Atlas Forum

Election Archive => 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls => Topic started by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:36:06 am



Title: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:36:06 am
35% Clinton
31% Trump
24% Johnson
  2% Stein

(
Img
)

The poll was conducted from Sept. 27-29, beginning the day after the first presidential debate. The poll surveyed 501 likely New Mexico voters and contained a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percent. All of the poll respondents were questioned by live interviewers, with 52 percent of respondents reached by cellphone and 48 percent on land lines.

https://www.abqjournal.com/857961/clinton-trump-in-tight-race-in-new-mexico.html


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:38:18 am
WOWza !

Looks like there's a huge disconnect between the hype of the Hillary fetishists this week and the real world and actual voters ... hopefully Hillary is not in for a rough surprise on election night when the actual votes are counted, not just those of her out-of-touch supporters and the media pundits.

;)


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Arch on October 02, 2016, 01:41:13 am
Here we go with the editorializing again. Are you literally unable to follow basic forum decorum?


Title: NM: Research & Polling Inc: Johnson surges to record-high, Clinton/Trump margin narrows to 4 points
Post by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:43:09 am
New Poll: New Mexico President by Research & Polling Inc on 2016-09-29 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3520160929075)

Summary: D: 35%, R: 31%, I: 26%, U: 8%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (https://www.abqjournal.com/857961/clinton-trump-in-tight-race-in-new-mexico.html)


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Ronnie on October 02, 2016, 01:44:01 am
Bizarre.  I'd like to see PPP poll here again.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: cinyc on October 02, 2016, 01:45:00 am
It's Clinton +10 in the head-to-head:
Clinton 44%
Trump 34%
Wouldn't Vote 11%
Other 3%
Undecided/Don't Know 8%

By the way, how hard is it to put at least the Clinton +4 number in the thread title instead of editorializing?


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Fmr President & Senator Polnut on October 02, 2016, 01:46:26 am
WOWza !

Looks like there's a huge disconnect between the hype of the Hillary fetishists this week and the real world and actual voters ... hopefully Hillary is not in for a rough surprise on election night when the actual votes are counted, not just those of her out-of-touch supporters and the media pundits.

;)

The ;) doesn't make it less insufferable.

Your HHB remains quite sad.

I also don't but for a SECOND that this is anywhere near the likely result.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:46:59 am
It's Clinton +10 in the head-to-head:
Clinton 44%
Trump 34%
Wouldn't Vote 11%
Other 3%
Undecided/Don't Know 8%

By the way, how hard is it to put at least the Clinton +4 number in the thread title instead of editorializing?

I put it into the database entry, so you guys are not freaking out entirely again ...

If you click on the thread, you'll see the +4 number anyway.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Arch on October 02, 2016, 01:47:11 am
It's Clinton +10 in the head-to-head:
Clinton 44%
Trump 34%
Wouldn't Vote 11%
Other 3%
Undecided/Don't Know 8%

By the way, how hard is it to put at least the Clinton +4 number in the thread title instead of editorializing?

Clinton+10 in the head-to-head, +4 even with Johnson in the mix (as he's progressively fading the closer we are to election day), and Tender says: "Muh swing state." Please.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: StatesPoll on October 02, 2016, 01:48:47 am

here Red Avatars used to understimate Google Survey NM Polls & Reuters/Ipsos NM Polls
But it seems Google Survey & Reuters/Ipsos wasn't outlier.
;)

   #BattleGroundNewMexico

(
Img
)


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Arch on October 02, 2016, 01:49:48 am

here Red Avatars used to understimate Google Survey NM Polls & Reuters/Ipsos NM Polls
But it seems Google Survey & Reuters/Ipsos wasn't outlier.
;)

   #BattleGroundNewMexico

(
Img
)

#TossUpWyoming


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Tender Branson on October 02, 2016, 01:50:10 am
It's Clinton +10 in the head-to-head:
Clinton 44%
Trump 34%
Wouldn't Vote 11%
Other 3%
Undecided/Don't Know 8%

By the way, how hard is it to put at least the Clinton +4 number in the thread title instead of editorializing?

Clinton+10 in the head-to-head, +4 even with Johnson in the mix (as he's progressively fading the closer we are to election day), and Tender says: "Muh swing state." Please.

Not in NM -> Johnson's 24% are a record-high there.

So, he's not fading away. He's an established factor in the state.

