posted September 19, 2016 11:30 PM            

New LA Times poll today shows Trump up by 7 points nationally.

Recent CBS poll showed both at 42% in 13 swing states.

posted October 04, 2016 10:17 AM            

Rasmussen Reports Clinton +1

NBC News/SM Clinton +6

October 3rd

Economist/YouGov Clinton +3

CBS News Clinton +6
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/

posted October 11, 2016 08:24 AM            

Poll Date Sample MoE Clinton (D) Trump (R)
RCP Average 9/28 - 10/9
Clinton +5

NBC News/Wall St. JrnlNBC/WSJ 10/8 - 10/9 Clinton +11

Economist/YouGovEconomist 10/7 - 10/8 Clinton +6

Rasmussen ReportsRasmussen 10/5 - 10/9 Clinton +7

NBC News/SMNBC News 10/3 -
Clinton +5

FOX NewsFOX News 10/3 - 10/6
Clinton +2

QuinnipiacQuinnipiac 10/5 - 10/6
Clinton +5

GravisGravis 10/3 - 10/3
Tie

Reuters/IpsosReuters 9/29 - 10/3
Clinton +6

CNN/ORCCNN/ORC 9/28 - 10/2
Clinton +5

posted October 11, 2016 08:43 AM            

General Election:
Trump vs. Clinton
LA Times/USC Tracking
Clinton 43, Trump 45
Trump +2

Imagine that. Even in the People's Republic of California, Trump continues to lead Hillary The Corrupt in every one of their "daily tracking polls".

Trump led in this poll on Friday...when he supposedly fell into the political black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Saturday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Sunday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Monday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump leads in this poll on Tuesday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

posted October 12, 2016 05:03 AM            

“Disloyal Republicans are far more difficult than Crooked Hillary. They come at you from all sides. They don’t know how to win -- I will teach them!” he said in a tweet.
“With the exception of cheating Bernie out of the nomination, the Democrats have always proven to be far more loyal to each other than the Republicans!”

Considered as ranting by pundits, I think this is an attempt at widening the base.
Obama spanked the Republicans in 2008 and 2012 without breaking a sweat partly because of such disloyalty. Now Trump has called it. Good, honest move after many self-goals.

Also, praising the Democrats less than a month before actual polls is a big gamble, and will take the heat off from the lewd remarks video.

Opinion Polls just before October 19th will reflect these.

posted October 12, 2016 07:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
October 11, 2016..TODAY

General Election:
Trump vs. Clinton
LA Times/USC Tracking
Clinton 43, Trump 45
Trump +2

Imagine that. Even in the People's Republic of California, Trump continues to lead Hillary The Corrupt in every one of their "daily tracking polls".

Trump led in this poll on Friday...when he supposedly fell into the political black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Saturday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Sunday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump led in this poll on Monday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

Trump leads in this poll on Tuesday...after being swallowed by a black hole.

---

Wednesday, October 12
LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 44, Trump 44 Tie

Yep, that black hole is growing ever wider.

posted October 12, 2016 09:24 AM            

Why aren't I leading by 50 points?

Well Hillary, it's your lying about everything possible, your email server, your failure to protect people working for you at State, The Clinton Foundation, your personal corruption and that of Bill Clinton AND,...your total bungling incompetence in every public position you've ever held.

posted October 14, 2016 08:54 PM            

Polls may not be actual but at this point, there is no need.

posted October 15, 2016 09:35 AM            

this man is a disgrace for thr US who, so far, haven't yet known the shame to fall prey of nationalist populists .

which give you the credit abroad to defend democracy and western values, but if trump was to be leceted, and considering he is seen as a populist by everyone else but his supporters, it would become difficult for the US to adopt any credible stance abroad.

france has failed miserably during world war 2 and politicians chose petain and asked him to lead the country when they fled from paris as soon as the war started (at the exception of de gaulle who went to london to organize the resistance) because petain had been a glorious general during world war 1

people were so afraid to live another war on their soil, and WWI had been so horrible that the politicians chose to collaborate and now, till this day it is a stain on france history.

in the international context when poutine wants to appear as the only man capable of resisting "regime change" operated by the US, and wants to be a pain in the ass so much so that it becomes necessary to do another YALTA and he can manage to secure a part of the world the influence of russia, all that before it becomes a insignificant player on the world stage in the next generations due to demography and economic situation (essentially relying on primary ressources)

trump would be a disaster.

all that to appease the sense of revenge of poor, uneducated white men !

anyway, they are not enough poor uneducated white men to elect him.

