Trump's surge comes to a halt

Trump's surge in the polls has come to a halt, a few points short of Clinton. Clinton holds a lead of 2-3 points baser on an average of national polls, and I think 538 might have had her just a hair over 3 (they adjust poll results based on certain data). 538 has Trump's chances of winning at just a hair of 35%, and has for a few days.

What makes this weird? Even as the national polling has shown Trump's rise basically stop, recent state polling has shown him improving. Trump, per 538, is now the favored to win in FL, OH, NC, IA, NV, the key five.

What is real interesting is that the recent RCP polling shows the race in PA to be close - Clinton's average is under 3, and one of the more recent state polls has it tied.

I still think these are the two worst nominees in my lifetime, but at least the actual election will be interesting to watch.

 

I've noticed the same. I think Clinton should have gone down losing by 10% after last weeks announcement by James Comey.

Apparently, people are either unaware and compliant like the democrats said they wanted them to be in the Wikileaks Podesta emails.

The "Stupidity of the Democrat voter" that Jonathan Gruber talked about, promise them one thing you know you're never going to deliver, they're too stupid to know the difference.

People may not even understand that the charges against Hillary are very serious.

At the same time, the national polls stalled, I see a closing in the local state polls which seems to be something of a dichotomy.

I think that all along they've been very deceptive of the polls, selecting who to call and where knowing what the likely results are in advance, and weighting the outcomes of that to achieve the desired results. I think the pollsters have a financial commitment to Hillary, they've contributed to her campaign and Foundation as well. They skew the results to suppress the Trump vote and thus voter suppression and intimidation in combination with the media.

 

Personally, I don't think Trump wins those 5.

Trump has had a lead in OH and IA for awhile.

Trump (at best) splits NC and FL. HiIlary wins NV.

But, even if he did, he is TOAST in New Hampshire.

A brand new JUST NOW poll of NH (from WMUR) has Clinton up 49-38.

Trump is TOAST. No chance to get to 270. NONE.

 

Told you to pray harder.

 

Per 538, Trump has these chances (remember, these are chances of winning the states, not his poll numbers)

IA: 72.8%
OH: 65.4%
FL: 52.2%
NC: 51.4%
NV: 50.5%

Note, these above 5 are the "polls only" forecast. 538's actual prediction is the "polls plus", where Trump does slightly better (about 1%+) in the first four, and is about 1% worse in NV.

Of course, we probably shouldn't expect him to win all 5 of those. Winning 5 races at those chances isn't likely. But remember, it's quite possible, and here are Trump's chances in some other states

NH: 39.3%
CO: 27.6%
PA: 25.1%
ME: 22.8%
VA: 19.1%
MI: 23%
WI: 19%
NM: 18.4%
MN: 19.2%

I would guess that most of these states were ones that you didn't see Trump winning, right? Yet chances (just statistically) are Trump would win two of them. The race is actually fairly close. 538 had Romney at a 9.1% chance of winning - it now has Trump at a 35% chance of winning. With races being this close at the state level, with states like PA legitimately in play, this race is far from certain. Should make for an interesting election night.

 

More voters self-identify (and register) as Democrats than Republicans, but independents lean Republican. Romney won independents in 2012, but lost the election by a sizable margin.

That polls have more Democrats than Republicans isn't a problem. Some polls, however, will poll something ridiculous like 23% Republican and 41% Democrat, and those are obviously flawed because the gap isn't that big.

 

I don't where you found that bogus New Hampshire poll, but here are 5 polls where it is tied or Trump is up in NH; http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-6022.html

He is up in Nevada
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nv/nevada_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson-6004.html

He is up in NC
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nc/north_carolina_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson-5951.html

The only state you were somewhat right about is Florida, it Clinton by +1, but that isn't huge, not that him being up by +1 is, it's just that He is winning in those.

 

Landslide Andy cherry picking outlier polls less than 48 from poll closing. Love it.

 

Nate's model is literally the only one that gives Trump a puncher's chance.

PEC, Upshot, Predictwise, etc all have HRC's chances above 84%.

 

Yeah, well, Nate's does have the best track record and is the most up to date. And, perhaps you missed it, but the cited chances are from 538 but based on the "poll-only" analysis. 538's polls-plus shows marginal difference at this point.

But, if you are real skeptical, here's RCP's no toss up map:



And Trump is only behind a point in FL, and if you look at that map above, if he wins everywhere he's ahead and she wins everywhere she's ahead with the sole exception of Florida, that puts him at 270. Not "a puncher's chance"? ^_-

 

At least on fly in this ointment is that early voting in some places has already banked quite a few votes. I think something like 70% of Nevadans have voted, so what the polls say now may not be as important as what they said a week ago.

Nevada, PA & Florida to go Dem, NH & maybe NC to go GOP, Trump to fall short.

 

I really doubt that 70% of Nevadans have voted. You'll need to source that.

However, the one state where Clinton has a sizable early voting lead is NC - the difference is negligible in the other early states except for NV, where she has a lead of abiut 5% in early voting.

But of course, early voting isn't a good indicator. Republicans are ahead more than 4:1 in Utah, but we don't actually expect them to win over 80% of the vote there.

 

His handlers performing a tweet castration on the reality tv performer in the waning days clearly helped him, although many miss that lunatic 3 am raving.

Election Betting Odds is an interesting alternative to FiveThirtyEight

If the pundits and oddsmakers are correct, the Tantrump® that follows Americans' making their decision could be postal, nookyaller, and pissy on the tsunami scale.

 

From 538:

I don't know if 70% of Nevada's voters have voted early in this election yet, but there does seem to be evidence that Nevadans tend to vote early.

As to the OP, I've read in several places that Trump's "surge" is coming from Republican voters that didn't support Trump earlier, but are "coming home," as Pence has been campaigning recently.

 

Hispanic votes have been undercounted in FL and that is largely because they are first time voters and therefore excluded from LV polls. Obama won FL in 2012 by 70k votes. 170 thousand newly registered Hispanics have voted in FL for the first time in early voting already.

A similar pattern is showing up in NV where Trump would need a massive percentage of uncast votes to overcome the early voting lead in Clarke county.

Trump can't afford to lose either of those states but Hillary can.

I suspect that the denigrating words Trump used to launch his campaign are coming back to haunt him now.

 

Ah, that's a lot different than what I was responding to.

And I would certainly believe that - that Trump's surge is from Republicans coming home. But that he's within the margin of error in states like PA will make it interesting.

 

Trump can afford to lose NV, not FL. But I think he has a pretty good shot at FL - the race is looking a point or two closer than 2012 which, with FL having been close in 2012, it looks like Trump should have a decent chance there.

But again, 538 has him at a little over 50% chance in FL, but it's a critical state for him that he can't lose.

 

Bogus? That new poll is all over the internet. Ever heard of Google?

 

This is what I have been reading about FL;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/florida-early-vote-2016_us_58200106e4b0e80b02cae01c

 

That doesn't make it credible... also, if it is all over the internet, show it to me like the polls I showed you (which you ignored because they proved you wrong).

 

Who cares? Trump is going to LOSE the POTUS election. That is engraved in stone.

The WMUR poll is a correct picture of the current trend.

Even factoring in sampling error, you can be GUARANTEED that Hillary is going to win NH.

I deal in FACTS. Hillary will WIN NH (and thus the POTUS election).

Anybody that deals in Wild-eyed Speculation (for example anybody who "seriously" believes Trump has a chance) and isn't just trolling, might as well be predicting aliens landing and the world ending tomorrow.

As far as "speculative" events--aliens landing or the world ending are much more likely than a Trump victory.

Just the FACTS, from yours truly.

Tomorrow night is going to be very painful for any of Trump's supporters who aren't just trolling (by parroting Alt-Right talking points).

Hopefully, the pro-Trump crowd has just been trolling.

I have serious empathy for anyone who actually thought that Trump had a chance.

Hopefully, the Trump crowd is working on their post-election coping mechanism.

Say hello to Madam President Hillary on 1/20/17.

 

Florida is such a problem. A big Hispanic vote and he's done, night over and stop counting.

 

I think that you are being over optimistic but I am not predicting a Trumpeizda victory. I think the Trumpeizda has a chance and that chance is through NH, and FL, NC, NV, CO, the county in ME and NE, and UT, and and just one of these states - WI, OR MN, OR MI or PA. That's that is all trump needs to do to. Otherwise it Trumpeizda 265 Hillaria 270.

 

The latest IBD poll shows the Trump surge continuing. The LA Times Daily Tracking Poll still shows Trump up by 5 points. It is never good for the party holding the White House to be close to a challenger the day before an election. Clinton should have been up by 10 points by now.

But if the election is close I would expect election fraud to win it for the DP.

 

I did. And look what happened:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/795440430259335168