Pew: Clinton +9

[Wiz in Wis]

Great resource to compare all Demos between 08, 12, 16:

http://www.people-press.org/2016/07/07/vote-preference-over-time/

[Wiz in Wis]

Interesting, if you go to table on page 3, Clinton has consolidated Dem party much more than Obama did at this point in 08.

[Wiz in Wis]

Where are Ljube and Seriously?

Oh no, a dated poll from Pew when Hillary! was at her peak. The race is over... /sarcasm

Heh... Yep, just like those dated Pew polls from 08, 12 that called Obama's margins almost perfectly as well.

[Wiz in Wis]

Where are Ljube and Seriously?

Oh no, a dated poll from Pew when Hillary! was at her peak. The race is over... /sarcasm

Heh... Yep, just like those dated Pew polls from 08, 12 that called Obama's margins almost perfectly as well.

Past performance is no indication of future success.

That's just mere coincidence that the June number was the same as the final result when it should not have been. It just tells me they took a bad poll in June.

If Pee-ewww was in lock step with the rest of the legitimate pollsters, that's one thing. When they provide an outlier, which they have here, it's another. Just about everyone else who has done more recent surveys is in the 3-5 point range (and that's being generous to Clinton, arguable 2-4 at this point).

I put this in the same ballpark as Trump +2 with Rasmussen.

Lol. You're not very good at spinning poll results for your side, are ya?

No, it's called being intellectually honest with math. When one poll is not like the other, it's generally an outlier.

I don't try to spin math.

The average lead for Clinton is 6 points in Pollster. This is 9. Rasmussen is off by 8 points, this is off by 3. You don't try to spin math, but you aren't very good at it either.

[Wiz in Wis]

Where are Ljube and Seriously?

Oh no, a dated poll from Pew when Hillary! was at her peak. The race is over... /sarcasm

Heh... Yep, just like those dated Pew polls from 08, 12 that called Obama's margins almost perfectly as well.

Past performance is no indication of future success.

That's just mere coincidence that the June number was the same as the final result when it should not have been. It just tells me they took a bad poll in June.

If Pee-ewww was in lock step with the rest of the legitimate pollsters, that's one thing. When they provide an outlier, which they have here, it's another. Just about everyone else who has done more recent surveys is in the 3-5 point range (and that's being generous to Clinton, arguable 2-4 at this point).

I put this in the same ballpark as Trump +2 with Rasmussen.

Lol. You're not very good at spinning poll results for your side, are ya?

No, it's called being intellectually honest with math. When one poll is not like the other, it's generally an outlier.

I don't try to spin math.

The average lead for Clinton is 6 points in Pollster. This is 9. Rasmussen is off by 8 points, this is off by 3. You don't try to spin math, but you aren't very good at it either.

The average lead in the RCP average is Clinton +4.7. This poll is 9. It's off significantly. The relevant polling time this poll was taken is mid-to-late June. They released the results over a week later. That is when Clinton was surging a bit from the wrap up of the nomination.

The polls concluded in the past week have the race in the 3-5 point range. They have shown a consistent narrowing.

This poll was roughly int he 5-8 point Clinton ballpark at the time period that it was taken. It is not representative of where the race is right now. That bounce has faded.

I'll wait while you show your work to establish how this poll is off by a statistically significant margin.