posted October 15, 2016 04:42 PM            

Rasmussen Reports Clinton 41, Trump 43, Johnson 6, Stein 2
Trump +2

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 44, Trump 44
Tie

New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein WBUR/MassINC Clinton 41, Trump 38, Johnson 11, Stein 3
Clinton +3

Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein PPP (D) Clinton 46, Trump 42, Johnson 5, Stein 1
Clinton +4

Indiana: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Monmouth Trump 45, Clinton 41, Johnson 9 Trump +4

Oregon: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein KATU-TV/SurveyUSA Clinton 48, Trump 38, Johnson 6, Stein 4
Clinton +10

Texas: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein WFAA-TV/SurveyUSA Trump 47, Clinton 43, Johnson 3, Stein 1
Trump +4

posted October 16, 2016 09:14 AM            

Why Pay Attention to the L.A. Times Poll?

It’s been a long year here at RealClearPolitics. Needless to say, readers’ interest in this election is especially piqued, and passions are high. I’m pretty sure that every polling organization this cycle has been the subject of at least one angry email “unskewing” or even dismissing its findings.

But I can say with confidence that no pollster has engendered as much controversy, or at times outright anger, as the Los Angeles Times’ operation, which has tended to show Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton. This has happened even as other polls show Clinton in the lead, at times by dramatic margins.

It’s a little bit odd, to tell the truth. The Times poll is a single survey, generating a two-way result in a year where the four-way average is probably the most relevant. It doesn’t help that the traditional trackers have basically pulled out of the tracking business. This means that the Times poll always has fresh data, and always has the first data available after every event – sometimes the only data available. It also doesn’t help that it is the only poll showing Trump ahead, which inflames liberals and #NeverTrump conservatives. Let’s just say the people sending angry e-mails and tweets about the poll were not doing so this summer when Reuters/Ipsos showed Clinton up by double digits, even as the RealClearPolitics Average showed Trump in a closer race.

Regardless, you can read a defense of the poll’s methodology here. You should also read this New York Times piece (published as this article was in production), which is a bit overstated in the title, but it does a nice job illustrating how the sometimes-arbitrary decisions of pollsters can have substantial effects on their findings. While you are at it, check out this piece, which makes a similar point.

My point here is not to debate methodology, it is to answer this question: “If their methodology is so different, why do you pay any attention to them?” The answer is twofold. First, truth is not decided by committee. That is to say, the fact that the L.A. Times pollsters weight their poll in a different manner than other pollsters do doesn’t make them wrong. As noted in the above Upshot article, all pollsters have their proprietary ways of weighting data, and the fact that they do so in roughly the same way can at times be a bug rather than a feature.

But second, and more importantly, we’ve heard all of this. The Times poll was actually the RAND poll in 2012, and I was concerned about it. These concerns were straightforward, and echo some of the more thoughtful critiques I receive today. First, by weighting your panel to the previous presidential election, you risk skewing (for lack of a better term) the results, as people forget how they vote over time.

Second, by drawing repeatedly from the same group of respondents, you risk creating what I called “Heisenberg effects.” Think of it this way: If you were to perform a single poll of Americans regarding the “best” European soccer clubs, the results would probably be fairly random. They would likely reflect the most famous cities in Europe, or perhaps a few especially well-known clubs. The findings would probably be representative of America as a whole, which has a relatively low level of knowledge about European soccer.

But over time, if you keep asking people this question, they become curious. “What are the winningest clubs in Europe?” they may ask, and then perform a Google search. Perhaps they begin watching games so that they can answer the question more thoughtfully. The point is, by putting people in the experiment, you risk altering the experiment.

Finally, in 2012, much like 2016, the results looked like a pretty significant outlier:

This chart shows three things. The top line, in blue, shows the results for the RAND poll from 52 days before the election through Election Day. The purple line shows the RCP poll average over the same time period, while the horizontal line shows the eventual result. As you can see, the RAND poll showed some pretty freakish results, popping out results as many as six points at variance to the RCP Average.

In the end, though, the RAND poll basically got it right. The national polls (though not so much the state polls) were off in 2012. During the closing month of the campaign, they showed, on average, a 0.3 point Romney lead. The RAND poll, by contrast, showed a 3.8 point Obama lead – which was almost exactly correct.

Does that mean the Times poll will be correct this year? Absolutely not. We should treat it as one poll among many, and should note its outlier-ish tendencies. It may be worth watching for trend lines. We might also note that this cycle, it runs contrary to both the national and the state polls, and tends to be off the RCP Average by an even larger margin.

