New Jersey-FDU Clinton +11
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 03, 2022, 07:47:16 AM
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 General Election Polls
  New Jersey-FDU Clinton +11
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: New Jersey-FDU Clinton +11  (Read 1678 times)
mds32
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,089
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 24, 2016, 03:57:16 PM »

New Jersey
Clinton 48%
Trump 37%

http://view2.fdu.edu/publicmind/2016/160525/
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,961
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2016, 03:58:20 PM »

Sanders 57%
Trump 33%
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,821
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2016, 04:10:32 PM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.
Logged
psychprofessor
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,294


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2016, 04:22:44 PM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.
Logged
This account no longer in use.
cxs018
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,291


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2016, 04:24:37 PM »

BUT NEW JERSEY IS THE SWING STATE
Logged
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,319
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2016, 04:28:30 PM »


Trump losing by 11 would be a better showing than either McCain or Romney.
Logged
Fusionmunster
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2016, 04:49:25 PM »
« Edited: May 24, 2016, 04:51:00 PM by Fusionmunster »


Trump losing by 11 would be a better showing than either McCain or Romney.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nj/new_jersey_romney_vs_obama-1912.html

Hillary is polling exactly like Obama was in NJ. Might I add the multiple single digit Quinnipiac polls.
Logged
psychprofessor
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,294


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2016, 04:56:00 PM »


Trump losing by 11 would be a better showing than either McCain or Romney.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nj/new_jersey_romney_vs_obama-1912.html

Hillary is polling exactly like Obama was in NJ. Might I add the multiple single digit Quinnipiac polls.

Funny thing, we tend to only remember the end result and not the polling that led up to it. Look at states like NJ, CA and Michigan - all showing closer races than what actually manifested in 2012. I think one of the issues in these blue states is the difficulty pollsters have with Hispanics and AA's. It actually makes me think that Hillary has a fighting chance in AZ and GA if she is polling within a few points as of now.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,000
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2016, 05:07:16 PM »

The Sanders number seems to indicate that many of the undecideds will ultimately break for Clinton.
Logged
Seriously?
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2016, 07:42:57 PM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.

Safe is an overstatement. It's really on the cusp between likely and lean D. (As it usually is.)

I wouldn't be losing sleep over New Jersey if I were Hillary! Let's leave it at that.
Logged
Mehmet Oz is a charlatan psychopath
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,090
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2016, 07:44:09 PM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.

Safe is an overstatement. It's really on the cusp between likely and lean D. (As it usually is.)

If NJ isn't safe Clinton, than MO, IN & AZ aren't safe Trump.
Logged
Seriously?
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2016, 07:53:59 PM »
« Edited: May 24, 2016, 07:57:04 PM by Seriously? »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.

Safe is an overstatement. It's really on the cusp between likely and lean D. (As it usually is.)

If NJ isn't safe Clinton, than MO, IN & AZ aren't safe Trump.
MO and AZ aren't. MO is probably Lean R. AZ is probably Lean R and ultimately may land in Likely R. IN will depend on the polling data. Of the three, it has the largest chance of being R+15 or so to get into the safe range.

The rough methodology I use is 0-5% Tossup (if 2-2.5+ Slight lean), 5-10% lean, 10-15% likely, 15%+ safe.
Logged
Woke Math Canceled Choco Tacos
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,008
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2016, 10:27:34 PM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.

*Sigh* once again, Bernie Sanders hasn't had one single negative ad ran against him by the Republicans like Hillary has for the past 40 years, and she's still ahead. That needs to be put into perspective.
Logged
StatesPoll
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 441
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2016, 10:52:58 PM »


1. Party Affiliation Statistics in NJ. April,30,2016

http://www.njelections.org/2016-results/2016-05-voter-registration-by-congressional-district.pdf

Total : 5.50 Mil

DEM: 1.77 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 32.2% | REP: 1.077 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 19.5%

Indpendent: 2.65 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 48.2%


2. Fairleigh Dickinson 5/18-5/22 Results
http://view2.fdu.edu/publicmind/2016/160525/

(The Point is TRUMP beat Hillary of Independents in NJ)

