PA- Bloomberg: Clinton +9

[Alcon]

This is also from Selzer who has a heavy Trump tilt in her likely voter screens all cycle. It's very likely Clinton is ahead by double digits

You have to stop unskewing polls, Selzer is probably the best pollster in the country. They know what are they doing.

Having said that, Trump is finished.

No, no, that's not "unskewing."  It's adjusting for so-called "house effects."

Pollsters often have house effects -- sampling practices and other factors that mean that they generate results that are more Democratic or Republican than the average poll.  For instance, if we only have one Indiana poll, and it's from a pollster that routinely finds unusually Democratic results in other states, it's very reasonable to assume that the poll in Indiana is also too Democratic.  This is perfectly reasonable, because pollsters with partisan house effects do exist, and it would be a bad idea to ignore that if the polls in a given state come from pollsters with the similar house effects.

"Unskewing" is re-weighting a poll based on either non-static political factors (like party ID), which is a terrible idea.  Sometimes "unskewing" is also applied to the practice of re-weighting based on shoddy prior data like race composition from exit polls.  In the former case, you're re-weighting a poll based on something you should reasonably expect to change; in the latter case, you're re-weighting a poll based on information that probably was inaccurate in the first place.

Neither of those things are reasonable.  Done right, re-weighting for house effects is the right thing to do.

[Alcon]

Others at 3% statewide, but 6% in the suburbs ?
So, Johnson + Stein + McMuffin + Castle all togheter at 2% beside
of Philly suburbs ?? S** poll.

The margin of error for the Philly suburbs is +/-5.1%.  The margin of error for the remainder of the state isn't specified, but is probably around +/-4.0%.  In other words, the two figures are within the Margin of Error.

A lot of polls (most?) these days ask two topline questions.  The first is just Clinton or Trump, and requires respondents to volunteer "Other."  Those are the numbers quoted above.  The second includes third-party candidates.  In this poll, third-party candidates are higher when they're explicitly named on the second topline questions, although Clinton's margin remains the same:

Clinton 48%
Trump 39%
Johnson 6%
Stein 4%

The article explains this all.

None of these numbers look unusual or unreasonable.  I don't see a basis for calling this a "s*** poll."

[Alcon]

 '373' Likely voters size for PA?

and by Bloomberg(pro-hillary)

I didn't hear you complaining when the same outfit showed Trump up 4 in Iowa a few days ago.

Total Votes (2012)
Iowa 1.58 Million votes. 6 EV
Pennsylvania 5.75 Million voets. 20 EV

373 LV size could be ok for IA/NV/NH. perhaps NM too.
But for PA, no.

1. You continue to have no damn idea how margin of error works.  A n=373 poll in PA would have a margin of error of a margin of error of +/-5%. An n=373 poll of Iowa, Nevada, or New Hampshire has a virtually identical margin of error, also +/-5%.  You have to get down to a population size of a couple thousand people before your MoE falls to +/-4%. 

2. The n=373 is for the Philadelphia suburban counties only.  It's an n=806 poll.

you're just terrible