Emerson Polls MO, ARk, CO, GA- Trump+13,+28,+4,+6

[NOVA Green]

The Arkansas number seems a bit high for Trump.... relatively inelastic state with a high Dem floor and low ceiling.

I can buy the GA & MO numbers if you take a couple points off because of the automated landline only system that Emerson uses.

I'm extremely skeptical about the Colorado poll results, like most others have said we'll need to see more data to see how tight the race really is there.

National polling numbers are probably slightly favorable to Trump, since at this point it looks like really this is more like a Clinton +1-2% lead based on the overall polling consensus and statewide numbers.

[NOVA Green]

Emerson was the worst pollster during the primary but apparently the posters here take every landline only junk they post as gospel.

I don't take Emerson as gospel, but when their polling numbers (GA and MO) actually are relatively similar to other polling organizations, I'll subtract/add a few points because of their antiquated polling model in an era, where many Americans, myself included, only have cellphones, and even then I won't answer the phone if I don't recognize the number, so without companies leaving a VM or even polling using a TM, I'll never be polled. I suspect that is the case for a huge proportion of the American public these days.

[NOVA Green]

If Trump can win IA/NV/CO, he doesn't need PA.

This is scary. My endorsement returns to Hillary for now. She needs every single vote.

You were always going to vote for Clinton, we all knew that.

I'm a 20 year old college student that just moved to Texas from Minnesota and college is 50% cheaper compared to the community colleges, probably because in Minnesota you have to pay tuition for those who are on welfare. Minnesota needs a change for once. Clinton represents a lot of those who don't work and don't pay anything to this country.

Please reconsider.

I hope you like that state of the roads in Texas....

Probably not the best thread to discuss different methods of state funding for social services (Or lack thereof). I am a bit confused about your conflating community college tuition with "welfare" (Whatever exactly that means--- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, SCHIPS, emergency food assistance "food stamps").

Be that as it may, we haven't yet seen any real polls from Minnesota and a ton of polls from Texas that show the race much closer than expected, which appear to indicate that Trump still has issues consolidating the Anglo College Educated voters in many states.

It does appear that there aren't enough of these voters in MO to make the state within a potential striking range for Clinton, but does appear to be a major factor in GA & CO.

[NOVA Green]

Emerson was the worst pollster during the primary but apparently the posters here take every landline only junk they post as gospel.

So Ebsy---- do you think these numbers from MO are realistic based upon your statewide knowledge and sense on the ground?

I'm thinking these numbers from MO are relatively reasonable, and from the same poll that shows the DEM candidate for Senate +2% !

Has Trump consolidated support in the 'burbs of KC and Saint Louis, or is this more a Clinton collapse "downstate" like the Ozark regions/ Springfield, the "Southern Boot", "Farm Country"?