FL/OH/PA-Quinnipiac: Trump leads or tied in all three states

[Seriously?]

Glorious, Glorious, Glorious polls! Get aboard the Trump train, red avatars!

Trump-mentum....

[Seriously?]

Quinnipiac is garbage, garbage, garbage. The stupid thing is that people will harp on these polls for months and then be shocked when Trump loses. No one has learned anything from 2012.

A 538 "A-" pollster is garbage because you don't like the messenger. Gotcha.

Look, it's three data points. There's nothing really to get excited about. However, this reinforces the narrative of basically a slim lead for Lying Crooked Hillary! at this point in time. If you are a red avatar, the next few weeks shouldn't be very fun. But things will come back to equilibrium post conventions.

[Seriously?]

Quinnipiac is garbage, garbage, garbage. The stupid thing is that people will harp on these polls for months and then be shocked when Trump loses. No one has learned anything from 2012.

A 538 "A-" pollster is garbage because you don't like the messenger. Gotcha.

Look, it's three data points. There's nothing really to get excited about. However, this reinforces the narrative of basically a slim lead for Lying Crooked Hillary! at this point in time. If you are a red avatar, the next few weeks shouldn't be very fun. But things will come back to equilibrium post conventions.

It's a crappy poll. It has the white vote higher than it was in 2012, which is not going to happen. The white vote drops every cycle, it doesn't go up.

If you really want a white supremacist to be President, you have issues. I put you on ignore, so don't bother replying to any of my posts anymore.

Overreact much?

I'd like proof that Trump is a "white supremacist," please.

[Seriously?]

In 2012, Mitt Romney and his supporters kept criticizing polls on the basis of oversampling, just as you are doing now. Be careful.

During the primaries, the GOP turnout hit records, surpassing the Democratic primary's turnout; and Trump is getting all of the media attention. Why, then, is it so unreasonable to expect that Republicans will turn out at a much higher rate than they did 4 years ago?

Were they using prior data at all in their criticisms? Didn't keep up with the minutia of their attack of the polls. I just looked at the PA SOS, and the split in party reg as of today is 49-38 in favor of Dems. Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think a ten-point advantage for Democrats is going to evaporate in the span of an election cycle, enthusiasm gap or not. Wouldn't you say it's a little presumptuous of a pollster to make such a shift in the weights, based off a guess?

PA is one of the few states that have people that would be considered "Reagan Democrats" where they are technically Democrats, but would self-identify as Republicans here.

I think the crossover in the primaries was over 100,000 in PA.

I do think Trump +6 is overstated here, but I am not shocked that the state is competitive.

[Seriously?]

PA is one of the few states that have people that would be considered "Reagan Democrats" where they are technically Democrats, but would self-identify as Republicans here.

I think the crossover in the primaries was over 100,000 in PA.

I do think Trump +6 is overstated here, but I am not shocked that the state is competitive.

Well, leaving aside a discussion of Reagan Democrats, Republicans are also undersampled here -- less so, but still. It's Independents who are extremely overrepresented, but I suppose that's inevitable in a "Do you consider yourself" sort of a question. Don't get me wrong, maybe Republicans will turnout at a higher rate. But there's a built-in 900,000 voter advantage for Democrats they have to work around, and the partisan crosstab here is about equally polarized. It's winnable for sure, but I question how representative the sample is.

Luckily, we'll get another data point on PA this afternoon.

[Seriously?]

PA is one of the few states that have people that would be considered "Reagan Democrats" where they are technically Democrats, but would self-identify as Republicans here.

I think the crossover in the primaries was over 100,000 in PA.

I do think Trump +6 is overstated here, but I am not shocked that the state is competitive.

Well, leaving aside a discussion of Reagan Democrats, Republicans are also undersampled here -- less so, but still. It's Independents who are extremely overrepresented, but I suppose that's inevitable in a "Do you consider yourself" sort of a question. Don't get me wrong, maybe Republicans will turnout at a higher rate. But there's a built-in 900,000 voter advantage for Democrats they have to work around, and the partisan crosstab here is about equally polarized. It's winnable for sure, but I question how representative the sample is.

Luckily, we'll get another data point on PA this afternoon.

We already did, Clinton is up 9 in the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll.

Obviously, one of the two polls is wrong. It's just a matter of interpretation. They are so far off from each other. And that's just the PA result. The rest (IA and OH) seem about right and in the same ballpark.