IA-Emerson: Trump +5

[NOVA Green]

Even if we operate on the assumption that this poll is accurate, even the polls own findings appear to indicate that Hillary is having a harder time consolidating the Democratic base than Trump with the Republican base.

Point being, it looks like Clinton has more room to grow in Iowa than Trump at this time...

[NOVA Green]

Even if we operate on the assumption that this poll is accurate, even the polls own findings appear to indicate that Hillary is having a harder time consolidating the Democratic base than Trump with the Republican base.

Point being, it looks like Clinton has more room to grow in Iowa than Trump at this time...

How did you come to this conclusion?

From Emerson's website:

Iowa voters do not appear happy with either Presidential candidate. Trump holds a 37% favorable
opinion and a 58% unfavorable while Clinton is even further behind with a 35% favorable and 62%
unfavorable.  In the Senate race the
voters have a positive opinion of Grassley 48% to 39% but Judge
finds herself underwater
with a 34% favorable and 36% unfavorable opinion.
Clinton is having difficulty securing the Democrat vote as currently she is at 78% while Trump is taking
86% of the
GOP vote. Independents are breaking for Clinton 34% to 33% with 16% voting for Johnson.
Once again 34% of Sanders voters
are supporting another candidate other than Clinton.
Gender continues to be a significant variable as women are breaking for Clinton 47
% to 39% but males
are breaking for Trump 51% to 30%. 
Clinton wins the younger vote (18
-
34 year olds) 47% to 37% but Trump continues to hold his lead with
voter 35
-
54 at 47% to 32%. Clinton is doing better with the white voter losing 44% to 41%. Clinton
is
doing well in the Northeast (39% to 32%) and the Southwest (46% to 43%) but is losing in the Southeast
59% to 31% and in the Northwest (43% to 40%).

[NOVA Green]

Even if we operate on the assumption that this poll is accurate, even the polls own findings appear to indicate that Hillary is having a harder time consolidating the Democratic base than Trump with the Republican base.

Point being, it looks like Clinton has more room to grow in Iowa than Trump at this time...

Iowa is one of the few states where the gop "establishment" has been supportive of donald since the primary.

No question that this is the case, and that is likely the reason why Trump has been able to consolidate Republican support much more easily than in many other states....

What is also interesting, is that Iowa appears to be one of the few states thus far, where not only is Hillary doing worse than Trump in consolidating their respective party bases, but additionally that there are still such a large number of Bernie holdouts (34% according to this poll).

[NOVA Green]

Iowa has had a Democratic tilt in every presidential election since 1984.

Iowa had performed like a bellwether state in every presidential election since 1992.

A winning Democrat should carry Iowa easily.

Is this state politically changing?

No, it is going back to its traditional GOP roots.

I believe it is a bit of both.... as I commented on other threads, Trumps blend of economic protectionism/populism and generally isolationist rhetorical positions generally plays well in this state, which historically has been relatively dovish/isolationist and has a decent industrial/manufacturing base in the Eastern Part of the state, where Democrats have performed quite well since '88.

[NOVA Green]

Even if we operate on the assumption that this poll is accurate, even the polls own findings appear to indicate that Hillary is having a harder time consolidating the Democratic base than Trump with the Republican base.

Point being, it looks like Clinton has more room to grow in Iowa than Trump at this time...

How did you come to this conclusion?

From Emerson's website:

Iowa voters do not appear happy with either Presidential candidate. Trump holds a 37% favorable
opinion and a 58% unfavorable while Clinton is even further behind with a 35% favorable and 62%
unfavorable.  In the Senate race the
voters have a positive opinion of Grassley 48% to 39% but Judge
finds herself underwater
with a 34% favorable and 36% unfavorable opinion.
Clinton is having difficulty securing the Democrat vote as currently she is at 78% while Trump is taking
86% of the
GOP vote. Independents are breaking for Clinton 34% to 33% with 16% voting for Johnson.
Once again 34% of Sanders voters
are supporting another candidate other than Clinton.
Gender continues to be a significant variable as women are breaking for Clinton 47
% to 39% but males
are breaking for Trump 51% to 30%.  
Clinton wins the younger vote (18
-
34 year olds) 47% to 37% but Trump continues to hold his lead with
voter 35
-
54 at 47% to 32%. Clinton is doing better with the white voter losing 44% to 41%. Clinton
is
doing well in the Northeast (39% to 32%) and the Southwest (46% to 43%) but is losing in the Southeast
59% to 31% and in the Northwest (43% to 40%).

Fair enough.
But the MOE of each group should be huge.

Recent poll from yougov that showed tie from    AUG. 17-19
Clinton D 80, I 31, R 4
Trump D 9,   I 39,  R 76

Here from QU, showing Clinton +2, from    AUG. 9-16

Clinton D 97, I 41, R 8
Trump D    1, I 45, R 85

As Nate Silver says:
Do not overanalyze samples.

EDIT:
Don't also forget, where house effect is probably coming from in that particular poll. Landslide only = old = more pro Trump. You can not both adjust for house effect and draw conclussions from the sample.

I totally get the MOE and subsample concept Mr. LittleBigOctopus, but party self-identification is not a small subsample but rather one of the largest samples (Other than Gender) so again regardless of the critique of IVR polls, which generally this season appear to have a +2-3 Trump lean, as well as methodology of this particular pollster, I generally agree with the argument that Trump currently has a narrow lead in Iowa, and that is mainly a result of Trump having solidified the Republican base and Clinton has not. Hence my statement that Clinton appears to have more room to expand her base in Iowa than Trump.

[NOVA Green]

a) Not small? 200 gives MoE about 7% (or?)
b) Have you missed the others polls with similar total results T vs C, but very different result if you look on subsamples?

It's like if Trump shows in some poll, that he's getting 10% of blacks in subsample of 200... In one single poll...

So Bernie supporters are being over-sampled in Iowa in a land-line only poll, when his largest base of support are from Millennials that tend to only own cell-phones these days???

Are you saying that Democrats were oversampled in this poll that shows your man up???

Honestly, not sure where you're going with all this....

Are you saying that Clinton has consolidated her Democratic base in Iowa and Trump has not???

[NOVA Green]

Hence my statement that Clinton appears to have more room to expand her base in Iowa than Trump.

Would this also mean Trump has more room to expand his base everywhere else?  If not, why not?

Actually, as a fellow Oregonian, I not only believe that is the case, but additionally I would also make the argument this is the major driver behind Trump's dramatically improved state and national polling numbers.

Additionally, it appears, although I have not yet run the numbers through my private software, that Hillary has dropped a couple points of the Democratic Party numbers over the past few weeks as a result of continued media coverage of "Clinton scandals" while Trump, until Yesterday didn't create any new controversy.

I have long made the argument that Clinton is significantly under-performing in Southern Oregon (Where Trump could potentially exceed Romney '12 number), but is significantly expanding beyond Obama '12 numbers in Washington and Clackamas Counties Oregon (Suburban/Exurban Portland), where a huge chunk of the state population actually lives.