Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 15, 2019, 07:38:32 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  USC Dornsife/L.A. Times Daybreak National Tracking: 11/7 - Trump +3.2
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 30 Print
Author Topic: USC Dornsife/L.A. Times Daybreak National Tracking: 11/7 - Trump +3.2  (Read 63085 times)
Soonerdem
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 95
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #150 on: July 31, 2016, 08:22:17 pm »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (7/30):
Trump - 46.1 (-.5)
Clinton - 41.9 (+.2)
(#) denotes change from previous day

Smaller change then you would expect
Logged
StatesPoll
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 441
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #151 on: July 31, 2016, 09:11:34 pm »

 
[/quote]

Pre DNC(7/24) TRUMP 46.3%
Post DNC(7/30) TRUMP 46.1%

Pre RNC(7/17) Hillary 42.2%
Post DNC(7/30) Hillary 41.9%

Wink

Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,455
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #152 on: July 31, 2016, 09:16:53 pm »


Pre DNC(7/24) TRUMP 46.3%
Post DNC(7/30) TRUMP 46.1%

Pre RNC(7/17) Hillary 42.2%
Post DNC(7/30) Hillary 41.9%

Wink


[/quote]
Um, there's still like 4 more days until we capture the entire DNC bump.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,515
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #153 on: July 31, 2016, 09:17:43 pm »


Pre DNC(7/24) TRUMP 46.3%
Post DNC(7/30) TRUMP 46.1%

Pre RNC(7/17) Hillary 42.2%
Post DNC(7/30) Hillary 41.9%

Wink


Um, there's still like 4 more days until we capture the entire DNC bump.
[/quote]

Well, we also know that this poll is garbage, so there's that.
Logged
StatesPoll
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 441
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #154 on: July 31, 2016, 09:34:55 pm »
« Edited: July 31, 2016, 09:45:46 pm by StatesPoll »


Pre DNC(7/24) TRUMP 46.3%
Post DNC(7/30) TRUMP 46.1%

Pre RNC(7/17) Hillary 42.2%
Post DNC(7/30) Hillary 41.9%

Wink


Um, there's still like 4 more days until we capture the entire DNC bump.
[/quote]

It Already reflects DNC convention(7/25-7/28) more than half.
7/24-7/30  (24,25,26,27,28,29,30)

especially Michael Obama's fantastic(?) speech, it was in 7/26 (Which was praised by every MSM).

Logged
dfwlibertylover
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,270
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #155 on: August 01, 2016, 02:11:14 am »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (7/31):
Trump - 46 (+/-)
Clinton - 42 (+/-)
(#) denotes change from previous day
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #156 on: August 01, 2016, 02:16:23 am »

For those that like decimals:

Trump 46.2 (+.1%)
Clinton 42.1 (+.2%)
Logged
HillOfANight
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,460
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #157 on: August 01, 2016, 06:54:26 pm »

https://twitter.com/JeffersonObama/status/760240794942988289

■ TRUMP WINS 30% Blacks
■ Hillary wins just 51% Latinos

trash
Logged
michelle
MikeWells12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,972
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: 0.35

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #158 on: August 01, 2016, 07:00:54 pm »


If you actually checked the crosstabs then you would know that what you just posted is obviously not true. The poll probably isn't that accurate (considering how it goes against every other poll out right now), but don't post lies to back it up, okay? Trump is only winning 5% of blacks in this poll, and Clinton is at 54% with Hispanics.
Logged
dspNY
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,574
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #159 on: August 01, 2016, 07:02:16 pm »


Put Clinton at 90% with African-Americans and 75% with Hispanics like most polls and she goes into the lead by 2 or 3
Logged
Pragmatic Conservative
1184AZ
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,774


Political Matrix
E: 3.00, S: -0.41

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #160 on: August 01, 2016, 07:04:43 pm »
« Edited: August 01, 2016, 07:12:16 pm by Fmr. RG 1184AZ »

Even if those numbers were true, and he matched Romney's numbers with white voters he would only win 52-46, and 306-252 EV, at least according to 538.  

Logged
HillOfANight
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,460
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #161 on: August 01, 2016, 07:18:45 pm »


If you actually checked the crosstabs then you would know that what you just posted is obviously not true. The poll probably isn't that accurate (considering how it goes against every other poll out right now), but don't post lies to back it up, okay? Trump is only winning 5% of blacks in this poll, and Clinton is at 54% with Hispanics.

