November 1, 2016

ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll has a 13 point shift from Clinton to Trump happening in a period of 10 days.

Look at this trajectory:
10/27 - 10/30 Trump +1
10/23 - 10/26 Clinton +4
10/21 - 10/24 Clinton +9
10/20 - 10/23 Clinton +12
That's a 13 point shift in a 10 day period. [ADDED: The +12 number is an average of several days, beginning on the 20th, and ending on the 23rd, so you might characterize the shift as occurring in 7 days, a more drastic plunge.]

Here's the graph, at an ABC news article:



The news article plays down what to me looks like a disastrous plunge:
Strong enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton has ebbed since the renewal of the FBI’s email investigation. While vote preferences have held essentially steady...
Huh?
... she’s now a slim point behind Donald Trump -- a first since May -- in the latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates.
There's a second graph at that link showing also a big shift in the "strong enthusiasm" people. In the October 22 tracking poll, 52% of those likely to vote for Clinton had "strong enthusiasm," which only 49% of Trump's people had. By October 30, Clinton had slipped 7 points to 45% and Trump picked up 4 points to 53%.

One thing seems clear: Trump rode out the disaster of the pussy-grabbing remark and what looked like corroborating accusations from a number of women. It had seemed that he was destroyed, sinking fast, and no decent people would stick with him. We'd have to desert the sinking ship...

Version 9

... and get on S.S. Clinton. There was nowhere else to go. But that Trump hulk stayed afloat, and now it's The Clinton that feels deeply infected....



We gotta get outta here.

129 comments:

damikesc said...

A swing like that shows that the poll is utterly meaningless. A 13 point swing in a week this late in the election is proof that the polls are horrendous.

TheGiantPeach said...

Is "tragectory" an Althousism meaning "fatal decline"?

Bay Area Guy said...

Yeah, Baby!

At a Halloween party last night, I got into an argument with 2 close Republican friends over Trump. I told them that, Yes, I'm proudly voting for a loud, coarse, thrice-married, unprincipled, Pussy-grabbing, Casino-bankrupting scoundrel Billionaire because the cause (depriving Hillary of ultimate power) is so great.

They looked at me like I was crazy.

So be it.

Vote Trump-Pence 2016 - don't let Huma and her Weiner anywhere near the Oval Office!

Comanche Voter said...

Only poll that counts will be taken next week in the voting booths (not that I don't believe there will be a bit of "extra curricular" voting that takes place outside the booth, but shows up in the results. After all that's the Democrat King County, Cook County way).

Qwinn said...

What this demonstrates is a last moment unskewing of the polls. They kept skewing far too log and now the shift to save their credibility is goingnto look ridiculous. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the email investigation was renewed solely to make the unskew look plausible.

Nonapod said...

52% of those likely to vote for Clinton had "strong enthusiasm," which only 49% of Trump's people had. By October 30, Clinton had slipped 7 points to 45% and Trump picked up 4 points to 53%.

While I don't doubt that they exist, I personally don't know anyone who has expressed strong enthusiasm for voting Hillary Clinton. I find it hard to believe that such people exist in vast numbers. I mean, I sort of distantly get the rationalization that Trump is much worse or whatever, but being "strongly enthusiastic" to vote for Hillary Clinton? Really? You'd have to either be living in a weird fantastical delusion or be deeply uninformed.

Paulio said...

One day when I have some free time, I'm going to put together a collection of all Althouse's posts like this under the heading "Ann Althouse is terrible at quantitative things". Anytime she tries to do anything with a number it ends in disaster. Her posts about the polls before Obama-Romney are classics (along with many of the comments). It's like watching an alien commentate a football game for the first time. They have no idea what is happening and a vague sense that the numbers are important.

mccullough said...

Hillary has to adjust. Put down the vodka, quit the naps, and get out there and campaign nonstop. Trump is an energetic campaigner and Hillar is lethargic. Time for her to pop some bennies and barnstorm

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

It's not as if there's much a rat can do to keep a ship afloat, really.

That said, there's probably some animated cartoon out there where a rat saves the crew from drowning.

traditionalguy said...

That was a Swamp Drain worthy of The Great Houdini.

And this morning Paul Ryan said he is now for Trump, again, but not enough for him to lift a finger to campaign for him.

MadisonMan said...

Support for Hillary was always a mile wide and a millimeter deep.

And the polls are useless.

Combine the two and this is the result.

AprilApple said...

Clinton = rat barf. LOL.

rhhardin said...

