Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

new poll today has tD beating hilly in ohio

mookie's losing his fastball! Rover was already lying in wait for somebody to post this.

"Meanwhile, a trio of swing state Quinnipiac polls show tight races in Florida (Clinton 43%, Trump 42%), Ohio (Trump 43%, Clinton 39%), and Pennsylvania (Clinton 43%, Trump 42%). But the polling samples in those three states are whiter than what they were in 2012, according to the exit polls.
•Quinnipiac's Florida sample is 69% white -- was 67% in 2012;
•Quinnipiac's Ohio sample is 83% white -- was 79% in 2012;
•Quinnipiac's Pennsylvania sample is 81% white -- was 78% in 2012."


So, much like the Romney campaign's expectations in 2012, we're going to reverse a 36 year trend of minorities making up a greater % of the voters and the electorate is going to be MORE WHITE! Woo hoo!

Expect to see a lot of lets say "interesting" polling samples this election season. Happens every time.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

mookie's losing his fastball! Rover was already lying in wait for somebody to post this.

"Meanwhile, a trio of swing state Quinnipiac polls show tight races in Florida (Clinton 43%, Trump 42%), Ohio (Trump 43%, Clinton 39%), and Pennsylvania (Clinton 43%, Trump 42%). But the polling samples in those three states are whiter than what they were in 2012, according to the exit polls.
•Quinnipiac's Florida sample is 69% white -- was 67% in 2012;
•Quinnipiac's Ohio sample is 83% white -- was 79% in 2012;
•Quinnipiac's Pennsylvania sample is 81% white -- was 78% in 2012."


So, much like the Romney campaign's expectations in 2012, we're going to reverse a 36 year trend of minorities making up a greater % of the voters and the electorate is going to be MORE WHITE! Woo hoo!

Expect to see a lot of lets say "interesting" polling samples this election season. Happens every time.

Black turnout may go down without Obama on the ticket, though I suspect it would be made up for by increased Hispanic turnout.

One other thing, though. Raw sample percentages are typically corrected to match expected turnout. Polling methodology is built around representative sampling -- you take the results by cross-tab but then you weight the cross-tabs by expected participation. To take a simplified example, let's say a state typically has 50% male and 50% female voters, and your sample is 60% men who vote {50% D, 50% R} and 40% women who vote {60% D, 40% R}. The reported polling result for Dems will not be .6*.5 + .4*.6 = .54; it will be .5*.5 + .5*.6 = .55. The fact that you contacted more men than women in your sample is an accident that has no predictive value for the general population.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

so.....rolling shows she WAS ahead, and now she's not.

That's not how rolling averages work.

By rolling she is still ahead. If there are more polls with her losing eventually it will "catch up." But the idea of rolling averages is not just to capture trending -- it's to correct for outliers by washing them out with additional results.

[mookie1995]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Black turnout may go down without Obama on the ticket, though I suspect it would be made up for by increased Hispanic turnout.

while bubba may have been the first black president, hilly surely wasn't the first black first lady!!! a true sister whoulda cut bubba's banana hooked pecker off at the stump

(people hate her! roll that )

[mookie1995]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

That's not how rolling averages work.

By rolling she is still ahead. If there are more polls with her losing eventually it will "catch up." But the idea of rolling averages is not just to capture trending -- it's to correct for outliers by washing them out with additional results.

well the top line of your linky did exactly that (simple math)

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

(people hate her! roll that )

They hate Drumpf more.

The other thing is, people hate Hillary when she's running for things, but they actually kinda like her when she's running things. She seems to run around -20 favorable on the campaign trail and +20 favorable when on the job. She's kinda Opposite Day Dubya.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

well the top line of your linky did exactly that (simple math)

The top line shows Clinton +3.0, mook. I'm worried about you.

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

It's a plan, anyway.

Time is absolutely right...the best way Clinton can win is not to fall for the trap. Let the child have his tantrum you just stay calm and answer the questions.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Maybe Sinclair was half wrong.

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Black turnout may go down without Obama on the ticket, though I suspect it would be made up for by increased Hispanic turnout.

One other thing, though. Raw sample percentages are typically corrected to match expected turnout. Polling methodology is built around representative sampling -- you take the results by cross-tab but then you weight the cross-tabs by expected participation. To take a simplified example, let's say a state typically has 50% male and 50% female voters, and your sample is 60% men who vote {50% D, 50% R} and 40% women who vote {60% D, 40% R}. The reported polling result for Dems will not be .6*.5 + .4*.6 = .54; it will be .5*.5 + .5*.6 = .55. The fact that you contacted more men than women in your sample is an accident that has no predictive value for the general population.

And it was that methodology that showed Romney had a chance 4 years ago despite the fact that people like Nate Silver had it nailed 2 months before the election. Pollsters pretending they know what participation is going to be may have worked 40 years ago when it was easier to predict but with the demographic changes along with socio-economic shifts they might as well be throwing darts at a wall. They have no clue who is going to vote or what the make up of the voters is going to be.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

I don't necessarily think black turnout will go down for two reasons. 1) Obama himself will be campaigning hard to turn them out, and 2) for blacks following Obama with a Dem pretty much cements his legacy. No promises after this year of course but the connection still seems to be there with blacks and Dems especially with an incumbent Dem black guy in the WH.

Regarding polls, any poll that shows an electorate makeup far out of the norm regardless of whether you like the result needs to be greeted with a healthy skepticism. Since 1980 minorities have gained 2% of the total voting pie from whities every election cycle. Could that reverse itself this year? Sure. Could it be greater than 2%? Sure. Is it likely? No. A poll should reflect another 2% gain in minority participation out of the total, because that's what's happened for the last 36 years.

I've noticed something else too and I'm curious as to why this happens. Whenever somebody puts out a poll showing an unexpected tie race (the Q polls or the one recently showing Hillary inexplicably tied with Trump in Georgia) they always have each candidate polling in the low 40's. 43-42 or 41-40 with a whopping 15-20% undecided. Is there ANY state right now where 20% of the electorate doesn't know which candidate it plans on backing at this time (subject to a game changing revelation or crappy debate performance later on)?

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Huh. Freep purged everybody who wouldn't bow down to Drumpf.

Man, that's gotta hurt -- talk about having to eat a sh-t sandwhich and smile.

What the hell is a freeper?

[St. Clown]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

What the hell is a freeper?

A term used for people associated with The Free Republic. It's likely a derogatory term, because Kep likes to use it, but I'm not certain about that.

[mookie1995]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

The top line shows Clinton +3.0, mook. I'm worried about you.

exactly.

it is rolling the average of those last 4 polls. a few of course had their time back in march.

now i'm worried about YOU kep

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

A term used for people associated with The Free Republic. It's likely a derogatory term, because Kep likes to use it, but I'm not certain about that.

They use it themselves. I mean, yeah, it's derogatory, but only because of what they are. Like "Men's Rights Activist" or "Bostonian."