Internal poll megathread

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Georgia D-Internal poll from Lake Research Partners has Clinton +1 (Clinton 41, Trump 40, Undecided 16) with a sample of 600 LV.  No three-way numbers are listed (Stein isn't on the ballot here).  No crosstabs.

Link: https://cmgajcpolitics.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/lrpmemo-georgiademocraticparty-f-072016.pdf

Favorability:

Hillary Clinton 42/53  (-11)
Donald Trump 39/55  (-16)
Barack Obama 51/45 (+6)
Michelle Obama 61/27 (+34)
Bill Clinton 53/39 (+14)

From:
MAR. 31-APR. 3, Lake Research Partners, 400 LV   
Clinton 50%
Trump 37%

[Erich Maria Remarque]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-mccain-is-in-the-fight-of-his-life-in-the-age-of-donald-trump/2016/08/29/1e3168ac-6b11-11e6-99bf-f0cf3a6449a6_story.html

according to McCain’s pollster, Bill McInturff, “Trump and Clinton are essentially running even in Arizona.”

Why does it seem like GOP internals are more D-friendly that public polls? In NC we heard Trump was down double digits, but recent polls show it's still pretty close.

If I recall in 2014 GOP internals were actually pretty accurate.

Both the D & R internals are showing a bigger lead for Clinton than a lot of the polls; and what we are seeing in the ground games and how the campaigns are responding is that feels like the case.  I think perhaps the public polls are starting to show a "herding" effect; with so many daily trackers and the like showing a close race, the other pollsters are showing the same herding problem we've seen in the past.

You don't really imply that internall poll are better, don't you?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Internal polls are generally better than public polls, yes (at least the ones that aren't high quality polls funded my major media companies).

Evidence?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Internal polls are generally better than public polls, yes (at least the ones that aren't high quality polls funded my major media companies).

Evidence?

Some internal polls from the parties have to be pretty accurate because the parties' entire reason for existence is to win

Can't see connection, actually. And, of course, it is not an evidence. If your internal polls is not showing you winning, you don't talk about them, because it will hurt you.

What is entire reason of most pollster firms?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Publicly released internals are usually junk meant to set a narrative. The private ones are meant to be good, otherwise they wouldn't be hiring them.

What's happening? I entirely agree with you. It just doesn't feel right

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Emerson is junk, but this is a great poll from a great pollster. amIrighigt?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/07/us/politics/donald-trump-ohio-john-kasich.html?ref=politics&_r=0

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Errr... Obama won Franklin 60-38 in 2012.

Really strange that Trump seems to consistently be doing much, much worse in private GOP polling than he is in public polls.

I'd rather believe internalls than public ones. 2012!!!111

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Really strange that Trump seems to consistently be doing much, much worse in private GOP polling than he is in public polls.

To my mind, there are three probable explanations:

1. The media wants a horse race, and are tweaking their methodologies/sampling to aid the narrative
2. The GOP wants a sense of panic among organizers (and/or donors), and is tweaking their polling in turn
3. Random noise (given how consistent the pattern is, though, this seems pretty unlikely)

Or GOP just doesn't like Trump. They can't say it loud, because R-voters are pretty much behind Trump. Right now, the race is about Clinton +2-4, and it is tie a Ohio/Florid/Iowa etc. We should by default get some internals, where Trump has a comfortable lead, just because of nature of polls. But the "leaked" polls are always awful for Trump.

It just doesn't add up.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Public polls obviously are junk. Internals, they are good. If they wasn't why would Hillary hire them. Right?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Public polls obviously are junk. Internals, they are good. If they wasn't why would Hillary hire them. Right?

This particular poll was paid for by the Patrick Murphy campaign but I don't think you are particularly concerned with reality.

Ehm. It is an internal made by D. Would they publish it, if Murphy was trailing by 10%, genius?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

In PA's 8th CD, Republican internal poll shows Clinton (42-37) running ahead of Obama in 2012 (50-49).

Apparently I don't have enough posts to include links yet, but you can find it on The Morning Call (mcall.com) if you search for "Fitzpatrick with some good news for Clinton in the 8th District?"

