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

[Jackstar]

With a hankie drenched in your tears when he loses

[Zetaspeak]

@Robert, I agree. Looking at the latest Ipsos numbers and they asked 1,457 registered voters, to narrow it own to likely voters they only use 1,111 contacts. Which seems to be they just dropped about 24% (about 1/4) of respondents because they viewed him as unlikely voters, even though they took the time to answer the call.... @Lily & 21Cent, I actually got the polling company a few times. Some of them have their name on the actual call display which is very helpful, others time the name display says "unknown" and I get lucky and it's them. Unfortunately most of the time is somebody asking if my windows are ready for the winter LOL. And YES I do answer it honestly. Hey I am a geek for this sort of stuff, so of course I will try to contribute.

This week "non toss-up" prediction EV sites is a mix bag for both candidates. Trump has gained Nevada (6Red-1Blue-1Tie) and N.Carolina (5Red-3Ties) . On the other hand Clinton made a run for Florida and barely captured this week with a very slight advantage of (3Blue-2Red-3Tie) Hillary gained in EV for first time in a while this week because Florida-29EV are higher then N.Carolina-15EV & Nevada-6EV combined (21EV). But it's a catch-22 as the Trump new grabs is much more comfortable then the split decision of Clinton/Florida. If Florida flips back it becomes razor thin lead for Clinton of 272-266.

538                     Dem 272       Repub 266     
electiongrapyh     Dem 301       Repub 237     
270/Sabato         Dem 297       Repub 241       [Nev-6,Fla-29,NC-15 split]     
electionproje       Dem 301       Repub 237     
270/Rothenberg  Dem 316       Repub 222       [Fla-29, NC-15, Ohio-18 split]
RCP                    Dem 272       Repub 266   
E-vote                Dem 300        Repub 238       [Main-4 split]
270/Prinston       Dem 295        Repub 243       [ Fla-29 & NC-15 split]
MY AVERAGE   Dem 301       Repub 237

[GravitySucks]

@Robert, I agree. Looking at the latest Ipsos numbers and they asked 1,457 registered voters, to narrow it own to likely voters they only use 1,111 contacts. Which seems to be they just dropped about 24% (about 1/4) of respondents because they viewed him as unlikely voters, even though they took the time to answer the call.... @Lily & 21Cent, I actually got the polling company a few times. Some of them have their name on the actual call display which is very helpful, others time the name display says "unknown" and I get lucky and it's them. Unfortunately most of the time is somebody asking if my windows are ready for the winter LOL. And YES I do answer it honestly. Hey I am a geek for this sort of stuff, so of course I will try to contribute.

This week "non toss-up" prediction EV sites is a mix bag for both candidates. Trump has gained Nevada (6Red-1Blue-1Tie) and N.Carolina (5Red-3Ties) . On the other hand Clinton made a run for Florida and barely captured this week with a very slight advantage of (3Blue-2Red-3Tie) Hillary gained in EV for first time in a while this week because Florida-29EV are higher then N.Carolina-15EV & Nevada-6EV combined (21EV). But it's a catch-22 as the Trump new grabs is much more comfortable then the split decision of Clinton/Florida. If Florida flips back it becomes razor thin lead for Clinton of 272-266.

538                     Dem 272       Repub 266     
electiongrapyh     Dem 301       Repub 237     
270/Sabato         Dem 297       Repub 241       [Nev-6,Fla-29,NC-15 split]     
electionproje       Dem 301       Repub 237     
270/Rothenberg  Dem 316       Repub 222       [Fla-29, NC-15, Ohio-18 split]
RCP                    Dem 272       Repub 266   
E-vote                Dem 300        Repub 238       [Main-4 split]
270/Prinston       Dem 295        Repub 243       [ Fla-29 & NC-15 split]
MY AVERAGE   Dem 301       Repub 237

Interesting read:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-year-of-the-reticent-voter-1474586866

[TigerLily]

Interesting read:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-year-of-the-reticent-voter-1474586866

Why are they so reticent?

[GravitySucks]

Why are they so reticent?

Don't ask me. I've been a Cubs fan since I could walk. I know no shame.

