a

[Stirring Wolf🥣🐺]

a

[Ljube]

State polls for sure.

[Xing]

Neither. Things are very volatile right now, and we'll probably get a little more convergence by the second week of August, when the conventions (and convention bounces) are over.

[Dr. Arch]

Neither. Things are very volatile right now, and we'll probably get a little more convergence by the second week of August, when the conventions (and convention bounces) are over.

[Mehmentum]

I would say state polls, but the problem is that we don't have enough polls from any one given state to draw firm conclusions.

[Seriously?]

National polls because you have a lot more data points right now. The state polls will eventually catch up.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

State polls don't start to matter until a month or two before the election.  And a big separation nationally renders the state polls meaningless.

The national numbers and state numbers don't seem to jibe with one another.  I'd wait for the convention bumps and turbulence to die down before putting too much stock in the state polls.

[IceSpear]

Uh, neither of them are consistent.

[psychprofessor]

Besides Q, both state and national polls are showing Hillary with a solid lead.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

National polls, individual stats are not polled very often in a short time period, so it is difficult to create an average or see trends. If you go by state polls Trump is ahead in Oregon and Clnton is ahead in Kansas, plus Mississippi, Utah and Conneticut are potential swing states. National polls are far more numerous so it is better to get a good poling average.