ABC/WaPo Tracking poll megathread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:47:41 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  ABC/WaPo Tracking poll megathread (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: ABC/WaPo Tracking poll megathread  (Read 37875 times)
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« on: October 23, 2016, 01:58:17 PM »



This is actually a tracking poll. They had one for the last few weeks of the 2012 election too

Bryan is supporting Jill Stein. Atleast Clinton's corrupt supporters shouldn't be using Bryan's signature chant!
He's supporting that nut and her terrorist apologist running mate?

Geez oh man.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #1 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 Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #2 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
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #3 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
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #4 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
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #5 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
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 13 queries.