Sorry, must have been a typo by the tweeter.

http://96.127.53.23/election/
Still, Trump +4 with millenials, while other posters have him down over 20.
Logged
Interlocutor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 961


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #162 on: August 02, 2016, 02:52:22 am »
« Edited: August 02, 2016, 04:25:57 am by Interlocutor »

Latest results from the only national poll currently showing a Trump lead, as cited by Donald Trump

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (8/1):
Trump - 45.3 (-.9)
Clinton - 43.1 (+1)
(#) denotes change from previous day
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #163 on: August 02, 2016, 04:10:57 am »

Latest results from the only national poll currently showing a Trump lead, as cited by Donald Trump

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (8/1):
Trump - 45.3 (-.9)
Clinton - 43.1 (+1)
(#) denotes change from previous day
The two biggest Trump/two worst Hillary! days are about to roll off this survey in the next few days, so it will be interesting to see where this poll is come Thursday morning.
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,940
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #164 on: August 02, 2016, 10:30:49 am »

It really is interesting how this poll has consistently come up with numbers always about 6 or 7 points more Trump leaning than the average.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #165 on: August 02, 2016, 10:34:24 am »

It really is interesting how this poll has consistently come up with numbers always about 6 or 7 points more Trump leaning than the average.
It's probably the turnout assumptions, which I don't think they've publicly released.
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #166 on: August 03, 2016, 03:46:38 am »
« Edited: August 03, 2016, 03:53:55 am by Seriously? »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (8/2):
Trump - 45.3 (-/-)
Clinton - 43.7 (+.6)
(#) denotes change from previous day

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-daybreak-poll-methodology-20160714-snap-story.html
(not on the polling-specific page yet from USC, just the LA Times for now).

Trump has one more +7 day left on this poll to roll off, which is tomorrow, before the Hillary! bounce from the DNC began in earnest.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #167 on: August 03, 2016, 10:36:11 am »

The fault in a moving average lies in its inability to reflect a major change in the underlying reality.  Consider what happened on May 2. 2011 and what that did for approval polls of President Obama. Polls from before then  suddenly became suspect.

Basically, Special Forces whacked Osama bin Laden. As I recall an approval poll for Virginia went from the high 40s to the mid 50s overnight.

Or try something apolitical. Texas is prone to a phenomenon known as a Blue Norther.  Before the dry and much colder air mass moves in, temperatures could be as high as the mid 80s under a clear sky even in January.  So let's look at the daytime highs in the five days before the Blue Norther comes by in Dallas.

Daytime highs are 72, 68, 77, 84, 81, and 85F. A rolling average of the daytime highs isn't that silly; that's how things are typically in Phoenix at the same latitude and often similarly low in humidity. The next day the temperatures reaches 82 at 1:30. Then, all of a sudden, the wind shifts from south to north, the sky goes overcast, and the temperature plummets. At 2PM one has overcast conditions, a strong north wind, and a temperature or 55F. By 3PM the temperature is down to 39F. On the next day people awaken in Dallas to find that if they go out to get the paper they find a sub-freezing 24F.

Weather forecasters do not use rolling averages of temperature to predict the daily weather.  The temperature of even two days earlier has practically no value in predicting the daily high temperature that day.   
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #168 on: August 03, 2016, 10:38:17 am »

The fault in a moving average lies in its inability to reflect a major change in the underlying reality.  Consider what happened on May 2. 2011 and what that did for approval polls of President Obama. Polls from before then  suddenly became suspect.

Basically, Special Forces whacked Osama bin Laden. As I recall an approval poll for Virginia went from the high 40s to the mid 50s overnight.

Or try something apolitical. Texas is prone to a phenomenon known as a Blue Norther.  Before the dry and much colder air mass moves in, temperatures could be as high as the mid 80s under a clear sky even in January.  So let's look at the daytime highs in the five days before the Blue Norther comes by in Dallas.

Daytime highs are 72, 68, 77, 84, 81, and 85F. A rolling average of the daytime highs isn't that silly; that's how things are typically in Phoenix at the same latitude and often similarly low in humidity. The next day the temperatures reaches 82 at 1:30. Then, all of a sudden, the wind shifts from south to north, the sky goes overcast, and the temperature plummets. At 2PM one has overcast conditions, a strong north wind, and a temperature or 55F. By 3PM the temperature is down to 39F. On the next day people awaken in Dallas to find that if they go out to get the paper they find a sub-freezing 24F.

Weather forecasters do not use rolling averages of temperature to predict the daily weather.  The temperature of even two days earlier has practically no value in predicting the daily high temperature that day.   
Meh. Rolling averages are generally fine for tracking polls of this sort. This is likely the first of many that will be employing this kind of methodology over the cycle. You just have to understand the trendlines, which is what these kind of polls are mainly about anyway.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #169 on: August 03, 2016, 02:33:37 pm »
« Edited: August 03, 2016, 05:12:25 pm by pbrower2a »

The fault in a moving average lies in its inability to reflect a major change in the underlying reality.  Consider what happened on May 2. 2011 and what that did for approval polls of President Obama. Polls from before then  suddenly became suspect.

Basically, Special Forces whacked Osama bin Laden. As I recall an approval poll for Virginia went from the high 40s to the mid 50s overnight.

Or try something apolitical. Texas is prone to a phenomenon known as a Blue Norther.  Before the dry and much colder air mass moves in, temperatures could be as high as the mid 80s under a clear sky even in January.  So let's look at the daytime highs in the five days before the Blue Norther comes by in Dallas.

