Collapse? Clinton's 12-Point Lead Over Trump Has Completely Evaporated.....

Maybe you don't. Read the definition and then apply it to the current situation. Hillary likely voters are less enthusiastic than ever and trump likely voters have the wind in their sales.

"First, there are demographic characteristics that have traditionally been associated with the propensity to vote. Everything else being equal, certain types of people are more likely to vote than others. The most important of these are age and socioeconomic status. Older and better-educated individuals are, in general, more likely to vote than younger and less well educated individuals. Generally speaking, because Republican voters tend to be better educated than Democratic voters, the actual voter pool on Election Day can be skewed more toward Republicans than the total population composition would suggest. This in turn helps explain why, in some elections, the actual vote on Election Day can be more Republican than pre-election polls predict.

The second set of factors which relate to voter turnout are idiosyncratic and can reflect one of a hundred characteristics that come into play in any given election. In some elections, specific factors may activate or excite certain groups of voters and cause them to vote at higher proportions than their representation in the general pool of registered voters might predict. An election that has racial overtones, for example, might activate minorities more than usual. An election that has hotly debated labor-related issues might activate union members."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/4636/how-define-likely-voters.aspx

 

Trump supporters heard all of the above over and over in the primaries and I believed it then as I cheered for Cruz.

 

Well, I think the MSM has finally realized that Trump is going to win and no amount of voter fraud can change that.

I think the media is trying to save face - just like Comey is all of a sudden reopening the email investigation.

 

They might have figured out how Hillary, and any of her people can be blackmailed and what they would mean for the country.

 

Maybe they know Hillary is going to lose so they no longer have to conceal her crimes out of fear.

I'll say this much tho. The media has all of a sudden become a bit more honest recently. I find that a bit odd.

My guess is that the Hillary cheerleaders don't want to be in the dog house when Trump wins.

 

If you want to know who's winning, just look at what side isn't claiming that the results are rigged.

 

They get no break.....they tried to directly influence an election. 91% of their coverage about Trump was negative. Destroy their livelihoods and send them to the ranks of the unemployed.

 

Well, the MSM shot themselves in the foot. No one trusts them anymore - certainly not people my age (mid 30's) or younger. You see, now the MSM is trying to save subscriptions but it's too late.

They should be punished and they will - they will eventually go out of business. The only people that actually watch the MSM are progressive SJW's and old people... SJW's watch the MSM because they want to listen to what they agree with and older people watch the MSM because a lot aren't computer/internet literate, so the MSM is all they have.

The MSM will be dead in 5-10 years.

 

All their polling of the same people and the oversampling didn't help make their case either. Its time to run them out of the industry and don't let them back in. Let them go start a blog somewhere.

Preferably overseas where they wont matter here anymore.

The other good news was Bob Woodward coming out and saying Hillary and that Foundation......its Corrupt. Despite doing whatever good works.

 

That oversampling really shot themselves in the foot. There was no way Hillary was ever leading by 10+ points. Voter fraud cant cover that lead, and now with Trump basically winning in a landslide they have to cover up their lies.

Look, 10+ point leads don't disappear over night.

Also, you can bet it's Trump that has the 10 point lead.

The cat is out of the bag and now the media has to be honest (or as honest as they can be).... I mean it's not like they want Trump - no they want the elitist Hillary but they know they can't fool people any longer.

 

Since when a deep state candidate complained about rigging the election? Incidentally, I have more bad news for you. It really sucks to be a Hillary supporter. What a disaster.

Professor who’s correctly called every presidential election since 1984 predicts Trump will win

https://www.yahoo.com/news/professo...e-1984-predicts-trump-will-win-202136418.html

Be very afraid. This old fella didn't get it wrong for quite some time.

 

All you really have to do is look at the grassroots support for each candidate and that will tell you who is going to win.

Trump is drawing crowds of 20,000+ people in airplane hangers and sporting arenas and Hillary can't even fill a high school gym.... It's hilarious!

Hillary is going to get destroyed, which is why the media of course is now flipping the script.

You know when Trump wins in a landslide people are going to ask questions why the MSM had Hillary up by 10+ points....

 

I'm not even sure what you are trying to ask here.

I'm not a Hillary supporter. I'm a third party voter. Partially because Trump is even a bigger disaster.

Sorry, but I require a bit more than click-bait. The objective fact is that Clinton has more paths to victory than Trump does.

http://www.270towin.com/
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

The fact that Trump and his supporter have to leap on conspiracy theories to convince themselves that they stand a chance tells me just how small they think their own chances are.

 

Clinton never had a 12 point lead. The media had to adjust their polls to keep from looking like fools.

 

Since that 12-point result was an outlier from the beginning, it is hardly surprising that it wasn't sustained.

The race is tightening, as reflected in the RCP average. But no rational person thinks Clinton was ever ahead by 12.

 

The RCP average doesnt define (*)(*)(*)(*).

- - - Updated - - -

Averages of selected ppoll over selected time frames are cherry picking to.

 

My opinion is that was an intentional outlier, or a herder. One of rules of thumb of marketing is that everyone wants to be associated with a winner so it was designed to sway that small percentage of undecideds towards hillary. This sounds nuts but race will be decided by the undecideds at this point

 

Just checked, and the LA Times poll, which in the past has had Clinton up has Trump at +4 in the general election. When it is just Trump v. Clinton; he is down by 1 when Johnson is thrown in. He is either up, or gaining in many swing states

 

And that explains why it has swung back toward Trump how .... ?

I think people accusing polls of deliberate bias without evidence are ... baselessly accusing people of things without evidence. Sometimes, a poll is just off. Most polls have a 95% confidence interval -- which means 5% of the time, you will get a result that is way off. That's not bias -- that's statistics.

And even if there is a consistent bias in a poll, most of the time it is an unintentional side effect of the poll's methodology, not deliberate.

Most polls want to get it right, because they will be judged on their accuracy.

- - - Updated - - -

LOL! Come on. The LAT poll has had a 5-6 point Trump lean all cycle. It showing a Trump-friendly result is neither new nor interesting.

 

This election really comes down to who of Trump or Hillary has more supporters.

Trump is going to win in a landslide. The guy is drawing 20,000+ to his events and Hillary can barely draw 1,000.

No one (er very few) likes Hillary..... I have never seen a democrat presidential candidate get so little support.

Johnson is pulling like 15 points, Stein is pulling like 3. You can bet that most of those votes are from voters that would normally vote democrat. Of course you have the progressive republican "never Trump" elitists - but they're very few.

Hillary is going to get beat very, very bad.

 

These poll surges need to be reflected in the key states. Whatever else happens, if he can't run the board of the crucial states he still won't make it. Will the FBI issue reflect in North Carolina? Without NC he'll need something like Pennsylvania. Ouch.

 

no pollster would want to get the reputation of being a consistently being an outlier unless they have a (D) or an (R) behind their name. A bump is a bump, is a bump. That 12 point talking point probably translated to several million in extra fundraising and media talking points

 

Uh, sure. Okay.

 

Well, that's the point. In addition to the MOE, there can be huge flaws in the likely voter modeling. If the MSM has misfigured the strength of Hillary's support, their polls are all wet and certainly their polls are much more volatile than the non MSM polls that have steadily shown a down to the margin of error race for the last several weeks.

LA Times Poll: Trump +4


http://cesrusc.org/election/

That's gonna smart. Internals not up yet.

 

''Trump has inched up by another percentage point. He now has a 10 percent chance of winning the election, compared to Clinton’s 90 percent chance. On Friday morning, Trump had a nine percent chance of winning, while a week ago Clinton had a 93 percent chance of coming out on top.''


http://www.newsweek.com/presidential-election-polls-october-31-trump-clinton-515320





Desperate times for the far right.