Even in 2012, when the ABQ Journal poll came pretty close to the actual election result (O+10), by showing O+9, they got the eventual Johnson number right ...


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: matthew27 on October 02, 2016, 01:52:47 am
Lol,

Hispanic support in this country is under 20% for Trump and New Mexico is like 48% Hispanic. So I seriously doubt that she doesn't win by at least 10% on election day.

The state should be more favorable then 2008 or 2012 for her.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Ebsy on October 02, 2016, 02:40:12 am
New Mexico is very hard to poll for even good pollsters.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: BeTo In DiSaRrAy on October 02, 2016, 03:52:11 am
(Obligatory include the actual number in the title comment)

Johnson could conceivably win a county or two with numbers like that. Fascinating.

Edit: Thinking about it, this would be the best third party result in a state since 1992. I'll bet that he will win some precincts at the very least.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Ebsy on October 02, 2016, 03:54:59 am
(Obligatory include the actual number in the title comment)

Johnson could conceivably win a county or two with numbers like that. Fascinating.
More than likely inflated. A PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NM_1216513.pdf) of New Mexico prior to the 2012 election has Johnson at 24 points. He ended up getting less than 4.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: dax00 on October 02, 2016, 04:18:06 am
interesting. i'm rooting for johnson to actually win new mexico here


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: BeTo In DiSaRrAy on October 02, 2016, 05:18:43 am
(Obligatory include the actual number in the title comment)

Johnson could conceivably win a county or two with numbers like that. Fascinating.
More than likely inflated. A PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NM_1216513.pdf) of New Mexico prior to the 2012 election has Johnson at 24 points. He ended up getting less than 4.

That poll was taken in December of 2011. It's not comparable to a poll taken a month and a half before the election. His numbers may go down, but they won't drop to 4%. Hell, I doubt his nationwide numbers will go down to 4%.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: President Johnson on October 02, 2016, 05:22:25 am
Bad! Third party candidates are a joke.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: politicallefty on October 02, 2016, 05:52:02 am
Looks like there's a huge disconnect between the hype of the Hillary fetishists this week and the real world and actual voters ... hopefully Hillary is not in for a rough surprise on election night when the actual votes are counted, not just those of her out-of-touch supporters and the media pundits.

Ah, so Hillary supporters are the real problem, nevermind the substantial minority of this country right now that is enthusiastic for someone like Donald Trump. I've always respected a lot of what you've had to say on various topics, but this is not funny. You may not like Hillary Clinton, but she's actually tried to accommodate Bernie supporters (not to mention having his strong and unwavering support). Let me put this in simple terms: a Clinton landslide with downballot coattails means a strong progressive agenda actually gets signed into law, a narrow Clinton victory basically means Democratic domination in the federal judiciary for a generation and continued control of executive agencies, and a Trump victory is pretty self-explanatory I think.

With that said, in the end, I don't think Gary Johnson will get above 15% in any state when all is said and done.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: ApatheticAustrian on October 02, 2016, 05:56:47 am
as was explained this week once again, debates like the first one of 2016 or the first one of 2012 make supporters of the losing candidate less likely to participate in surveys for some days....which results into making a poll-winning-margin even bigger.

this is very much the "real" world - it's just not some kind of final truth at the moment and could still change.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: NRS11 on October 02, 2016, 09:57:43 am
And while I don't deny that a result showing Clinton up by more would be desirable, why exactly are we so concerned? She is winning after all.  I don't see Johnson gaining any more in NM.  In electoral college system it doesn't matter if you win by 1% or by 50% you get all the votes.  If he does get 25% of the vote and she still wins it will linger forever on some Wikipedia page, but that's about it.

Also, is there really that much support for Johnson among Hispanics as this poll is suggesting?



Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Secret Cavern Survivor on October 02, 2016, 10:02:55 am
Oh FFS Tender.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: Southern Dep. Speaker Dwarven Dragon on October 02, 2016, 10:09:25 am
(Obligatory include the actual number in the title comment)

Johnson could conceivably win a county or two with numbers like that. Fascinating.
More than likely inflated. A PPP poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NM_1216513.pdf) of New Mexico prior to the 2012 election has Johnson at 24 points. He ended up getting less than 4.

