McClatchy/Marist National Poll: Clinton +1/+2

[Absolution9]

Just a reminder that Obama's average lead in national polls was 0.7% right before election day.

That was based on RCP only, more inclusive aggregators had it higher.  538's model had him up 2.5% I believe.  Huffpo was above 2% also if memory serves (could be wrong).

[Landslide Lyndon]

Correct me if I'm wrong but no other poll last week showed the Comey letter to have such a big impact.

[Landslide Lyndon]

That was based on RCP only, more inclusive aggregators had it higher.  538's model had him up 2.5% I believe.  Huffpo was above 2% also if memory serves (could be wrong).

Pollster.com had it at 1,5%.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

49-34 among Latinos is not likely.

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

With the same logic - Hillary is only winning  Latino voters by 15 points in this poll, and if that happens, Trump wins handily.

It cancels out. But 9% latino in demographics is wrong.

34% say they have already voted. Clinton winning 50-42 among people that have already voted, Trump winning 45-44 among those that haven't voted yet.

Is that supposed to make sense?

Just calculated it, it comes out to an overall Clinton +2 lead.

DECIMALS. It might for example be 50.2 vs 43.7

Just a reminder that Obama's average lead in national polls was 0.7% right before election day.

And in 2008 polls were right... You can't cherry-pick single year.

[alomas]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

[psychprofessor]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

Yes, because 12 points is reasonable - at most he will have a 15-18 point lead with whites, esp with college educated whites swinging to Clinton. However, no one in their right mind thinks that Hillary will underperform Obama with Latino's...and in fact, Latino Decisions puts her margins at "historic" levels, probably +60.

[The Other Castro]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

You're much more likely to get wacky subsample results with smaller samples. Whites are a much larger portion of any national poll, so their subsamples will have a smaller MOE. Meanwhile, 9% of a poll will have a large MOE.

[Absolution9]

Also they have the "other" at 9% which is pretty high. Last election Latinos and others voted pretty similarly.

[alomas]

Latino Decisions puts her margins at "historic" levels, probably +60.

Do you really think Latino Decisions is an objective source?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

Yes, because 12 points is reasonable - at most he will have a 15-18 point lead with whites, esp with college educated whites swinging to Clinton. However, no one in their right mind thinks that Hillary will underperform Obama with Latino's...and in fact, Latino Decisions puts her margins at "historic" levels, probably +60.

But Whites has much bigger share. 6% of Whites (T+18 as you said) would give extra 70% * 0.06 =5.2%

Latino has about 12%, so 45% (if Clinton +60) would give 12% * 0.45 =5.4%.
And Latino Decision overestimated Obamas margin by 10% points in 2012.

It would cancel out.

[john cage bubblegum]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

My larger point is that given a variety of data, we know that Latino voters will go for Clinton by a much larger margin than 15 points.  

Now it's possible that Clinton does worse with white voters than -12, but if she gets even close to that, she will win because we know approximately what the electorate will look like (and if anything, the early vote indicates that Latino enthusiasm is high this year).  Also, the MoE on the white subsample is a lot lower than the Latino subsample.

[Ronnie]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

My larger point is that given a variety of data, we know that Latino voters will go for Clinton by a much larger margin than 15 points.  

Now it's possible that Clinton does worse with white voters than -12, but if she gets even close to that, she will win because we know approximately what the electorate will look like (and if anything, the early vote indicates that Latino enthusiasm is high this year).  Also, the MoE on the white subsample is a lot lower than the Latino subsample.

But once again MOE of 2% of 72% whites is > than MOE of 15% among 12% Hispanics.

[psychprofessor]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

Yes, because 12 points is reasonable - at most he will have a 15-18 point lead with whites, esp with college educated whites swinging to Clinton. However, no one in their right mind thinks that Hillary will underperform Obama with Latino's...and in fact, Latino Decisions puts her margins at "historic" levels, probably +60.

But Whites has much bigger share. 6% of Whites (T+18 as you said) would give extra 70% * 0.06 =5.2%

Latino has about 12%, so 45% (if Clinton +60) would give 12% * 0.45 =5.4%.
And Latino Decision overestimated Obamas margin by 10% points in 2012.

It would cancel out.

They had Obama at 75% in 2012, the exits pegged him at 71. Not bad for gauging a hard to contact group.

This poll has Hillary at 49 with Latino's. That's just not plausible.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

They have Latinos at only 9% of the electorate, too.  I know, subsample MoE, but that's your problem right there.  Trump is only winning white voters by 12 points in this poll, and if that happens, Clinton wins handily.

Why are you analysing this post selectively? 12 point lead amongst whites is ok but 15 point deficit with Latinos is not ok.

Yes, because 12 points is reasonable - at most he will have a 15-18 point lead with whites, esp with college educated whites swinging to Clinton. However, no one in their right mind thinks that Hillary will underperform Obama with Latino's...and in fact, Latino Decisions puts her margins at "historic" levels, probably +60.

But Whites has much bigger share. 6% of Whites (T+18 as you said) would give extra 70% * 0.06 =5.2%

Latino has about 12%, so 45% (if Clinton +60) would give 12% * 0.45 =5.4%.
And Latino Decision overestimated Obamas margin by 10% points in 2012.

It would cancel out.

They had Obama at 75% in 2012, the exits pegged him at 71. Not bad for gauging a hard to contact group.

This poll has Hillary at 49 with Latino's. That's just not plausible.

I talked about margin. They overestimated Obama's margin by 8-10% (don't remeber correctly).

As I said Trump +12 among Whites is to low. He got the same number, before Reps (and 99% of them was white) coming home.

1% of all Whites = 7% of all Hispanics.

[Mr. Morden]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

Should be noted that this poll is an outlier though.  No other poll has Trump over 90% among Republicans.  Even when I’m generous to Trump by using the “less smoothing” option at HuffPo (which puts him higher), the trendline has him at 86.8% support from Republicans, as compared to 90.5% support for Clinton for Dems:

GOP

Dems

So yes, Trump is cleaning up among Republicans, but there is still a small band of holdouts within the GOP, which is larger than the holdouts on the Dem. side for Clinton (and larger than the group of Republicans who didn’t vote for Romney in 2012).

EDIT: Caveat to the above: Looks like this poll hasn't been added to HuffPo yes, so I guess that could shift things when they add it.

[Ebsy]

Going to be an embarrassing night for pollsters on Tuesday.

[psychprofessor]

Going to be an embarrassing night for pollsters on Tuesday.

Well, at least Fox has one more poll to release to say "hey, we hit the margin."

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

Should be noted that this poll is an outlier though.  No other poll has Trump over 90% among Republicans.  Even when I’m generous to Trump by using the “less smoothing” option at HuffPo (which puts him higher), the trendline has him at 86.8% support from Republicans, as compared to 90.5% support for Clinton for Dems:

GOP

Dems

So yes, Trump is cleaning up among Republicans, but there is still a small band of holdouts within the GOP, which is larger than the holdouts on the Dem. side for Clinton (and larger than the group of Republicans who didn’t vote for Romney in 2012).

EDIT: Caveat to the above: Looks like this poll hasn't been added to HuffPo yes, so I guess that could shift things when they add it.

Not really. It sort of 2012-unkewer misstake, if it is self-reported (I guess) Reps/Dems/Indys.

In this poll Trump is just +3 among Indys. So I guess, more Rep Indys said that they are Reps. Not to talk about self-cancelled MOE in different subgroups etc. (in this case Reps vs Indys among other).

[Mr. Morden]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

Should be noted that this poll is an outlier though.  No other poll has Trump over 90% among Republicans.  Even when I’m generous to Trump by using the “less smoothing” option at HuffPo (which puts him higher), the trendline has him at 86.8% support from Republicans, as compared to 90.5% support for Clinton for Dems:

GOP

Dems

So yes, Trump is cleaning up among Republicans, but there is still a small band of holdouts within the GOP, which is larger than the holdouts on the Dem. side for Clinton (and larger than the group of Republicans who didn’t vote for Romney in 2012).