(or just go to: mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-fitzpatrick-with-some-good-news-for-clinton-in-the-8th-district-20160916-story.html)
 

Nice try, Hillary! Accept that you are losing!

[Erich Maria Remarque]

In PA's 8th CD, Republican internal poll shows Clinton (42-37) running ahead of Obama in 2012 (50-49).

Apparently I don't have enough posts to include links yet, but you can find it on The Morning Call (mcall.com) if you search for "Fitzpatrick with some good news for Clinton in the 8th District?"

(or just go to: mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-fitzpatrick-with-some-good-news-for-clinton-in-the-8th-district-20160916-story.html)
 

Nice try, Hillary! Accept that you are losing!

This is from a Republican internal poll

Stop defending Hillary!

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Geoff Garin says he was in the field last night polling and saw no negative impact against Clinton from Comeygate

https://twitter.com/geoffgarin/status/792376273460924416

If he did see, would he tell us about it?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

If he did see, would he tell us about it?

all polls are rigged, eh?

Just partisan ones.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Here's a somewhat cryptic tweet from PPP:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sounds good. I interpret it as the-margin-is-inside-MOE-win and Trump trending up, i.e. Clinton +3-4 right now and Trump is doing slightly better in recent days.

Consistent with my theory, that last night attack was because of ABC'ish internals.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

@JohnJHarwood  5s6 seconds ago


top GOP pollster: "Trump recovering, not enough to dig out of hole. superior HRC data/digital/GOTV too much to overcome. GOP holds Senate."



https://twitter.com/JohnJHarwood/status/793470712287748097

Is it not the same person that "a former FBI agent says anonymously"?..

I mean why the hell would they spread bad news to depress their own pubs? If Trump will lose in landslide, GOP will lose senate as well.

Sorry, but it doesn't make any sense, does it?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

where do you see landslide in this comment. They think the firewall states will all fall short, but they still think they can win senate races in MO, NC, IN, NV which would hold Senate. Not really that complicated.

I ment that stating this fact might depress voters which may lead to landslide. What would happen, do you think, if "Democrat top pollster" would say the same? Would it not derpess D-voters?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Once again, I'm only here to post info. Don't shoot me, please:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No mercy!

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Wow, it sounds nice, given that this is PPP

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Wow, it sounds nice, given that this is PPP

Why?

PPP is a landline pollster, which generally favors the GOP.

They don't favor GOP in this cycle, no.

But anyways, I was talking about their message. They likely won't publish those polls, why my interpretation is that their "Clinton +3-5" are D-friendly and means sort of: Clinton is at best +3-5
No data, no responsibility.

We'll see soon.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Wow, it sounds nice, given that this is PPP

Why?

PPP is a landline pollster, which generally favors the GOP.

They don't favor GOP in this cycly, no.

But anyways, I was talking about their message. They likely won't publish those polls, why my interpretation is that their "Clinton +3-5" are D-friendly and means sort of: Clinton is at best +3-5

We'll see soon.

Or they won't publish polls because they are not doing any public polls for the last two weeks.  All private.

Yep, that's why they can say anything.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

PublicPolicyPolling ‏@ppppolls  8m8 minutes ago
Every NC poll we've done in the last month has had Clinton up narrowly. She will probably win. If she loses it will be likely be by 1-2 pts

Niiiice.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood  4m4 minutes ago
top Dem pollster #2 on approx Clinton edge over Trump: "2-6 IMHO"

Lol

[Erich Maria Remarque]

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood  4m4 minutes ago
top Dem pollster #2 on approx Clinton edge over Trump: "2-6 IMHO"

Lol

This is consistent with stability in the race over several months assuming all swings are reflecting non-response.

Yes, I know. But this says basically nothing. It is like saying:

top Trumpista pollster on approx race in FL/NC/IA/[ any close state]: "from C-2 to T+2 IMHO".

[Erich Maria Remarque]

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/02/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-tied-in-colorado-new-poll-shows/


#Colorado:
University of Denver (10/29-31):

Clinton 39%
Trump 39%
Third-Party Candidates 15%