The election is really about a principal/agent problem.

Should the President make deals that benefit Americans, or deals that benefit the President.

The principal/agent problem is that the agent begins to operate for the benefit of the agent even against the interests of the principal who hired him. A standard failure mode.

Hagar said...

Hillary! is no ways "lethardic," but she must be programmed and re-set, and all that takes time.

JPS said...

damikesc:

"A 13 point swing in a week this late in the election is proof that the polls are horrendous."

I'm not sure it is. It could certainly be that. It's consistent with both candidates having a remarkably committed core comprising around or just under 40% of the voters; the rest being lightly attached, not thrilled with their choice, and easily (and reversibly!) dissuaded from the position they'd settled on.

PB said...

And, STILL, the poll doesn't properly correct for a democrat over sampling.

The Trump lead is likely bigger.

The good part of a Hillary loss will be watching the Democrats go through the stages of grief. Lots of anger and denial.

Gusty Winds said...

I can't wait to vote for Donald Trump.

Having moved back to Wisconsin from Illinois two years ago, I finally get to vote in a battleground state.

Is anybody really enthusiastic about voting for Hillary? Bernie supporters? African Americans? Most of the enthusiasm is probably bubbling from the beta male population. Until I see it on election night, and the analysis of the exit polls, it's hard to believe that even her support among women is enthusiastic.

John Taylor said...

oh... I thought "we gotta get outta here..." was riffing on this (given the Dylan thing-y), but maybe not? Yet... appropriate?

"There must be some kind of way out of here,"
Said the joker to the thief,
"There's too much confusion, I can't get no relief.
Businessmen - they drink my wine
Plowmen dig my earth
None will level on the line
Nobody of it is worth."

"No reason to get excited,"
The thief - he kindly spoke,
"There are many here among us
Who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I we've been through that
And this is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now
The hour's getting late."

All along the watchtower
Princes kept the view
While all the women came and went
Barefoot servants too
Outside in the cold distance
A wildcat did growl
Two riders were approaching
And the wind began to howl, hey.

PB said...

While people talk about the early vote and a Hillary lead among the early voters, the early voters are largely those that are committed and would never change their vote away from party.

Bob Boyd said...

"Strong enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton has ebbed since the renewal of the FBI’s email investigation."

The ebb was already happening. The FBI only made their announcement last Friday.

Gusty Winds said...

Bernie won Michigan and Wisconsin. Just wondering if Trump has a better chance at flipping these two needed states instead of Pennsylvania. We'll see.

I manage a factory on the NW side of Milwaukee. All the African-American guys on the floor are voting for Trump.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Trump has got this thing won if he is willing to spend his own money on a mega ad buy over the weekend in 3 to 6 swing states. I predict he won't.

MadisonMan said...

BTW -- given that I'm trying to promote gridlock, Hillary tanking means I'm more likely to vote against Johnson. This is a very confusing election for people like me who so very rarely vote *for* someone.

Default: Trump, maybe Johnson, but I'm not beholden to them, really, and just want to escape blame for having voted for a reprehensible President-elect, and to throw a spanner in the gears for the next President as far as the Senate goes.

I am not fond of Feingold's vote for Obamacare, but I AM fond of his lone vote against USA-PATRIOT, still.

At least my vote against Pocan -- a do-nothing Representative if ever there was one -- is easy (although I don't even know who is running against him!)

Bay Area Guy said...

@PB,

"The good part of a Hillary loss will be watching the Democrats go through the stages of grief. Lots of anger and denial."

This is exactly right. To any folks still wavering out there -- imagine the look on Rachel Maddow's face, and the rest of her cohorts on MSNBC, as they have to report an "unexpected" Trump victory next week.

Yes, it may not happen, but the glimmer of such hope, is worth your vote.

Trump-Pence 2016!

The Vault Dweller said...

Such a big shift in so little time seems odd. There really isn't that much new information that was revealed about Hillary Clinton. Sure new e-mails and a reopening of a federal investigation is a new event, but everyone already kinda knew that she was corrupt.

I haven't looked into the polling samples, but I doubt that so many polling companies would willing weight their samples for Clinton or word their questions to support Clinton. While it would play into how she likes to campaign, as a storied stateswoman who always has an aura of inevitability, I doubt so many polling companies would intentionally try to support something like that. Bad polling predictions are bad for business if your business is polling.

