Nah. If you are anywhere to the left of Calvin Coolidge, you get whupped so often, you think its normal. A state of permanent Eeyore.
That’s where the Dems far better ground game will make a decisive difference. Trump has been utterly incompetent in organization. There’s every indication that the Dems will be much better in get-out-the-vote efforts to counteract any complacency.
IBD – The more accurate poll ever OMG, according to Trump – now shows Clinton leading +1
Rasmussen is also showing Clinton with a +1 lead, continuing their proud tradition of showing Republican leaning results for 95% of the campaign and then suddenly tightening to the norm in the last days so they don’t look totally stupid on Election Day.
So far turnout appears to be way up - could be ground game, or enthusiasm.
I’d be willing to be corrected if there are statistics on it, but personally I’m more enthusiastic about voting when I think my side might actually win. It’s human nature to want to pile on, I believe. If anyone’s going to have a suppressed vote here, it’ll be Trump voters who think 1) he’ll probably lose and 2) it’s all rigged against him anyway, so why bother?
I think you’re likely correct. Polling this year, asking who you voted for in 2012, shows Obama with a larger “win” than he actually had and an amusing number of people who “don’t remember” (this is an issue with the LA Times poll). People don’t want to associate themselves with a losing campaign and I’m sure that, if a candidate seems destined to lose, a number of people stay home rather than emotionally connecting themselves with that loss by voting.
It could also simply be increased popularity in advance voting, not popularity of a candidate. Advance voting didn’t used to be a popular thing at all in most places.
Didn’t even exist in most places, yes? And then we saw those pictures of people waiting for hours and hours to vote. Some of us noticed that there appeared to be a higher concentration of melanin-enhanced Americans, and some of us had to wonder how often a Brownish-American voter just gave up and walked away. Anybody think it was a coincidence?
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-10-26/florida-poll
Trump winning in FL according to one poll. In reality it’s probably more like a statistical tie given the other polling data, but the trend is now favoring Trump again. I think Trump will trend a little better nationally over the final 13 days as well. I seriously doubt it’s enough to earn him a win but again, I think we all agree that Hillary’s got a major EV advantage if we’re speaking strictly in terms of a win-loss on election night. The real question is how close can Donald get, and what kinds of damage could be inflicted on Hillary (and everyone else) after November 8th? We’re talking about how ‘real’ her victory appears to be and how effectively she will be able to govern in 2017.
Trump might trending slightly higher in FL polling but actual voting is going Hillary’s way.
So… the open Trump supporters you know are happy to tell people they support Trump. Do you think you might be missing something here?
That poll really worries me. It’s from a very good pollster without much of a Trump lean. We really can’t afford to lose Florida.
Of the 13 Florida polls listed on Real Clear Politics from October, Clinton led in 10 of them and one was a tie. Most had her +3 or +4.
It also came out on the same day as several Clinton +3 polls. Aggregate and move on.
Of the six biggest toss-ups right now-- FL, OH, IA, NC, NV, AZ-- Clinton could lose all six and still have 273 EVs.
Right. Clinton could lose every state that could reasonably be considered a toss-up and still win the election.
Thanks, I probably need to back away from the internet for a couple of weeks.
This is what bugs me about Silver’s chance-of-winning percentage, and for the first time I’m actually getting annoyed by his numbers. They’re trending downward for Hillary over the past couple weeks, despite the fact that state by state, he gives Hillary an 80+% chance of winning enough states to put her over 270. And of the six that are in the toss-up category that I mentioned above, three are trending away from Trump/holding steady for Hillary, while the other three are moving slightly in Trump’s direction.
So with less than two weeks to go, even if all six of those states swung to the Trump column, which also swung some votes toward Trump in their neighboring states, it wouldn’t be enough to give him the election.
I’m just curious what path Nate sees for Trump that would give him the 15.3% chance of winning that he’s showing right now-- and what justifies the fairly-hefty swing toward Trump since his low point on October 17? Polling in the states that are close don’t show any real moves in Trump’s direction, and we continue to get closer to ED. Any electoral map that has Donald winning is becoming increasingly far fetched. So why has he gone from just under 12% chance of winning on the October 17 to just over 15% chance today on FiveThirtyEight?
I’m not looking for warm-and-cozy feelings from election forecasts, but as the big day gets closer, early voting is in full swing, polling still shows Hillary holding her lead in all places that matter AND nationally, PLUS the fact that there just isn’t a path to 270 for Trump, I don’t see how a forecast could be less than mid-90s for Hillary at this point.
Core Trump supporters as in most of those who voted for him in the primaries, and where no net ‘shy Trump supporter’ factor showed up in polls v results on average, perhaps. Among the perhaps 75% of Trump votes Nov 8 that will come from non-primary voters, perhaps most of whom just dislike Clinton and/or Democratic policies worse, not as much. Those people are more likely to be exposed to a general culture telling them it makes you morally inferior to vote for Trump, and that’s why it’s possible ‘shy Trump’ could show up in the general where it did not in the primaries.
In general ‘right wing echo chamber’ ‘Faux News’ etc refers to a fairly small proportion of voters, as it would going the other way. But everyone is exposed more or less to the general attitude in mass media, entertainment, education world etc, which is not symmetrical.
Now, does that mean I predict a major shock caused by ‘shy Trump’? No, there’s other stuff going on (eg. Democratic GOTV). And I think all these sort of factors tend to be exaggerated in %-points by their wishful proponents (including Democratic GOTV). And again if there was serious over performance of Trump v polls I think it would come from a skew in those who agree to participate in polls (does that count as ‘shy X’?) or LV screens being screwed up by Trump’s unconventionality (that’s really not ‘shy’). I take it as given people literally telling a pollster then favor X when they actually favor Y isn’t going to shift results by many % points, in US conditions.
You missed New Hampshire, a battleground state. Were she to lose that, she loses the election. She can’t lose every battleground state. Gore lost the 2000 election… but would have won it with about 7500 more votes in New Hampshire.
There are states you’re assigning to Clinton that are not guaranteed, anyway. Colorado is very likely, but not a sure thing. Wisconsin is very likely, but not a sure thing. It would take both a Trump comeback of several points (which is quite plausible) and a polling error (hard to say how likely that is) for Trump take states like that, but it’s not impossible.