Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 10, 2019, 11:07:46 pm
News: 2020 Gubernatorial Predictions 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 (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: USC Dornsife/L.A. Times Daybreak National Tracking: 11/7 - Trump +3.2  (Read 63285 times)
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« on: July 25, 2016, 05:39:59 am »

lol this is such junk

I can't be the only one thinking that it is pretty much statistically impossible for them day after day, with such a small n of respondents, to have results that only vary a point or two. There should be more variation with such a small sample.
It's 5 Day Rolling.
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2016, 06:12:52 am »

Trump now up by 7. Still want to defend this trash heap?
If one is intrested in trend, it indeed gives some information. I don't believe, Trump is +7 now, but I don't believe either, Clinton was +12 as ABC/Washington and Ipsos/Reuters showed.

Or is ABC pollster a trash heap as well?
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2016, 07:08:52 am »

Trump now up by 7. Still want to defend this trash heap?
If one is intrested in trend, it indeed gives some information. I don't believe, Trump is +7 now, but I don't believe either, Clinton was +12 as ABC/Washington and Ipsos/Reuters showed.

Or is ABC pollster a trash heap as well?

Clinton was never ahead by that much.
In polls?

ABC, June 26, Hillary +12 http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1178a12016Election.pdf

Ipsos, July 14, Hillary +15 http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1/dates/20160701-20160726/type/day
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2016, 03:39:08 pm »

I don't understand why people get so worked up about polls that aren't in their favor. 
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2016, 02:36:24 pm »


You do realize that 1: this is a seven-day running average (as has been discussed in this thread already), and 2: because of that fact, Trump's convention bump in this poll didn't even BEGIN until AFTER the convention was over, and by analogy, Clinton's shouldn't begin until tomorrow's tracking numbers, right? No?
Also the poll itself is just sh**t. 

I'm not convinced of that. Perhaps it has a bias, but that doesn't mean it is useless. It seems to capture trends pretty well (if late).
Not really.  It is a sham compared to what they had four years ago.  Shouldn't have launched it until after the conventions at the least.

"It's a sham because I don't believe assumptions X, Y, and Z" reeks of "unskewing". I'm not prepared to make such a bold statement about any poll just yet.
No, because they won't release the cross tables of the poll.  Why should I trust something just based on the numbers without seeing who they are polling.
The "detailed data" tab has sample sizes. 

Yeah I pretty much tuned out of the conversation when he said that...
At this point, you seem like an idiot who wants to believe this damn poll.  So, I'll leave you in your "poll".

Also, they didn't have that when I first looked at this poll and threw it in the garbage.  Havent looked since.  But think what you want to think.
So you threw it in the garbage, because they did't have it [at the very start], but now, when they do have it, you don't care.

Ok!
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #5 on: July 30, 2016, 12:07:33 pm »

No
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2016, 02:38:25 pm »


Well the poll is contradicting nearly every other poll taken since it became a Clinton/Trump election and the demographics of the United States just wouldn't allow for a Trump margin to be this large.

There seems to be a pretty substantial R bias in their sample, but the trends seem reasonable if you account for the lag (it's a 7-day running average, so the "7/29" number is an average of 7/23-7/29).
Yes. Trends!
So basically Clinton's bounce is 2 points so far, and we've got another 6 days before they completely capture the bounce.

Yep. Trump's full bounce wasn't registered until 6 days after the end of the RNC. That suggests Clinton's will have to wait 'til the 7/28-8/3 number released on August 4th.
Yes. We can actually calculate, what the last day approximately shows (~ 300 sample):

Trump today:
(6*46.7 + Trump*1)/7 = 46.6 (7 day rolling)
=> Trump = 46.6*7 - 6*46.7 = 46%

Clinton today:
(6*40.6 + Clinton*1)/7 = 41.7 (7 day rolling)
=> Clinton = 7*41.7 - 6*40.6 = 48.3%

But since the sample is so small (~300) the MOE is YUUUGE!
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2016, 03:26:36 pm »

Clinton +1 is laughable. I thought the LA Times is a liberal newspaper.
You mean that liberal newspapers use a liberal methodologies in their liberal polls?

It is not really a poll. They use the same members all over again. It means that such polls will have an inbuilt bias (it seems like it favors 5-6 pps towards Trump), but it will probably better on "catching trends" (but with 7 day lagging).
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2016, 10:25:21 am »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (through 8/18) Clinton +1.2%
Clinton: 44.6% (+0.6%)
Trump: 43.4% (--%)

HILLARY DOUBLES HER MARGIN OVERNIGHT! - If Hillary tweeted.
Cheesy
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2016, 10:06:51 am »

It's pretty clear that Hillary's bounce has come back down to 2012 margins at least.  There's still a long way to go!

It's pretty clear based on the garbage L.A. Times poll!
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2016, 11:35:48 am »

It's pretty clear that Hillary's bounce has come back down to 2012 margins at least.  There's still a long way to go!

It's pretty clear based on the garbage L.A. Times poll!

This poll has issues. The sub-sample does not change, meaning that they randomly poll from the same group of people everyday. The poll has a heavy R-bias due to the non changing sample, even LA times admits thats.
Yes. Everybody's agree that it have some constant bias (probably 5-7 pps). So the statement that margins are down to those in 2012 is pretty reasonable. And is consistent with pew.
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2016, 11:37:59 am »

It's pretty clear that Hillary's bounce has come back down to 2012 margins at least.  There's still a long way to go!

It's pretty clear based on the garbage L.A. Times poll!
Were're not the ones believing a poll that the makers have even said has a Republican bias.  But go on with your "dank memes".

538 believes (with some adjustments). I rather believe Nate than anonymous red hacks Smiley
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2016, 11:55:27 am »

You distinguish between his opinion and his model, don't you?
It's pretty clear that Hillary's bounce has come back down to 2012 margins at least.  There's still a long way to go!

It's pretty clear based on the garbage L.A. Times poll!
Were're not the ones believing a poll that the makers have even said has a Republican bias.  But go on with your "dank memes".

538 believes (with some adjustments). I rather believe Nate than anonymous red hacks Smiley
Nate Silver also believed that Trump would just fade away.  He's not the most trustworthy. 
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2016, 12:29:08 pm »
« Edited: August 20, 2016, 12:38:52 pm by LittleBigPlanet »

If Trump supporters are staking all their hopes on both rampant poll unskewing and one or two polls with well-known issues & bias, then it's going to be rough on November 9th when reality sets in.
Sigh. Stop tilting at windmills Smiley
There are some indications that the race is tightening, for instance pew. But of course we need more evedence. I guess next week we'll get a bunch of polls from A pollsters.
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #14 on: August 20, 2016, 01:44:45 pm »

Any move back to 'pre convention' polling would still give Clinton an Obama 2012 style victory.
Exactly. And "pre convention" polling looks like best case scenario for Trump right now. What this poll indicates is that race got down from +8-10 (Khan) to +5-7 right now. But it might just be fluctuations due to adding of new panel members.
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #15 on: August 23, 2016, 02:31:26 pm »

Ahaha. Nate is saying EXACTLY what I've been saying for WEEKS.


Me ↓↓↓
Clinton +1 is laughable. I thought the LA Times is a liberal newspaper.
You mean that liberal newspapers use a liberal methodologies in their liberal polls?

It is not really a poll. They use the same members all over again. It means that such polls will have an inbuilt bias (it seems like it favors 5-6 pps towards Trump), but it will probably better on "catching trends" (but with 7 day lagging).



Nate ↓↓↓
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Red hacks on this forum make me believe that Trump is not doing well enough with uneducated Sad Sad Sad
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #16 on: August 23, 2016, 02:46:01 pm »

Ahaha. Nate is saying EXACTLY what I've been saying for WEEKS.


Me ↓↓↓
Clinton +1 is laughable. I thought the LA Times is a liberal newspaper.
You mean that liberal newspapers use a liberal methodologies in their liberal polls?

It is not really a poll. They use the same members all over again. It means that such polls will have an inbuilt bias (it seems like it favors 5-6 pps towards Trump), but it will probably better on "catching trends" (but with 7 day lagging).



Nate ↓↓↓
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Red hacks on this forum make me believe that Trump is not doing well enough with uneducated Sad Sad Sad

Not to get into a pissing contest, but since we're handing out kudos to ourselves, I'll point out that this has been my position for (actual) weeks (your quote is from six days ago). See the conversation that begins here, on July 29th.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=240856.msg5187774#msg5187774

And I'm a proud "red hack"
I'm sexy and I know it! Cheesy

Meaning, you're Shy Trump supporter! Cheesy Wink
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #17 on: August 23, 2016, 02:56:17 pm »

I'm sexy and I know it! Cheesy

Meaning, you're Shy Trump supporter! Cheesy Wink

As a reasonable human being, if forced with the choice of being shot dead or voting for Trump, I would choose to be shot dead.
Words hurt, you know!
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2016, 07:13:27 am »

The trend is consistent with Ipsos Sad
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2016, 04:40:30 pm »

8/23 Approximate Numbers

Clinton 52% (+4)
Trump 38% (-2)

I've decided that I would start using the formula to figure out the approximate numbers for 8/22.

Clinton 48%
Trump 40%

What formula is that? +8 is a bit extreme, probably closer to +5 or +6.

Yes. We can actually calculate, what the last day approximately shows (~ 300 sample):

Trump today:
(6*46.7 + Trump*1)/7 = 46.6 (7 day rolling)
=> Trump = 46.6*7 - 6*46.7 = 46%

Clinton today:
(6*40.6 + Clinton*1)/7 = 41.7 (7 day rolling)
=> Clinton = 7*41.7 - 6*40.6 = 48.3%

But since the sample is so small (~300) the MOE is YUUUGE!

It's not perfect, but it gives you some idea.

I might be missing something, but doesn't this fail to account for the oldest poll dropping off the average in exchange for the newest one? That would change the average of the previous polls.
Yes, the assumption is that dropped day is "average" one, which of course is not true. So we're actually kind of calculating difference between dropped day and new one. So Clinton's numbers today are +5 compared to the day exactly one week before. If I'm  not completely wrong Embarrassed
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #20 on: August 26, 2016, 08:16:01 am »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (through 8/25) Trump +0.7%
Trump: 44.3% (+0.3)
Clinton: 43.6% (-0.7)


Wow! Crooked Hillary's speech backfired spectacularly.

MAGA!!!

That's not how this poll panel works...
That's how sarcasm works, dude... Grin
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2016, 07:00:42 am »

USC/LA Times national tracking poll (Aug. 21-27) Clinton +0.6%
Clinton: 44.2% (-0.4)
Trump: 43.6% (+0.3)

It seems like daily polls have stabilized around C +5-7 (after adjustments for house effect).

I look forward to A pollsters coming next 1-2 week.

JUL. 29-31         CNN, (A-, RV)                          C+8
JUL. 29-31         CBS News/New York Times, (A-, RV)      C+5
JUL. 31-AUG. 2   Fox News, (A, RV)                        C+9
JUL. 31-AUG. 3   NBC News/Wall Street Journal (A-, RV)    C+9
JUL. 29-AUG. 4   IBD/TIPP   (A-, RV)                      C+4   
AUG. 1-3      Marist College   (A, RV)                    C+14   
AUG. 1-4      ABC News/Washington Post    (A+, LV)        C+8
AUG. 4-7      Monmouth University   (A+, LV)              C+13
AUG. 5-8      Selzer & Company    (A+, LV)                C+4
AUG. 9-16    Pew Research Center   (B+, RV)               C+4
AUG. 18-24   Quinnipiac University   (A-, LV)             C+7

Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #22 on: August 30, 2016, 02:39:24 am »

Their latest poll

AUG. 4-7   Monmouth University   

Clinton 50%
Trump 37%
Johnson 7%

Clinton +13   

So we now have evidence, that daily trackers/Pew were right Smiley
They even might underestimated Clinton's loss. They showed - (2-3) Pew (-5), Monmouth (-6)!!!111

LA Times've been underestimating Clinton's loss. Not anylonger. Now it is consistent with Monmouth !!!111 Grin
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2016, 07:04:05 am »

Their latest poll

AUG. 4-7   Monmouth University   

Clinton 50%
Trump 37%
Johnson 7%

Clinton +13   

So we now have evidence, that daily trackers/Pew were right Smiley
They even might underestimated Clinton's loss. They showed - (2-3) Pew (-5), Monmouth (-6)!!!111

LA Times've been underestimating Clinton's loss. Not anylonger. Now it is consistent with Monmouth !!!111 Grin

Is it any wonder most of us have you on ignore.
I was told when I get older all my fears would shrink
But now I'm insecure and I care what people think
My name's Blurryface and I care what you think
My name's LittleBig and I care what you think
Wish we could turn back time, to the good old days
When our momma sang us to sleep but now we're stressed out
Logged
Erich Maria Remarque
LittleBigPlanet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,646
Sweden


« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2016, 07:33:32 am »

Is it any wonder most of us have you on ignore.
I was told when I get older all my fears would shrink
But now I'm insecure and I care what people think
My name's Blurryface and I care what you think
My name's LittleBig and I care what you think
Wish we could turn back time, to the good old days
When our momma sang us to sleep but now we're stressed out

You're an unusual poster you know that?
It sounds like a trap!

I'm an average Trump supporter, I think.
Well, he's from Sweden. But why is his username Little Big Planet? Isn't that a video game?
Yes, it is! And a good one!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
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