Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 21, 2019, 02:56:36 pm
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (General) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls (Moderators: AndrewTX, Likely Voter)
  Indiana- Clout Research GOP Primary Poll: Trump +2
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Indiana- Clout Research GOP Primary Poll: Trump +2  (Read 4972 times)
Fargobison
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,488



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 28, 2016, 01:18:02 pm »

Trump 37
Cruz 35
Kasich 16

http://cloutpolitical.com/new-poll-indiana-gop-contest-a-total-toss-up/
Logged
Pro-Life Single Issue Voter
ExtremeRepublican
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,017


Political Matrix
E: 8.39, S: 7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2016, 01:18:58 pm »

When Kasich falls (as the third choice generally does on Election Day), Cruz will win this by 5 points.
Logged
Hugo Award nominee
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,113


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2016, 01:26:40 pm »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So there's well under a day sampled here.
Logged
Holmes
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,684
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2016, 01:29:52 pm »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So there's well under a day sampled here.

They polled a whole evening.
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,881
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2016, 01:38:54 pm »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So there's well under a day sampled here.

Don't worry, they have a lot of clout.
Logged
swf541
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,154


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2016, 01:58:34 pm »

They polled an entire evening?  Those poor overworked pollsters.....

Throw it in the trash
Logged
Classic Conservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,646
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 28, 2016, 03:07:21 pm »

Seems like a reliable Indiana poll as it was the only one that predicted Mourdock winning and also predicted Deb Fischer and Cruz winning too. I still think Trump is going to sweep.
Logged
For Trump everything, for immigrants the law
xingkerui
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17,043
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.63, S: -6.13

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2016, 03:30:40 pm »

Methinks we're calling the race for Trump a bit early. Remember, results in the NE don't tell us much about Indiana.
Logged
For Trump everything, for immigrants the law
xingkerui
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17,043
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.63, S: -6.13

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2016, 03:43:40 pm »

Methinks we're calling the race for Trump a bit early. Remember, results in the NE don't tell us much about Indiana.

Mostly agree.  I think Cruz will narrowly win Indiana in the end and do great in Nebraska, proving that nothing has really changed in the Midwest.  But then Trump nearly gets his Northeast numbers on the West Coast, in which case he will still have a pledged majority unless he screws up WV and gets absolutely nothing from IN. 

I can't speak for OR/CA, but Trump will definitely not get his NE numbers here in WA, unless Cruz drops out.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,032
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2016, 12:07:11 am »

Methinks we're calling the race for Trump a bit early. Remember, results in the NE don't tell us much about Indiana.

Mostly agree.  I think Cruz will narrowly win Indiana in the end and do great in Nebraska, proving that nothing has really changed in the Midwest.  But then Trump nearly gets his Northeast numbers on the West Coast, in which case he will still have a pledged majority unless he screws up WV and gets absolutely nothing from IN. 

I don't buy into the IN is similar to the Plains states meme. To me, it is more of an extension of the Rust Belt, Chicagoland and Kentucky to the South, a region where Trump has done well.

I don't see Indiana as Wisconsin.

Keep in mind the only state that Trump didn't win immediately surrounding Indiana is Ohio and that's only because Kasich is a sitting governor.
Logged
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,919
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2016, 12:11:57 am »

Methinks we're calling the race for Trump a bit early. Remember, results in the NE don't tell us much about Indiana.

Mostly agree.  I think Cruz will narrowly win Indiana in the end and do great in Nebraska, proving that nothing has really changed in the Midwest.  But then Trump nearly gets his Northeast numbers on the West Coast, in which case he will still have a pledged majority unless he screws up WV and gets absolutely nothing from IN. 

I don't buy into the IN is similar to the Plains states meme. To me, it is more of an extension of the Rust Belt, Chicagoland and Kentucky to the South, a region where Trump has done well.

I don't see Indiana as Wisconsin.

Keep in mind the only state that Trump didn't win immediately surrounding Indiana is Ohio and that's only because Kasich is a sitting governor.

I agree with your reasoning but not your conclusion. Trump received 35% in Wisconsin, 36% in Ohio, and 38% in Michigan and Illinois, all of which were open primaries like Indiana is. The variation between the results in these states was in which of Trump's opponents did well or poorly. (Incidentally, the parts of Illinois and Ohio that look demographically like Indiana tended to be areas where Trump did worse, not better, than his average in those states).

Trump wins Indiana if backlash from the Cruz/Kasich deal and momentum from his mid-Atlantic wins get him new supporters. If you think Indiana will behave like its neighbors, then the conclusion that Cruz will win is inescapable. The argument for Trump winning here is reliant on a change in the broader electorate having occurred since the Wisconsin vote (since the New York vote, probably).
Logged
Ronnie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,843
United States
P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2016, 12:29:23 am »
« Edited: April 29, 2016, 12:36:49 am by Ronnie »

According to the crosstabs, women encompass 51% of the poll and men 49%, when it's usually ~53% men and ~47% women in a Republican primary.  21% 18-35 year olds is also really high.