EDIT: Caveat to the above: Looks like this poll hasn't been added to HuffPo yes, so I guess that could shift things when they add it.

Not really. It sort of 2012-unkewer misstake, if it is self-reported (I guess) Reps/Dems/Indys.

In this poll Trump is just +3 among Indys. So I guess, more Rep Indys said that they are Reps. Not to talk about self-cancelled MOE in different subgroups etc. (in this case Reps vs Indys among other).

I don’t understand your point about “more Rep Indys said that they are Reps”.  What do you mean by that?

In any case, look, political party isn’t some fundamental characteristic of a person, like age.  If you say you’re a Republican, then you’re a Republican*.  If you say you’re an Independent, then you’re an Independent.  You might say you’re an Independent and still mostly vote for one party or the other.  Fine.  What I’m saying though is that in the aggregate of all polls, Clinton is getting a larger share of support from self-described Dems than Trump is getting from self-described Republicans.  This poll is different, but as I said, it’s an outlier in that regard.

That does not mean that I’m trying to “unskew” this poll by suggesting that that one crosstab result means we should adjust the topline numbers.  I’m simply saying that if you’re interested in the party crosstabs themselves, as opposed to the topline numbers, then you shouldn’t just look at the party crosstabs from a single poll.  You should look to see if other polls give similar results.

*Sure, there is such a thing as party registration, at least in some states.  But I don’t think that’s a terribly important distinction, since nearly every poll relies on self-identification, and registration is something that you can change too.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I don’t understand your point about “more Rep Indys said that they are Reps”.  What do you mean by that?

a) Those who usually say they are Indys (but vote for Trump) said in this particular sample/poll that they are Reps.
b) Those who usually say they are Reps (but don't vote for Trump) said in this particular sample/poll that they are Indys.
c) combination of above

So Trump is doing somewhat higher % among Reps, but somewhat lower % among Indys. It sort of cancels out. This particular poll has R27/I36/D36.

Because as you said, it is just a self-reported feature and often pretty meaningless, besides those cases, when it is way-way off.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Lol, I only now noted the headline of this poll.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article112635048.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I say: wow!

Not really, but it is like ~        51% think #LockHerUp

[Seriously?]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

I've said this a million times to you red avatars and I'll say it one more time: Never underestimate how much Republicans absolutely despise and can not tolerate the corruption that comes from Bill and Hillary Clinton. If there's one unifier, it's that Republicans hate the Clintons.

And let me make one other prediction, if it's Hillary +1 or maybe even Hillary +2 (rounded from 1.5+) nationally, she loses. California is going to be so far out of whack to the rest of the country that Trump can win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote by a small margin.

[mark_twain]

I'm floored at Trump's strength among Republicans.  Virtually all intra-Party resistance has completely collapsed.  If we've ever seen a time in which a major party has turned into a cult, this is it.

I've said this a million times to you red avatars and I'll say it one more time: Never underestimate how much Republicans absolutely despise and can not tolerate the corruption that comes from Bill and Hillary Clinton. If there's one unifier, it's that Republicans hate the Clintons.

And let me make one other prediction, if it's Hillary +1 or maybe even Hillary +2 (rounded from 1.5+) nationally, she loses. California is going to be so far out of whack to the rest of the country that Trump can win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote by a small margin.

Let's see whether you can keep that fervor after the election...

[PresidentSamTilden]

And let me make one other prediction, if it's Hillary +1 or maybe even Hillary +2 (rounded from 1.5+) nationally, she loses. California is going to be so far out of whack to the rest of the country that Trump can win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote by a small margin.

I tend to agree, but with Trump improving significantly in Red States recently (Big swings to him in TX and MO for example), it may balance and give her a chance to win in this circumstance. As she should, if she gets that many more votes.