2016 General Election - Opinions, thoughts, polls, EC, odds

[aldousburbank]

Johnson is picking up a little momentum

That's what she said.
<Feeling like the BellGab housekeeper for the compulsion that, like picking up dirty socks on the floor, it's my job to post this>

[TigerLily]

That's what she said.
<Feeling like the BellGab housekeeper for the compulsion that, like picking up dirty socks on the floor, it's my job to post this>

This calls for a Classic Cat Clip! Oh Long Johnson, why I eyes yah!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjKi944CzGA

[Dr. MD MD]

This calls for a Classic Cat Clip! Oh Long Johnson, why I eyes yah!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjKi944CzGA

Aw! It thinks it's people. 

Seriously though, I think that cat might've been trying to do this song:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuULf-u6hgk

He was improvising a bit though too....I think just trying to find his particular vibe for the song. 

[Zetaspeak]

@Lily, Yeah that is one thing Trump has against him. Too many Romney states that his lead is less than 4% (Arz, Geo, SC, NC) his numbers are improving in some of those but he needs to sure it up. What it looks like to me is Clinton is losing more votes to 3rd party candidates than Trump, Trump seems to be stuck at 39% no matter what, Clinton the numbers that are going up an down, with trump lack of movement those votes have to be either staying at home or going to Johnstein. I personally always think 3rd party candidates poll better than result as people get cold feed and go for the "lesser evil" when it's time to actually vote.

As for what happens with people staying at home. That's a pet peeve of mine in polls, that they have a column for undecided/won't vote. If they actually stay at home their vote won't be counted anyway so not sure why they count it in polls. Even though the polls average have Clinton/Trump at 42.5%-39% BOTH are going to go up as they have about 7% as won't vote/undecided and most likely they will just stay home giving Clinton and Trump a bigger percentage overall of available vote.

Looking at the "non-toss up" map and analysing the prediction sites. There been a shift. Iowa has gone blue to slightly Trump (5-3), Georgia has gone from light to became very comfortable Trump (7-1) on the other hand Clinton seem to be shoring up N.Carolina more (8-0)

538                       Clinton 341       Trump 197     
electiongrapyh       Clinton 341       Trump 197     
270/Sabato          Clinton 348       Trump 190     
electionprojection  Clinton 357       Trump 181
USatlas                 Clinton 347       Trump 191     
RCP                      Clinton 340       Trump 198         
E-vote                  Clinton 327       Trump 211     [fla-29 split between HRC & DJT]
270/Prinston         Clinton 344       Trump 194     [iowa-6 split between DJT % HRC]
MY AVERAGE        Clinton 341       Trump 197

[=Schlyder=]

 LOL  the Chinese have him pegged just perfect.  A real potato. 

http://debatepost.com/2016/09/05/the-chinese-have-a-nickname-for-trudeau-little-potato/

[Zetaspeak]

First time in a month we have seen a strong shift in the betting odds towards Trump

-paddy power            Clinton 4/11    (71%)   Trump  11/5    (29%) (Trump gain 3%)
-William Hill                Clinton -225  (66%)    Trump  +175 (34%) (Trump gain 9%!)
-Pinnacle                   Clinton 1.384 (70%)    Trump  3.260 (30%) (Trump gain 4%)
-Sportsbet               Clinton 1.41   (68%)    Trump   2.85   (32%) (Trump up 6%)
-Sportsinteraction     Clinton 1.36   (70%)    Trump  3.00 (30%) (Thegreek odds weren't available so I switched to this)

The average is  Clinton 69% - 31% Trump Giving Trump a 6% better chance than last time I did this a week ago. RCP still has it the same as last week Clinton 76%-24%. 538 is much closer to the betting odds as they give Clinton a 70%-30% chance of winning in the polls only prediction (Trump gained from last week)

Clinton/Trump vs football odds. Last week I said Trump odds match Auburn while Hillary matched Clemson. Clemson won the game giving Hillary 1-0 record. This week we go to the NFL the Hillary/Trump odds are tighter this week so the game match up is more of a closer game. The game with the most similar odds to Clinton/Trump currently is the Chicago Bears/Houston Texans game. Houston/Hillary are favorites(1.41) while Chicago/Trump are underdogs (3.00)

[Zetaspeak]

A pretty big shift has happened on the toss-up map this week, the most since I started calculating it. For the first time if Clinton loses all swing-states she doesn't get to 270. Colorado-9ev shifted big time from solid blue to toss up (+4.2% for Hillary) Wisconsin-10ev went from solid blue two weeks ago, to light blue last week and now toss up (+4.0% for Hillary) on the other hand Trump had some toss up states go more comfortable for him, S.Carolina-9ev went from toss up to light red (+5.% for Trump) and Missouri-10ev went from toss up to medium red (+7.2% for Trump). There is a shift of 19-EV with two Clinton comfort states turning toss up thus having Clinton lose 19ev in total with Trump gaining two toss up states with a total of 19ev

Good on you Robert you totally predicted last week Colorado would be closer, and you got S.Carolina correct in leaving toss-up status. As for New Mexico it seems to be breaking for Clinton as it went from medium blue to barely solid blue (+8.6 for Hillary) The Connecticut scare seems to go away as it turned into a very solid blue (+13.1% for Hillary)  but Rhode Island seems to be something to keep an eye on as it turned medium blue (+7.3% for Hillary)

Grey      = Tied to 4.5%
Light color = 4.5% -6.5%
Medium color = 6.5% - 8.5%
Solid color    = 8.5% and up

[Dr. MD MD]

LOL  the Chinese have him pegged just perfect.  A real potato. 

http://debatepost.com/2016/09/05/the-chinese-have-a-nickname-for-trudeau-little-potato/

They must be Devo fans:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQvEu6G-i_0

[21st Century Man]

A pretty big shift has happened on the toss-up map this week, the most since I started calculating it. For the first time if Clinton loses all swing-states she doesn't get to 270. Colorado-9ev shifted big time from solid blue to toss up (+4.2% for Hillary) Wisconsin-10ev went from solid blue two weeks ago, to light blue last week and now toss up (+4.0% for Hillary) on the other hand Trump had some toss up states go more comfortable for him, S.Carolina-9ev went from toss up to light red (+5.% for Trump) and Missouri-10ev went from toss up to medium red (+7.2% for Trump). There is a shift of 19-EV with two Clinton comfort states turning toss up thus having Clinton lose 19ev in total with Trump gaining two toss up states with a total of 19ev

Good on you Robert you totally predicted last week Colorado would be closer, and you got S.Carolina correct in leaving toss-up status. As for New Mexico it seems to be breaking for Clinton as it went from medium blue to barely solid blue (+8.6 for Hillary) The Connecticut scare seems to go away as it turned into a very solid blue (+13.1% for Hillary)  but Rhode Island seems to be something to keep an eye on as it turned medium blue (+7.3% for Hillary)

Grey      = Tied to 4.5%
Light color = 4.5% -6.5%
Medium color = 6.5% - 8.5%
Solid color    = 8.5% and up

I'd put Georgia in the red.  No way are we voting for Hillary.  The Democratic hopes for Georgia are nothing but wishful thinking.  The party machine in this state is in tatters.

[Robert]

Good on you Robert you totally predicted last week Colorado would be closer, and you got S.Carolina correct in leaving toss-up status.

But I had no idea Clinton would actually lose ground in Wisc.  I'd thought it a bit of a fluke previously that she wasn't leading by more there.  This trend toward The Donald and/or away from Hillary, because it came at the time more people traditionally start to pay att'n, looks like a harbinger.

[Zetaspeak]

@21st; I thought Georgia was going t fall right along with S. Carolina and Missouri eventually , but it seems to be stubborn. It seems to be staying close and giving Trump a margin of error lead (+2.5% for Trump)  ...  @Robert, Wisconsin fall seems to be more contained during this update. The previous update went for safe (10+) just to a slim Clinton lead with (+4.3) even though this week it went from slim lead to toss up it only fell 0.3 leaving Hillary with a tossup/narrow (+4.0 lead)

This weeks polls, the numbers seem to be contained. Not much shift at all. Of course these numbers were polled before the weekend incident.

Public Policy Polling   Clinton 45%    - 40%  Trump - AltParty 10%  (8/28) -   (no new polling this week)
Ipsos Reid /Reuters   Clinton 40%   - 38% Trump -  AltParty  11%  (9/5)  (a 2.5-point positive swing for Clinton this week)
Pew Research           Clinton 41%    - 37%  Trump -  AltParty 14%  (8/16) (no new polls)
YouGov/Economist    Clinton  42%  -   40% Trump - AltParty  12%   (9/6)  (Trump cut the lead by 3-points with this poll compared to last week)
CNN /ORC                Clinton  46%  -  45%% Trump  - AltParty  09%     (8/4) (Likely voters had Trump by 2, Registered voters Cllinton by 3)
AVERAGE               CLINTON 42.5%  - 39.%  TRUMP - AltParty  11.5   No change from last week.

This weeks polls, everything seems to have evened out giving Clinton still a 3.5% lead. Reuters Hillary improved by a couple of points, Economist Trump improved by a couple of points, which turns out to be a wash. The big news in polls was the CNN poll which had Clinton in a big lead to Trump by 1.5 with Likely voters, not surprising they buried the other poll they did with Registered voters which had Hillary by 2.5 because the poll with Trump in the lead is a "juicer" story. I ended up splitting the difference even though I personally like Registered voters technique for General elections, especially considering 2012 the RV polls were much more accurate than the LV.

[Robert]

I personally like Registered voters technique for General elections, especially considering 2012 the RV polls were much more accurate than the LV.

I understand that the previous models they've used to try to figure out who'll be likely voters haven't held up lately.  This year they'll be even less reliable.  Who can tell whether the high negatives for the presidential candidates will propel voters to the polls or away from them?  Pollsters have been very proprietary about the formulas they use to figure out likely voters, thinking it gives them a leg up on their polling competitors, but I doubt they'll care much longer.  Zogby in particular used to make that a big deal, but Zogby's great record before and around the turn of the century has soured with that turn.

[Jackstar]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-06/too-many-whites-msnbc-tweaks-cnn-poll-show-hillary-lead-not-trump

With the numbers adjusted to reflect how the electorate shook out four years ago, Clinton’s two-point deficit shifted to a four-point lead, 46 percent to 42 percent.

Mission accomplished.

[Zetaspeak]

@Robert, I never liked Likely numbers on a general election, it works probably better in mid-terms as only real politicofreaks get excited by that an therefore you have a turn out of around 35%, but in a general election you normally get around 55% at times even 60% turn out. I think if you are engaged enough to answer a random political poll you are probably engaged enough to vote.... @Jackstar, it's an interesting article. I will give CNN the benefit of the doubt, even though it is fishy that their poll is 5% difference of the average of the other top-4 polls, which is a pretty big margin, I'd feel the same way if somebody had Clinton up by 8%

Looking at the "non-toss up" map and analysing the prediction sites. There's another big shift for Trump, Trump has captured Ohio (6Red-1Blue) and Florida (5Rred-1blue-1Tied) on the 7 prediction sites and is really close to getting N.Carolina too (4Blue-2Red-1Tie). For the first time Clinton is under 300Ev in the average and 5 out of 7 prediction has Clinton under 300 for the first time.

538                       Clinton 279       Trump 259     
electiongrapyh        Clinton 285       Trump 253     
270/Sabato             Clinton 348       Trump 190     
electionprojection    Clinton 288       Trump 250
RCP                        Clinton 293       Trump 245       
E-vote                     Clinton 277       Trump 261     [Nev-6 split between HRC & DJT]
270/Prinston            Clinton 309       Trump 229     [Fla-29, Geor-16, NCar-15 split between DJT & HRC]
MY AVERAGE        Clinton 294       Trump 244

Clinton still barely wins but Trump is certainly right behind her and switching a couple of more states he could take the lead.

[Zetaspeak]

A similar shift of last week happened this week in the betting odds.

-paddy power            Clinton 4/7    (62%)   Trump  6/4    (38%) [Trump gain 9%]
-William Hill                Clinton -175  (61%)    Trump  +138 (39%)  [Trump gain 5%]
-Pinnacle                   Clinton 1.552 (63%)    Trump  2.600 (37%) [Trump gain 7%]
-Sportsbet                Clinton 1.55   (63%)    Trump   2.60   (37%) [Trump gain 5%]
-Thegreek                 Clinton -185  (63%)     Trump  +165  (37%) [Thegreek odds weren't available last week but a Trump gain of 15% from 2-weeks ago]

The average is  Clinton 62% - 38% Trump Giving Trump a 7% better chance than last time I did this a week ago. RCP had a similar 7% Clinton drop making their odds 69%-31%. 538 had a larger drop of 11% as they give Clinton a 59%-41% chance of winning in the polls plus prediction.