If you extrapolate the right demographic numbers onto this poll, Trump would probably lead by around 5, which feels about right.  Ted could really use Mike Pence's endorsement right about now.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,032
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2016, 12:29:43 am »

Methinks we're calling the race for Trump a bit early. Remember, results in the NE don't tell us much about Indiana.

Mostly agree.  I think Cruz will narrowly win Indiana in the end and do great in Nebraska, proving that nothing has really changed in the Midwest.  But then Trump nearly gets his Northeast numbers on the West Coast, in which case he will still have a pledged majority unless he screws up WV and gets absolutely nothing from IN. 

I don't buy into the IN is similar to the Plains states meme. To me, it is more of an extension of the Rust Belt, Chicagoland and Kentucky to the South, a region where Trump has done well.

I don't see Indiana as Wisconsin.

Keep in mind the only state that Trump didn't win immediately surrounding Indiana is Ohio and that's only because Kasich is a sitting governor.

I agree with your reasoning but not your conclusion. Trump received 35% in Wisconsin, 36% in Ohio, and 38% in Michigan and Illinois, all of which were open primaries like Indiana is. The variation between the results in these states was in which of Trump's opponents did well or poorly. (Incidentally, the parts of Illinois and Ohio that look demographically like Indiana tended to be areas where Trump did worse, not better, than his average in those states).

Trump wins Indiana if backlash from the Cruz/Kasich deal and momentum from his mid-Atlantic wins get him new supporters. If you think Indiana will behave like its neighbors, then the conclusion that Cruz will win is inescapable. The argument for Trump winning here is reliant on a change in the broader electorate having occurred since the Wisconsin vote (since the New York vote, probably).
Wisconsin was a perfect storm for Cruz. Trump had a terrible week. Cruz had the local talk media basically in his pocket ambushing Trump. It is the home to Prebus the GOP-e. #NeverTrump was at its apex.

A lot has changed since then and this "we're going to collude and tell you to vote for strategy" reeks of desperation. Voters see right though it.

Using percentages from Ohio, Michigan and Illinois as the basis of a Trump ceiling in Indiana doesn't really play. There were a lot more candidates in the race at that time. Wisconsin is a fair assessment, but I don't equate those upper midwest states (WI and MN) with the lower midwest/transitional states like Illinois/Indiana.
Logged
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,919
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 29, 2016, 12:43:42 am »

Mid-to-high 30s is not his ceiling, but it has been his typical performance in Midwestern open primaries. Trying to draw a distinction between Trump's performance in Wisconsin and Illinois isn't particularly useful, because Trump got 36% in WI and 38% in IL. If the dates of the two primaries were flipped, Trump would've won Wisconsin while the opposition was still divided, and he would've lost Illinois to Cruz. Again, if Trump wins Indiana, it's through new supporters having been attracted either by distaste for the Cruz/Kasich deal or through his mid-Atlantic victories.

Trump had a terrible week because he was losing Wisconsin. He did not lose Wisconsin because he had a terrible week. His performance in Wisconsin polling did not shift at all during that week.

Trying to group Minnesota in with Wisconsin is even less useful, because Minnesota was a closed caucus and Trump performed way worse. The difference is incredibly marginal.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,032
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 29, 2016, 12:56:16 am »

Mid-to-high 30s is not his ceiling, but it has been his typical performance in Midwestern open primaries. Trying to draw a distinction between Trump's performance in Wisconsin and Illinois isn't particularly useful, because Trump got 36% in WI and 38% in IL. If the dates of the two primaries were flipped, Trump would've won Wisconsin while the opposition was still divided, and he would've lost Illinois to Cruz. Again, if Trump wins Indiana, it's through new supporters having been attracted either by distaste for the Cruz/Kasich deal or through his mid-Atlantic victories.

Trump had a terrible week because he was losing Wisconsin. He did not lose Wisconsin because he had a terrible week. His performance in Wisconsin polling did not shift at all during that week.

Trying to group Minnesota in with Wisconsin is even less useful, because Minnesota was a closed caucus and Trump performed way worse. The difference is incredibly marginal.
Trump internals have him up 20. Cruz internals per CNN have him down 10. One of Clout's partners tweeted out what is basically a #NeverTrump tweet. I believe 538 gave Clout a D rating.

I'd treat this thing as an internal for Cruz. And if that's the case and Trump +2 is the best they can do, you and I both know that means it is really not looking pretty for Cruz.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 43,160
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 29, 2016, 01:08:14 am »
« Edited: April 29, 2016, 01:21:46 am by Eternal Senator North Carolina Yankee »

Since when does Trump have internals? The Manafort hirering?
Logged
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,919
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 29, 2016, 01:08:41 am »

OK, first of all, I haven't been talking at all about polling: I'm talking about results in areas nearby and demographically similar to Indiana. These will only work for prognosticating Indiana if voter preferences haven't meaningfully shifted. Comparison of Pennsylvania results to New York results shows that, at least in the Northeast, they clearly have.

