First, let me remind people that polls are worthless for a whole variety of reasons. Their only value might be in tracking changes over time, but not in predicting an outcome or explaining an outcome. Why? Because the person picking the population of respondents essentially decides the outcome. Also, people lie. People give protest responses. People game the system. And responding to a poll lacks commitment, so people can be more fanciful in answering polls.
With that in mind, here are some observations:
● There is something wrong with the narrative that Trump’s supporters are white trash. He wins among people with high school or less (52% to 39%) and some college (48% to 41%), but loses among college grads (36% to 53%). Ok, so he wins among the least educated. Got it. His followers are poor white trash.Thoughts?
Or are they?
By income, Trump loses badly among those earning less than $35k (53% to 35%) and those earning $35k to $75k (51% to 38%). He only wins among those earning more than $75k (47% to 44%).
How can this be? How can he win among the least educated, who should be earning the least, yet lose among the two lowest earner groups? Something is wrong with this narrative. Any thoughts?
● Despite his supposed implosion among Hispanics, Trump does way better than recent Republicans with Hispanics. Trump polls 33.4% versus Clinton’s 55.6% with Hispanics. Romney got killed by Hispanics 71% to 27%. That’s an Hispanic gap of 44% for Romney and 22% for Trump... half Romney’s gap.
● Women favor Clinton 50.7% to 38.8%. Remember how Trump would be destroyed by women? Romney lost 55% to 44% among women. That’s a gender gap of 11%. Trump’s gender gap is OMG... 11%.
● By the way, McCain’s gender gap was 13% and his Hispanic gap was 36%. So again, Trump looks pretty good.
● The effect of the overwhelming media bias can be seen in this: “Who will you vote for?” gives Trump the edge: 45% to 44%. But “Who do you think will win?” gives an overwhelming edge to Clinton 58% to 36.9%. Think about this. The race is 50/50 +/-2%, as all recent presidential races have been, yet the media onslaught has convinced conservatives that Clinton is winning by an unprecedented blow out of 28%. Do you understand the problem with media bias now?
52 comments:
Gee Andrew, that's a great article. Why thank you, Andrew!
Just kidding. Did anyone see that Hillary wished herself a happy birthday? Because that's not creepy.
If the LA Times poll (which every week asks the same 3200 people questions about which way their support is currently leaning) is correct Trump's support among various groups is being hugely underestimated by most of the rest of the pollsters (who tend to use random sampling).
That is of course a big 'if' but its worth noting that in terms of predictions Nate Silver was also an outlier before Obama's election (many polls predicted a Romney win or at least a closer loss).
I think the best point of comparison at the moment is where Trump is polling vs where Romney was polling (not how the votes ended up). Unfortunately the LA Times poll in its current form wasn't around the last election cycle.
Also, I think we should worry about how Trump stacks up not just with people who lost, but people who won (the only recentish Republican example is Bush).
Last but not least, the percentage of people who think Clinton will win is a different than the margin by which they expect her to win. 28% would be historic (at least in this country). That is 'Strong candidate vs weak candidate'. This election is 'Weak candidate vs weak candidate' so while I think Trump will lose, I think its going to be close.
I heard it said on TV that the last two weeks are when the polls "become accurate." That's a disturbing turn of phrase.
tryanmax, It is very disturbing. That is essentially an admission that they have been presenting information they know is false.
Anthony, History tells me that the LA Times is closer to correct. We haven't really seen any blow outs in a long time, and right now the electorate is pretty close to 50/50 with turnout being the issue.
That said, take all polls with a grain of salt.
What interests me though is that we hear this idea that Trump is a monster who has turned off Hispanics and women in record numbers... yet the LA Times poll suggests otherwise. It suggests that Trump is doing just about how GOP candidates always do with women and Hispanics.
I think the outlier was Obama, who managed to pull in more than usual, which I suspect is the result of him being the first minority to run.
On the margin thing, I think what that shows is how complete the media's bias has been. You can't look at a webpage or a television show without Trump and his supporters being smeared and told that they have no chance. I think that is what these people are responding too, even as they say they will vote for him.
BTW...
The FBI just re-opened the investigation into Hillary after the discovery of "pertinent emails." Whoops.
Update. The WashPo polls says that white women have gone from 49%/43% Clinton to 48%/43% Trump. Interesting. The narrative breaks again.
Interestingly, they also say 7 in 10 think the vote "will be counted accurately," but it's really only 43%. The other 29% of that 7 in 10 are only "somewhat confident" the vote will be accurate.
None of the statistics account for how many people are just not saying. At least there are very few people on the street who will publicly declare that they are voting for. These are the same people who tend not to pick up the phone when the pollers call ad nauseum. Though probably Clinton "undecideds" or "for sures" are more likely to be honest than for Trump.
Being an undecided/most likely will not vote at all period exclamation point" person, I am one of those "does not answer pollers calls" people.
Well, this is an interesting turn of events. Apparently FBI Director Comey must have gotten tired of being considered part of Clinton conspiracy and disgracing the DOJ/FBI. As reported in WaP, Comey submitted a letter to Congress and it appears that the FBI may be reopening another investigation with newly "found" emails...