Clinton/Trump vs football odds. Last week I said Trump odds match The Bears while Hillary matched Texans. Houston won the game giving Hillary 2-0 record. This week we stay in the NFL the Hillary/Trump odds are tighter this week so the game match up is more of a closer game. The game with the most similar odds to Clinton/Trump currently is the Cincinnati Bengals /Pittsburgh Steelers game. Pittsburgh/Hillary are favorites(-170) while Cincinnati/Trump are underdogs (+150)

[TigerLily]

A similar shift of last week happened this week in the betting odds.

-paddy power            Clinton 4/7    (62%)   Trump  6/4    (38%) [Trump gain 9%]
-William Hill                Clinton -175  (61%)    Trump  +138 (39%)  [Trump gain 5%]
-Pinnacle                   Clinton 1.552 (63%)    Trump  2.600 (37%) [Trump gain 7%]
-Sportsbet                Clinton 1.55   (63%)    Trump   2.60   (37%) [Trump gain 5%]
-Thegreek                 Clinton -185  (63%)     Trump  +165  (37%) [Thegreek odds weren't available last week but a Trump gain of 15% from 2-weeks ago]

The average is  Clinton 62% - 38% Trump Giving Trump a 7% better chance than last time I did this a week ago. RCP had a similar 7% Clinton drop making their odds 69%-31%. 538 had a larger drop of 11% as they give Clinton a 59%-41% chance of winning in the polls plus prediction.

Clinton/Trump vs football odds. Last week I said Trump odds match The Bears while Hillary matched Texans. Houston won the game giving Hillary 2-0 record. This week we stay in the NFL the Hillary/Trump odds are tighter this week so the game match up is more of a closer game. The game with the most similar odds to Clinton/Trump currently is the Cincinnati Bengals /Pittsburgh Steelers game. Pittsburgh/Hillary are favorites(-170) while Cincinnati/Trump are underdogs (+150)

I'm liking this sporting odds viewpoint. Adds a fun flavor.  C'mon Big Ben! Deliver us a win! For your Country!

[21st Century Man]

Poll: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton tied across battleground states

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-tied-across-battleground-states/

[21st Century Man]

Black voters are turning from Clinton to Trump in new poll

http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

[21st Century Man]

New Mexico Poll: Trump Leads Clinton 43% to 38%

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/18/new-mexico-poll/

[albrecht]

Black voters are turning from Clinton to Trump in new poll

http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

I have a pollster calling incessantly I guess I'm going to answer in the off chance they will stop calling. In the rare cases when I have I almost never told the truth and purposely skew them (though it could be like a good psychological experiment they are prepared for that?) But I question the polls and also there is big difference between popular vote and the stuff that really matter (key counties in certain key states.) And the fact that many, maybe most, don't have landlines, don't answer unidentified callers, are not home during the hours when they call, etc. I know some polls say that account for these things but considering the quality of the people I've spoken with on the phone (out-sourced to a 3rd world country maybe) I'm not sure I buy them. I think there are a number of people who will vote for Trump (or at least not vote) than who will admit it. I also think he will do better with the Hispanics and Blacks more than polls would show. Rich leftist elitists think simply government give-aways and historical trends have them 'in the bag' but those communities are often most effected by the crimes, job-loss, ethnic conflict, cartel corruption, failing schools etc brought about my illegals and 'refugees.'

[Jackstar]

Surprise! An October Surprise--in September!

[TigerLily]

Bless you, Pittsburgh Steelers. May you be a predictor of things to come

[Zetaspeak]

@Lily, Glad you are enjoying it but I really should make myself a 1-976 pay service number, not to brag (of course I am bragging) but that's 3-0... @Albrecht, sure there could be manipulation like that, but I still find polls to be the best guide in predicting elections, yet astrology and Nostradamus is a close 2nd and 3rd LOL...

@21st century. I buy 2/3 posts you made, I need something more credible than LATimes poll who have slanted Trump this entire election to really believe the African American voter growing for Trump. But the other two posts make a good point, Ipsos is a good poll and shift in N.Mex is something to notice, and I did take it into account from my personal map having N.Mex solid blue last week and this week a toss-up (+3.2 for Hillary) I will always say be careful of the single poll even if it is from Ipsos. CBS battle ground link is interesting, their battleground is very similar to mine. So they say it's 50/50 split, so lets even out the 13 states they listed and even it out 6 each according to current polls. So that will give Clinton (Min, Penn, Vir, NH, Wisc &  Colo) and we will give Trump ( Geor, Iowa, Ariz, Ohio, Fla, NC , and lets throw in Nev to give Trump a slight advantge)  the electoral vote still ends up 273 - 265 for Hillary. So yeah it does get pretty darn close if the battleground states split 50/50

Another shift for Trump this week. As 21stcentury predicted Georgia went from toss-up to light red. Trump also secured S.Car and Missouri to solid red. As for Clinton, as I mentioned in previous paragraph N.Mex got a negative poll which made the state turn from solid to toss up (+3.2 for HC) Michigan @ Wisconsin traded places with Mich going toss up  (+3.7 for HC) as Wisc goes light blue (+4.1 HC). Some small notes is that New Jersey and Texas moved from solid to medium, but nothing to panic on either state as they are still a pretty safe distance, (NJ+8.4 for HC & Tex+8.5 for DT)

Grey      = Tied to 4.0%
Light color = 4.0% -5.5%
Medium color = 5.5% - 9.0%
Solid color    = 9.0% and up

[Jackstar]

It's gonna be President Trump, and you're all gonna be soppin' it up with a biscuit. Mark my words.

[Zetaspeak]

National poll time, did some digging into the numbers and found something interesting. The media seems to love to report the "likely voters" poll numbers and almost always ignore the "registers voters" poll number from the same company. In some instances the difference is shocking. I personally like registered numbers because they had a better track record and I believe enough people vote, that if they take to the to answer the call they probably are interested enough to vote. Recent weeks the media has Trump close to a tie due to focusing on only likely numbers. But if you just look at registered voters Clinton is close to a 5 point lead. In the interest of fairness I am averaging likely and registered totals in my forumula

Public Policy Polling   Clinton 45%    -    40%  Trump -      AltParty 10%  (8/28)  -  (no new polling this week)
Ipsos Reid /Reuters   Clinton 39%   -    37% Trump -     AltParty  10.5%  (9/19) -  (still a 3-point difference)
YouGov/Economist    Clinton  42.5%  -  41% Trump -    AltParty  9%      (9/19) -  (A slight 0.5 improvement for Trump
CNN /ORC                Clinton  45.5%  -  45%% Trump  - AltParty  10.5%  (9/4) - (Likely voters had Trump by 1.5, Registered voters Cllinton by 2.5)
ABC/WashPost         Clinton    48.5%  -  39.5% Trump - AltParty    12.5%    (9/8) - (Very different numbers from the rest, not much weight on it)
AVERAGE                CLINTON 43%       - 40%  TRUMP - AltParty  10%

Trump improved by 0.5 and cutting Clinton lead to 3% Both gained slightly in total numbers while AltParty lost 1.5%.   As I was talking about difference of likely and registered numbers. Ipsos had the biggest difference if you average 2way+4way likely  voters with Ipsos numbers Trump is up by 1%. But if you do the same thing with registered voters (average 2way + 4way) Hillary is up by 5%.

This sort of stuff actually gets on my nerves because it's kind of a way for the pollsters to make two bets. If Hillary wins by 4+ they can point at their registered numbers and claim victory. If it super close or Trump squeezes out a win they can point at their likely numbers and claim victory. I think the only fair thing is to average both numbers to keep them at least honest.

[TigerLily]

It's gonna be President Trump, and you're all gonna be soppin' it up with a biscuit. Mark my words.

With a hankie drenched in your tears when he loses

[TigerLily]

@Zeta. I am both registered and likely. My phone rings easily half a dozen times a day with non-local calls from numbers I don't recognize. Of course, I never pick up.  I figure half are pollsters and the other half Dems who want money.  Who picks up these calls?

[21st Century Man]

@Zeta. I am both registered and likely. My phone rings easily half a dozen times a day with non-local calls from numbers I don't recognize. Of course, I never pick up.  I figure half are pollsters and the other half Dems who want money.  Who picks up these calls?

Not me either.  I had a cell phone call the other day from DC and I didn't pick it up.  House phone rings all of the time but I don't pick it up if I don't recognize the caller.

[Robert]

I think the %s of registered voters will give an imprecise picture, but I don't trust any pollster's model for likely voters for prez now, so registered voters is probably the best measure we've got this year.

[(Sandman) Logan-5]

I don't trust the source of anything online, but have you guys seen this yet ?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/283120-google-denies-tilting-search-results-to-favor-clinton