I think it’s possible that the “bounces” may just be reflections of enthusiasm, and may not reflect anyone (or any more than very small numbers of people) actually changing their minds – when there’s been a week of bad stories for Hillary, Hillary voters of all types are just less likely to pick up the phone and answer polls because they’re not in the mood. And vice versa. I think that might go into Sam Wang’s much steadier predictions as compared to 538. But this could just be wishful thinking.
We’ll see. We’ll also see if ground game and such have had a big impact. If Hillary wins by a bigger margin than the polls, then I think that will be the 3rd straight election in which the Democrat won by a bigger margin than the polls suggested.
Again, the usual caveat about the strengths and weaknesses of the trackers. Poor for absolute value amount but useful usually for trends.
Oh reality is that I think debate bounces, like most other news cycle driven bounces, matter little. I am somewhat Wangian in this: the race is pretty stable with a significant but not overwhelming Clinton advantage and news cycle bounces are mostly noise. If this settles into Clinton +4 after the debate noise it is more because that is roughly the stable point for the race in this polarized electorate, not because she won the debate.
As others have alluded to, the numbers generated by 538 et al. – whether or not they reflect shorter-term “bounces” and the like – may be most valuable for the GOTV ENERGY they help to spur.
For Hillary supporters, there is a sweet spot between “despair/resignation” and “complacency” for getting people to the polls (and working to get others to the polls) on Nov. 8. If, say, she’s 50/50 in 538’s Polls-Only in that last week, that could generate despair/resignation. If she’s 90/10, that could generate complacency. Best if she’s somewhere in between (one could argue) – I’m hoping for (and expecting) she’ll be at around 75-80.
(Not that 538 is the only game in town – but the overall mood will be similar everywhere, and reflected in other sites in some way).
I’ve been thinking that if Iowa can go to a 40% chance or better for Hillary by Oct 1, it officially re-enters “swing state” territory. Right now 538’s polls only has Hillary at 40.2% in Iowa, so it’s headed in the right direction for tomorrow. Hope we see a new poll there.
The chances of Trump winning are extremely slim now. In addition to Hillary Clinton, he has two enemies, which are unforgiving: time, and geography. As I said back in August, as inconceivable as a comeback was back then, he still had enough time to draw even – and he nearly did. His map was shrinking, too. But his horrible debate performance and his disastrous post-debate meltdown make a Trump victory seemingly inconceivable to me. We’re a little over a month out, and people have already started voting. Whereas he had once narrowed his map, he’s given Hillary an advantage in multiple states. He can’t focus his fight on any one area, which is a problem given his logistical disadvantage. He can run ads and get attention, but those aren’t going to get less inspired voters to show up at polls. It’ll probably be another week or so before Trump can even begin to reverse his slide and that’s assuming he doesn’t add fuel to the fire. I just don’t see how it happens now, barring an extraordinary set of unforeseen circumstances. He could still make the race interesting to watch - perhaps closer than we’re comfortable with. But unless voters just assume it’s in the bag and inexplicably fail to show up at the polls, I think it’s all pretty much a done deal for Hillary.
Yes, I did, but I would also acknowledge that it becomes more significant with each passing day. It becomes particularly important when one candidate fails miserably in front of 100 million viewers, which hadn’t happened when I posted that comment. The time between that debate, the ongoing nightmare of a news cycle, and the next debate (his earliest opportunity to fight back and stop the bleeding) gives more absentee voters to make up their minds. I don’t believe absentee voting would work against Trump if he’s down by a percentage point in the polls in two or three states. But 3-7 points in almost all of the battleground states? Yeah, it’s going to be a potential factor. The real factor, however, is that Trump threw a cigarette near the gas can. What I’m really getting at, whether they vote early or not, is that minds are being made up now. Races are typically decided at around this time. And the winds aren’t blowing in Trump’s direction.
Except if it’s moved from 5 to 1 before, why wouldn’t it be at 1 come election day? Getting close once is a fluke, twice is a pattern. We could very well see it happen a third time or even a fourth time.
And then there’s still the matter of what Johnson voters and the still undecided are going to do. I think 538’s model takes that into account.
The Fox +3 compared to the +1 of two weeks back is the most concrete evidence of a debate bounce. The Rasmussen +1 compared to the earlier -2 backs it up though the dates are 26-28 so I am not sure it’s entirely post-debate (seems odd to start a poll on the same day as the debate).
I expected a debate bounce of 2-3 points but after Trump’s remarkable Machado meltdown there could be a second post-debate bounce.
Possibly, just possibly we may be done and Hillary may now obtain a comfortable lead which she keeps till election day.
