Overtime Politics Thread (WARNING: Possible fraud)

[Holmes]

He's cooking up numbers.

Even with the demographics now your still going to complain?

What exactly am I complaining about? "Muh Hillary is not at 70%"? You can believe this garbage all you want. It's your life. But it's easy to make state polls that mirror national polls and pass them off as legitimate.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Last Virginia poll was 58-32 Clinton, in November. So this is a pretty significant tightening.

It has Sanders at 23% among blacks and 34% among hispanics. Not completely out of the realm of possibility, but still hard to believe.

The last CNN national poll had Bernie at 32% with minorities.

He's cooking up numbers.

These numbers are not the most believable, but really don't smell like the pure garbage he put out for Michigan. It's perfectly possible that that was just a weird outlier - every polling company has them sometimes, no one is perfect. The Missouri numbers differed strongly from other polls, but I've always felt that that state would go for Sanders in a competitive primary due to it being almost entirely white outside of three counties (2 CDs), so you can at least entertain the notion of that poll being correct.  And it's impossible to tell the validity of their Arkansas numbers since the last poll of that state was from 2013 and included people like Warren and Cuomo.

That being said, given their methodology, small staff, and previous strong criticisms of Clinton on Twitter, I'm not quite ready to resume inclusion yet. But if their Iowa numbers are reasonable, which will be easy to tell because of the countless number of times that state has been polled,  I will resume including their polls in the democratic map, including retroactively adding this Virginia Poll and the Florida Poll. The Michigan Poll will not be included as it is undeniable garbage.

On the Democratic side, their Iowa poll almost exactly matched the Selzer poll released the next day.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Certain people clearly need them... we don't need to take them seriously.

[Tender Branson]

Maybe those Overtime polls recently were not that off as people thought, considering the recent IA and NH and national polls.

Also, they polled mostly "white" states where Sanders should do well in.

[Lief 🗽]

My god, the berniacs are really getting desperate now if they're clinging to this garbage.

[Senator Cris]

I asked them via email to release the demographic composition of their sample.
Without it, the suspect that they are cooking up numbers is still high.

[Senator Cris]

Clinton leads Sanders 49-44 in IA.

[Senator Cris]

They released the demographic composition of the sample.

[Wells]

Iowa demographics.
Group: Candidate (%%-%%) Sample Size

Male: Sanders (48-46) 194
Female: Clinton (52-40) 202

18-30: Sanders (56-38) 71
31-45: Clinton (51-41) 119
46-59: Clinton (53-41) 127
60+: Clinton (51-42) 79

White/Caucasian: Clinton (47-45) 372
Black/African-American:Clinton (75-17) 12
Hispanic/Latino: Clinton (75-25) 8
Asian: Clinton (67-33) 3
Native American/Other: Clinton (100-0) 1

<$10,000: Clinton (54-42) 24
$10,001-$25,000: Clinton (46-44) 87
$25,001-$45,000: Sanders (47-45) 123
$45,001-$65,000: Clinton (52-44) 87
$65,001+: Clinton (54-40) 75

Overall
Clinton 49%
Sanders 44%
O'Malley 4%
Sample Size: 396

[bigedlb]

R in Iowa has a 27-27 tie with Rubio 15 and Carson 9

[Wells]

Republican Iowa demographics.
Group: Candidate (Sample Size of said group)

Male: Cruz (210)
Female: Trump (201)

18-30: Trump (58)
31-45: Trump (138)
46-59: Cruz (127)
60+: Cruz (90)

White/Caucasian: Cruz (392)
Black/African-American: Tie; Carson and Trump (4)
Hispanic/Latino: Tie; Cruz and Rubio (9)
Asian: Trump (4)
Native American/Other: Tie; Bush and Trump (2)

<$10,000: Cruz (29)
$10,001-$25,000: Cruz (86)
$25,001-$45,000: Trump (132)
$45,001-$65,000: Cruz (90)
$65,001+: Trump (74)

Overall:
Cruz 27%
Trump 27%
Rubio 15%
Carson 9%
Bush 5%
Paul 4%
Christie 3%
Kasich 2%
Fiorina 1%
Sample Size: 411

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Reasonable numbers and demographics. I will now resume including overtime polls in my map, with the exception of the ridiculous Michigan poll.

[Ebsy]

Male: Sanders (48-46) 194
Female: Clinton (52-40) 202

18-30: Sanders (56-38) 71
31-45: Clinton (51-41) 119
46-59: Clinton (53-41) 127
60+: Clinton (51-42) 79

Just a small comment, but these demographic numbers don't look anything like what the caucuses probably will be. In 2008, the Democratic caucus was 57% Female and 43% male, and the 60+ group was 29%. I'm thinking they drastically undersampled white women.

[Eraserhead]

Male: Sanders (48-46) 194
Female: Clinton (52-40) 202

18-30: Sanders (56-38) 71
31-45: Clinton (51-41) 119
46-59: Clinton (53-41) 127
60+: Clinton (51-42) 79

Just a small comment, but these demographic numbers don't look anything like what the caucuses probably will be. In 2008, the Democratic caucus was 57% Female and 43% male, and the 60+ group was 29%. I'm thinking they drastically undersampled white women.

They didn't sample anyone.

I've still been given no reason to believe that these are real polls.

[Holmes]

Male: Sanders (48-46) 194
Female: Clinton (52-40) 202

18-30: Sanders (56-38) 71
31-45: Clinton (51-41) 119
46-59: Clinton (53-41) 127
60+: Clinton (51-42) 79

Just a small comment, but these demographic numbers don't look anything like what the caucuses probably will be. In 2008, the Democratic caucus was 57% Female and 43% male, and the 60+ group was 29%. I'm thinking they drastically undersampled white women.

They didn't sample anyone.

I've still been given no reason to believe that these are real polls.

Finally someone speaks some sense.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

The denial is strong in the Clinton hacks. I'm sure more polls will come out confirming these results.

[Lief 🗽]

Lol Eraserhead is not a Clinton hack, dummy. He is just a forthright and honest man in search of the truth.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Lol Eraserhead is not a Clinton hack, dummy. He is just a forthright and honest man in search of the truth.

Did i quote Eraserhead? No i did not. Obviously this polls are iffy but other hacks will use that to dispute any polls even if they line up with other recent polls.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Clinton leads Sanders 49-44 in IA.

That's a pretty reasonable result. Together with this poll, only 1 of the last 5 polls has Hillary doing better than a 5 point lead. Those include actually somewhat reputable NBC and YouGov and not so reputable Overtime and ARG. Not so reputable Gravis has a huge Hillary lead.

[Senator Cris]

Sanders leads Clinton 54-40 in NH, Trump @30%, Kasich leads Rubio for 2nd place.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Sanders leads Clinton 54-40 in NH, Trump @30%, Kasich leads Rubio for 2nd place.

Looks like these polls are pretty reasonable.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Sanders leads 50/46 with Women! Nice!

[Flake]

New Poll: New Hampshire President by Overtime Politics on 2016-01-12

Summary:

Sanders:	54%
Clinton:	40%
Other:	4%
Undecided:	2%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

[Former Democrat]

GOP:
Donald Trump: 30%
John Kasich: 15%
Marco Rubio: 13%
Chris Christie: 09%
Ted Cruz: 09%
Jeb Bush: 06%
Carly Fiorina: 05%
Ben Carson: 04%
Rand Paul: 02%

https://strehlspresidentialelection2016.wordpress.com/2016/01/14/sanders-and-trump-the-clear-favourites-in-their-parties-in-nh-by-overtime-politics/

[This account no longer in use.]

Everybody get on the overHYPE TRAIN.