That's from 11 months before the election. We're only a month out.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Fmr. Deputy Speaker Spark on October 02, 2016, 11:16:47 am
Johnson might deliver NM to Trump lol


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: NV less likely to flip than FL on October 02, 2016, 11:31:59 am
I highly doubt Johnson will get anything like that, or that the margin will be anywhere near that close. The two-way number is somewhat more plausible.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Invisible Obama on October 02, 2016, 11:36:57 am
If Johnson actually gets that much, Trump would probably end up in third place on election day. With that said, this poll is way too favorable to Johnson.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: yeah_93 on October 02, 2016, 11:38:00 am
I seriously doubt Johnson is going to get more than 20% here.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Mister Mets on October 02, 2016, 11:41:20 am
If Johnson wins here and gets enough to prevent either Trump or Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, I legitimately wonder what the congressional delegations will do.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: heatcharger on October 02, 2016, 11:47:09 am
If Johnson wins here and gets enough to prevent either Trump or Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, I legitimately wonder what the congressional delegations will do.

There are more states with Republican majorities in the House. They'll pick Trump even if he loses the popular vote by 5%.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Secret Cavern Survivor on October 02, 2016, 12:09:55 pm
Junk poll is junk.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Southern Dep. Speaker Dwarven Dragon on October 02, 2016, 12:25:55 pm
If Johnson wins here and gets enough to prevent either Trump or Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, I legitimately wonder what the congressional delegations will do.

There are more states with Republican majorities in the House. They'll pick Trump even if he loses the popular vote by 5%.

The house can pick Johnson, constitution says top 3 in EVs. Considering there won't be any risk of electing Hillary (an absolute majority of states is required, plurality doesn't cut it), I could see the house settling on Johnson.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: yeah_93 on October 02, 2016, 12:30:52 pm
If Johnson wins here and gets enough to prevent either Trump or Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, I legitimately wonder what the congressional delegations will do.

There are more states with Republican majorities in the House. They'll pick Trump even if he loses the popular vote by 5%.

The house can pick Johnson, constitution says top 3 in EVs. Considering there won't be any risk of electing Hillary (an absolute majority of states is required, plurality doesn't cut it), I could see the house settling on Johnson.
"Ok, you only won your home state, which is worth 5 EVs. Here's your prize: The presidency."


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: DavidB. on October 02, 2016, 12:32:52 pm
The house can pick Johnson, constitution says top 3 in EVs. Considering there won't be any risk of electing Hillary (an absolute majority of states is required, plurality doesn't cut it), I could see the house settling on Johnson.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: JerryArkansas on October 02, 2016, 12:35:23 pm
WOWza !

Looks like there's a huge disconnect between the hype of the Hillary fetishists this week and the real world and actual voters ... hopefully Hillary is not in for a rough surprise on election night when the actual votes are counted, not just those of her out-of-touch supporters and the media pundits.

;)
Are you ok.  You seem to be going nuts.  Is the racist that your country s going to elect really affecting you this much. 


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Eraserhead on October 02, 2016, 12:58:35 pm
Stein is at 2% if anyone cares.

I doubt Johnson will get anywhere near 24% on election day but 10%+ should happen.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: RINO Tom on October 02, 2016, 01:30:34 pm
Johnson might deliver NM to Trump lol

Wut


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: ProudModerate2 on October 02, 2016, 01:43:12 pm
Johnson might deliver NM to Trump lol

Not going to happen.
Sorry.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: ProudModerate2 on October 02, 2016, 02:17:04 pm
At most, come election day, New Mexico will be "Likely D" instead of "Safe D."


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Seriously? on October 02, 2016, 02:20:34 pm
If Johnson wins here and gets enough to prevent either Trump or Clinton from getting 270 electoral votes, I legitimately wonder what the congressional delegations will do.

There are more states with Republican majorities in the House. They'll pick Trump even if he loses the popular vote by 5%.

The house can pick Johnson, constitution says top 3 in EVs. Considering there won't be any risk of electing Hillary (an absolute majority of states is required, plurality doesn't cut it), I could see the house settling on Johnson.
I could see the House, which has more net-Republican delegations, voting Donald Trump in.

With that said, Johnson still trails by double-digits and is in not position to win New Mexico, so this really is moot.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: jaichind on October 02, 2016, 02:40:17 pm
Looks like Nate Silver wrote an entire article on a deadlocked election all based around this poll

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-craziest-end-to-the-2016-campaign-runs-through-new-mexico/


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Ebsy on October 02, 2016, 02:42:31 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Secret Cavern Survivor on October 02, 2016, 02:47:18 pm
Looks like Nate Silver wrote an entire article on a deadlocked election all based around this poll

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-craziest-end-to-the-2016-campaign-runs-through-new-mexico/

Quote
Because New Mexico hasnít been polled much, the survey had a fair amount of influence on our forecast, reducing Clintonís chances of winning New Mexico to 82 percent from 85 percent in the polls-only model.

3-point shift in odds = GAME CHANGER.

lol


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: PresidentSamTilden on October 02, 2016, 02:56:30 pm
"Ok, you only won your home state, which is worth 5 EVs. Here's your prize: The presidency."

Ah, the Kasich strategy.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: NOVA Green on October 02, 2016, 03:04:10 pm
New Mexico is not nearly as solidly a Democratic state as some on the forum would believe.

However, I still envision Clinton winning by 8-10 points depending upon the final 3rd party numbers.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Lief 🐋 on October 02, 2016, 03:11:29 pm
Wow, looks like Tender's disgusting and all-consuming hatred of women and immigrants has turned his brain to mush. Very sad.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Minnesota Mike on October 02, 2016, 03:38:31 pm
Would be impossible to actually pull off but the smart play would for Trump supporters to vote for Johnson. An election thrown to the House would likely mean a President Trump. Of course your average Trump supporter would never grasp the concept.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: RINO Tom on October 02, 2016, 08:29:41 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I know things are a bit different in Hackland, but he's pretty clearly a liberal Democrat.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: heatcharger on October 02, 2016, 08:42:15 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I know things are a bit different in Hackland, but he's pretty clearly a liberal Democrat.

Uh no, in 2012 he said "I'd say I am somewhere in-between being a libertarian and a liberal. So if I were to vote it would be kind of a Gary Johnson versus Mitt Romney decision, I suppose." Doesn't sound like a Democrat to me.

Regardless, his model is too volatile because he's committed to adding every single poll even if they are junk tracking polls with supposedly large sample sizes like USC/LA Times or Reuters. It exaggerates the amount of fluctuation in the race.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Minnesota Mike on October 02, 2016, 08:42:36 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I know things are a bit different in Hackland, but he's pretty clearly a liberal Democrat.

I have been following Silver since he was posting as Poblano on Daily Kos during the Dem primaries in 2008. He is definitely not a Republican.  


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: yeah_93 on October 02, 2016, 08:47:50 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

Just what.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Alcon on October 02, 2016, 09:33:57 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

Just what.

He accepted a paid speaking event in front of a Republican group...which somehow makes him a "paid Republican operative," as if he was giving them any proprietary information, and not just stuff he's said in public a bunch (as if that matters anyway).  It's silly nonsense.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Julian Assange is a Snowflake on October 02, 2016, 09:34:38 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

Just what.

He accepted a paid speaking event in front of a Republican group...which somehow makes him a "paid Republican operative," as if he was giving them any proprietary information, and not just stuff he's said in public a bunch (as if that matters anyway).  It's silly nonsense.

Uh, he's also been unskewing polls like crazy in favor of Trump this year. Actually behaving exactly like that Dean Chambers joke who attacked him so much in 2012 hilariously.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Invisible Obama on October 02, 2016, 09:38:16 pm
It's probably not even an issue of party. You have to remember that Silver works for a media outlet and the media needs a horse race when it comes to presidential elections. He's only doing what he needs to do for his employer to stay relevant.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: StatesPoll on October 02, 2016, 09:43:39 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

(
Img
)


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Alcon on October 02, 2016, 09:45:14 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

Just what.

He accepted a paid speaking event in front of a Republican group...which somehow makes him a "paid Republican operative," as if he was giving them any proprietary information, and not just stuff he's said in public a bunch (as if that matters anyway).  It's silly nonsense.

Uh, he's also been unskewing polls like crazy in favor of Trump this year. Actually behaving exactly like that Dean Chambers joke who attacked him so much in 2012 hilariously.

I'm not sure what you're referring to.  I've never seen Silver advocate for weighting based on political variables; quite the opposite, in fact.  Explain?

It's probably not even an issue of party. You have to remember that Silver works for a media outlet and the media needs a horse race when it comes to presidential elections. He's only doing what he needs to do for his employer to stay relevant.