Numerous leaks from the Trump campaign have indicated the campaign does not engage in internal polling. If you search his Twitter account, his most recent mention of internal polls dates back to when he was considering running for Governor of New York in 2014. Trump internal polls don't exist. An unnamed source on the CNN article talking about the Fiorina pick said that Cruz was down "8 to 10 points" earlier in the week, but that Fiorina helped by "a couple of points". It's fairly obvious that Cruz's strategy here very strongly depends on undecideds behaving the way they did in Ohio/Michigan/Illinois/Wisconsin, rather than Pennsylvania and Maryland. Either chronology matters or location matters, take your pick.

538 has also never rated Clout Research. They have rated St. Cloud State University, which is obviously similar-sounding; St. Cloud received a B-, which isn't a perfect grade but is far from a D.

If you don't know what you're talking about, then sit back and listen. There's no need to make sh**t up.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,032
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: April 29, 2016, 01:23:02 am »

If you don't know what you're talking about, then sit back and listen. There's no need to make sh**t up.

Make sh**t up. OK...

"Cruz allies and people close to the campaign describe a budding sense of gloom, with internal polls diving as Trump mounted even stronger than expected showings in his native northeast. In Indiana, which Cruz backers once believed they were favored to win after his strong defeat of Trump in Wisconsin, Cruz's numbers have fallen precipitously: Once leading, Cruz now trails in the state by eight to 10 points, according to a person who has seen the numbers, with Trump over the 40% mark. Cruz's campaign did not respond when asked about those figures."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/politics/ted-cruz-carly-fiorina-indiana-plan/index.html

Alleged Trump internal.

https://twitter.com/kincannon_show/status/725816659563393026?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Tweets of Clout Research's PJ Wentzel, clearly #NeverTrump

https://twitter.com/PJWenzel/status/707723509712232448
https://www.facebook.com/pjwenzel/posts/10154020877909740

The only thing I was wrong on was the D. That was for Wenzel's other firm Wenzel Strategies. Same pig, different lipstick.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,032
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: April 29, 2016, 01:25:11 am »

Since when does Trump have internals? The Manafort hirering?
My guess is if these "internals" are true, it would come from the Manafort hiring. He obviously stopped the bleeding with unpledged delegates in PA, so you would think they had some sort of micro-polling available in crucial states like PA, IN and CA.
Logged
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,919
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2016, 01:39:48 am »

I quoted the same CNN article with the "8-10", so I don't know what you're trying to demonstrate with that. The alleged Trump internal is literally from some random guy's Twitter; he has no connection to the Trump campaign besides being a supporter.

I'll give you PJ Wenzel sitting on the board of Clout Research and being anti-Trump. That part's real.

Since when does Trump have internals? The Manafort hirering?
My guess is if these "internals" are true, it would come from the Manafort hiring. He obviously stopped the bleeding with unpledged delegates in PA, so you would think they had some sort of micro-polling available in crucial states like PA, IN and CA.

My guess is if these internals were true, Donald would be promoting them himself instead of leaking them to some random guy with a radio show who is currently arguing with random Twitter users about the Holocaust.
Logged
dax00
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,381


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: April 29, 2016, 01:57:53 am »

Trying to group Minnesota in with Wisconsin is even less useful, because Minnesota was a closed caucus and Trump performed way worse. The difference is incredibly marginal.
Minnesconsin is a very real thing. It may as well be one state.
Logged
libertpaulian
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: April 29, 2016, 05:24:53 pm »

Mid-to-high 30s is not his ceiling, but it has been his typical performance in Midwestern open primaries. Trying to draw a distinction between Trump's performance in Wisconsin and Illinois isn't particularly useful, because Trump got 36% in WI and 38% in IL. If the dates of the two primaries were flipped, Trump would've won Wisconsin while the opposition was still divided, and he would've lost Illinois to Cruz. Again, if Trump wins Indiana, it's through new supporters having been attracted either by distaste for the Cruz/Kasich deal or through his mid-Atlantic victories.

Trump had a terrible week because he was losing Wisconsin. He did not lose Wisconsin because he had a terrible week. His performance in Wisconsin polling did not shift at all during that week.

Trying to group Minnesota in with Wisconsin is even less useful, because Minnesota was a closed caucus and Trump performed way worse. The difference is incredibly marginal.
The difference is Trump has all the political and moral momentum right now.  There are always going to be fence sitters that jump the winner's way. 

Wisconsin was 1) a fluke, and 2) back when more states were voting.  Trump also underperformed in the Midwest because the nomination process was still wide open.  Now that the process is almost over, most people are going to want to go with the apparent winner and bring this to a close.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC