Latino Decisions: Clinton 70 Trump 19

[Erich Maria Remarque]

It looks actually pretty good for Trump
But it'd very interesting, if those numbers have changed after his terrific speech

[Erich Maria Remarque]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/10/latino-decisions-obama-73-romney-21-with-hispanic-voters-147565

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surprisingly for Dems on Atlas only Trump is only doing moderately worse with Hispanics. However, I still don't think Trump is going to get > 20%. We are likely going to see a surge in turnout among Hispanic voters, and mostly against Trump. That will probably help dilute his margins.

As I said, it is women, that makes it hard for Trump. He's probably doing much better among Hispanics men than Romney. How does it sound?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

As I said, it is women, that makes it hard for Trump. He's probably doing much better among Hispanics men than Romney. How does it sound?

Please don't act like you are the arbiter of world knowledge outside Atlas. As the article said, he was doing even worse in previous polls, so with that in mind and knowing what we know about his rhetoric and policy positions, it is in fact surprising that he is holding higher margins right now.

What a logic. You can't just extrapolate it like this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are evil!

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I think this will be one of those issues that define how the election turns out. What we are seeing in polls doesn't jive with what one would expect considering Trump's views and what I am seeing on the ground. I have a feeling Clinton over performs her polls, at least with Latinos and Asians, on election day.

You would expect, that Clinton would win this election with 20%. But your feelings do not count.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Um, she's doing much better and Trump is doing much worse. You are willfully obtuse

Latino vote share in the last four presidential elections:

2000: Gore 62, Bush 35 (-27)
2004: Kerry 53, Bush 44 (-9)
2008: Obama 67, McCain 31 (-36)
2012: Obama 71, Romney 27 (-44)

2016: Clinton 70, Trump 19 (-51)

Latino Decisions is the go-to poll with Latino voters because they do deep-dive polling in both languages, unlike the national polls who only take subsamples of 125 Latino voters

From the final 2012 poll from Latino Decisions:
Obama 75, Romney 23 (-52).
You can not just compare polls that have bias with the election's outcome.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I think this will be one of those issues that define how the election turns out. What we are seeing in polls doesn't jive with what one would expect considering Trump's views and what I am seeing on the ground. I have a feeling Clinton over performs her polls, at least with Latinos and Asians, on election day.

You would expect, that Clinton would win this election with 20%. But your feelings do not count.

No, only cold hard facts. We can both agree on that. Like the fact that poll after poll shows Clinton winning with college-educated whites and doing about 5-10 points better among the overall white vote than Obama in 2012. That doesn't jive with a 4-6 point election either......

Haha. No, your opinion is not cold, and actually is not a fact.
What we have is polls. And you, trying to unskew them.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I agreed with you that my opinion doesn't really matter, only facts......

Like the fact that Clinton is doing about 5-10 points better among whites than Obama in 2012, and about the same as Obama 2008. Do you disagree with that?

I don't know. Just link to those facts/polls. That's who we do in Sweden.
I always do so, when I talk about numbers.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I agreed with you that my opinion doesn't really matter, only facts......

Like the fact that Clinton is doing about 5-10 points better among whites than Obama in 2012, and about the same as Obama 2008. Do you disagree with that?

I don't know. Just link to those facts/polls. That's who we do in Sweden.
I always do so, when I talk about numbers.

Seriously? Obviously you don't follow the polls that closely......

1)http://www.investors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/POSTING_Tables_Sep2016_Horserace_Registered_And-_Likely-Voters.pdf
IBD poll where Clinton leads by 1 but only loses white vote by 14 points.

2) http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/08/31/fox-news-poll-aug-31-2016/
Fox Poll where Clinton leads by just 6 while only losing the white vote by 11 points. That would be 2 points better than Obama 2008.

3) http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1,SC_RACE:1/dates/20160801-20160901/type/week
Latest Reuters poll which is tied but Trump only up by 11 among whites.

4)https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/d1qd4msxfd/econTabReport.pdf
Yougov poll where Clinton leads by 5 but only down 13 points among whites.

5) http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_83016.pdf
PPP poll where Clinton is up 5 and down 15 among whites

6) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/09/01/suffolk-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-fear/89577824/
In this USA today poll Trump is only up by 8 points among whites but Clinton only leads him by 7.

7) http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_US_082916/
Monmouth poll where again Trump is only up 8 points up among whites while only losing by 7 points.

And these are just the latest polls on Realclearpolitics.com.........

Why would I? Look at "2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls" board. I've been consitently against unskewing, whether Clinton led by 14% or by 2%.

So ok. Trump is +8-13 among Whites. Your point is?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Obama lost the white vote by about 17-20 points in 2012 depending on the source you use. If there is a 5-10 point swing to Clinton this year, it would imply a race where she is winning by 9-14 points assuming non-whites swing the same amount. Instead the topline numbers show something close to Obama 2012. That can only be true if non-whites swing by about 8-12 points towards Trump compared to Romney. Perhaps that is true. I guess we will find out in November.

Have you applied your Math to the 2008/2012. Did it work?
Romney loose because of incredibly low turnout of Whites, but guess what. Even McCain didn't manage to have get high turn-out among Whites.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Obama lost the white vote by about 17-20 points in 2012 depending on the source you use. If there is a 5-10 point swing to Clinton this year, it would imply a race where she is winning by 9-14 points assuming non-whites swing the same amount. Instead the topline numbers show something close to Obama 2012. That can only be true if non-whites swing by about 8-12 points towards Trump compared to Romney. Perhaps that is true. I guess we will find out in November.

Have you applied your Math to the 2008/2012. Did it work?
Romney loose because of incredibly low turnout of Whites, but guess what. Even McCain didn't manage to have get high turn-out among Whites.

Ah yes, the whites didn't turn out scenario. Rather the polls are saying Trump will do better with non-whites than Romney. We shall see.

Ehm... polls are showing both. But you want to unskew them, right?

One more time, what is your point?
That polls are wrong? Why?
Need to be unskewed like in 2012? Why?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Are you getting into Sean Trende's 'missing white voters' theory?

What theory?

I am talking about cold facts. Turnout was low in 2008. It was even lower in 2012. It felt in much higher rates than demographics. Why? I don't know, may be, because Whites didn't feel, they had someone to voter for.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Obama lost the white vote by about 17-20 points in 2012 depending on the source you use. If there is a 5-10 point swing to Clinton this year, it would imply a race where she is winning by 9-14 points assuming non-whites swing the same amount. Instead the topline numbers show something close to Obama 2012. That can only be true if non-whites swing by about 8-12 points towards Trump compared to Romney. Perhaps that is true. I guess we will find out in November.

Have you applied your Math to the 2008/2012. Did it work?
Romney loose because of incredibly low turnout of Whites, but guess what. Even McCain didn't manage to have get high turn-out among Whites.

Ah yes, the whites didn't turn out scenario. Rather the polls are saying Trump will do better with non-whites than Romney. We shall see.

Ehm... polls are showing both. But you want to unskew them, right?

One more time, what is your point?
That polls are wrong? Why?
Need to be unskewed like in 2012? Why?

No, I don't want to skew anything. Just showing that whites are voting at a higher rate for Clinton than for Obama. You can draw your own conclusions from that.

And I just showing that  and non-whites are voting at a higher rate for Trump than for Romney, or/and that turnout among white will be higher.

It is what polls shows, right?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Obama lost the white vote by about 17-20 points in 2012 depending on the source you use. If there is a 5-10 point swing to Clinton this year, it would imply a race where she is winning by 9-14 points assuming non-whites swing the same amount. Instead the topline numbers show something close to Obama 2012. That can only be true if non-whites swing by about 8-12 points towards Trump compared to Romney. Perhaps that is true. I guess we will find out in November.

Have you applied your Math to the 2008/2012. Did it work?
Romney loose because of incredibly low turnout of Whites, but guess what. Even McCain didn't manage to have get high turn-out among Whites.

Ah yes, the whites didn't turn out scenario. Rather the polls are saying Trump will do better with non-whites than Romney. We shall see.

Ehm... polls are showing both. But you want to unskew them, right?

One more time, what is your point?
That polls are wrong? Why?
Need to be unskewed like in 2012? Why?

No, I don't want to skew anything. Just showing that whites are voting at a higher rate for Clinton than for Obama. You can draw your own conclusions from that.

And I just showing that  and non-whites are voting at a higher rate for Trump than for Romney, or/and that turnout among white will be higher.

It is what polls shows, right?

No Sir.... I haven't seen you present one even half-baked argument supported with facts that shows that Trump is over-performing among "minority voters".

In fact, I might go so far to argue that you are making up facts without any supporting evidence, even you were to go and "cherry-pick" individual polls that you might claim support your point.

The reality Sir, is that many of those of us on this board have been around a long time, and although there are frequent strong disagreements and debates both within and between the major political parties, and then all of the 3rd parties as well, that you are essentially hijacking what for many months and years has generally been an extremely civil (and sometimes uncivil conversations) at least based upon actual data and facts.

If you have something to say Sir, please back it up with actual evidence and statistics and not just resort to selected data that you are polling off of other websites in order to create a false narrative.

I'm always open to legitimate discussion and debate with most members of the forum, and I expect that they call me out to explain and justify my statements, and I believe it is a similar perspective from the overwhelming majority of forum members that might well disagree and/or challenge some of my statements and perspectives.

It was Sbane's point, not mine

If Trump is doing much worse among whites (according to Sbane by 5-10%) than Romney, but still have about the same margin [in last nationall polls from IBD and Fox even better], that should imply that... [your answer here]. Otherwise math doesn't add, right?

P.S. "cherry-pick" ? Right now, according to 538's, Upshot's, RCP's, [you name it]'s average, there is a 3-4% margin.

P.S.S. Muahaha, smart boy. Ther irony, when you always bash polls, whose results you don't like. The reality... Muahaha

[Erich Maria Remarque]

So.... please explain your argument bolded for emphasis regarding Trump outperforming Romney among "Non-whites".

You can't just quote part of my argument, can you?

If Trump underperfomfing among Whites that means that

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If he doesn't outperform Romney among non-Whites, it means that he outperforms among Whites or/and turnout is higher (among Whites).

So what, according to you, do polls show?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Are you getting into Sean Trende's 'missing white voters' theory?

What theory?

I am talking about cold facts. Turnout was low in 2008. It was even lower in 2012. It felt in much higher rates than demographics. Why? I don't know, may be, because Whites didn't feel, they had someone to voter for.

2008 had the highest Presidential Turnout since 1964.

I was talking about Whites' relative turnout. Was it not clear? It felt in a much higher rate than demographics (especially in 2012)

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Obama lost the white vote by about 17-20 points in 2012 depending on the source you use. If there is a 5-10 point swing to Clinton this year, it would imply a race where she is winning by 9-14 points assuming non-whites swing the same amount. Instead the topline numbers show something close to Obama 2012. That can only be true if non-whites swing by about 8-12 points towards Trump compared to Romney. Perhaps that is true. I guess we will find out in November.

You're indeed an Shy unskewer.

What you're trying to say is that polls shows Whites' preference correctly, but fail to show correctly non-whites' prefence, right?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

If Trump underperfomfing among Whites that means that non-whites are voting at a higher rate for Trump than for Romney, or/and that turnout among white will be higher.

If he doesn't outperform Romney among non-Whites, it means that he outperforms among Whites or/and turnout is higher (among Whites).



So what, according to you, do polls show?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

My statement is fact. Trump can't  be doing worse (in marginal seance. Read, what we've been talking with Sbane) among Whites and non-Whites at the same time, if turnout is the same as 2012.

We take 3 latest A polls.
IBD/TIPP
Tie
Whites:       Trump +15% (5% worse than Romney)        47% vs 32%
Black/Hisp:  Clinton +52%                                             15% vs 67%
 
Fox News
Clinton +2%
Whites:        Trump +13% (7% wrose than Romney)       46% vs 33%
Non-Whites: Clinton +42                                               21% vs 61%

Monmouth:
Clinton +7
Whites:        Trump +12  (8% worse than Romney)        44% vs 36%
Non-whites:  Clinton +51                                              14% vs 65%

Since we are talking about margins.  
 
Just look at first Sbane's post

I agreed with you that my opinion doesn't really matter, only facts......

Like the fact that Clinton is doing about 5-10 points better among whites than Obama in 2012, and about the same as Obama 2008. Do you disagree with that?

She's not, but she's better margins.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Still, i am patiently awaiting any types of data or facts to support the argument that come Nov 16 Trump will outperform Romney with minority voters....

Once again, I and Sbane were talking about margins (that means for instance that if Hillary will get <87% Blacks, Trump will outperform Romney, even if he'll get exactly 0% Blacks ).

So here we go. According to http://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-2012/ (first link on google with search word - obama romney demographics.)

White (72%)                  39 vs 59,                 Romney +20
African-American (13%)  93 vs   6,                Obama   +87
Hispanic (10%)               71 vs 27,                Obama   +44
Asian (3%)                     73 vs 26,                Obama   +47
Other (2%)                    58 vs 38                  Obama   +20

So now we can calculate this >>>

Code:

                                           2012                            2016
Combined Hisp+Blacks         Obama   +68          Clinton +52% (IBD/TIPP)
Combined non-Whites          Obama  +62          Clinton +42 (Fox), +51 (Monmouth)

So, in those polls Clinton had worse margins among non-Whites, but better among Whites, compared to Obama.

If look at Romney alone (not margins).

Non-whites 20.4%
Black/hisp 14.7%

Trump
Black/Hisp                  15% IBD/TIPP
Non-whites                 14% Monmouth, 21% Fox.  (14+21)/2 = 17.5 on average.

All three are A pollsters with interviews in Spanish wit (tie, Clinton +7 and Clinton +2 results i 4-way). The reason, why I look on non-Whites is that the error gets very large if you look at each minority by own. You can argue, that polls are bad at polling Hispanics, but then you should compare polls to polls (so the bias is ~the same).