Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 12, 2019, 07:24:14 pm
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Endorsements Close today at noon

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  ABC/WaPo Tracking poll megathread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 17 Print
Author Topic: ABC/WaPo Tracking poll megathread  (Read 24126 times)
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: October 24, 2016, 12:20:33 am »

+12 for Clinton when she's only up 3-5% in Florida, North Carolina, and Michigan? Not a chance, throw this in the dumpster.

Because she's not up 3-5 in MI, and if internals are to believed, Trump is getting slaughtered in most Democratic-leaning swing states. It's absolutely plausible.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: October 24, 2016, 12:24:20 am »

Because she's not up 3-5 in MI, and if internals are to believed, Trump is getting slaughtered in most Democratic-leaning swing states. It's absolutely plausible.

MRG found her at 5% in Michigan, and that doesn't answer the issue of North Carolina and Florida. If she is up by 12%, she's going to not only be leading in both of those by double digits but she should also be leading in Ohio and Iowa firmly. Every other poll we've got recently says she's not in any of these cases. As for internals, give me a break.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: October 24, 2016, 12:26:23 am »

Because she's not up 3-5 in MI, and if internals are to believed, Trump is getting slaughtered in most Democratic-leaning swing states. It's absolutely plausible.

MRG found her at 5% in Michigan, and that doesn't answer the issue of North Carolina and Florida. If she is up  by 12%, she's going to not only be leading in both of those by double digits but she should also be leading in Ohio and Iowa firmly. Every other poll we've got recently firmly says she's not in any of these cases. As for internals, give me a break.

a) NEVER believe any polling of MI... regardless of what it says.

b) this is not going to be a universal swing election, so no, there's no way of saying xx should be xx if this is the result.

You're welcome to think otherwise, but I don't think she's up 12, but close to it.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: October 24, 2016, 12:32:03 am »
« Edited: October 24, 2016, 12:33:43 am by EpicHistory »


a) NEVER believe any polling of MI... regardless of what it says.

b) this is not going to be a universal swing election, so no, there's no way of saying xx should be xx if this is the result.

You're welcome to think otherwise, but I don't think she's up 12, but close to it.

Even if we completely ignore MI, 3-5% in Florida and North Carolina is completely inconsistent with being up 12 nationally. It is, however, compatible with the ARG +7 and Morning Consult +6 we got recently. As for comparing it to other stuff, the polls we're getting from swing states don't show her being up 12, and the most recent Illinois and New York polls show Trump doing about average for a Republican in the former and a bit better in the case of the latter. So basically, there is no basis for a +12 HRC margin right now. None of the polls are showing where these mythical votes are coming from.  
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: October 24, 2016, 12:33:48 am »


a) NEVER believe any polling of MI... regardless of what it says.

b) this is not going to be a universal swing election, so no, there's no way of saying xx should be xx if this is the result.

You're welcome to think otherwise, but I don't think she's up 12, but close to it.

Even if we completely ignore MI, 3-5% in Florida and North Carolina is completely inconsistent with being up 12 nationally. It is, however, compatible with the ARG +7 and Morning Consult +6 we got recently. As for comparing it to other stuff, that simply doesn't fly this election. The polls we're getting from swing states don't show her being up 12, and the most recent Illinois and New York polls show Trump doing about average for a Republican in the former and a bit better in the case of the latter. I haven't looked to see if there has been a recent California poll, but I sincerely doubt there has been enough of a swing to make it a +12 election.

So basically, where you accept or not, there is no basis for a +12 HRC margin right now. None of the polls are showing where these mythical votes are coming from. 

No one really knows how these play out.

I agree that it's not likely a 12 point lead, but there are a weird number of shifts that could take place among groups and states that could lead to this, but we're looking at closer to 8-10%.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: October 24, 2016, 12:39:01 am »


No one really knows how these play out.

I agree that it's not likely a 12 point lead, but there are a weird number of shifts that could take place among groups and states that could lead to this, but we're looking at closer to 8-10%.

There's no mixture of states one can make to get even a +10 result with Trump doing average in New York and Illinois, being ahead in Ohio, and having close races in North Carolina, Pennsylvania and North Carolina. This is also ignoring all the other recent polls which have the race far different from what is being portrayed from this tracker.  
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: October 24, 2016, 12:40:06 am »


No one really knows how these play out.

I agree that it's not likely a 12 point lead, but there are a weird number of shifts that could take place among groups and states that could lead to this, but we're looking at closer to 8-10%.

There's no mixture of states one can make to get even a +10 result with Trump doing average in New York and Illinois, being ahead in Ohio, and having close races in North Carolina, Pennsylvania and North Carolina. This is also ignoring all the other recent polls which have the race far different from what is being portrayed from this tracker.  