DEM: Hillary 80% | TRUMP 7% | REP: TRUMP 74% | Hillary 10%
Ind: TRUMP 47% | Hillary 35%


3. Convert the Poll as Realistic Demographics

1) TRUMP
32.2%(DEM) X 7% + 19.5%(REP) X 74% + Ind(48.2%) x 47% = 39.33%

2) Hillary
32.2%(DEM) X 80% + 19.5%(REP) X 10% + Ind(48.2%) x 35% = 44.58%

just 5% gaps. Which is fightable(if he fully unifies the GOP, induce increase turnouts of Independents. plus trying to get 10%+ish of Democrats in NJ)



Logged
Fusionmunster
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2016, 10:56:04 PM »


1. Party Affiliation Statistics in NJ. April,30,2016

http://www.njelections.org/2016-results/2016-05-voter-registration-by-congressional-district.pdf

Total : 5.50 Mil

DEM: 1.77 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 32.2% | REP: 1.077 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 19.5%

Indpendent: 2.65 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 48.2%


2. Fairleigh Dickinson 5/18-5/22 Results
http://view2.fdu.edu/publicmind/2016/160525/

(The Point is TRUMP beat Hillary of Independents in NJ)

DEM: Hillary 80% | TRUMP 7% | REP: TRUMP 74% | Hillary 10%
Ind: TRUMP 47% | Hillary 35%


3. Convert the Poll as Realistic Demographics

1) TRUMP
32.2%(DEM) X 7% + 19.5%(REP) X 74% + Ind(48.2%) x 47% = 39.33%

2) Hillary
32.2%(DEM) X 80% + 19.5%(REP) X 10% + Ind(48.2%) x 35% = 44.58%

just 5% gaps. Which is fightable(if he fully unifies the GOP, induce increase turnouts of Independents. plus trying to get 10%+ish of Democrats in NJ)





I dont think you need to unskew so much.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,491
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2016, 10:56:46 PM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.

Yeah, but we know why and it'll largely be over soon.



1. Party Affiliation Statistics in NJ. April,30,2016

http://www.njelections.org/2016-results/2016-05-voter-registration-by-congressional-district.pdf

Total : 5.50 Mil

DEM: 1.77 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 32.2% | REP: 1.077 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 19.5%

Indpendent: 2.65 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 48.2%


2. Fairleigh Dickinson 5/18-5/22 Results
http://view2.fdu.edu/publicmind/2016/160525/

(The Point is TRUMP beat Hillary of Independents in NJ)

DEM: Hillary 80% | TRUMP 7% | REP: TRUMP 74% | Hillary 10%
Ind: TRUMP 47% | Hillary 35%


3. Convert the Poll as Realistic Demographics

1) TRUMP
32.2%(DEM) X 7% + 19.5%(REP) X 74% + Ind(48.2%) x 47% = 39.33%

2) Hillary
32.2%(DEM) X 80% + 19.5%(REP) X 10% + Ind(48.2%) x 35% = 44.58%

just 5% gaps. Which is fightable(if he fully unifies the GOP, induce increase turnouts of Independents. plus trying to get 10%+ish of Democrats in NJ)





This will sound terribly harsh... but no one cares.

Please stop.
Logged
StatesPoll
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 441
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 24, 2016, 11:44:15 PM »
« Edited: May 24, 2016, 11:47:11 PM by StatesPoll »


1. Party Affiliation Statistics in NJ. April,30,2016

http://www.njelections.org/2016-results/2016-05-voter-registration-by-congressional-district.pdf

Total : 5.50 Mil

DEM: 1.77 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 32.2% | REP: 1.077 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 19.5%

Indpendent: 2.65 Mil / 5.50 Mil = 48.2%


2. Fairleigh Dickinson 5/18-5/22 Results
http://view2.fdu.edu/publicmind/2016/160525/

(The Point is TRUMP beat Hillary of Independents in NJ)

DEM: Hillary 80% | TRUMP 7% | REP: TRUMP 74% | Hillary 10%
Ind: TRUMP 47% | Hillary 35%


3. Convert the Poll as Realistic Demographics

1) TRUMP
32.2%(DEM) X 7% + 19.5%(REP) X 74% + Ind(48.2%) x 47% = 39.33%

2) Hillary
32.2%(DEM) X 80% + 19.5%(REP) X 10% + Ind(48.2%) x 35% = 44.58%

just 5% gaps. Which is fightable(if he fully unifies the GOP, induce increase turnouts of Independents. plus trying to get 10%+ish of Democrats in NJ)





I dont think you need to unskew so much.

'unskew so much'?

it just: Hillary -3.44%. TRUMP + 1.33%
Which is based on realistic demographics.
( Party Affiliation Statistics in NJ. April,30,2016 )

Logged
○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 51,526


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 25, 2016, 02:08:59 AM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.

It's mocking the people who claim that Hillary is more electable.
Logged
Woke Math Canceled Choco Tacos
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,008
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 25, 2016, 03:49:50 AM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.

It's mocking the people who claim that Hillary is more electable.

Lol
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,849
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 25, 2016, 05:40:36 AM »


lol, the gap between Hillary and Bernie in terms of general election performances is just getting ridiculous.

It's mocking the people who claim that Hillary is more electable.

Lol

Well, Hillary may have lost in 2008, but she was the REAL winner. After all, polls in June showed her as more electable. lol
Logged
Rick Grimes
Rookie
**
Posts: 95


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 09, 2016, 04:07:53 AM »

fake poll trump will win NJ, all the people I know from Nj are behind trump here in jackson county and alot are puerto ricans and guidos who trump will do better with the guidos.
Logged
Redban
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,415


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 09, 2016, 08:10:18 AM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.


I question your assumption that 2012 polls are "instructive" in 2016. In 2012, the Democratic candidate was an incumbent, which significantly makes that race different from this race; and you must remember that Hurricane Sandy likely caused Obama's ultimate margin of victory over Romney in New Jersey.

Bush came within 5% of New Jersey in a tight race. Trump, who has ties to the Northeast, could feasibly get closer if he runs a great campaign (or Hillary runs a bad campaign).
Logged
psychprofessor
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,294


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2016, 09:20:16 AM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.


I question your assumption that 2012 polls are "instructive" in 2016. In 2012, the Democratic candidate was an incumbent, which significantly makes that race different from this race; and you must remember that Hurricane Sandy likely caused Obama's ultimate margin of victory over Romney in New Jersey.

Bush came within 5% of New Jersey in a tight race. Trump, who has ties to the Northeast, could feasibly get closer if he runs a great campaign (or Hillary runs a bad campaign).

You can "question" my assumption but all I did was point out that polls at the same time in 2012 showed the race as high single digits or low double digits. The same as it is now - Trump is not winning NJ.
Logged
Redban
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,415


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2016, 09:48:52 AM »

It's instructive to see where the race was in the Spring of 2012 - and well, exactly where it is now.

Quinnipiac 4/3-4/9 2012: Obama +9 49/40
Quinnipiac 5/9-5/14 2012: Obama +10 49/39


NJ is safe Clinton.


I question your assumption that 2012 polls are "instructive" in 2016. In 2012, the Democratic candidate was an incumbent, which significantly makes that race different from this race; and you must remember that Hurricane Sandy likely caused Obama's ultimate margin of victory over Romney in New Jersey.

Bush came within 5% of New Jersey in a tight race. Trump, who has ties to the Northeast, could feasibly get closer if he runs a great campaign (or Hillary runs a bad campaign).

You can "question" my assumption but all I did was point out that polls at the same time in 2012 showed the race as high single digits or low double digits. The same as it is now - Trump is not winning NJ.

Regarding the bolded portion -- do you know what "instructive" means? When you say that 2012 polls are "instructive" in the 2016 race, you're saying that 2012 polls should guide our analysis of 2016 polls. Therefore, you didn't just "point out" a similarity in the 2012 and 2016 polls; you tied them together.

However, as I said, the 2016 race is relevantly different from the 2012 race (e.g. no incumbent, Hurricane Sandy, Trump-factor), so the 2012 polls are not "instructive." They don't show that "Trump is not winning NJ [in November]."
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 0.232 seconds with 14 queries.