56:37 pm
Polls of Nevada Nd South Carolina on the Republican side would be meaningless at this point.  Half the candidates will have dropped out by then, and it's not yet clear which candidates those will be.  Voters in those states will take their cues from the results in Iowa and New Hampshire.  So why bother at this juncture?

Neither state has crappy single-state pollsters like New Hampshire, Michigan, North Carolina, New York, California or other states, so you don't see a local pollster's monthly poll with a horserace question, either.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: CNN/WMUR NH polls coming at 5 and 6 PM ET. on: February 04, 2016, 03:27:17 pm
CNN had the absolute worst Iowa poll of them all (Sanders +8, Trump +11)

I think the CNN/WMUR poll uses a different pollster (University of New Hampshire) than CNN's regular polls (ORC).  We need to keep that in mind when figuring out the trends, as ORC has polled New Hampshire for CNN from time to time, too.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The most important thing re: Rubio’s chances of winning the nomination on: February 03, 2016, 10:31:33 pm
Totally agree, but Cruz is not going to be second in NH. He's abandoned the state.

No he didn't.  He's spending the majority of this coming week campaigning there.


OK, I got that from the headline in this thread, which reading the article linked now, is obviously false. You might want to correct the headline Mr. Moderator, so that lazy posters like myself who don't bother to read the article, get themselves embarrassed. Smiley

Cruz hasn't abandoned NH and is campaigning in the state, but he hasn't been advertising much on TV there.  Cruz is not really trying like he did in Iowa.  Granted, that can change in the next few days.  Fiorina just bought some ads on WMUR, for example.

The ad rates in the Boston market (which covers much of NH) compared to the Iowa markets are astronomical.  One of the SuperPACs are paying $300,000 a week on ads on just one station.

Isn't WMUR just the Manchester area, rather than the Boston media market? Why advertise in the Boston market? Because other stations reach NH, or at least up through Concord or something?

WMUR is in Manchester, but Manchester is in the Boston TV market, which includes most of southern New Hampshire.  The Boston TV market has 2 ABC stations (WMUR in Manchester and WCVB in Boston), but all the other major network affiliates are based in Boston.  So if you want to reach New Hampshire viewers watching, say, the Today Show, you have to buy airtime on Boston's NBC affilaite, WHDH.  This is really inefficient, as most of the people watching will be from Massachusetts, and you're paying extra for it.  If you want to reach people who care more about NH news than Boston news, you can buy time on WMUR's newscasts, which, due to the popularity of candidates buying ads there, aren't exactly cheap, either.

The northern part of the state is split between the Burlington, VT and Portland, ME TV markets.   The well-funded major candidates also buy airtime in Burlington and Portland.  So there are three TV markets to buy if you want to reach all of the state.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The most important thing re: Rubio’s chances of winning the nomination on: February 03, 2016, 10:17:17 pm
Totally agree, but Cruz is not going to be second in NH. He's abandoned the state.

No he didn't.  He's spending the majority of this coming week campaigning there.


OK, I got that from the headline in this thread, which reading the article linked now, is obviously false. You might want to correct the headline Mr. Moderator, so that lazy posters like myself who don't bother to read the article, get themselves embarrassed. Smiley

Cruz hasn't abandoned NH and is campaigning in the state, but he hasn't been advertising much on TV there.  Cruz is not really trying like he did in Iowa.  Granted, that can change in the next few days.  Fiorina just bought some ads on WMUR, for example.

The ad rates in the Boston market (which covers much of NH) compared to the Iowa markets are astronomical.  One of the SuperPACs are paying $300,000 a week on ads on just one station.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 363


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines