Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 28, 2016, 07:03:58 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 412
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: New poll hype thread on: September 27, 2016, 09:23:14 pm
In 2012 (just like this time) there were two weeks between the first two presidential debates (with the VP debate in between). Not counting tracking polls, there were four polls released during that period, with the first (from Pew) 5 days after the first debate.  So this weekend is probably a good bet. CNN hasn't done a poll in a few weeks so they are probably up for a new one.

Fox News said they will have a poll out on Friday, presumably national.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NH-01-Normington Petts: Clinton with commanding lead on: September 27, 2016, 08:13:12 pm
This is the Boston suburbs/military district.  I do think the mountain district (NH-02) will likely swing to Trump.

What is military about NH-01?  Pease Air Force Base is closed, and the Portsmouth Navy Yard is in Maine.  The Boston suburbs are actually split between NH-01 and NH-02, with those near Nashua in NH-02, and those closer to Portsmouth in NH-01.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 07:59:40 pm
Anyone know what kind of international audience this thing got (personal anecdotes are fine)?

I don't know. Probably very low.  The Canadian broadcast networks didn't air it last night, and I can't imagine the ratings are very high in Europe for a debate that started at 3AM CET. 

Quote
Also, if anyone can find that, what were the numbers in the past?

http://www.thewrap.com/trump-clinton-presidential-debate-tv-ratings-history/
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Tie Republicans to Donald Trump on: September 27, 2016, 07:38:00 pm
This post has too many wes and thems in it to be comprehensible.  Who is the "them" you want to be "linked" to "trump"?  Who is the "they" who hope the Dems destroy Trump "in private"?  And why do you think tying "them" to Trump would work in a close race, anyway?  Trump's unfavorables are more or less on par with Clinton's at this point.

My bad, "them" = Republicans politicians. I am speaking from a partisan position and my main point is that the appeal to republican voters isn't working. It's putting doubts into the minds of liberals who are already wary of Clinton. She is better served trying to appeal to democrat leaning voters than republican leaning ones.

The problem is that a "tie Republican politicians to Trump" strategy isn't going to work in places where Trump is relatively popular, like Missouri, and isn't going to be particularly effective in places where Senators haven't endorsed Trump, like Illinois.  It could work in Illinois and parts of Pennsylvania, but might backfire in Downstate Illinois and in places like Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.  So, tying a congressional candidate to Trump in metro Philly might be a good idea, but tying a statewide candidate like Toomey to Trump could potentially backfire.  And statewide places where it would work, like California and New York, it will be completely irrelevant, as Democrats will win there, anyway.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Tie Republicans to Donald Trump on: September 27, 2016, 07:11:05 pm
This post has too many wes and thems in it to be comprehensible.  Who is the "them" you want to be "linked" to "trump"?  Who is the "they" who hope the Dems destroy Trump "in private"?  And why do you think tying "them" to Trump would work in a close race, anyway?  Trump's unfavorables are more or less on par with Clinton's at this point.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: ME-UNH/Portland Press Herald: Clinton+4, but Trump wins CD2 by 14% on: September 27, 2016, 06:28:48 pm
I think they have determined that it is a Trump blowout and that the 1 EV is unlikely to matter.  In any event, we'll know something is up if Clinton starts campaigning in Portland.  Note that Clinton has campaigned and run ads in NE-02, so they must be pretty sanguine about that one.

Portland is not in ME-2....

Yet Trump was campaigning there. Grin

One thing to keep in mind is that just because a city isn't in a particular CD (or even state) doesn't mean that its entire TV market isn't.  Some major ME-02 towns like Lewiston and Auburn are in the Portland TV market.  Also, I think the Bangor TV market is so small that at least one of the stations largely simulcasts Portland TV news, instead of producing their own product.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 06:12:52 pm
K, and your point?

It's still the most watched debate in over twenty years ...

My point is although it is the most watched debate EVER (not just in over 20 years) in terms of total viewers, the media hype of it getting 100 million TV viewers was greatly overblown. 

I also put up a poll yesterday for Atlas users to predict the TV viewership.  ElectionsGuy came closest by guessing 85 million.  I was second at 82 million.  The most common chosen range was 80-90 million, although the median and mean were higher than the mode.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI: MIRS - Clinton +5 on: September 27, 2016, 06:06:04 pm
I updated the original post with additional information from the co-sponsor of the poll, Michigan bipartisan lobbying firm GCSI.  Stein's result wasn't separately broken out, but she and 2 others are at 2%.

Also, the sample was 45 D/35 R/20 I.  Trump's favorables are at -14, while Clinton's are -7.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI: MIRS - Clinton +5 on: September 27, 2016, 05:52:22 pm
Someone needs to take one for the team so we can get that data. I'd offer to, but I'm just a broke college student. Cheesy

Mlive.com or some media source will report on the full poll eventually.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 05:50:37 pm
Nielsen's press release is out.  84,011,000 viewers watched the debate on TV, including PBS.

Nearly 100m people saw Trump's disastrous performance, great!

84 million << 100 million.  The media expectations of 100 million TV viewers were wildly exaggerated.

I think if you included streamers and people dvr-ing and watching it later, you'll hit 95-100 million, just not 100 million live TV watcher.

I doubt it.  YouTube only had 2.5 million live streamers, which covered many of the network broadcasts.  And very few people dvr live TV like political debates.  Maybe you reach 90 million after streaming and dvring.  I doubt you'll reach 100 million.  While Nielsen does measure dvr-delayed TV watching, it doesn't measure streaming.

Plus, the media was expecting 100 million TV viewers, not including streaming, anyway.  The debate ratings didn't come close.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 05:36:18 pm
Nielsen's press release is out.  84,011,000 viewers watched the debate on TV, including PBS.

Nearly 100m people saw Trump's disastrous performance, great!

84 million << 100 million.  The media expectations of 100 million TV viewers were wildly exaggerated.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 05:29:30 pm
Nielsen's press release is out.  84,011,000 viewers watched the debate on TV, including PBS.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 03:55:48 pm
There's no press release from Nielsen yet, but the final broadcast network adjusted figures are in, and various media outlets are reporting an audience of 81.4 million.  My guess is that figure doesn't include PBS (but the Nielsen press release likely will).
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI: MIRS - Clinton +5 on: September 27, 2016, 03:35:49 pm
Before or after debate?  This is somewhere between status quo and good for Clinton.

Without a subscription to MIRS, all that is available is the topline - not even poll dates or number or type of voters polled is available.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / MI: MIRS/GSCI/Target Insyght - Clinton +5 on: September 27, 2016, 03:21:34 pm
Clinton 46%
Trump 41%
Johnson 8%
Others 2%
Undecided 3%

September 18-24; 600 "persons"; MoE +/- 4.0

Target Insyght conducted the poll for MIRS and bipartisan Michigan lobbying firm GCSI.  Here is the link to a press release from GCSI's website:
http://gcsionline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Polling_President_092716.pdf
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 03:04:12 pm
No, the 80 million is supposed to be people, not households. 

To be fair, I only meant 'households' as in the way they determine those statistics. They mean people, but the way they count it for most of that is by household, right? For instance, for each cable customer who uses their TV to tune in to some network to watch, they count that as 1 person, even though they could have a whole family watching with them. There is really no way for the companies to know how many people are actually watching. The viewers over the internet could probably be more accurately assumed to be 1 person, but still.

Anywho, given how media is consumed, we'll probably never know how many people truly watched last night. It could be considerably higher when factoring in groups/families, no?

Yes, Nielsen does know who is watching in a household - at least in theory.  Family members are supposed to check in on the electronic people meter (or whatever technology Nielsen is using these days) when they start watching a program, and check out when they stop.  I don't know whether Nielsen has automated the process with new technology like they use for video games that allows boxes to tell how many people are in the room yet.

Nielsen provides both household and individual ratings.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 02:33:26 pm
I think Nielsen can track how many people are watching in a Nielsen household.  Nielsen provides ratings for both households and individuals watching.

How big is their sample, though? They aren't in everyone's home. I mean how accurately can Nielsen judge how many people are watching together in homes out there from what limited number of households they are in?


That's a secret.  Some sources say there were about 25,000 Nielsen Households in 2013, others say there are about 50,000.  Nielsen put out a press release saying they increased the number of Nielsen families in 2014, but didn't disclose how many total Nielsen families there were.

Statistics don't require a very large sample to get an accurate rating, though.  25,000 randomly-selected households should be representative of the TV watching universe, in theory.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 01:53:57 pm
How much higher do you guys think these numbers would be if it included that segment of people?

That's impossible to say. There is no way to account for who was watching in such environments. Plus, think about all the homes where multiple adults were watching, which there is no feasible way to account for that, either (?)

But given the size of these ratings, and those 2 points above, it might be fair to say that a majority of the country tuned in or at least will inevitably catch parts of it over the next week.


I think Nielsen can track how many people are watching in a Nielsen household.  Nielsen provides ratings for both households and individuals watching.  The universe for individual ratings in most reported results is usually Persons 2+, not adults.  Nielsen also provides sub-group ratings to networks who buy them, like Adults 18-49 (the key money demo), adults 25-54 (the key news demo), etc.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What do you think if the polls don't move after this debate? on: September 27, 2016, 01:48:56 pm
It would be pretty normal if the polls don't move much after the debate.  It wouldn't mean that anyone is doomed.  There is still a month or so until the election - plenty of time for things to change.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 01:32:16 pm
So how does this factor in places like bars and other public gathering sites? I know a lot of people who went out to watch the debate in public places.

Nielsen ratings don't count those people, just in-home viewership.  I don't think they ever have counted out-of-home viewership, so it's an apples-to-apples comparison.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 01:05:38 pm
CNN is reporting total viewership of 80.9 million before PBS.  I'm not sure if that includes time-adjusted numbers for the broadcast TV networks.

From the Hollywood Reporter:

Quote
Early numbers had the 90-minute showdown, simulcast on more than 10 networks and umpteen streamers, easily topping all recent debate coverage. With Nielsen's Fast Affiliate ratings, the Big Four broadcast networks' coverage pulled a total 45.3 million viewers ahead of time zone adjustments. That's a 22 percent increase from the same numbers in 2012. Among the individual networks, NBC currently leads with 16.6 million of those viewers, followed by ABC (12.5 million), CBS (11 million) and Fox (5.3 million). Univision (2.2 million) and Telemundo (1.8 million) add another 4 million viewers.

On the big three cable networks alone, Fox News Channel, CNN and MSNBC, the debate added another 26.1 million viewers. All marked increases from 2012. FNC led the trio with 11.4 million viewers, while CNN closely following with 9.8 million and MSNBC rounded out at 4.9 million.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 1st debate TV ratings on: September 27, 2016, 12:41:46 pm

So, sounds like they're saying total TV viewership was ~81 million, the same as the 1980 Reagan-Carter debate.  But since there were also some people who watched it online, total viewership would be higher than the 1980 debate.

Of course, the US's population is a lot higher today than it was in 1980, so 80 million might not be as impressive as it once was.


There were at least 2 million people watching the NBC youtube stream, and this number doesnt include PBS and CSPAN (I think)

The NBC YouTube stream doesn't count for TV ratings, and I doubt CSPAN is rated by Nielsen.  PBS might be included in the final tally when we get it around 4PM eastern, though - but I don't remember if those will be Nielsen numbers or self-reported PBS numbers.

The overnights we got this morning are always subject to revision, especially for live programs like the debate.  They usually don't take into account the pre-prime time viewership on the West Coast, when the debate aired.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Gingrich on Hannity: New MN Poll has it tied at 42 on: September 27, 2016, 12:28:54 am
Didn't catch who the pollster was, but he said it was coming out tomorrow morning.

The Gravis/Breitbart poll released yesterday showed a 43-43 tie in Minnesota.  Is this supposed to be another Minnesota poll showing a tie?
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Well, I think we can stop panicking now on: September 26, 2016, 11:17:56 pm
Who is this "we" you are referring to?  Why do you and many red avatars assume everyone on this website is backing Hillary Clinton, instead of Trump, Johnson, Stein or someone else, or is undecided or doesn't care, or wasn't panicking in the first place?   This isn't supposed to be an exclusively pro-Clinton website.
Honey your on the internet.  If you want a safe space, go elsewhere.

Who said I wanted a safe space?  Not everyone here is panicking and not everyone supports Hillary Clinton.  Stop trying to speak for us.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Well, I think we can stop panicking now on: September 26, 2016, 10:49:09 pm
Who is this "we" you are referring to?  Why do you and many red avatars assume everyone on this website is backing Hillary Clinton, instead of Trump, Johnson, Stein or someone else, or is undecided or doesn't care, or wasn't panicking in the first place?   This isn't supposed to be an exclusively pro-Clinton website.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 412


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines