FL - Bloomberg - Trump +2 (4 way)

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Bloomberg's horrible likely voter screen will be its undoing.

What's wrong with A+ Selzer?

If it is too restrictive, it might hurt Trump, actually, because his voters are less entusiastic right now

But as I always say, average polls. Race might be tighten a bit, but no way that quick.  Clinton is still in lead.

Only 51% of Hispanics go Clinton?  It was 60-40 in 2012.  JUNK POLL!!!

They have extra big sample of Hispanics, so the MOE should be less than usual among this group

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Demographics:

Favs/unfavs:
Obama 51/47
Bill       47/49
Hillary  44/53
Trump  46/51
Kaine   39/41
Pence   51/33
Rubio    50/44
Michelle 57/37
Biden    54/38

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Change Bloomberg to Selzer and add head-to-head:

Hillary Clinton 45
Donald Trump 46

Other/would not vote 4
Not sure/don’t remember 1
Don’t want to tell 4 What is it?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

https://twitter.com/lpdonovan/status/791246418501574656
Trump has a higher favorable than Obama 🙄

No.

Favs/unfavs:
Obama 51/47
Hillary  44/53
Trump  46/51
Bill       47/49
Kaine   39/41
Pence   51/33
Rubio    50/44
Michelle 57/37
Biden    54/38

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Another point from Steve Schale:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bloomberg's likely voter model sucks.

What this statement has to do with this poll?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

https://twitter.com/lpdonovan/status/791246418501574656
Trump has a higher favorable than Clinton, at odds with most polls

Is it strange that Trump has better favorable, when he's leading?

Trump is leading in this particular poll at odds with most polls.
It is correlated.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

When the poll had Trump getting 44% of Hispanics, the poll is just bad.

Trump gets 36% vs 51% in two-way according to this poll. With MOE of 7%

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Another point from Steve Schale:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bloomberg's likely voter model sucks.

They're (well, Seltzer is) generally one of the most accurate pollsters.  It's tough to argue with past results, even if such results don't guarantee future performance.  Take a look at their Iowa Senate polls in 2014 that everyone else thought were outliers.

But they also had Trump winning Iowa in the primary and Clinton beating Sanders by a lot more than the actual margin.

It is likely an outlier, but you are just pathetic... sigh...

[Erich Maria Remarque]

When the poll had Trump getting 44% of Hispanics, the poll is just bad.

Trump gets 36% vs 51% in two-way according to this poll. With MOE of 7%

Read wrong number, but the principle still stands.  

In SurveyUSA that had Clinton+3, Trump got MORE Hispanics in 4-way:

Cuban 49% and Non-Cuban Hispanic 37%

SurveyUSA

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Lol, average and move on

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Each pollster has laid an egg once upon the time. That's a fact

[Erich Maria Remarque]

their model works just fine...they just assume a low latino turnout cause those normally don't vote.

No, they didn't assume it.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

What ridiculous panic over a single poll. Literally 3 pages in as soon as I wake up early in the morning and the poll was posted at 3 AM.

Did they hope Trump would tweet about it