At the same time, though, we should recall that almost all of the objections lodged against the poll could have been lodged against it in 2012. Many were. The poll may well be flat-out wrong in 2016, but its history cautions heavily against dismissing it outright.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/14/why_pay_attention_to_the_la_times_poll.html

posted October 16, 2016 10:30 AM            

The major polls RCP uses in their "Averages" are skewed so far to democrats that they're worthless. Their only purpose is to create a false narrative about this election.

You tell me, when polls consistently poll 10-13% more democrats than republicans and far less independents...which are about 40% of voters, then, what good is that poll and the RCP "Average"...except as an engine of disinformation?

Rational people can see right through the BS. All that's necessary is to see the huge crowds at Trump rallies...many who stood in line outside for up to 6 hours...or more verses the tiny crowds showing up to see Hillary The Corrupt.

The press meme seems to be: yes, Trump draws huge crowds but they won't show up to vote!

posted October 16, 2016 11:12 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
Rational people can see right through the BS. All that's necessary is to see the huge crowds at Trump rallies...many who stood in line outside for up to 6 hours...or more verses the tiny crowds showing up to see Hillary The Corrupt.

The press meme seems to be: yes, Trump draws huge crowds but they won't show up to vote!

Right press weenies. They're willing to stand in line for hours to see Trump..BUT they won't spend 30 minutes to go vote!

---

posted October 16, 2016 11:52 AM            

quote:

---

The press meme seems to be: yes, Trump draws huge crowds but they won't show up to vote!

---

Most likely they are 60% die hard supporters and the other 40 % are looky lous. They want to see the drama of a reality star.

This article is frightening and I think it is fair in describing his hard core supporters...

Warnings of conspiracy stoke anger among Trump faithful

quote:

---

His supporters here said they plan to go to their local precincts to look for illegal immigrants who may attempt to vote. They are worried that Democrats will load up buses of minorities and take them to vote several times in different areas of the city. They’ve heard rumors that boxes of Clinton votes are already waitin

---

quote:

---

“If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it,” Dan Bowman, a 50-year-old contractor, said of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take. . . . I would do whatever I can for my country.”

---

Thats quite a train they are riding and wonder how the good folks like you and etheralsaturn can work past that kind of aggressive voter.

posted October 16, 2016 11:52 AM            

Pollsters and their weenie political activists posing as journalists are saying:

posted October 16, 2016 12:06 PM            

Clinton has 4-point edge as voters weigh in on Trump's treatment of women
Sunday, October 16, 12:31 AM

In this poll:

Click "detailed view" to see interactive results by political and demographic groups (i.e. by party identification, gender, race/ethnicity and other groups). All results are based on the overall adult sample unless a subgroup is specified.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/10/16/National-Politics/Polling/release_452.xml?tid=a_inl

Now, you can go to the site and click on "detailed view".

If you do, let me tell you what you WON"T find. You won't find any breakout of the number of democrat v republican v independents the Washington Post/ABC poll used to compile this poll.

Notice too, the statement: on Trump's treatment of women in yet another attempt to skew the poll and denigrate Trump.

posted October 16, 2016 12:14 PM            

You must have been very impressed with Hillary The Corrupt supporters who spray painted Trump supporter's cars at one of his campaign rallies. Right?

Violent Hillary Supporters Spray Paint 20 Cars Outside Trump Rally (VIDEO)

Posted on October 15, 2016 by
DC Watchdog

Violent Hillary supporters spray painted at least 20 cars outside of Donald Trump’s rally in Bangor, Maine.

The cars were vandalized during the rally.

The media will likly blame this violence on Trump.

The Bangor Daily News reported:

posted October 16, 2016 02:17 PM            

quote:

---

You must have been very impressed with Hillary The Corrupt supporters who spray painted Trump supporter's cars at one of his campaign rallies. Right?

---

jwhop,
You of all Lindalanders know I deplore violence, hate speech and vandalism.

There is a huge divide between the stupidity of vandalism and hate speech ie a coup with bloodshed or shooting a candidate.
Much less stalking the elections like the Trump police to root out the Muslims,Latinos and dead people .
So it is Clinton encouraging vandalism and Trump bloodshed?
If so, why?

posted October 16, 2016 02:38 PM            

I have noticed Hillary The Corrupt and Bernie supporters disrupting Trump rallies, spitting on Trump supporters and throwing punches at Trump supporters when they exit Trump rallies.

posted October 16, 2016 03:38 PM            

quote:

---

Are you condoning democrats voting in the name of the dead? Are you condoning illegal aliens voting in American elections?

---

Neither.

BUT I don`t condone thugs stalking the voting booths either.

It smacks of elitism and racism.