There is. But that's fine.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: October 24, 2016, 12:44:18 am »


Then please enlighten me as to where these mythical votes are, because just saying "there is" is not a valid argument. There is no way Clinton can be up +12 when the Republican is doing average in Democratic strongholds like New York, Illinois and California (Last poll I saw for there) and have close races in the Swing states. The facts, and math in this case, do no lie.
Logged
Ronnie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,865
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: October 24, 2016, 12:51:53 am »
« Edited: October 24, 2016, 01:07:45 am by Ronnie »


Then please enlighten me as to where these mythical votes are, because just saying "there is" is not a valid argument. There is no way Clinton can be up +12 when the Republican is doing average in Democratic strongholds like New York, Illinois and California (Last poll I saw for there) and have close races in the Swing states. The facts, and math in this case, do no lie.

Well, for one thing, he's incredibly weak in Texas, a state Romney won by 16 points.  Also, not many polls have been conducted in the rockies and plains, but it seems likely that he'll underperform the numbers one would expect from a generic R in them.  We already know that he's going to do far worse than Mitt Romney did in Utah and Idaho.
Logged
Wade McDaniel
Full Member
***
Posts: 106
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: October 24, 2016, 12:57:10 am »

Tracking polls should be treated separately.  There's tracking polls with Trump up by a point or two.  Average them and Clinton is up 5-6 like the real polls show.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: October 24, 2016, 12:57:58 am »


Then please enlighten me as to where these mythical votes are, because just saying "there is" is not a valid argument. There is no way Clinton can be up +12 when the Republican is doing average in Democratic strongholds like New York, Illinois and California (Last poll I saw for there) and have close races in the Swing states. The facts, and math in this case, do no lie.
Obama was ahead in the RCP average in Florida by just 1.8. While he did win the state by 2.8, he won  by 7.2 points nationally.

Polls in individual states can also be way off. Obama lost half his pre election lead in Iowa and doubled his Nevada margin.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: October 24, 2016, 12:58:42 am »

Tracking polls should be treated separately.  There's tracking polls with Trump up by a point or two.  Average them and Clinton is up 5-6 like the real polls show.
This is not a daily tracking poll.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: October 24, 2016, 12:59:05 am »

Well, for one thing, he's incredibly weak in Texas, a state Romney won by 16 points.  Also, not many polls have been conducted in the rockies and plains, but it seems likely that he'll underperform the numbers one would expect from a generic R in them.  We already know that he's going to do far worse than Mitt Romney did in Utah and Idaho.

The Rocky and Plains states are the most underpopulated states in the Union, and being weak in Texas would not explain +12 (Especially when he is doing almost 10% better in New York and is close in states like Florida and Pennsylvania).
Logged
Lok
lok1999
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,277
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: October 24, 2016, 01:00:36 am »

+12 for Clinton when she's only up 3-5% in Florida, North Carolina, and Michigan? Not a chance, throw this in the dumpster.
How do you explain Texas then?
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: October 24, 2016, 01:00:59 am »

Well, for one thing, he's incredibly weak in Texas, a state Romney won by 16 points.  Also, not many polls have been conducted in the rockies and plains, but it seems likely that he'll underperform the numbers one would expect from a generic R in them.  We already know that he's going to do far worse than Mitt Romney did in Utah and Idaho.

The Rocky and Plains states are the most underpopulated states in the Union, and being weak in Texas would not explain +12 (Especially when he is doing almost 10% better in New York and is close in states like Florida and Pennsylvania).
He's not doing ten points better in New York nor is he close in Pennsylvania. Plus, Florida has been consistenly +3-4 D, something not seen in decades. Not even in 2008 or 1996.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: October 24, 2016, 01:04:20 am »


I already have. Even a +3 Trump result there will not explain a +12 result for Clinton when Democratic states are showing about normal results for Republicans and the Swing states are close. +6 Clinton I can buy, but +12 is a pipe dream for the Red Avatars.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,559
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: October 24, 2016, 01:05:32 am »

So many things...

No evidence that Trump is doing better than Romney in New York.

Trump is not close in Pennsylvania and is likely losing by nearly double digits. Same with Michigan.

Losing 10% in Texas is going to hurt your national popular vote. So is getting blown out in California by a historic margin, as seems to be the case.

Trump is doing worse than Romney in a number of mid-sized states (Maryland, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, Arizona...) by about 5 points.  Romney lost in 2012 by 4 points. 4+5 is very close to 12, especially with margin of error.

McMullin could take an additional 300 to 400k votes from Trump in Utah and Idaho, compared to Romney.

All this adds up.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: October 24, 2016, 01:07:04 am »


I already have. Even a +3 Trump result there will not explain a +12 result for Clinton when Democratic states are showing about normal results for Republicans and the Swing states are close. +6 Clinton I can buy, but +12 is a pipe dream for the Red Avatars.
You have several major national polls putting her up in the range of +7-12. Excluding daily trackers, that jumps to an average of 9.9.

Clinton is greatly overperforming in blue states, Trump is underperforming in a lot of red states. Just not enough to lose them.

