NBC/WSJ/Marist: NH-Clinton +9 NV-Tied

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Pretty good for Trump trailing nationally by 7.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

As we've learned Presidential cycle after cycle, it's just tough to poll Nevada, even for pretty good pollsters like Marist.  It's still basically safe for Clinton.  If you want to call it Likely, fine whatever.

But is it true?
In 2008/12, it was true. But it might be Obama thing rather then D thing. In 2004 rcp average was pretty good.

Do you guys know what polls showed in Nevada, 2000? I googled, but not found only one poll from Sep 29 2000
http://www.surveyusa.com/ArchivedArticles/NevadaNews.htm

It showed Al Gore +5

[Erich Maria Remarque]

The NV polling did well in '04, but the Nevada electorate has changed significantly in 12 years.  Huge population growth, particularly among Latinos.

You are likely right. Can't get used to it. Swedish voters are so homogen

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Every Dem operative is either optimistic or giddy about NV...don't think Clinton is worried too much about this state. Trump has never led in any aggregate of NH over the campaign..that's not going to change in the next 13 days. Both are solid D.

Remember that Every Romney operative believed he was going to win in a landslide nationally, at least publicly. Every McCain operative believed McCain was going to eke it out nationally, at least publicly.

No Operative is going to come out and say "WAAH!! WE ARE GOING TO LOSE!!!!".

Except Dem field operators vs Romneys... false equivalence.

So you're saying that Dem field operators in 2004 were like "WAAH!! WE ARE GOING TO LOSE!!!!"