Gee, the context would say that it was the polls pointed out by 538:
The most recent ipsos one they use shows Clinton up by 7, corrected to up by 6 by 538. Not sure when they will check the latest one.
I would if that result was as others found, but 538 again points to Clinton being ahead by 4 in the aggregate+ and by 5 in the polls only aggregate.
Good thing I did not say that, but again, 538 does not find that Trump was ahead in two of the last three polls, Trump actually only managed to get under Clinton by 2 in one of the last three polls. The difference IIUC is that 538 has some polls that is not using because they do not “weight” too much or that they are so new as to not be useful yet to set trends.
I thought it was obvious that that particular portion of the post was directed towards asahi because he did say that and I quoted him. I’ll try to be more clear in future posts. Thanks for the link to the 538 Florida page.
That 27% is 10 points behind Rick Scott in 2014. Scott won that election but it was close (70k vote margin out of over 5 million votes).
I thought it would be interesting to compare the poll you linked to and exit polls from the 2014 governor race. Similar to the current presidential race, both candidates were underwater in favorability.
2014
Crist Scott Other
White (69%) 37 58 5
African-American (14%) 85 12 3
Hispanic (13%) 58 38 4
Current Mason-Dixon
Clinton Trump Other
White 29 54 17
African-American 91 5 4
Hispanic 63 27 10
Trump is making up for latinos with whites.
Also of note, Crist won Cubans 50-46 and other hispanics 66-31.
I was basing the Florida Latino vote on results from FIU and other sources compiled in August, which showed only 12-14 percent of Latinos planning to vote for Trump. However, upon further review, I’ll back away from that poll, as it seems to rely heavily on ‘market research’ techniques and utilize questionable methodology.
Even so, as others have said, 27 percent is behind Rick Scott’s 39 percent. It’s conceivable that Scott probably could have won with Latino support in the lower 30s, but not very likely. Likewise, it’s Trump could win with Latino support in the high 20s but not likely.
Republicans actually come pretty close in recent years to winning 60%. Given the fact that minorities are concentrated and whites are dispersed more widely, for the forseeable future 65% will insure victory for any Republican candidate no matter what minority voters do.
Now I don’t know if Trump can reach 65%, but his campaign seems predicated on getting more of the white vote than any other Republican candidate, so that’s clearly what he’s going for. And I don’t think getting just 6% more than Romney did is unrealistic. And since Latinos and African-Americans aren’t actually going to vote against him 100%, he actually can live with 63 or 64 percent.
In terms of the general electoral vote, I don’t think he can. In terms of the white vote only, I think he’ll get 60-62%. Which is not quite enough, but it’s much easier for him to increase his support there than among minorities.
Notably, whites seem by far the most inclined to vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein. If we assume the third parties will underperform their polling, that’s a lot of undecided voters. 17% in Florida, according to the poll cited above by Lance. Trump needs two thirds of those “other” voters to break for him to be sure of a win in Florida. Half would make Florida a toss up.
Not at this point commenting on how the Hispanic voters in Florida respond to the Trumpian deport-the-illegals positions but what makes you think the Florida Hispanic vote is all of Cuban origin?
Significantly many fewer of Mexican origin than the rest of the country, only 9% (the rest of the country is 59%) but more “other” and lots more of Puerto Rican origin. Also compared to all U.S. Hispanics more are naturalized citizens and fewer citizens by birth.
The concept that Florida Hispanic equals Cuban is perhaps commonly held but incorrect.
It comes from the Cuban vote being so powerful. In most states the Latino vote doesn’t matter, but in Florida the Cuban vote usually decides elections.
GW Bush 2004: 40%
J McCain 2008: 31%
G Romney 2012: 27%
Hispanic share of eligible voters in Florida has grown since 2012 - “now 15.4 percent of the voter rolls, up from 13.9 percent overall in 2012”
Polls of Florida Hispanics have historically significantly over-estimated GOP share as the relatively less Democratically leaning Cuban origin Florida demographic is more likely to have landlines. Romney, who got 27% of the vote … was polling at 47% in the PPP poll taken just before the election.
Puerto Ricans, as noted above a large cohort in Florida, about as large as the Cuban origin group, are, according to Fox’s August 7 to 10th poll, going 17% Trump.
Overall Hispanics that poll gives Trump 20%, less than what Romney actually got and less than half as well as Romney was polling, and unfavorable rating of 82%, was only 74% in May. For comparison [the 2012 Fox Latino poll](For comparison the 102 Fox Latino poll gave Romney 30% share) gave Romney 30% share.
So per the data it does look like Trump is doing poorly by historic metrics with the Florida Hispanic population, which is a larger pool than it has been before.
Addie, yes the Cuban vote matters more in Florida than it does in other states. It does not however define the Hispanic vote there, no where close, and it apparently is over-represented in many polls of the population. The Cuban origin vote went to Obama in 2012; it is set to go to Clinton by a significantly wider margin, and the larger rest of the Floridian Hispanic vote is much more so set to go more for Clinton than it did for Obama.
I don’t think as much as it used to. Those who were displaced by Castro are pretty much dying off now and it is no longer necessary to be the most anti-Castro in order to win Florida.
Yes, and for the foreseeable future a crystal ball that reveals upcoming lottery ticket numbers will insure financial security for me no matter what the economy does.
I made some mistakes above. I conflated Florida and national Hispanic numbers.
The Hispanic share 2012 result in Florida was 39% Romney. He lost the Cuban vote 49 to 47 and the non-Cuban vote 66 to 34.
Current in Clinton Trump Florida Hispanic share is 63 to 27 in Mason Dixon (8/22-24), and 53 to 39 in CBS-YouGov (8/10-12). And an outlier Florida Atlantic University poll that put it 50 to 40 Hispanics and gives him 20% of the Black vote. (!)
The overall point still stands but my apologies for the mistake. At least I discovered it myself!
You guys make me nervous with all the talk about HRC having it wrapped up. Trump is exactly the kind of candidate who will do better in the voting than in the polls. I’m worried that overconfidence will lead to a Trump win.
Does the Clinton campaign show any signs of overconfidence? Is it decreasing its overall efforts? Other than pulling money from some sure states to add to toss-up states has her spending slackened off? Her fundraising? Her ground efforts? Her nasty tweets aimed at Trump? Her number of surrogates? Her campaign schedule? Her preparation for the debates?
Those of us predicting a win are using actual current conditions to do so. If Clinton suddenly stopped campaigning then the current condition would change and so would the prediction of the outcome. But without that change I don’t understand how you are calling this overconfidence or seeing another outcome.
You do realize that he is in many polls losing the White college educated vote. The most recent Fox poll has him at least marginally leading in that group, 41 to 39% (with 11 to Johnson and 3 to Stein) but has his overall White share at only 46% (to 33, 10 and 4%). It’s tied 45 to 45 in the two-way.
Heck, he only wins non-college educated Whites in the four-way with 51% (28% Clinton, 9% Johnson, and 5% Stein). It’s 54 to 35% in the two-way, which is 61% of those who have a choice. A little under Romney’s 62%.
And that’s in a poll that he does relatively well in, only Clinton +2.
He is in no way currently on track to break even 60% White voter share, let alone 65%.
In terms of location he only wins in rural areas. That’s the extent of where his supporters are dispersed. He does not only lose the cities; he loses the suburbs too. And the rural voters don’t seem too excited about him given that that’s also where Johnson’s support peaks and where the fraction who are “certain” of their support is the lowest (80 and 81% in urban and suburban but only 69% in rural areas).
Deeg, yes it can change, and we do not know what turnout of each demographic will be. NO complacency. Do not try to run out the clock. Any chance of a Trump win is too big of one to live with. No rest until the beast is staked and the ashes scattered.
It could happen, but it doesn’t appear that this is going to happen based on anything that exists in the present. Hillary is clearly winning the race, and she has been for most of the cycle.
The one fear that I have is that Hillary’s negative quotient could continue to rise, bringing her favorables (whatever they are) down and putting her within striking distance. My guess is that it would take an extraordinary and highly unlikely set of events to vault Trump ahead of Hillary in the polls prior to election day. But he may not necessarily have to be ahead. The question in my mind is, does Hillary wake up on November 8th with a 1-2 percent lead or a 3-5 percent in critical states. If it’s the latter, she wins. But if it’s less than that, then that’s within the margin of error. Moreover, who knows who’s going to show up at the polls? Who knows whose votes are going to get counted correctly? Maybe there’s severe weather that day or a freak snowstorm. Then it’s a matter of whose voting base is more committed to showing up at the voting stations.