Do you have any evidence he's "unskewing" unreasonably, or exaggerating uncertainty, or whatever?  I get that there's probably some pressure to focus on competitiveness and uncertainty -- not sure how much of that is coming from ESPN -- but it's not like this hasn't been a fairly high-uncertainty and reasonably competitive election year.  I don't know when he's been hyperbolic about that.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: NOVA Green on October 02, 2016, 09:47:59 pm
It's probably not even an issue of party. You have to remember that Silver works for a media outlet and the media needs a horse race when it comes to presidential elections. He's only doing what he needs to do for his employer to stay relevant.

My take on Nate S and 538 is that he started as this political geek in '08, made a big name for himself, shifted and got a raise and hired onto the NYT in time for the '12 election, and then got his dream job working for ESPN in time for '16 and focusing on sport statistics, which is his first geek love, and now has a decent job with people working for him, and doesn't pay as much attention to politics as he used to, since its only one of his business service lines, and the new bosses are a bit more interested in his sports stats than election stats.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: ExtremeConservative on October 02, 2016, 10:27:22 pm
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I know things are a bit different in Hackland, but he's pretty clearly a liberal Democrat.

Uh no, in 2012 he said "I'd say I am somewhere in-between being a libertarian and a liberal. So if I were to vote it would be kind of a Gary Johnson versus Mitt Romney decision, I suppose." Doesn't sound like a Democrat to me.

Regardless, his model is too volatile because he's committed to adding every single poll even if they are junk tracking polls with supposedly large sample sizes like USC/LA Times or Reuters. It exaggerates the amount of fluctuation in the race.

Umm, does he mean Gary Johnson or Barack Obama?  Or libertarian and conservative?  I think there must have been a misspeak or a typo there.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Kempros on October 03, 2016, 01:23:19 am
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I forget the source (I think it was CNN) that said that Nate Silver is the Democrats' "re-assure" guy. He skews the polls as you probably know to fit the picture better. He does have a very cool map though.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal (post-debate poll): Johnson turns NM into swing state
Post by: HokeyDood on October 03, 2016, 07:34:44 am
WOWza !

Looks like there's a huge disconnect between the hype of the Hillary fetishists this week and the real world and actual voters ... hopefully Hillary is not in for a rough surprise on election night when the actual votes are counted, not just those of her out-of-touch supporters and the media pundits.

;)

Where is my royalty check, Tender?!  I will also accept a bag of schillings if that's what you can afford.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: PeteB on October 03, 2016, 09:16:25 am
Interesting poll.  It does show that, on paper at least, any one of the three could win NM.  However, at this point, the most likely winner is Clinton.  The only other likely scenarios are:

1. Trump implodes while Clinton gets a lot of bad press (Assange?).  Clinton's share holds steady, while many Trump voters switch to Johnson (who itm does NOT have another Aleppo moment) and Johnson carries NM.

2. Trump cleans up his act and for once in his life manages to stay disciplined for a month (:)) while Clinton gets buried by new negative revelations.  Johnson figures out that Aleppo is the capital of Mexico and proceeds to tell journalists that.  Trump carries NM.

I would say that the probability of a Clinton win are 85%, of a Johnson upset perhaps 10% and of a Trump comeback less than 5%.


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: Alcon on October 03, 2016, 09:48:58 am
Nate Silver is literally a paid GOP operative so this is hardly surprising. NM is safe D and I invite Trump/Johnson to waste all the money they want there.

I forget the source (I think it was CNN) that said that Nate Silver is the Democrats' "re-assure" guy. He skews the polls as you probably know to fit the picture better. He does have a very cool map though.

Did "CNN" (the network said it?) explain what any of that means?  The "house effect" correction skews toward neither party by definition.  For most of this year, the "polls-plus" model he does has benefited Trump, because it sees "the fundamentals" as favoring a tight election.  The FiveThirtyEight model has pretty consistently given Trump higher chances than any of the other models out there.  Besides Silver's clear personal animosity for Trump, how is he the "re-assure" guy, and how does he "skew" the polls?


Title: Re: NM-Albuquerque Journal: Clinton 35 / Trump 31 / Johnson 24
Post by: ApatheticAustrian on October 03, 2016, 09:54:53 am
silver isn't reassuring anyone.

i am pretty sure most people in the political data journalism scene are against trump on a personal basis but i haven't seen a single proof that silver is helping anyone...just testing his own assumptions about data.

and i am happier with a trump candidacy looking stronger than it really is than one being stronger than it seems.