...Yet.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: October 24, 2016, 01:08:15 am »

He's not doing ten points better in New York nor is he close in Pennsylvania. Plus, Florida has been consistenly +3-4 D, something not seen in decades. Not even in 2008 or 1996.

Sienna Poll has Clinton only up 24% there, while Rasmussen and Quinnipac have PA at +3 and +6 respectively. As for Florida, that is a recent development. Back in September, if you will recall, Trump pulled ahead for a good chunk of the month. As well, Iowa and Ohio being in the Trump camp would counteract such a lead there.
Logged
EpicHistory
Full Member
***
Posts: 233
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: October 24, 2016, 01:12:15 am »

You have several major national polls putting her up in the range of +7-12. Excluding daily trackers, that jumps to an average of 9.9.

Clinton is greatly overperforming in blue states, Trump is underperforming in a lot of red states. Just not enough to lose them.

...Yet.

You've got the ARG, Morning Consult, YouGov and I think an NBC poll all showing 4-7%, which I accept. The IBD and LA Times trackers, however, show a Trump lead. To my knowledge, this is the only tracker which shows a Clinton lead and averaging out these trackers, as was noted upthread, puts it at around +6, which I believe is the actual number. As for Clinton over performing in Blue States, where are these mythical results? New York she is doing worse than Obama, average in Illinois and and California. The swing states are close. The math just doesn't add up to +12.

Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: October 24, 2016, 01:18:05 am »

You have several major national polls putting her up in the range of +7-12. Excluding daily trackers, that jumps to an average of 9.9.

Clinton is greatly overperforming in blue states, Trump is underperforming in a lot of red states. Just not enough to lose them.

...Yet.

You've got the ARG, Morning Consult, YouGov and I think an NBC poll all showing 4-7%, which I accept. The IBD and LA Times trackers, however, show a Trump lead. To my knowledge, this is the only tracker which shows a Clinton lead and averaging out these trackers, as was noted upthread, puts it at around +6, which I believe is the actual number. As for Clinton over performing in Blue States, where are these mythical results? New York she is doing worse than Obama, average in Illinois and and California. The swing states are close. The math just doesn't add up to +12.


+12 is a bit high, surely. But let's take a look at some recent polls:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Parsing these data points shows a clear seperation. Daily Tracking is a major outlier, as it was in 2012. Most pollsters rated highly by 538, with the exception of Reuters, show a national lead at 7% or above.

There's also been an 8 point swing since the last ABC/WaPo poll, seen near the bottom. Clinton is doing above 6 points nationally, only daily trackers are dragging this down.
Logged
BlueSwan
blueswan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,942
Denmark


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -7.30

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: October 24, 2016, 01:27:48 am »

Why all the arguing?

The polls that currently have Trump leading the race are totally inconsistent with the state polling. And so is this poll that has Clinton up by 12.

Surely, the sober conclusion is that Clinton is up by about 6 points, give or take a point or two. Maybe with a bit more upside than downside. A Clinton lead by about 4-9 points sounds right to me at this moment and seems consistent with most of the state polling.
Logged
Ebsy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,834
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: October 24, 2016, 02:01:51 am »
« Edited: October 24, 2016, 02:04:56 am by Ebsy »

To all the dips[Inks]ts in this thread, tell me the difference:



Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,727
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: October 24, 2016, 02:04:13 am »

So many things...

No evidence that Trump is doing better than Romney in New York.

Trump is not close in Pennsylvania and is likely losing by nearly double digits. Same with Michigan.

Losing 10% in Texas is going to hurt your national popular vote. So is getting blown out in California by a historic margin, as seems to be the case.

Trump is doing worse than Romney in a number of mid-sized states (Maryland, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, Arizona...) by about 5 points.  Romney lost in 2012 by 4 points. 4+5 is very close to 12, especially with margin of error.

McMullin could take an additional 300 to 400k votes from Trump in Utah and Idaho, compared to Romney.

All this adds up.

If you look at the RCP average for polls conducted in October (or the only 1-2 polls conducted in October if there's not enough for an average) you get this swing map from 2012 -> 2016:



>30% shade: 1-5 points
>50% shade: 5-10 points
>90% shade: 10+ points

So yeah, it's a pretty clear picture of Trump underperforming Romney overall, even if you assume most of the gray states swing to him.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,236
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: October 24, 2016, 02:14:01 am »

Well, twelve percent is a little off I guess. I don’t think she’s winning by double digits in the end (though I hope so because that could deliver the house). More likely six or seven percentage points. Nevertheless, this poll likely confirms his pretty weak numbers in TX. If you’re greatly underperforming here, that sinks your national PV substantially. Let alone small states like UT, AK, MT or ID were he's weak, but Mr. Drumpf is also doing poorly in GA, NC and MO while he is not doing better than Romney in larger Dem states like CA, NY and NJ.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 17 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