Cubs/Trump 2016

[albrecht]

Why are they so reticent?

I don't presume to know everyone's, or that guy's, motivation but likely for fear of being attacked, not necessarily physically, audited by the IRS, demonitized by YouTube, or marginalized etc. Sort of a "yellow star" situation by Clintonistas and leftists. It is, indeed by my provocative analogy, not that bad, yet, but, of course, that started out slowly also with riots etc but seems maybe true considering that the majority of media, bankers, and universities are in the bag for her and the rigging at the DNC, IRS targeting, etc? And considering the violence and terrorism on the streets now? I doubt it will go full on no matter who is elected. Hopefully. Personally, my reason is more trolling and trying to logically argue. Whatever happened to the Australian ballot? The idea that privacy is important? Freedom of conscience? In essence what "progressives" and "liberals" have claimed to support for decades but, now, due to Trump, or other issues that demands to accommodate people who hate, and often rape, women, gays, Jews, Christians, etc we in our countries should not have free speech, secret ballots, or not telling people how you will vote is "hiding" isms etc.

[Dr. MD MD]

Don't ask me. I've been a Cubs fan since I could walk. I know no shame.

Cubs/Trump 2016

I always like a team from where people get murdered the most. I feel it gives them an edge.

[Jackstar]

I believe that voting should be a matter of public record, and I can't imagine how it came to become private at all. Husbands & wives, one presumes.

[Zetaspeak]

@Gavitysucks, People been pushing the Bradley type effect type thing with Trump, it might be but most recently when people suspect it might happen it turns out the polls were correct (Obama-McCain)

Betting odds: The week of "okay" news for Clinton continues with the betting odds. After a couple of weeks of odd drops from 75% to 62% bets of winning, Hillary finally stopped the downfall and stayed even.
-paddy power            Clinton 8/15    (64%)   Trump  17/10 (36%) [Clinton gain 2%]
-William Hill                Clinton -188  (62%)    Trump  +150  (38%)  [Clinton gain 1%]
-Pinnacle                   Clinton 1.500 (65%)    Trump  2.760  (35%) [Clinton gain 2%]
-Sportsbet                Clinton 1.53   (63%)    Trump   2.65   (37%) [similar percentage as last week]
-Thegreek                 Clinton -185  (63%)     Trump  +165  (37%) [same as last week]

The average is  Clinton 63% - 37% Trump  Giving Clinton a 1% better chance than last time I did this a week ago. Clinton RCP betting odds dropped a couple of points though making her lead 67%-33%. 538 had a similar 2-point drop as they give Clinton a 57%-43% chance of winning in the polls plus prediction.

Clinton/Trump football odds: Here's Lilys favorite part lol. Last week I said Trump odds match The Bengals while Hillary matched Steelers. Pittsburgh won the game giving Hillary 3-0 record. This week is difficult because many teams have similar odds as Clinton/Trump. Yet the closest I found is another Pittsburgh Steelers game. Comparing to the Sportsbet site Pittsburgh/Hillary are favorite (1.52) while Philadelphia/Trump are underdogs (2.61) It said to be a close game, which I think reflects the election.

[Robert]

What would be an interesting statistic to me in a presidential election would be an overall, or (better) state-by-state, correlation between the changes from date to date of the national polling percentages with the state polling percentages.  This would give a good picture of how much of the change within a state is predicted by national poll trends, vs. the amount peculiar to that state.  Of course they don't necessarily poll over exactly the same dates in each state, so that would limit its usefulness somewhat.

I'm trying to figure out how the handicappers project outcomes: each state independently, or as they move with the nation as a whole.  If each state is viewed as an independent "event" or observation, then a projected EC lead would be seen as much harder to overcome than it would be if someone were figuring, well, another 1% swing carried across all the states would change the electoral votes by....

Or are the odds you quote coming not from handicappers, but from people who just report on pari-mutuel odds, i.e. the wisdom of the masses?

