People who call Hillary a feminazi are not undecided, even if they’re too chicken to admit that they’re going to vote for Trump.
That’s an unreliable assumption. You can’t just take undecided voters, look at their demographics and just assume they’ll behave like their group identity. If they were going to do that they’d be doing it now.
As for Clinton’s statement, isn’t it wonderful to have a candidate who is so smart when off script? If you thought she was handled and scripted before…
Only if you believe that “undecideds” are actually undecided. I don’t. I don’t believe that Rush Limbaugh fans who use the term “feminazi” are actually undecided. I just think they lack the courage to stand up for Trump in public.
I do, however, think it’s hilarious to watch the people who whine about how we’re all too PC these days get all butthurt when anyone calls them out for their prejudices. Perhaps they should “get the fuck over it”, as Clint Eastwood would say.
Isn’t that bad news for Clinton though, if most of the undecideds are just Trump people who won’t stand up and say so? if that’s the case, Trump’s going to win. By a lot.
Most undecideds call Hilary a feminazi?
The people who call her a Feminazi were never going to vote for her in the first place. I wouldn’t worry about them.
As for the numbers - given Hillary’s solid advantage with Women, Hispanics, African Americans, LGBTQs, Wall Street, Foreign Policy wonks, and basically Everyone Outside of Rush Limbaugh Fans, I’m not seeing it as a problem.
Clinton is up by 3 with 18-20% undecided or third party. In order for her to win, there have to be a lot of Clinton voters in there.
:: crosses fingers ::
Not as many as you think, though. That number includes those who want to vote third party and people who don’t want to vote either way. It’s likely a lot of them will either not vote or vote in such a way that it won’t affect the election.
Demographic data is actually largely predictive. That’s exactly what 538 uses to estimate the results in states before the polls come in, and they are usually right.
Funny how the “ashamed voter” theory only applies to the Trump supporter who hangs in liberal circles, but never the Hillary supporter in conservative circles… a far more common scenario, especially given the constant conversations I have here in Texas.
Demographic data is predictive for voters as a whole. It is not predictive of how undecideds will behave. Undecideds often break hard one way or the other towards the end of the campaign.
My God, the new ABC/WaPo poll just destroys Trump. There isn’t a single issue in which he is seen more favorably, 58% of Mericans expect HRC to win (29% Trump), beats him on.honesty, kills him on qualifications (page 5 is especially brutal)… just brutal.
Two things you might want to take into account with that poll:
- While some polls can be outliers, comparing their results to their own past results can account for that, and Clinton is losing ground to Trump in their poll. Clinton+5 is Trump’s best result ever on the WP poll
- The poll probably is an outlier, because it shows 58% job approval for Obama, 8 points above his average. The fact that Clinton is getting 46% of the vote among a group that gives Obama 58% approval is not a good result.
I can’t provide a safe haven but I can start calling them “deps”.
Using trends from previous elections, whether about “undecided” or not, are likely to be of limited value. Main reason being that while all recent elections have been tainted by a strain of insanity, this one is barking mad. Crazy as a duck on acid.
They are white, and they dislike Trump. Just as true.
At that rate, Trump could win, if the election is in January.
So Republicans should try harder to link Clinton to Obama?
I think this goes back to the discussion about people not liking Hillary. There are a lot of ‘undecideds’ who don’t want to publicly admit that they will vote for her. To many of them, she is the ‘evil that we know’ (even though I don’t think she’s all that evil, especially for a politician)!
Er, no, it means that the WP is confirming what all the other polls are confirming: the race is tightening. Clinton is between +5 and -1, averaging about +3.
Probably not a good idea at this point, since Obama is more popular than Clinton or Trump.
But his approval is not 58%, it’s 51%, so there’s definitely a pro-Clinton house effect in that poll, which Nate Silver’s model would already be taking into account given that the WP has generally shown Clinton with larger leads than other polls.
adaher: When comparing the trend within one pollster’s results, you need to do RV to RV or LV to LV, not LV to RV. The trendline of the WaPo poll is Clinton +2 over August.
Not that anyone should be debating individual polls. But if you’re gonna do it, do it right.