CT - Emerson: Trump +24, Clinton +6 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 03:53:50 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
  CT - Emerson: Trump +24, Clinton +6 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: CT - Emerson: Trump +24, Clinton +6  (Read 5398 times)
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,857
Greece


« on: April 12, 2016, 11:48:26 AM »

I mean, for all the sh**t it gets, wasn't Emerson the most accurate in Wisconsin? And Lief is right, it's closed, going to be 20%+ non-white, and 65%+ over the age of 45. And Sanders is sh**tting the bed with the gun issue right now. But because it's in New England, it all leads to a comfortable single digit win for Clinton.

It's amazing how, aside from Michigan, the polling and the demographics almost always predict the right winner, and the margin, within a few points. Bernie fans expecting a double digit win in CT are deluded.

Demographics have been even more accurate than polling. Even in Michigan most demographic models were predicting a modest Sanders lead.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,857
Greece


« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2016, 12:02:34 PM »

I think that Benchmark Politics blog had MI at basically a tie, despite the polls showing Clinton +20.

And Nate Silver's model was Sanders +4, IIRC.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,857
Greece


« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2016, 02:36:04 PM »
« Edited: April 12, 2016, 02:51:09 PM by Landslide Lyndon »

ITT: Clinton hacks trash another poster for suggesting this poll might be biased toward Clinton based on flimsy evidence, and then go on to assert that it's biased toward Sanders, based on flimsy evidence.

This happened?

Closed primary = always bad for Sanders, exaggerating demographic advantage for Clinton, etc.

Well, that's a fact. Except when the primary is full of conservative Dixiecrats who vote Sanders only because they want to stick it to Obama.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,857
Greece


« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2016, 03:04:17 PM »

ITT: Clinton hacks trash another poster for suggesting this poll might be biased toward Clinton based on flimsy evidence, and then go on to assert that it's biased toward Sanders, based on flimsy evidence.

This happened?

Closed primary = always bad for Sanders, exaggerating demographic advantage for Clinton, etc.

Well, that's a fact. Except when the primary is full of conservative Dixiecrats who vote Sanders only because they want to stick it to Obama.

So the evidence is the Southern primaries, and Oklahoma doesn't count? That doesn't really give us much basis to predict the NE contests, and it certainly isn't what I would consider solid evidence for predicting that Clinton will significantly beat her poll numbers.

Arizona was closed too.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,857
Greece


« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2016, 04:22:11 PM »


That's true, although Clinton actually slightly underperformed her polls there.

Nope. There were no polls before the primary, at least from any reputable firm.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 14 queries.