Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As WH2016 moves into the final straight: The PB/Polling Matter

In this week’s episode of the PB/Polling Matters podcast Keiran Pedley (@keiranpedley), Leo Barasi (@leobarasi) and Rob Vance (@robvance) look at the latest US election polling and discuss whether the they are tightening.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-yes-donald-trump-has-a-path-to-victory/
http://news.sky.com/story/trump-claims-momentum-as-he-takes-lead-in-presidential-poll-10641469
This from Nate: "Whenever the race tightens, we get people protesting that the popular vote doesn’t matter because it’s all about the Electoral College, and that Trump has no path to 270 electoral votes. But this presumes that the states behave independently from national trends, when in fact they tend to move in tandem."
.
Jack no way this can be right?? 10% maybe but over a quarter? They must have their modelling wrong.
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age, one of the frontrunners for the party’s leadership has said."
Our model takes all this data in stride, along with all the other polls that nobody pays much attention to. And it thinks the results are most consistent with a 3- or 4-percentage point national lead for Clinton, down from a lead of about 7 points in mid-October. Trump remains an underdog, but no longer really a longshot: His Electoral College chances are 29 percent in our polls-only model — his highest probability since Oct. 2 — and 30 percent in polls-plus.
Yep but that's also based on a polling average which includes polls taken before most of the Trump momentum. I've never found averaging a very reliable method. There's no doubt that Donald Trump is in the ascendancy with the Big Mo.
With Congress on his side and the Supreme Court falling into his lap Trump will be among the most powerful US presidents there has ever been.
If she is so dense as that, she should fit right in at the DfES...
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age."
Although many teachers don't often bring their politics into the classroom, I could have guessed the voting patterns of several of my teachers at grammar school in the 1960s. In that era, they were generally for Queen, country and the Conservatives.
As I switched to science as quickly as possible, it faded quickly, but in the Micky Mouse sciences (sociology et al), it can become a matter of personal interpretation. The ones I bumped into at university from 1967 onwards were often obvious left-wingers, but that's less important. We weren't too bothered about safe spaces.
I meet young family members and their friends and some do echo the prevailing ethos as if it were the holy grail. I assume many will grow out of it anyway.
I have a fiver laying Nuttall, as kipper elections are full of incident that affects frontrunners!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37838087
Agree that Evans teaching comment is disturbing but it's worth remembering that foster children were taken from parents because they supported UKIP (the parents, not the kids...), and that BNP members have been banned as teachers in the past.
Sadly, political views have had an influence when it comes to children and their upbringing and who ought to do it long before Evans made her ill-advised comments.
If that movement doesn't come Clinton still wins big. If it does its going to be a long night.
Another point is the Hispanic spike. Previously they have underperformed their demographic. Not so this time. If crosstabs are provided look to see the likely voter screen.
We certainly require more evidence.
What a bleak prospect before us. Let's hope the 30% chance remains at that level.
National OCT. 20-NOV. 1 RAND (American Life Panel) (2,269) C: 44% T: 35% Clinton +9
Arizona OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys (656) C: 38% T: 33% Clinton +5
Colorado OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys (637) C: 43% T: 28% Clinton +15
Florida OCT. 25-30 TargetSmart/William & Mary (718) C: 48% T: 40% Clinton +8
Iowa OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys (429) C: 38% T: 30% Clinton +8
Maine’s 2nd District OCT. 28-30 Emerson College (375) C: 44% T: 42% Clinton +2
Michigan OCT. 31 Mitchell Research & Communications (737) C: 50% T: 43% Clinton +7
Minnesota OCT. 25-31 SurveyMonkey (773) C: 46% T: 37% Clinton +9
Nevada OCT. 27-31 Auto Alliance / ESA / Pulse Opinion Research (525) C: 44% T: 40% Clinton +4
New Hampshire OCT. 25-31 SurveyMonkey (659) C: 48% T: 35% Clinton +13
North Carolina OCT. 25-31 SurveyMonkey (1,574) C: 47% T: 44% Clinton +3
Ohio OCT. 27-31 Auto Alliance / ESA / Pulse Opinion Research (525) C: 47% T:41% Clinton +6
Pennsylvania OCT. 26-30 Franklin & Marshall College (652) C: 49% T: 38% Clinton +11
Virginia OCT. 25-31 SurveyMonkey (2,089) C: 48% T: 38% Clinton +10
Wisconsin OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys (816) C: 41% T: 29% Clinton +12
Only problem being the need to a big personality (come Grillo) to build it around; hard to see Farage being up for this?
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/podesta-clinton-doj-investigation/#wKkdpu4bGH19bbKx.99"
With Congress on his side and the Supreme Court falling into his lap Trump will be among the most powerful US presidents there has ever been.
That's an interesting question. Just how much damage could the election of an obvious scofflaw who bears grudges do to the rule of law in the US ?
The system has a large number of checks and balances, but a Trump win would test them severely.
As for Clinton, in law, even assuming the worst email conspiracy theories are true, it's not at all clear that a criminal case would succeed:
https://www.justsecurity.org/34012/
A common refrain in discussions of the Clinton case has been that “anyone else” would have been charged in similar circumstances. Yet if you look closely at the supposedly parallel cases where lower-ranking individuals have been prosecuted for mishandling, you find that invariably the circumstances aren’t similar. You’ll find prosecutions involving classified material knowingly and intentionally provided to uncleared persons (as in the case of Gen. David Petraeus), or where large quantities of documents were literally removed from secure facilities, but I haven’t turned up any cases where conversations about classified subjects on an insecure line have been treated as a criminal matter. In a country where literally millions of individuals hold top secret clearances, we may safely assume this is not because such indiscretions never occur, but because they had not been understood to be criminal acts, and were dealt with as matters of administrative discipline…
It says that the granting of the warrant means, amongst other things:
"1) A federal judge supervising a grand jury has now made a finding, based on FBI affidavits which present evidence gathered during the preliminary Hillary inquiry (the one which the FBI director stated had been closed back in July), that there's probable cause to believe that a federal crime was committed in connection with Mrs. Clinton's use of a private email server.
We still, however, don't know what crime(s) are suspected to have been committed. Or by whom.
2) The FBI can use this new grant of grand jury authority to investigate Mrs. Clinton's use of a private email server for the first time to issues subpoenaes to obtain testimony from witnesses and compel the production of documents and things. The Bureau and DOJ can, furthermore, use the judge's probable cause finding to support further warrant applications."
As I say it may be overstated but it is definitely worth a read.
Clinton is still ahead where she needs to be
"...national polls are tightening with Hillary Clinton’s missteps while a key Wall Street indicator that has correctly predicted past elections is lining up in the billionaire’s favor.
The S&P 500 Index is down 3.6 percent since Aug. 8 — a trend that could signify a Trump victory next week, according to an analysis cited in a Bloomberg report. That’s because when there’s a gain in the index during the three months prior to the vote, the incumbent party — in this case, Democrats — have won 86 percent of the time since 1928. The pattern has rung true 100 percent of the time since 1984."
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/11/signs_pointing_up_for_donald_trump
https://xkcd.com/1122/
https://youtu.be/uw3T1V9DQZc
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/22/two-massive-poll-boosts-for-remain-with-voting-starting-in-less-than-nine-hours/
Back in the EU
Back in the EUSSR
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-has-decided-to-opt-into-eu-crime-fighting-measures-risking-anger-of-brexit-tory-mps-a7391666.html
Clinton 42.4 .. Trump 47.8
Note - Trump winning 18-34 by 2.6% .. Gender divide by 11.3% and 30% more Hispanic than Romney ..
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
However they events aren't independent. He's quite likely to win either 2 or 0 depending upon if the polls shift one way or another, or if there's a mistake in the polling one way or another.
Unless that has changed this increase in the lead should reflect the movement in the RCP average towards Trump and may even anticipate it a little with newer data. I think the LA Times have generally had a bias of about +4 for Trump. Again, unless that has changed, this indicates that it is getting extremely close in the popular vote.
YouGov
Those big poll swings in the US presidential election? We think they're phantoms, and that this race has been stable https://t.co/XHI7dSnndC https://t.co/yILKwM8GfC
The trouble is in determining which are the best polls. And confirmation bias doesn't help.
Despite your assertion, my experience has been that those occupations that involve working with people in a supportive context, whether teaching, nursing or social work, tend to attract people with a more left wing mindset.
https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/793564692287483904/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
If Trump wins, it will be interesting to see if he starts to make baby steps towards such moves.
If the same occurs in the USA Hillary has won.
On the basis of 2015 GE people opted to believe the phone rather than online polls
If you're right but everyone else agrees with you then you won't make money betting as the odds will be terrible.
It's one reason why the registration stats for early voting in Florida could be unreliable this time.
Hillary's big collapse seems to be with the over $75K voters.
A bit of the change seems to be likelihood to vote with Rs heading upwards.
But going back to the original comment I replied to, the key thing for the estimate of electoral college votes is that the model doesn't assume a state is "in the bag" for Trump just because it turns light red.