Daytime highs are 72, 68, 77, 84, 81, and 85F. A rolling average of the daytime highs isn't that silly; that's how things are typically in Phoenix at the same latitude and often similarly low in humidity. The next day the temperatures reaches 82 at 1:30. Then, all of a sudden, the wind shifts from south to north, the sky goes overcast, and the temperature plummets. At 2PM one has overcast conditions, a strong north wind, and a temperature or 55F. By 3PM the temperature is down to 39F. On the next day people awaken in Dallas to find that if they go out to get the paper they find a sub-freezing 24F.

Weather forecasters do not use rolling averages of temperature to predict the daily weather.  The temperature of even two days earlier has practically no value in predicting the daily high temperature that day.  

Meh. Rolling averages are generally fine for tracking polls of this sort. This is likely the first of many that will be employing this kind of methodology over the cycle. You just have to understand the trendlines, which is what these kind of polls are mainly about anyway.

The comparison I use is of the same pollster from one week to another, with recognition that events can happen that make old polls completely irrelevant. Rasmussen to PPP is probably apples to oranges unless there is some huge gap in time.

I changed my polling thread to recognize that polls, however valid, from before the Conventions have all become suspect. Assumptions that I could make beforehand (that someone up 45-38 has a significant lead) may have made sense beforehand, but as the elections get closer the 45-38 lead is not as strong as a 49-44 lead even if the 49-44 lead is somewhat narrower. Winners in a binary race should be approaching the magic 50% barrier in a binary election. (I made little change on determining how a three-way race would go).  

I do not treat this Presidential race like that of 2012. In 2012 we all found Barack Obama extremely predictable. His opponent was simply predictable, offering much the same policies as John McCain. Mitt Romney ran as reality compelled him to run, seeking to cultivate mass disdain for the incumbent President in some parts of the country to spread it elsewhere. The personality of Mitt Romney was not going to matter much. A President with a scandal- free  Administration, one who had an improving economy, and one whose foreign policy was effective ordinarily wins re-election. Were he running against a catastrophically-failed President, Mitt Romney would have won.
 
This year things are very different. The incumbent President isn't running. Both Presidential nominees faced genuine competition in the primaries. Most of our assessments of Trump vs. Clinton are qualitative.

Do Conventions matter? They certainly do! They establish themes for the upcoming election. Donald Trump has left much material for Democrats to use against him. Hillary Clinton has adopted Reagan-like themes  that worked well in 1980, 1983, and 1988, maybe giving some slightly liberal twists to them so that they seem genuine enough for people to believe them. Donald Trump has offended huge chunks of America without excuse. Even more significantly, Hillary Clinton has gotten a unified Party in contrast to Donald Trump.

My gut feeling is that I see a slightly-liberal version of a Reagan-like campaign against a right-wing version of McGovern-like campaign, but I have yet to have my intuition confirmed.  Polls will confirm or deny my intuition, and they will show in the form of a map.

I can't imagine a strong Trump win. Such would require him to win states that Republican nominees have not won beginning in 1992, and often by huge margins. A bare Trump win looks something like 2000 or 2004, with Trump ahead in practically all of the legitimate swing states and making some states behind the Blue (Atlas Red) Firewall look shaky. A bare Clinton win has a map looking like 2000 or 2004 with her winning everything that Democrats have lost no more than once since 1992 while picking up Colorado and Nevada together or one or two  swing states (from among Florida, Missouri, Ohio, or Virginia). That would probably be like Obama 2012 less Florida. Get three of those swing states (including Florida) and start picking off states like Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, and North Carolina and a Hillary Clinton wins  an election like Obama in 2008, if not a little stronger.

It's practically certain that Hillary Clinton will not win an election in the style of her husband. Should she pick up states that her husband won twice but Obama lost twice by 10% or more, then she may be winning a 45-state landslide. I doubt that she can reconstruct the Southern electorate that Carter got.  I can more easily imagine her winning Texas than winning Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Tennessee, and West Virginia. It is more likely that she wins an election with a map similar to those of Eisenhower in the 1950s.

But I am ahead of myself. Some things have not changed: the Democrats have lost, perhaps permanently, the Mountain and Deep South.        
Logged
Ebsy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,815
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #170 on: August 04, 2016, 12:43:17 am »

Now it is Trump +1. Might the final poll showing Trump ahead finally topple on the rcp average?
Logged
Seriously?
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #171 on: August 04, 2016, 01:01:43 am »

Now it is Trump +1. Might the final poll showing Trump ahead finally topple on the rcp average?
Tonight will be the night if it does. The last truly pro-Trump sample will come off of the average tonight.
Logged
Interlocutor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 961


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #172 on: August 04, 2016, 02:14:32 am »
« Edited: August 04, 2016, 02:16:09 am by Interlocutor »

The streak is over.


USC/LA Times national tracking poll (8/2)
Clinton: 44.8 (+1.1)
Trump: 44.2 (-1.1)
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #173 on: August 04, 2016, 05:59:33 am »

It looks as if my analogy in weather is becoming relevant. 
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,940
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #174 on: August 04, 2016, 09:51:51 am »

Nate Cohn pointed out that it looks like this pollster is weighting it's results to conform to 2012's 51-47 Presidential outcome, which partly explains the big Republican slant since some people in most polls tend to say they voted for the winner when they did not.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 30 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