[TigerLily]

Clinton/Trump football odds: Here's Lilys favorite part lol. Last week I said Trump odds match The Bengals while Hillary matched Steelers. Pittsburgh won the game giving Hillary 3-0 record. This week is difficult because many teams have similar odds as Clinton/Trump. Yet the closest I found is another Pittsburgh Steelers game. Comparing to the Sportsbet site Pittsburgh/Hillary are favorite (1.52) while Philadelphia/Trump are underdogs (2.61) It said to be a close game, which I think reflects the election.

Oh oh. There goes our perfect record. Big time

[TigerLily]

I don't presume to know everyone's, or that guy's, motivation but likely for fear of being attacked, not necessarily physically, audited by the IRS, demonitized by YouTube, or marginalized etc. Sort of a "yellow star" situation by Clintonistas and leftists. It is, indeed by my provocative analogy, not that bad, yet, but, of course, that started out slowly also with riots etc but seems maybe true considering that the majority of media, bankers, and universities are in the bag for her and the rigging at the DNC, IRS targeting, etc? And considering the violence and terrorism on the streets now? I doubt it will go full on no matter who is elected. Hopefully. Personally, my reason is more trolling and trying to logically argue. Whatever happened to the Australian ballot? The idea that privacy is important? Freedom of conscience? In essence what "progressives" and "liberals" have claimed to support for decades but, now, due to Trump, or other issues that demands to accommodate people who hate, and often rape, women, gays, Jews, Christians, etc we in our countries should not have free speech, secret ballots, or not telling people how you will vote is "hiding" isms etc.

Yeah. Right

[mikuthing01]

The world wants Trump in 2016

https://worldwide.vote/hillary-vs-trump/#/results

[Lt.Uhura]

The world wants Trump in 2016

https://worldwide.vote/hillary-vs-trump/#/results

If accurate, it's not that surprising.  Our election has made us a laughing stock to the rest of the world.  Many countries would stand to benefit from a Trump presidency--to the detriment of our own country.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/01/make-america-meek-again-why-dictators-dig-trump.html

[Lt.Uhura]

Will there be a dedicated thread for the big game debate tonight, or are you all headed over to Alex Jones' place? 

I'm going to listen on the radio as I don't have TV, or WiFi to live stream from where I am.  Some of the local bars are advertising drink specials for the debate, but I think I'll stay here with my radio, lol.  Cheap alcohol and politics, what could go wrong? 

[Dr. MD MD]

Will there be a dedicated thread for the big game debate tonight, or are you all headed over to Alex Jones' place? 

I'm going to listen on the radio as I don't have TV, or WiFi to live stream from where I am.  Some of the local bars are advertising drink specials for the debate, but I think I'll stay here with my radio, lol.  Cheap alcohol and politics, what could go wrong? 

Interesting. I wonder if it will effect your perspective. People who only listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debate thought Nixon won but people who watched it on TV thought Kennedy won because Nixon looked pale, sweaty and shifty. 

[Lt.Uhura]

Interesting. I wonder if it will effect your perspective. People who only listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debate thought Nixon won but people who watched it on TV thought Kennedy won because Nixon looked pale, sweaty and shifty. 

Maybe. I've always been a radio person and like to think I listen more closely, forming my own visuals from audio cues. I think people who are primary visual are actually distracted by the pictures, miss a lot of the story. Also, given a choice, I'd rather listen to MLB games on the radio than watch on TV. ⚾️

[Walks_At_Night]

Maybe. I've always been a radio person and like to think I listen more closely, forming my own visuals from audio cues. I think people who are primary visual are actually distracted by the pictures, missing a lot of the story. Also, given a choice, I'd rather listen to MLB games than watch on TV. ⚾️

Could not agree more.   

[albrecht]

Maybe. I've always been a radio person and like to think I listen more closely, forming my own visuals from audio cues. I think people who are primary visual are actually distracted by the pictures, missing a lot of the story. Also, given a choice, I'd rather listen to MLB games than watch on TV. ⚾️

I agree. I've heard different theories, and maybe it is different for different people, but I like to listen also. I think easier to focus. At least for the first run, might watch a repeat later- especially if there is some major incident (she keels over or he attacks her or some protester does something.) Can focus more on what is being said and less how on how gestures, clothes, audience, modified podiums, etc. With baseball it depends on the announcers and home or away coverage. But I love to listen to BB and hockey (and watch.) (As an aside I have to say hockey announcers have to the be the hardest working radio sports broadcasters. Fast game, foreign names,etc.)

