CNN/ORC: CO: Trump +1 PA: Clinton +1

[SirMuxALot]

It's getting to the point we can summarize many poll reactions this way:

"My preconceived notions of how people who disagree with me think must be superior to this undesirable polling result."

At this point, I see a lot of people basically saying, "PVI is permanent and perfect."

There is an argument that Trump is the closest thing to a map-scrambling candidate we've seen in our lifetimes.  Add that to the fact these are the most two disliked candidates in recent memory, and that's a recipe for some significant PVI-busting oddities this year.

And we have quite a few polls that are confirming that.  It's not impossible.

[SirMuxALot]

Cook's 2016 PVI projections for these states is: PA D+2, CO D+1.  (For comparison, 2012 he had it: PA D+2, CO Even.)

One point difference.  I'll repeat that...one point.

To say that it's impossible for them to flip is assigning a precision to demographic-based voting tendencies that doesn't exist in the real world.  Humans are complex.  Elections have all sorts of cross-currents.  PVI is an estimate of a trend.  It's a 2nd derivative.

CA to the right of UT is impossible.  CO 20 points to the right of PA is impossible.

CO 1-3 points to the right of PA is certainly possible.

[SirMuxALot]

we have ample national polling data that can be used to build models that can predict forecasts/trends?

Sure, but this boils down to: "I can disprove forward-looking polling data with forward-looking polling data."

You're trying to poke holes in the aggregate polling showing CO slightly more right than PA, and your choice of hole-poking armament is....other aggregate polling data.

You might be right, I just merely object to this ill-deserved certainty that it's impossible.  That's all.