LINK
Or they have to quickly indict her and all of her cronies so that Obama can give them all a blanket Presidential pardon...
Bev, Believe it or not, he can pardon her in advance.
I find the timing of the FBI investigation interesting. I'm not sure what to make of it yet.
My dad is another who refuses to talk to pollsters.
Although nothing surprises me, an indictment and a pardon might just bring down the government. Couple thoughts out loud ......could it impact states to the point where neither of these idiots get a majority and it goes to Ryan to decide? Second, if the Dems were to force HRC to step down, how do they choose a successor? What about early votes? I notice Hillary is pounding Trump on acting like Bill in her speech, and begging people to vote early
Are we in unprecedented territory here?
If Obama grants Hillary an advance pardon, it proves he hated her all along.
Andrew - I know he can, but it would just look better if she et al. were indicted on something to make it look like the DOJ/FBI were actually doing their jobs in a non-political way. It would put the heat onto lame-duck Pres Obama's head and not theirs. And appear to restore the honor of the FBI. And then that will clear Loretta Lynch for her nomination tp the SC or a nice federal court judgeship.
I am just riffing here, btw. Too much caffeine this morning.
Let's make a list. A vote for Hillary is a vote for:
WW3
Nixon 2.0
Race riots
Unchecked immigration
Near 100% policy uncertainty (i.e. nervous economy)
Feel free to add
Tryanmax:
Nothing...nothing will happen.
Nothing will change.
Business as usual.
Trump and his alt right buddies winning would certainly be interesting. With the email taking center stage again it is likely.
So these emails came from Anthony Weiner. It's the revenge of the Weiner. Somehow, that's truly fitting here that Hillary was made by a rapist and now might be undone by a pervert.
Anthony, The way Hillary is responding suggests that this is a disaster for her. Demanding that the FBI release what they have is something desperate lawyers do. It basically says, "I know you have something really bad on me, but I don't know what it is."
And by attacking the FBI in public, she's telling us that this one will resonate with her voters and she's trying to discredit the FBI before they get her.
Either way, they are clearly freaking out.
Holly cow! The New York Post headline is "stroking gun" and it's a semi-naked picture of Anthony Weiner. LOLOLOLOL!
Jed, sorry for the delay in responding. Busy day. Halloween party for our oldest... six 13 year old girls destroying our house.
I would say that we are in unprecedented ground, with the possible exception of Andrew Johnson. But nothing in modern times. In modern times, they tend to get rid of people like Hillary before they reach this point.
At this point, they have no choice but to ride her out. If she quits, they would actually struggle to replace her and couldn't on most ballots. What happens then... good question.
I laughed out loud at that "dicki-leaks. The world truly has gone mad
I think it's worth noting at this juncture that we will probably never hear the phrase, "early October surprise" again in our lifetimes.
This turn in the race demonstrates that Trump actually is the best possible candidate that the GOP could have nominated. It is not hard just to surmise what any of the other candidates might have said about this. They would have urged caution. They would have called for patience. Hell, Jeb! might have even extended his condolences to Hillary. The only other candidate I can see taking a different approach is Chris Christie, but he would have almost certainly taken it too far. Trump's official statement is a hope that justice is served, a sentiment impossible to argue with, but loaded with implication. He's shown how to be statesmanlike without giving up the attack. Very savvy.
Interesting stuff all around! Trump's numbers are definitely strange... You'd think that with his earlier rhetoric that he'd be polling worse than that, especially when you consider that the LA Times sample would probably skew left. Regardless, if nothing else Trump has been an interesting study in how screwed up modern politics is. I'd like to think that the right people will learn the right lessons from this no matter what happens on Election Day, but we've been down that road enough times, so...
...On to the October Surprise! This whole election has definitely shown that God has a warped sense of humor and Hillary possibly going down becsuse of Anthony Weiner's obsession with photographing his surname would definitely be a Hell of a punchline! A guy named Weiner getting in trouble because of his last name over and over again feels like something out of a Mel Brooks or ZAZ movie. You really can't make this stuff up, can you?
- Daniel
I think Weinergate is bigger than Watergate!
Jed, That it has. And yeah, I laughed too. This is going to bring out a lot of puns. LOL
Jon, From a seriousness perspective, this is infinitely bigger. That said, the left will deny and dismiss as hard as they can because that's what they do. And what made Watergate serious to them was that Nixon was a Republican. If he had been a Democrat, they would have laughed it off as politics.
Just like they laugh off Bill Clinton's rape as not him just being cheeky.
tryanmax, I agree with that. The instinct of the other GOP candidates would have been to say this is a serious matter and that we need to leave it to the FBI to work out. Trump is blowing her apart.
Daniel, God definitely has a sense of humor and this is evidence of it.
On the polls, I'm seeing articles now worrying that Trump is making inroads with white women and with the middle generation of Hispanics -- adult children of immigrants, but not the immigrants or the grandkids.
Bloomberg headline: Don't Let the FBI's E-Mail Surprise Swing the Election By Eli Lake
1. Who is he talking to?
2. Clearly he thinks it might.
tryanmax, Agreed.
There is an all out attack by the left on the FBI today, and they all seem to accept the premise that this will kill her.
These articles basically call the FBI "irresponsible," ask with great puzzlement "WHY WOULD COMEY DO THIS????", and suggest that the FBI is trying to "swing" the election.
Yahoo wrote what appears to be a fact based "what happens next" kind of article that is crawling with innuendo about the FBI not knowing what it has and suggesting this is just a witch hunt.
Krugman is having a meltdown.
"It's bad enough having the media do the 'raises questions,' substance-free innuendo thing. Worse when the FBI director does it. Disgraceful."
"Comey needs to provide full info immediately. Otherwise he has clearly made a partisan intervention, betraying his office."
LOL!
He described Comey's handling of this as: "inexcusable" and "grotesque." "...this is a story about Comey and his behavior."
"Comey is trying to swing the election. And that should be the story!"
He said Comey "probably" isn't trying to help Trump, but he's trying to help GOP Senators.
"misleads the public" "trying to tip the scales" "trying to be cute"
My favorite comment is this: "Journalist Twitter is full of shock at FBI behvaior." That's one of those telling comments about whose side the media is on. And you can bet if this had been Trump, we would be awash in articles about how evil Trump is and how serious these charges are and how he should step aside. Instead, we get the anguished whining attacks on the FBI.
BTW, tryanmax, To confirm your suspicion about the GOP candidates, note two things:
1. There has been virtual silence from the GOP about this issue. Ask yourself how many Democrats would have remained silent if it had been Trump. There aren't enough microphones in the country to accommodate that. Yet, crickets from the GOP.
2. The director of John Kasich's campaign is mimicking the Clinton campaign's strategy, attacking the FBI for doing this this close to the election and not releasing everything they have so it can be attacked and dismissed.
It's hard to win when your allies want the other side to win.
Heard right after this hit the webverse: "How could they do this 8 days before the election?? It disgraceful! Why didn't they wait?"
Made me laugh. I wanted to respond "So if this had been an FBI sting about Trump being investigated, you'd be crowing 'Bout time! He should suspend his campaign! He's toast! We knew it all along!" BUt I wisely just let it go...;-) Btw, once again, if you name is "Weiner", you just don't do what he did or do it repeatedly 'cause the NY Post and NY Daily News headline writers are having a field day!
Btw, Weiner better check to see how much life insurance Huma has taken out on him in the last few months...just sayin'
Btw, this has just gotten fun again. It's gone from Aaron Sorkin drama to Norman Lear comedy to Stephen King horror to Shakespearean tragedy to Christie "Who Done It" to Moliere-ian high farce! Can't wait for what's next!
Bev, Weiner is the perfect name for headline writers. I can only imagine the fun they are having.
And yeah, this has gotten fun again. :)
I know...Broadway Musical! Oh, you know Lin-Manuel Miranda is working on it right now...
What would be the title?
Ass of the Titans...
Revenge of the Weiner...
Weiner-mail...
Untouchables...
The Phall Guy...
(at least that is what the NY Post called him)
That's great! He looks ridiculous too, to go with the name. That makes it even better. In fact, I couldn't design a better look to go with the name Wiener for a scandal.
Poor HuffPo. They don't know what to do. They finally had to do their 50 foot headline about Hillary after a year of 50 foot TRUMP IS BAD headlines. Of course, this is all Comey's fault 'cause he "reopened" the investigation against the AG's wishes. "IT GET'S WORSE: COMEY DEFIED ATTORNEY GENERAL!"
Whining about timing is hilarious. Everyone knows Clinton is guilty.
And Comey was btw a rock and a hard place. Lunch should be happy with him. because if it came out after the election that she ordered him to wait, she'd be in biiiig trouble.
I think Comey is at heart a cop and is trying to salvage what's left of his reputation. He has to work with FBI agents everyday and look them in the eye...
Anthony, It's all they have... that and claiming the FBI has nothing and is desperate to elect a GOP congress.
Bev, Lynch apparently DID tell him not to release this until after the election. In the old days, that was illegal. These days it's no big deal if you're a liberal.
Critch, I agree. I think this was eating at him after he let Clinton off and this was his second chance to do his job rather than bend the law to suit his friend.
Andrew - Now it's time for Lynch to explain herself before Congress and, oh, PLEASE, let it be Trey Gowdy who asks the questions! I see no future for Huma Abedin in the WH. I expect that Huma will be making some kind of tearin-eyed announcement that she is having health issues and her child needs her during this difficult time with her soon-to-be deceased estranged husband. "Suicide" most likely.
But then again, it's the Clintons so whoever takes her place will be just as irresponsible with classified info and emails and subderfuge.
It does sound like the left is getting nervous about everything, which is fine with me! They're way overdue for a nice smackdown. Still, it says...something that Trump was the only man for the job out of all the candidates. That response from the Kasich campaign manager and the majority of the GOP was absolutely disgraceful. They really do need a mass clean out and fringe trimming, don't they? It's like the country clubbers are back to running the place again with an unhealthy side of fringe nuttery.
- Daniel
Post a Comment