[21st Century Man]

Uh-oh.  Hillary is in trouble.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/09/26/UPICVoter-state-polls-Donald-Trump-ahead-of-Hillary-Clinton-in-Electoral-College/3941474908310/

[Jackstar]

Uh-oh.  Hillary is in trouble.

It was decided weeks ago to knock her out of the running. Everything now is just theater, They can't afford--and don't want--to collapse the stock market yet. How do you not see this?

[Dr. MD MD]

It was decided weeks ago to knock her out of the running. Everything now is just theater, They can't afford--and don't want--to collapse the stock market yet. How do you not see this?

So you figure a Trump win then or some last minute bounder?

[Zetaspeak]

@Robert, I didn't do any long range research on it, but for the 2-months of this election it seems like national numbers break first and a few weeks later the state polls move. If we look at when the polls recently, Clinton was comfortably on top in early August. Late August/Early September her percentage lead started to narrow( Aug 16 HC+6, Aug 27 HC+4.5, Sep 4 HC+3.5) Her state numbers seem to only really start droping at Sep 10 or so. This week her national numbers are starting to showing better, will be interesting how it will play  out state-by-state (spoiler, she still losing ground in state polls)... As for the betting odds, I simply just get them from 5 different betting sites and what the current odds are. I look at the moneyline and if the money is split between the two then you get a 50/50 split, but try to get as much even money as possible they move around the money line in hopes that people bet on the "underdog" so giving them better odds. The more even the competition is the closer the moneyline is, the bigger difference means a bigger favorite/underdog.

Sorry @Lily, it just shows an underdog can win.Which doesn't surprise me, again Clinton as her odds this weekend has a 63% chance of winning, so in reality 4 out of 10 times you can lose. Considered favorite Hillary/team won 3 out 4 it gives her 75% success ratio if just comparing it to football teams of same odds.

The national numbers are looking a bit better for Hillary but the state by state polls still shifting for Trump.  The big changes this week is that Main went from medium blue to toss up (+3.2 for HC) and the big news is Pennsylvania went from light blue to toss up (+2.4 for HC) Minnesota also dropped from medium to light blue (+6.4 for HC) the only bright spot for Clinton this week state-by-state is she seemed to secure the New Mexico scare as it went from toss up to medium blue (+6.6 for HC) Overall Clinton has lost 20 more EV this week to the toss up column.

Grey      = Tied to 4.5%
Light color = 4.5% -6.5%
Medium color = 6.5% - 8.0%
Solid color    = 8.0% and up

[Zetaspeak]

Clinton had a strong national bump this week overall. She seemed to have grabbed some of the Johnstein voters.

Public Policy Polling   Clinton 46.5%  -    42.5%  Trump -   AltParty 7%  (9/28)   (A monthly poll which Trump improved by 1% from late August)
Ipsos Reid /Reuters   Clinton 40%   -    35.5% Trump -     AltParty  9%  (9/28)  (This week big difference as Clinton doubled her lead from 2 to 4.5%)
Pew Research           Clinton 47.5    -     40%  Trump   -    AltParty  11.5 (9/12)  (Pew hasn't polled in over a month but came back with a very strong HC number)
AP/GFK                     Clinton  46%    -   40.5% Trump -   AltParty   11     (9/19) (Same story with GK, didn't poll for a while came back with a strong Clinton lead)
YouGov/Economist    Clinton  46%  -     42.5% Trump -    AltParty  7%      (9/24)  (A week ago they were 1.5% apart here, now doubled to 3.5 HC lead)
AVERAGE              CLINTON 44.5%  - 39.5%  TRUMP - AltParty  8%

Two out of five polls were post debate. Clinton seems to be doing better a week before debate. Clinton improved by 2% and grew her lead to 5% She seemed to have been getting votes form Johnstein who lost 2% from going from double digits to 8%. The two post debate polls have the third party numbers lower then pre debate numbers. Clinton seems to have a so solid 4 to 5 % lead in each poll and and a total of around 46 or 47 (exception of Ipsos who seem to have high undecideds/will not vote) Trump still seems to be stuck in the low 40s (maybe sneaking up to 42%). That is kind of the trouble with Trump, no matter what happens Trump seems to be stuck at 39/40 (it really amazing to look at his week to week average, the number is always the same so far) While Clinton so far has been up to around 46 and down close to  42.

[Zetaspeak]

I know this was talked about a little bit in the "Debate" thread but after the debate the betting odds went crazy! Gigantic rush to bet for Clinton. I know, I know Trump won the online polls, but I know the betting sharks know better than looking at online polls, if online polls (or TV ratings) are accurate the Dallas Cowboys would be a SuperBowl dynasty but they haven't won sh*t in decades.
-paddy power            Clinton 4/11   (72%)   Trump  13/5 (28%) [Clinton gain 8%]
-William Hill                Clinton -275  (71%)    Trump  +225  (29%)  [Clinton gain 9%]
-Pinnacle                   Clinton 1.380 (71%)    Trump  3.330  (29%) [Clinton gain 6%]
-Sportsbet                Clinton 1.38   (70%)    Trump   3.25   (30%) [Clinton gains 7%]
-Thegreek                 Clinton -260  (70%)     Trump  +215  (30%) [Clinton gaqins 7%] 

The average is  Clinton 71% - 29% Trump  Giving Clinton a 8% better chance than last time I did this a week ago. Clinton RCP betting odds jumped as well by 7& though making her lead 74%-26%. At 538 her percentage chance of winning is lower than the betting odds at 67%-33% but it's still a big jump from last week as Hillary got a 10% bump in one week . I am not a usual believer debates really change anything as mostly it turns out to be close to a draw. But Trump really sh*t the bed this week and Clinton actually brought some of her best game(finally) to the table which resulted in huge gains across the board... The Clinton/Trump football odds. Last week the underdog/Eagles/Trump won giving Hillary a 3-1 record. This week was really difficult to fine a game that had similar odds to current Clinton/Trump but there was one (even though the line is iffy because of injuries) Going by the Pinnacle odds Patriots/Hillary are favorite  (1.344) while Bills/Trump are at (3.560)

This weeks (almost) non-toss up map didn't have much visual movment yet but there is some slow movement towards Clinton that might show a stronger shift once the state polls come out (which usually is delayed vs national polls) Some obvious visuals that we did see Nevada shifting  barely back to light blue from medium red (4Blue-3Red-Tie1) and N.Carolina being the first tie/grey every in the non-toss up polls due to the prediction site having a (3Blue-3Re4d-2Tie) draw and used to be a medium red. All important Florida was a very light blue last week with just a 3-2-3 Hillary lead. But this week a couple of more prediction site is currently giving it for Clinton with her now having Florida (Blue5-Red1-Tie2). So Clinton just gained 6EV with Nevada but Trump did lose 21EV because he also lost control of N.Carolina along with losing Nevada back to Clinton.

538                     Dem 322       Repub 216     
electiongrapyh     Dem 272       Repub 266     
270/Sabato         Dem 297       Repub 241       [Fla-29,NC-15, Nev-6 split]     
electionproje       Dem 301       Repub 237     
270/Rothenberg  Dem 316       Repub 222       [Fla-29, NC-15, Ohio-18 split]
RCP                    Dem 292       Repub 246   
E-vote                Dem 323        Repub 215       
270/Prinston       Dem 323        Repub 215   
MY AVERAGE      Dem 307       Repub 216 (NC-15 undecided ) [Dems gain Nevada-6 this week)

[TigerLily]

Oh no, Zeta. Of all games you chose that crazy Bills/Pats game.  Oh, well politics is not football. Somehow that statement sounds more deep and Zen than it really is.

Happily she looks good in the Electoral College and the Smart Money is with her

[Jackstar]

the Smart Money is with her

... is that what we're calling fascist corporate bribery now?

[TigerLily]

Betting odds, numbskull

[136 or 142]

... is that what we're calling fascist corporate bribery now?

Strawman.

[21st Century Man]

Strawman.

I propose that everytime someone wants to use that word (and I include myself) then we should simply post this instead. lol