Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 20, 2019, 04:04:05 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  Election Archive
| | |-+  All Archived Boards
| | | |-+  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: AndrewTX, Likely Voter)
| | | | |-+  Home-stretch polling (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: Home-stretch polling  (Read 26488 times)
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« on: September 06, 2016, 08:50:29 am »

The Washington Post has polled all fifty states, missing only the District of Columbia and the separately-voting Congressional Districts of Maine and Nebraska. With such a rich collection of polls, I can begin anew:

Blank map.



OK -- not that new!

This is all by the same pollster even with over 5000 people polled in Texas, and some of the results are counter-intuitive. We can ignore prior controversies from hereon and be stuck with new ones (oh, well!). Counter-intuitive data can be right, and change in the way people show valid perception of the world often begins with counter-intuitive data. In a binary choice:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):

Blank map.



Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.   

Numeric data here:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-surveymonkey-50-state-poll/2086/


A few comments:

1. We no longer have the situation in which anyone has a lead with less than 45% of the vote in any state. I will include no such polling results hereon unless the margin is outside the margin of error (4%).

2. I could say such things as "Michigan/Pennsylvania/Wisconsin typically closes late and hard against Republicans in a Presidential year", but I cannot say whether an inverse is true in other states. What you  see happening in polls will be what you get.

3. As always I will reject any polls from trade associations, campaigns, political parties, lobbyists, unions, ethnic associations, or advocacy groups. Until recently I might have done so on the principle that 'beggars can't be choosers', but I am not begging any more. I already have data for all 50 states.

4. I was tempted to expect that the Dakotas might trend D because they are reasonably-well-educated states... but Donald Trump is doing well there.

5. Texas is a gigantic surprise. Of course a 1% lead there by a Democratic nominee is both counter-intuitive and practically insignificant. So basically, don't make a bet that Hillary Clinton will win Texas unless it be a long shot. 

6. The only real chance that I see for a Trump pick up from any Obama state from 2012 is Iowa. Usually Iowa votes much like Wisconsin, but this time it seems to be voting more like Nebraska or South Dakota.     

7. The small margin (by usual standards) for Nebraska suggests that the Second Congressional District will be in play. Maine's Second Congressional District will not be a quick call, but I can reasonably expect that Hillary Clinton will get all four electoral votes from Maine.

8. Mississippi close? What is going on there?

9. Wyoming looks like the best state for Trump, and Maryland looks like the best state for Clinton.

Binary here so far.

   
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 06, 2016, 09:13:22 am »

We will have more polls. Anything that fits the criterion of a lead with at least 45% for the leader and without an agenda for the pollster can supplant this one.

We have polls for states that had not been polled -- like those in the High Plains and some that hadn't been polled for a very long time -- maybe last year or so. So, yes, we can start with this. Polling samples at least look large.

Example: PPP polled Florida  this weekend.

Does anyone think that PPP, Quinnipiac, Marist, or many of the other active pollsters will shut down?

This is a clean, but practically full slate. Beginning no later than tomorrow I consider these polls obsolete that anything not from a pollster with an agenda will supplant these polls.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2016, 09:19:15 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2016, 10:14:47 am »

Now -- the tricky one, the three-way or four-way map.

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):



I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for 40-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire. Clinton is up by 6 in New Hampshire (small state that makes seeing the numbers tricky).

Numeric data here:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-surveymonkey-50-state-poll/2086/
.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2016, 12:01:12 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2016, 10:22:42 am »

I went to great effort to set up this map so that we have something to work with. The completeness of the polling does not indicate its reliability, but for many states for which we would otherwise have nothing, we now have something.

Remember: there will be more polls. I am guessing that at this stage, an 8-point lead is practically unsurmountable barring a calamity for a nominee, and cracking 50% is difficult in a three-way race.

There will be new polls to replace some of these. Not every state will have such polls.  
« Last Edit: September 06, 2016, 05:34:13 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2016, 10:34:00 am »

First new poll by the Baltimore Sun  -- Maryland.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-trump-clinton-poll-20160906-story.html

756 LV, B- poll (according to 538). Four-way only.

Clinton     55%
Trump      26%
Jonhson     6%
Stein         2%

Nothing changes.

