Well, fuck!
Nice…but I won’t start cursing with joy until she gets back to 70%. She’ll get there. (But if you live in a swing state, start planning for how you’re gonna help get out the vote!).
Eludicator, I’m a big fan of yours here on the Elections thread, and I apologize for the fact that that comment might have contained some “blue” terminology fueled by the fact that I’ve spent the evening consuming a beverage made from red grapes that were older than their recommended sell date, but I’ve really been looking forward to the moment that Hillary broke 60% again, and I wanted to share it!!!
Hillary descending below 70% hit me pretty hard as well, but <60% has meant <3hrs of sleep per night, so her hitting 60 again is very encouraging to me.
I feel you. Tonight we start to cach up on the z’s. Let’s shoot for six hours, seven if we’re really lucky. We can’t afford to get sick. And, we’ll surely be restless in the 3-4 days between the first debate and its effects showing up on the good Mr. Silver’s esteemed web site.
Hillary has a slight edge going into the debates. No reason to panic, but no reason to feel especially confident either. Trump needs to exceed expectations and you could argue that Hillary does as well.
Will be curious to see how the debate moderator performs. If the debates become nothing more than a reality TV spectacle then f*ck the whole idea of debating in the future. This is the last chance for Clinton and Trump to make their pitches but it’s also the last chance for debates to have any shred of legitimacy.
From the outside (New Zealand resident) it looks as though the US should be committed to a lunatic asylum . . . for it’s own protection.
It’s the only so-called developed nation where everyone hopes a new president will fail to keep his/her pre-election promises . . . the rest of us fervently hope they will!
Oh! and by the way . . . have a look at this . . . from the Online Etymology Dictionary:
Trump: “fabricate, devise,” 1690s, from trump “deceive, cheat” (1510s), from Middle English trumpen (late 14c.), from Old French tromper “to deceive,” of uncertain origin. Apparently from se tromper de “to mock,” from Old French tromper “to blow a trumpet.” Brachet explains this as “to play the horn, alluding to quacks and mountebanks, who attracted the public by blowing a horn, and then cheated them into buying …” The Hindley Old French dictionary has baillier la trompe “blow the trumpet” as “act the fool,” etc, etc.
Good point, thx!
Honestly I must not be understanding what you are trying to argue.
Your premise was, I thought, that “his GOP support has been steadily increasing, explaining all or most of the change” along the lines of “partisans returning to the barricades like they always do”
And no, his GOP support has not been steadily increasing. It in fact went up with the GOP convention then down after the Democratic convention+the Khans. That Clinton bump lasted most of August and and his GOP approval only moved back in the last week of August. The first two weeks of September that saw his polls rise was in fact associated with no significant change in his GOP approval ratings on average.
No, the amount of change in his GOP support is not anywhere close to being enough to explain most, let alone all of the change. It was, since late July, the lowest point to the highest in that HuffPo average graph, a change of 3 points. 3 points of at most 40% of the electorate. Being very generous and rounding upwards that means it could explain at most a 1.5% change in the totals while the RCP average moved 7 points from mid-August (that post Democratic convention peak) to mid-September.
There may be a few among the GOP who abandoned the barricades in face of the Democratic convention and Trump’s Khan attacks following who returned end of August. And that simply has not been the major driver of the polls. It was a reasonable speculation to make but the facts are simply inconsistent with it.
The facts are more consistent with some few percent in each group that can shift with news cycles, some from Clinton into undecided or other, or the other way, some from Trump into undecided or other, or the other way. Whatever their actual past leans the biggest moves have been among those who identify as Independents.
My thesis is that the polling change observed from the end of the convention bump through mid-September is principally a result of Republicans and other conservatives returning to Trump at the levels they supported him at in mid-to-late July.
What data are you looking at to draw that conclusion? The Huffington Post (which is the only place I can seem to disaggregate the GOP support) shows a steady increase in that period.
It’s more like a 4-point move in the HuffPo aggregates, which is the apples-to-apples unless you can pluck the GOP support from the RCP aggregates. Some of that is Clinton-to-Trump switching, which doubles the number. It’s not so big a change that it cannot be principally (if not exclusively) explained by my thesis.
Up to 61.7% on 538 poll only, and Nevada has shifted back to blue. All seems to be based on Ipsos and Gravis national polls, the latest of which show Hillary +4 or +5.
Need a new batch of swing state polls to shift FL and NC back to blue, then OH and IA.
Yeah, I don’t get where you’re seeing a 7 point move either, DSeid. I can only imagine you mixed it up with the fact that she dropped from +7 to where she is now.
For the first time that I’ve noticed, she’s below 80% chance to win (Bayesian) over at PEC.
The Ipsos tracking poll shows a huge surge on September 22, which is interesting because I cannot think of a reason why that would have happened. Anyway, by itself it’s not really a major deal.
Where are you looking? I’m not seeing a surge on the Reuters polling site.
Nobody was really disputing this. It’s a question of why they’re moving. To some extent, I would agree that perhaps some of the polls are explained by the typically climax and bottoming out that occurs between the two candidates. Sure, Trump was probably bound to shave a few points off of the lead, but smearing a Gold Star family was disastrous, and it really should have been the end of the race – it wasn’t. And it wasn’t because on one hand Hillary got a lot of bad press, as she was dogged by new email releases, pestered with questions about her husband’s foundation, and spending a lot of time with fundraisers instead of real voters. Conversely, not only was Trump in front of the cameras, he actually started to look someone human. Trump’s support clearly collapses when he goes on his tirades about individuals like the Khans or Judge Curiel. And he there not been an intervention, republicans would not have come back to support Trump. Much of the party was, and still is, in near open revolt against Trump, so I just don’t by that this race is in any way just a case of republicans and conservatives supporting their guy. He is the most unpopular republican nominee in recent memory. Fortunately, he’s running against someone almost as unpopular.
When talking about a single poll, if the huge surge is within the margin of error, then there’s no need to search for an explanation, is there?
I wonder how much is caused by people drifting away from the Apathy Party?
That’s right. One possibility is that it just so happens that in every election cycle a particular confluence of news cycles leads partisan support for each candidate to grow in the early fall. Another possibility is that this happens regardless of the content of the news cycles in any given year.
I’m not saying news cycles don’t matter at all. I think they affect response rates in polls (hence the term “bounce”–an ephemeral rise that always deflates), fundraising, and move things at the margins and matter in close elections, but they are rarely the principal force behind big picture week-to-week moves. Or, to put it another way, I see no evidence of that, beyond pundits desire for it to be true because it gives them more to talk about.
The establishment is less supportive of Trump than a typical nominee, but GOP voters aren’t. He’s getting 80% support. That’s pretty standard for September. It will likely rise to mid-eighties for both candidates by election day.
DSeid was quite clearly disputing this.
RCP Trump v Clinton rolling averages - peaked on 8/9 at Clinton +7.9 and bottomed on 9/18 at Clinton +0.9, a 7 point swing top to bottom.