How and where does Trump crack the blue wall?

[Fuzzy Bear]

On Trump's best possible day, THIS could happen.

I'm throwing in the outside chance that New Mexico's Johnson vote draws more votes from Clinton than Trump, which well may play out.

No

It's not a likely map, but I do think it represents the top of Trump's possibilities.  I would not have NM in there for Trump in a 2 way race.

[Maxwell]

only Pennsylvania, and even that is out of reach.

[Nyvin]

On Trump's best possible day, THIS could happen.

I'm throwing in the outside chance that New Mexico's Johnson vote draws more votes from Clinton than Trump, which well may play out.

No

It's not a likely map, but I do think it represents the top of Trump's possibilities.  I would not have NM in there for Trump in a 2 way race.

When Trump is polling within single digits in CO, NH, and VA you can post that map...

[Seriously?]

NV+IA then either: CO or NH+ME1, MI, MN, WI or CT (in order of possibility).

That's assuming PA or VA don't work.

[Senator-elect Spark]

On Trump's best possible day, THIS could happen.

I'm throwing in the outside chance that New Mexico's Johnson vote draws more votes from Clinton than Trump, which well may play out.

No

It's not a likely map, but I do think it represents the top of Trump's possibilities.  I would not have NM in there for Trump in a 2 way race.

When Trump is polling within single digits in CO, NH, and VA you can post that map...

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

[Hammy]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

[Senator-elect Spark]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

President Dukakis would admire that statement had he won.

[Hammy]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

President Dukakis would admire that statement had he won.

You're blanketly throwing out literally all the polls based on a single race, in which the dynamics make more sense if you switch the parties. And using an election from almost three decades ago for this basis, when polling methodology was less refined, which makes it make less even less sense.

[Senator-elect Spark]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

President Dukakis would admire that statement had he won.

You're blanketly throwing out literally all the polls based on a single race, in which the dynamics make more sense if you switch the parties. And using an election from almost three decades ago for this basis, when polling methodology was less refined, which makes it make less even less sense.

It simply is an example and a representation that polling isn't as accurate as we'd like to believe. It can be inflated in another candidate's favor and the result can be drastically different than what we were expecting.

[Hammy]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

President Dukakis would admire that statement had he won.

You're blanketly throwing out literally all the polls based on a single race, in which the dynamics make more sense if you switch the parties. And using an election from almost three decades ago for this basis, when polling methodology was less refined, which makes it make less even less sense.

It simply is an example and a representation that polling isn't as accurate as we'd like to believe. It can be inflated in another candidate's favor and the result can be drastically different than what we were expecting.

I won't disagree with this, but just remember it could equally be just as different in the opposite direction. It is probably best to ignore national polling anyway to be honest (and I'm saying this even with Clinton ahead) because the state vote is what matters given the electoral college. Unfortunately I can't compare this year to anything prior to 2008 as I don't know where state polls can be found prior to then.

[Senator-elect Spark]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

President Dukakis would admire that statement had he won.

You're blanketly throwing out literally all the polls based on a single race, in which the dynamics make more sense if you switch the parties. And using an election from almost three decades ago for this basis, when polling methodology was less refined, which makes it make less even less sense.

It simply is an example and a representation that polling isn't as accurate as we'd like to believe. It can be inflated in another candidate's favor and the result can be drastically different than what we were expecting.

I won't disagree with this, but just remember it could equally be just as different in the opposite direction. It is probably best to ignore national polling anyway to be honest (and I'm saying this even with Clinton ahead) because the state vote is what matters given the electoral college. Unfortunately I can't compare this year to anything prior to 2008 as I don't know where state polls can be found prior to then.

Interesting document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EWaKPDUolqbN7_od8sSTNMRObfUidlVPRBxeyyirbLM/htmlview#

[Hammy]

Interesting document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EWaKPDUolqbN7_od8sSTNMRObfUidlVPRBxeyyirbLM/htmlview#

Interesting, though these aren't the pre-election polls.

It makes sense though because I think most exit polls are taken in urban areas (which tend to go to the Democrats more) so that explains why the adjusting is necessary in the first place.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Interesting document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EWaKPDUolqbN7_od8sSTNMRObfUidlVPRBxeyyirbLM/htmlview#

Interesting, though these aren't the pre-election polls.

It makes sense though because I think most exit polls are taken in urban areas (which tend to go to the Democrats more) so that explains why the adjusting is necessary in the first place.

Exactly, and having quite a bit of difficulty searching for those pre-election state polls.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Interesting document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EWaKPDUolqbN7_od8sSTNMRObfUidlVPRBxeyyirbLM/htmlview#

Interesting, though these aren't the pre-election polls.

It makes sense though because I think most exit polls are taken in urban areas (which tend to go to the Democrats more) so that explains why the adjusting is necessary in the first place.

Exactly, and having quite a bit of difficulty searching for those pre-election state polls.

Found another interesting source: http://www.surveyusa.com/ror/aapor2005bloomoregon.pdf

[Nyvin]

On Trump's best possible day, THIS could happen.

I'm throwing in the outside chance that New Mexico's Johnson vote draws more votes from Clinton than Trump, which well may play out.

No

It's not a likely map, but I do think it represents the top of Trump's possibilities.  I would not have NM in there for Trump in a 2 way race.

When Trump is polling within single digits in CO, NH, and VA you can post that map...

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

Okay...so what exactly is his prediction based on?   Why bother posting the map at all?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Assuming WI MI doesn't tighten significantly, he probably has to win PA, because he has zero chance of winning NH.

FIFY.

[Skye]

I think he should focus first on even winning FL and OH.

[Yank2133]

It's best that we disregard current polling, because the only poll that matters is in November. I can list a number of candidates that were leading at this time and went on to lose the general election. So it's best we not jump to conclusions just yet.

The sounds of a losing campaign. The state by state polls by late August tend to be pretty decent relative to the actual election, far better than national polling.

Yup.

You would think people would have learned something from 2012. State polling was far more accurate then national polling, especially the daily tracker(ex. Gallup had Romney +7 on the even of election night.)