Idaho, Dan Jones:

44% Trump
23% Clinton
13% Johnson
  2% Stein
12% Others
  5% Undecided

http://idahopoliticsweekly.com/politics/1218-Bob%20Bernick,%20Idaho%20Politics%20Weekly%20Contributor

Who are the "others" here?

Missouri, Remington:

47% Trump (R)
38% Clinton (D)
8% Johnson (L)
3% Stein (G)

The poll was taken Sept. 1 and Sept. 2. It polled 1,275 likely voters and was commissioned by MoScout.

http://themissouritimes.com/33365/poll-shows-republicans-koster-well/

Consistent with the extant poll.

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.


« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 08:10:42 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2016, 11:57:51 pm »

Trump - 50%
Clinton - 38%
Johnson - 3%
Stein - 1%

Quote
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump leads Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton by 12 percentage points in a new poll released by a conservative South Carolina political management firm.

In the poll released by First Tuesday Strategies, Trump has 50 percent of South Carolina voters' support, while Clinton has 38 percent. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson and Jill Stein registered low numbers in the poll of 775 likely voters; Johnson received 3 percent and Stein received 1 percent. Undecided voters made up the remaining 8 percent.

This poll, conducted between Aug. 30 and Sept. 1, comes the same day as a Washington Post-Survey Monkey poll of all 50 states showed Trump ahead by 7 percentage points in South Carolina and 4 percent of voters undecided when presented with all four national candidates. The Washington Post-Survey Monkey poll was conducted online, while First Tuesday Strategies' Palmetto Presidential Poll was conducted via landline phone numbers. Both polls are the first to be conducted in South Carolina independent of a political party since Nov. 2015 and the Washington Post-Survey Monkey poll is the first poll independent of any politically-adjacent group.

http://www.wltx.com/mb/news/politics/poll-trump-up-by-12-points-in-sc/314493283

Why I can't use it.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2016, 04:32:54 am »

This is what I had before -- lots of states in gray. I will make some compromises to gind completeness.


Binary race, Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) 



Leader up with

60% or more -- saturation 80%
55-59% --     saturation 70%
50-54% --     saturation 60%
46-49%, margin 4% or greater saturation 40%
46-49%, margin 3% or less saturation 20%

(the usual color applies for the partisan leader, but yellow blue to green and red to orange below:) 

40-45%, margin 4% or greater, saturation 40%
43-45%, margin 3% or less, saturation 20% 











Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2016, 08:04:41 am »

Old polls compiled by PPP on a group that wishes to get the ninth Justice on the US Supreme Court.

Pennsylvania

47% Clinton (D)
42% Trump (R)

http://weneednine.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/PAToplines1.pdf

New Hampshire

46% Clinton (D)
41% Trump (R)

http://weneednine.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/NHToplines1.pdf

Iowa

45% Clinton (D)
43% Trump (R)

http://weneednine.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/IAToplines1.pdf

What may be even more telling is that the gambit of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to ensure that Barack Obama does not get his appointee to the Supreme Court ratified no matter what does not help two Republican Senators get re-elected... and a third one, long-time incumbent Chuck Grassley, could be hurt should the Democrats succeed in using that against him.

Now a big and current poll of Florida by PPP for its own sake:

Trump 44
Clinton 43
Johnson 5
Stein 1
McMullin 1

Clinton 47
Trump 46

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/09/presidential-race-up-for-grabs-in-florida.html

Colorado President by Magellan Strategies on 2016-08-31[/url]

Summary: D: 41%, R: 36%, I: 16%, U: 7%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

This is from a Republican-leaning pollster. No binary choice.




Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.


« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 09:23:48 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2016, 08:22:52 am »

Why is this topic stickied? This is nonsense sperging.

It starts a polling scheme practically anew based upon one collection of 50 statewide polls.

I like completeness, and I will make some compromises to get it. As with the weather, if you dislike one poll (unless you have cause for calling a foul), then wait for another, especially in swing states. I was able to start with a map filled in, which answers plenty of questions that we already have... such as whether the High Plains states really can vote for Donald Trump or whether they consider his flamboyance off-putting. The collection answered my question, if not in the way that I wanted to find an answer.

The moderators seem to like my thread. I put much effort into it. When I call fouls I am consistent. But this map is a fresh start. This map does not project anything other than how the November election looks from a point in time.

I like completeness. So do the moderators.   

...in case you think that I believe that Hillary Clinton has a real chance of winning Texas, then that is simply what the most recent poll says. 

If you want your own polling thread, one that 'unskews' polls to suggest that Donald Trump will be the 45th President based on some inexorable dynamics that my snapshot doe snot show, then go ahead.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2016, 02:49:11 pm »

Quinnipiac, FL/OH/NC/PA

Florida
Clinton - 47%
Trump - 47%

Clinton - 43%
Trump - 43%
Johnson - 8%
Stein - 2%

Ohio
Trump - 46%
Clinton - 45%

Trump - 41%
Clinton - 37%
Johnson - 14%
Stein - 4%

Pennsylvania
Clinton - 48%
Trump - 43%

Clinton - 44%
Trump - 39%
Johnson - 9%
Stein - 3%

North Carolina
Clinton - 47%
Trump - 43%

Clinton - 42%
Trump - 38%
Johnson - 15%

From August 29 - September 7, Quinnipiac University surveyed:
761 Florida likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.6 percentage points;
751 North Carolina likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.6 percentage points;
775 Ohio likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points;
778 Pennsylvania likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points

https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2376

No0rth Carolina:

http://www.suffolk.edu/documents/SUPRC/9_8_2016_north_carolina_tables_updated.pdf

Trump: 44%
Clinton: 41%
Johnson: 4%

Donald Trump realistically needs at least three of these states to have a chance of winning the Presidency. The average is less than 1% for Hillary Clinton in North Carolina.

...Trump needs to be up more than this in Ohio to win it in November; the Democrats can expect strong GOTV efforts by unions and minority groups while Republicans have nothing as effective.



Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.



« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 11:52:37 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2016, 12:49:30 pm »

Louisiana -- Anzalone-Liszt, a very Democratic pollster.

Trump 46
Clinton 40
Johnson 3
Stein 0
Undecided 6
Neither 4


https://lapolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ALG-Topline-Report.pdf

I'm not using this one.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2016, 03:29:52 pm »

Indiana, Howey Polling, WTHR-TV (NBC-13, Indianapolis)

YouGov, Florida and Ohio

Img


Republican nominees for president have not won nationally without winning Indiana by at least 10% since...

Ohio:

Clinton 46
Trump 39
Johnson 7
Stein 2

Florida:

Clinton 44
Trump 42
Johnson 5
Stein 2

13 state battleground tracker: Clinton 43, Trump 42

Note the huge drop in support for Gary Johnson in both states.


https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/11/clinton-holds-ohio-lead-trump-gains-florida/

Marist, four states:



NH:

RV:

Clinton 37%
Trump 36%
Johnson 17%
Stein 3%

LV:

Clinton 39%
Trump 37%
Johnson 15%
Stein 3%


AZ:

RV:

Clinton 37%
Trump 37%
Johnson 13%
Stein 4%



LV:

Trump 40%
Clinton 38%
Johnson 12%
Stein 3%

GA:

RV:

Clinton 41%
Trump 40%
Johnson 11%

LV:

Trump 44%
Clinton 42%
Johnson 10%

NV:

RV:

Clinton 41%
Trump 39%
Johnson 9%
Stein 3%

LV:

Trump 42%
Clinton 41%
Johnson 8%
Stein 3%

Basically ties. Valid polls, but I really can't use them because leaders have less than 45%.

In related news, Republican incumbents are up significantly in Arizona and Georgia, have a slight edge in the race for the open seat in Nevada, and have taken back the lead for the US Senate in New Hampshire. The Koch strategy seems to be working to keep the GOP in control of the Senate, and perhaps on the way to a veto-proof Senate in 2018.



Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.




« Last Edit: September 11, 2016, 10:16:47 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2016, 09:47:55 pm »

A critical demographic shows how it projects in battleground states:


AZ: Clinton 71, Trump 17
CO: Clinton 69, Trump 17
FL: Clinton 63, Trump 27
NC: Clinton 73, Trump 14
NV: Clinton 71, Trump 14
OH: Clinton 61, Trump 22
VA: Clinton 70, Trump 20

400 Latino voters were polled in each state

http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2016/09/09/the-trump-effect-in-the-swing-states-new-state-polling-from-americans-voice-and-latino-decisions/

In Florida, Cuban-Americans go for Trump -- but Puerto Ricans go heavily for Clinton.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2016, 12:17:20 pm »

California, Los Angeles Times:

Clinton 49
Trump 29
Johnson 11
Stein 6

Clinton 58
Trump 33

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-california-presidential-poll-20160912-snap-story.html


IVR FOX 2 Detroit Mitchell Poll of Michigan
Conducted September 6-7, 2016 Survey
(N=940 Likely Voters)

45% Clinton
39% Trump
  7% Johnson
  1% Stein

47% Clinton
42% Trump

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/FOX_2_Detroit-Mitchell_Poll_of_MI_Press_Clinton_v_Trump_9-9-16.pdf

Oregon, Portland Tribune (four-way

Toplines:
Clinton 43
Trump 28
Johnson 11
Stein 4

http://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/322388-202046-poll-shows-brown-leading-in-governors-race?utm_source=New+Media&utm_medium=twitter


http://utahpolicy.com/index.php/features/today-at-utah-policy/10765-
Dan Jones & Associates, SEP. 1-9

Compared to    JUL. 18-AUG. 4:

Trump   39% (+2)
Clinton  24% (-1)
Johnson 13% (-3)
McMullin  9% (----)
Castle     2% (----)
Stein       0% (-1)
Other      6% (-7)

Utah could have the weirdest electoral results in November. Neither Clinton not Trump is a good cultural match for Utah.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/09/clinton-leads-by-6-8-in-virginia.html

PPP's new Virginia poll finds that Hillary Clinton is still in a pretty good position in the state. In the full field she leads with 45% to 39% for Donald Trump, with Gary Johnson at 6%, Jill Stein at 2%, and Evan McMullin at 1%. In a head to head contest just against Trump, she leads 50/42.

Clinton - 45%
Trump - 39%
Johnson - 6%
Stein - 2%
McMullin - 1%

Clinton - 50%
Trump - 42%

878 likely voters surveyed between September 9th and 11th.






Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.




« Last Edit: September 13, 2016, 01:45:10 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2016, 01:15:48 am »

Kansas, SUSA:

48% Trump (R)
36% Clinton (D)
8% Johnson (L)
2% Stein (G)

No binary data.


Maine, SUSA:


Clinton - 42%
Trump - 39%
Johnson - 9%
Stein - 5%

The poll of 779 likely voters statewide was conducted via automated phone calls and web surveys from Sept. 4 through 10. It had a margin of error of 3.6 percent.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/09/13/new-poll-shows-competitive-race-maine/YNsB57jVpHmEJcJsFZRXMP/story.html?event=event25







Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.




« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 01:21:03 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2016, 09:28:25 pm »

Play up Kaine.

The VP has as his greatest Constitutional responsibility being ready in the event of the Unthinkable. His second responsibility is as President of the Senate. Third? He could be a sort of Minister without Portfolio, much as Dick Cheney was (well, let's hope not as devious as Dick Cheney).

Also take some swipes at Mike Pence for his reactionary agenda... anti-feminist and anti-worker, at the least.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2016, 08:26:05 am »

Back to this polling thread. Leads that I saw for Donald Trump made me physically ill. Yes, I have a bias -- against someone who advocates political violence, who promotes breaking up families in the name of mass deportation, who vilifies whole ethnic and religious  groups. I have enough personal problems as it is, and hearing someone attack the core decencies of the American experiment in democracy could push me over the edge.

But if I am to show a comeback by Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump going into the tank, I must show Trump charging, if only for a week. And by charging I do not mean putting 'surf 'n' turf on a charge card.

Iowa, Monmouth:

45% Trump (R)
37% Clinton (D)
8% Johnson (L)
2% Stein (G)

http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_091516/

Nevada, Monmouth:


44% Trump (R) (+3)
42% Clinton (D) (-3)
8% Johnson (L) (+3)


http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_NV_091416/


Michigan, EPIC/MRI
 
Img



A bunch of polls from Emerson College -- the first batch stank when they first came out, so I am not using this batch.

Minnesota, Mason-Dixon  

44% Clinton (D)
38% Trump (R)
  6% Johnson (L)
  2% Stein (G)

Ohio  -- three polls (Monmouth, CNN, and Selzer for Bloomberg -- Trump up 4.67 on average.







Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 60% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.




« Last Edit: September 20, 2016, 11:32:10 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2016, 09:05:06 am »

Geez, Lungazi really taking it's toll (yes, I said it).
And out of curiosity, this may be a stupid question, but does anyone know who Johnson and Stein are taking votes from?

Considering what Donald Trump has said about arresting people who disagree with him (just think of it -- I disagree with Donald Trump on about every position and his basic character, I am staunchly anti-drug except on marijuana; if I were to go to jail I might have to share a cell with a doper, and that would be extremely unpleasant for both the doper and me)...

Anyone who can support Donald Trump after implications that he would gut the First Amendment to get his political way is in the literal 'basket of deplorables'.

You believe in the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution as a minimal standard of governmental ethics or you are not a patriotic American. It is that simple. My loyalty is to the Constitution and not to the economic elites of his country.

« Last Edit: September 20, 2016, 09:19:29 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2016, 09:31:17 am »

We may be seeing some reduction of the extreme polarization between the states that appeared when Barack Obama was President. This may be Donald Trump, who (in view of some of his rash statements) should offend anyone with a three-digit IQ.

Img


Yes, there are white people with above-average intelligence in some states in which Barack Obama absolutely got crushed in 2008 and 2012. But Hillary Clinton may be getting weakened support from blue-collar workers in the North. Trend or reversion?
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2016, 02:08:26 pm »

Florida, Monmouth:

Among 400 Likely Voters, conducted Sept. 16th-19th:

Clinton 46 (-2)
Trump 41 (+2)
Johnson 6 (nc)
Stein 1 (nc)

Official report: http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_FL_092016/

Out of the margin of error, and Donald Trump cannot win without Florida. This pollster showed Trump up 8 in Iowa last week, so such suggests a real comeback.

Elon, North Carolina. PPP will give us a poll in a couple of days, and I trust PPP more than anyone else on North Carolina. The PPP poll will supplant this one. Trump cannot be anywhere close to losing North Carolina to have a real chance of winning.  

https://www.elon.edu/e/elon-poll/poll-archive/092016.html

Trump 44
Clinton 43
Johnson 6

North Dakota, DFM Research:

43% Donald Trump (R)
32% Hillary Clinton (D)
8% Gary Johnson (L)
1% Jill Stein (G)

https://de.scribd.com/document/324685567/ND-Pres-DFM-Research-Sept-2016
https://www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/poll-trump-leads-clinton-north-dakota-neither-50-percent/

Oklahoma, Sooner Poll.

51% Trump
36% Clinton
  6% Johnson

The poll of 515 Oklahoma likely voters was conducted between September 13-15. It carries a margin of error of 4.32 percent. The poll's results were stratified to represent the state's likely voter population.

http://newsok.com/clinton-gains-some-ground-on-trump-in-oklahoma-poll-shows/article/5518562

Oklahoma hasn't voted for a Democratic nominee for President since 1964, and that streak will hold this year. Anyone who believes  otherwise is a fool. This is still rather weak for a Republican in Oklahoma.

Pennsylvania, Muhlenberg College.

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-pa-trump-clinton-poll-20160917-story.html

Clinton - 47%
Trump - 38%

Clinton - 40%
Trump - 32%
Johnson - 14%
Stein - 5%

Poll was conducted from Sept. 12-16.

Well out of the margin of error. Pennsylvania has to be close for Donald Trump to have a reasonable chance of winning. An 8% lead is solid.


Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 50% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

Note: Gary Johnson is in second place, above Donald Trump, in New Mexico. Jill Stein is at 10 (just under Johnson) in New Hampshire.





« Last Edit: September 20, 2016, 11:53:34 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2016, 11:29:33 pm »

Why are you still showing Ohio as a strong Democratic lead? There's been six polls of the state since the start of the month, and only one found a Clinton lead with the rest showing Ohio leaning Trump. For reference:

9/1 - Washington Post, R+3
9/7 - Quinnipiac, R+4
9/9 - YouGov, D+7
9/12 - Selzer, R+5
9/12 - CNN, R+5
9/14 - Suffolk, R+3

At the very least, it should be noted as tossup if not lean Trump.

I missed them in the "recovery" process.

Ohio, three polls:

CNN
Trump 46
Clinton 41
Johnson 8
Stein 2

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/09/14/ohiopoll.pdf

Suffolk:
https://twitter.com/davidpaleologos/status/776449329217220608

Trump - 42
Clinton - 39
Johnson - 4
Stein - 1

Bloomberg:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-14/ohio-poll

Trump 48 Clinton 43

Trump 43 Clinton 38 Johnston 10 Stein 3

...The three polls  average to Trump up 4.67.

I will backtrack.  Thank you.

By the way -- with recent national tracking polls with Hillary Clinton with leads around 5^, the next poll of Ohio is likely to show a Clinton lead. 
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: September 22, 2016, 09:23:22 am »

Colorado:

540 LV, 9/14-9/18:

Clinton: 44
Trump: 35

Bennett: 45
Glenn: 32

gjsentinel.com/news/articles/university-jumps-into-politics


Who are these guys?

Monmouth, New Hampshire:

The Monmouth University Poll  was conducted by telephone from September 17 to 20, 2016 with 400 New Hampshire residents likely to vote in the November election.  This sample has a margin of error of + 4.9 percent.  The poll was conducted by the Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch, NJ.

Clinton 47
Trump 38
Johnson 10
Stein 1


http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_NH_092116/

New Hampshire must be close in a Republican win in recent years. It isn't this time.

Three by Fox News, usually a good pollster.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/21/fox-news-poll-trump-tops-clinton-in-battlegrounds-nevada-n-carolina-ohio.html

Nevada:

Trump - 43%
Clinton 40%
Johnson - 8%

Ohio:

Trump - 42%
Clinton - 37%
Johnson - 6%
Stein - 2%

North Carolina:

Trump - 45%
Clinton - 40%
Johnson - 6%

North Carolina goes to an average. of about 3%. I cannot use the ones for Nevada and Ohio  for binaries.

Virginia, Roanoke University:

http://www.roanoke.edu/about/news/rc_poll_politics_sept2016

Clinton - 44%
Trump - 37%
Johnson - 8%

Clinton - 51%
Trump - 40%

...Corroborates other polls. No Republican has won the Presidency without Virginia since 1924.

Wisconsin, Marquette University

Clinton:44
Trump:42
2 Way LV

Clinton: 43%
Trump: 38%
2 Way RV

Clinton: 41%
Trump: 38%
Johnson: 11%
Stein: 2%
4 Way LV

Clinton:39%
Trump:35
Johnson:12%
Stein:3%
4 Way RV

Not usable, lead with less than 45% in a binary election. Wisconsin is looking close now...

Wyoming:


New Poll: Wyoming President by DFM Research on 2016-09-11

Summary: D: 19%, R: 54%, I: 12%, U: 15%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

WY would anyone expect differently?

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 50% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  

« Last Edit: September 22, 2016, 09:40:05 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: September 22, 2016, 11:57:56 pm »

California,PPIC


50% Clinton (D)
33% Trump (R)
6% Stein (G)
5% Johnson (L)

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/election/presidential-election/article102803037.html

Stein is ahead of Johnson in California! Otherwise, nothing unexpected.

Maryland, Goucher

58% Clinton (D)
25% Trump (R)
6% Johnson (L)
2% Stein (G)

http://www.wbaltv.com/politics/goucher-poll-tracks-races-for-president-senate/41779158

No surprise here.

Colorado:
Clinton: 44%
Trump: 42%
Johnson: 10%
Stein: 2%

Georgia:
Trump: 47%
Clinton: 40%
Johnson: 9%

Iowa:
Trump: 44%
Clinton: 37%
Johnson: 10%
Stein: 2%

Virginia:
Clinton: 45%
Trump: 39%
Johnson: 8%
Stein: 1%

https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2381

No binaries. Colorado becomes an average between Q and the college poll.

Louisiana:

500 LV, Sept. 15-17:

49% Trump
33% Clinton
  8% Johnson
11% Undecided

(Jill Stein wasn't asked)

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/09/2016_louisiana_senate_race_wan.html

Blowout here.

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Any lead with less than 45% will be considered unusable.  




The three-way map:

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) vs. Gary Johnson (L):




I'm going with saturation for the raw vote for the leader. The percentage (3 for 30-39, 4 for ro-49, 5 for 50-59, 6 for 60-69...) will be the number for the saturation.

No internal number will be shown for any nominee who has at least 50% of the raw vote or has a lead of at least 8%. and at least 40% of the raw vote.  Otherwise I will show

the leader by color (white for a tie), the margin for the leader, and the amount for Johnson (maybe McMullen added should he become relevant).  


I will be away for the weekend, so I may not be posting.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2016, 09:27:17 pm by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: September 28, 2016, 10:43:45 am »

It may be troublesome, but I may have a fresh cause for a restart.  Monday's debate performance by Hillary Clinton was understated, civil, and topical without going for the kill. Donald Trump's debate performance was simply execrable.

I'm going binary only. If Gary Johnson were to have a chance at a late-season charge, he has yet to show it.  

This is time for a nearly-complete restart. Nearly complete, because old polls for some states may be all that we will ever have. Some states (and the District of Columbia) just don't get polled often. Begin by clearing all results for states except those for which little credible polling exists  and whose electoral character is a lock. If there is any controversy about polling I now show nothing until I see a new poll.

Multitudes who had tuned out Donald Trump for a while have gotten the chance to see him. They had to if they were to see Hillary Clinton in the debate.

States (and DC)  whose prior results look uncontroversial include

AL AK AR CA CT DE DC HI ID IL IN KS KY LA MD MA MT NE (except for the second congressional district) NJ ND NY OK OR RI TN VT WA WV WY

All other states go blank (gray) now.

Even Texas and Utah hold some controversies. Anything close before the debate will not be shown here. Afterward? Of course.

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Hillary Clinton (D) 182
Donald Trump (R)  94
« Last Edit: September 29, 2016, 12:33:36 am by pbrower2a »Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,933
United States


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2016, 01:49:04 am »

First one. Mitchell Poll of Michigan. Every four years, Michigan looks within contention until late in the season... only to become not-so-close due to a Democratic get-out-the-vote drive.

You cannot knock a poll that fails to show something yet to happen. A polling thread is not the definitive prediction.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/FOX_2_Detroit-Mitchell_Poll_of_MI_Press_Clinton_v_Trump_9-28-16.pdf

Clinton 49 (47)
Trump 44 (42)

Clinton 46 (45)
Trump 41 (39)
Johnson 8 (7)
Stein 1 (1)
Undecided 4 [Sunglasses

Debate winner
Clinton 51
Trump 25

White
Clinton 44
Trump 48

Black
Clinton 75
Trump 20 Huh

Hillary Clinton (D) vs. Donald Trump (R):





Tie -- white

60% or more -- saturation 8
55-59.9%        --  saturation 6
50-54.9%        --  saturation 5
45-49.9%, lead 8% or more -- saturation 4
45-49.9%, lead 4-7.9% -- saturation 3
45-49.9%, lead 1-3.9%  -- saturation 2

Hillary Clinton (D) 198
Donald Trump (R)  94

« Last Edit: September 29, 2016, 09:03:43 am by pbrower2a »Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines