IA - Monmouth: TIED (high turnout: Greenfield +2%, low turnout: Greenfield +6%)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2023, 04:31:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 Senate & House Election Polls
  IA - Monmouth: TIED (high turnout: Greenfield +2%, low turnout: Greenfield +6%)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: IA - Monmouth: TIED (high turnout: Greenfield +2%, low turnout: Greenfield +6%)  (Read 1093 times)
TiltsAreUnderrated
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,332


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 21, 2020, 10:04:27 AM »

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_ia_102120/

October 15-19
501 registered/likely voters
MoE: 4.4%
Changes with September 18-22 poll

Ernst 47% (n/c)
Greenfield 47% (n/c)
Stewart (L) 1% (n/c)
Herzog (I) 1% (+1)
No one 1% (+1)
Other 0% (but some voters)  (n/c)
Undecided 2% (-2)

High likely turnout

Greenfield 49% (n/c)
Ernst 47% (+1)

Low likely turnout

Greenfield 51% (+3)
Ernst 45% (-2)
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,149
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2020, 10:06:17 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.
Logged
DINGO Joe
dingojoe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,703
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2020, 10:10:26 AM »

Well, not sure how Monmouth tries to weight things, but more than half of the electorate has requested early ballots and that has skewed heavily to the Ds, so the Rs will have to show up big on election day to achieve high turnout.  If they don't, then it's a low turnout that favors the early vote even more.
Logged
Pollster
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,498


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2020, 10:11:05 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.

There's no "normal turnout" model - the base numbers are all registered voters. If anything, it suggests that there is a lack of Republican motivation to vote, though we're dealing with small samples here.
Logged
Mr.Barkari Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 78,609
Jamaica
P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2020, 10:12:13 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.


But Indy Rep told us that IA was a forever R state due to Ernst retail politics, but our Congressial districts are leading D
Logged
wbrocks67
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,802


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2020, 10:14:27 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.

Monmouth accurately predicted IA in 2016 (had Trump +8)
Logged
xavier110
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,168
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2020, 10:16:23 AM »

Electoral behemoth Theresa Greenfield!!! The Senate Flipper!
Logged
Sestak
jk2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,815
Ukraine



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2020, 10:35:11 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.

RV is not normal turnout Huh
Logged
UncleSam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,473


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2020, 10:38:33 AM »

So I guess this implies that Greenfield is winning high-propensity and low-propensity voters, but moderate-propensity voters favor Ernst? I guess that makes some sense but itís still a really weird result.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,149
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2020, 10:40:52 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.

RV is not normal turnout Huh

Yes, but it's strange that both turnout numbers are more favorable for Greenfield, while the RV number is a tie. This would seem to imply that if turnout isn't especially low or high (i.e. normal turnout) that we'd expect it to be better for Ernst, which is... odd.
Logged
Sestak
jk2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,815
Ukraine



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2020, 10:42:52 AM »

Not a great poll for Greenfield, given IA polling, but it's very odd that both high and low turnout are more favorable to Greenfield than... normal turnout.

RV is not normal turnout Huh

Yes, but it's strange that both turnout numbers are more favorable for Greenfield, while the RV number is a tie. This would seem to imply that if turnout isn't especially low or high (i.e. normal turnout) that we'd expect it to be better for Ernst, which is... odd.

Not really. Generally both LV screens include less people than the RV pool. However, according to the pollster here, a substantial number of Biden/Greenfield voters (more than Trump/Ernst ones) have reported that they have already voted, which automatically gets them included into the stricter screens even if they otherwise wouldn't be.

The RV number includes people who they don't expect to vote even in the high turnout scenario; so it can almost be considered a "higher turnout" one?
Logged
RussFeingoldWasRobbed
Progress96
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,900
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2020, 01:00:03 PM »

I actually think this is a decent poll for Greenfield. If she wins, it probably will only be by 0-1 point. As someone said earlier, Monmouth is a good pollster in IA. I cant wait to see all the memes if IA really is a .3 percent Greenfield win lol
Logged
TiltsAreUnderrated
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,332


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2020, 01:02:25 PM »

I actually think this is a decent poll for Greenfield. If she wins, it probably will only be by 0-1 point. As someone said earlier, Monmouth is a good pollster in IA. I cant wait to see all the memes if IA really is a .3 percent Greenfield win lol

Obama in Florida = Trump in Iowa = titanium tilt R/D respectively. Sen. Axne is inevitable!
Logged
Anxious Pessimist Doomer
freethinkingindy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 523
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2020, 01:05:03 PM »

Republicans will hold the Senate because Greenfield will lose. Gideon might lose at this point as well.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,079


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2020, 03:11:54 PM »

New Poll: Iowa Senator by Monmouth University on 2020-10-19

Summary: D: 49%, R: 47%, U: 4%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 12 queries.