What seems most likely to me is a shy tory effect. Lots of people could not be willing to reveal their support for Trump but will vote for him anyway. This is especially true considering how most in the media tried to portray him as Hitler reincarnated. So even if you liked him for his qualities of being tough and seemingly not running his comments through a focus group to parse everything, you may have just trained yourself to avoid disclosing your support for him to avoid blowback. People on the right are already used to doing this.

But it is looking hopeful for Trump's chances at winning right now. Polls being even right now, and with seemingly all the momentum behind him, (or atleast against Hillary) I think it looks like he can win. But the people who really need to worry are not the people in the Hillary campaign, (though I do hope in a year and a half from now we are hearing about how long Hillary will spend in the klink), but rather the down ballot democrats. The media spent so much time trying to tell republicans they need to worry because Trump will be a disaster for down ballot republicans, that they never really paid attention to Hillary. Even though Hillary got more votes in the primary, it was clear that nearly all the emotional support was for Bernie Sanders. People actually liked him. No one likes Hillary. Sure people support her but it is not because of her. It is because she seems a more measured candidate compared to Bernie, or perhaps a more abstract concept like it being her time, or because a person wants to see the first woman president. But no one supports her because they like her as a person. Or because they trust her as a leader. There is no emotional support for her. Given that and the momentum behind Trump right now a week away from the elections, if I were a down ballot democrat I would have my butt pretty tightly puckered right about now.

cubanbob said...

Between now and election day a lot can happen and whatever the Democrats have on Trump or can invent will be pushed by the media with full force; i.e the nonsense about Trump releasing his 1995 tax returns. What I don't see is Hillary authorizing the National Archives to release the draft of her 1994 White Water indictment, that was suppressed by her husband's AG. Trump may have, indeed probably did, push the envelope with his return back then but if he actually committed tax evasion then the Clinton Administration let him slide. A return like that is always reviewed by the IRS.

Unknown said...

Did you have a plan all along with your rat cartoons?

tcrosse said...

Strong enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton ebbed in 2008, if it ever existed at all.
I am reminded of a scene from Peter Pan: Tinkerbell is far from well, and all the boys and girls in the audience are asked to applaud if they believe in fairies.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Berlitz Palo Alto said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brando said...

Looking at the graph, what seems clear is that Hillary's low point and Trump's high point are very close together--so if he can end the campaign on a good note and she ends on a sour one, this will become a tossup. There's only a week left, so presumably this closeness will hold, but don't be too shocked if we get one more "weekend surprise".

Right now, Trump holds a small lead in Florida, which gives him a chance in the electoral college (no way he wins without Florida--if he loses Florida, there's no combination of states he could take it away with, as Florida leans more GOP than most swing states). The main question remaining is the ground game--is Hillarys' as good as Obamas? Will it be enough to make a one or two point difference she needs?

We may be up late next Tuesday watching returns!

traditionalguy said...

When a British Captain with the better ship and better guns and better crew asked a Scotsman named Jones, sailing as the first American Navy Captain, "Has your ship struck? as it was burning and sinking, Jones shouted back very rudely, "I have not yet begun to fight." And Jones attacked the other ship, took it over and won.

Jones was also known for another Trump like statement: "I wish to have no connection to any ship which does not sail fast, for I intend to go in harm's way."

110 years later, the United States Navy later brought him back from his Paris grave and placed his remains in a Marble Sarcophagus in the Naval Academy Chapel. ..something about he had made the Navy Great Again. It was Teddy Roosevelt's era.

Michael said...

The way they get the poll numbers to swing even though "vote preferences have held essentially steady" is by changing their estimates of who will actually vote. Last week's polls were heavily weighted toward Democratic turnout, maybe following 2008 and 2012. Now they are thinking: maybe not. Preference numbers have some science behind them. Turnout is anybody's guess.

AJ Lynch said...

If Trump wins, I predict our far left office manager will be in tears the day after the election and I will tell her "see your tears are proof that women should not be president" just to bust her chops.

Greg Hlatky said...

"Mrs. Clinton, will you and your campaign accept the results of this election?"

gbarto said...

I like the second rat.

dreams said...

CNBC is in all out attack mode on Trump today, all agree he is bad and going to lose.

Achilles said...

Carville losing his shit.

Achilles said...

Blogger dreams said...
"CNBC is in all out attack mode on Trump today, all agree he is bad and going to lose."

General Electric getting full value on it's investment. It won't be enough though.

Tank said...

MadisonMan said...

BTW -- given that I'm trying to promote gridlock ...


I don't get this. You're a bright guy, do you think things are going so nicely we should just continue to float along in this direction? $20T in debt, open borders, rising violence in our cities, etc?

Don't you think we need to change a few things?

One answer ... Trump. You don't like him personally? Who cares, we're not electing our new BFF. We need someone who will (may) do some right things. If you don't vote for Trump, you're electing Clinton the Corrupt !

My name goes here. said...

Couple of thoughts here...

Hillary dropped 10 of those points in that poll before the FBI news broke on Friday.

The idea that the polling group "had it right" and there was a 10 point drop before the FBI news and only 3 more point adjustment after seems laughable to me. Either they were wildly wrong before and started cleaning up their act or they are wrong now.

Oh, and Obamacare and company provided healthcare premium increases were being announced throughout the month of October.

Achilles said...

When do I get to say I told you so?

And I fully expect the Clinton team to "win" at some point on the 8th. They will turn in obviously fake results from Philadelphia just like they did in 2012 and in several other cities. It is clear more legal voters support Trump.

dreams said...

"General Electric getting full value on it's investment. It won't be enough though."

I think Comcast bought the rest of GE's investment in CNBC.

TreeJoe said...

Umm, the FBI news came on a friday (when all bad news is dumped to minimize impact) and in that poll-graph the candidates were within margin of error by friday. It wasn't truly witnessed until over the weekend. So I would say that graph does not yet reflect any impact from the FBI news, if any is to occur.

Oso Negro said...

Vote the Vag! Free felonies for all!

traditionalguy said...

That much desperation may show they don't want the real polls showing how far ahead Trump's votes are when the Fractional Vote Count Central Computer allocates a rigged winning vote % to Hillary. That can be embarrassing.

matthew49 said...

Most of the movement in poll numbers occurred before the FBI announcement. It was Obamacare that did it.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I'm in the "they were oversampling the Democrats" camp myself. Not necessarily for nefarious reasons. Figuring out who is actually going to show up at the polls is more of an art than science.

Bay Area Guy said...

In Florida, Black voter turn-out is weak so far.

And, as long as Bull Connor is not using fire hoses to suppress the vote or poll taxes or other illegal methods historically perfected by Southern Dems, I am happy.

Mike said...

The math is mindboggling at first. How can a three-day rolling average change 6 points in one day? Or 10 in a week? The underlying numbers are either hugely disfavorable to Clinton or the sample composition is whack. Or the phony poll season is over and the professionals are now tilting toward fixing their own reputations at the expense of fixing the race.

Ann Althouse said...

"Is "tragectory" an Althousism meaning "fatal decline"?"

Ha ha. That's what I thought. Reminds me of the time I lost a spelling bee because I saw the ostrich in ostracize.

Spelling was corrected when Meade noticed it, shortly after it went up.

Ann Althouse said...

"That said, there's probably some animated cartoon out there where a rat saves the crew from drowning."

The usual idea is that the rats help because they figure out sooner that the ship will go down. You see the rats leaving, so that's all you need to know. Get out now without further investigation.

rhhardin said...

Tragectory would be goats.

Achilles said...

Blogger Mike said...
The math is mindboggling at first. How can a three-day rolling average change 6 points in one day? Or 10 in a week? The underlying numbers are either hugely disfavorable to Clinton or the sample composition is whack.

We need to stop accepting premises. The people at ABC are clearly corrupt and they clearly used the polls to shape opinion rather than report on it.

We need to stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt. They have been caught hiring violent thugs to attack us at our rallies. They call us racist and sexist because we disagree with them. They sent the IRS after us. The EPA is attacking us every day. The DOJ is clearly undermining the rule of law.

We need to treat them like evil people who are enemies of freedom. Because they are.

Mike said...

In some states like CO early votes can be changed. The voter can go to the registrar and request a new ballot and have their old one voided. Trump mentioned this is a speech last week, suggesting that "all the changed votes would be in his direction" in the end. Of course CNN "reported" on this as "Trump urges his supporters to vote multiple times"!

Ann Althouse said...

"Did you have a plan all along with your rat cartoons?"

No. The original rats just came with experimenting with a new iPhone/iPad feature that lets you finger-write in Messages. When I realized I could draw, I drew human faces first. After a while, I drew a bird and then something that looked enough like a rat (not even intended to be a rat) that I drew another rat and another and another, trying to amuse Meade with texts. That led to putting them on the blog, taking a vote on the best rat, and casually thinking about other things to do with rat drawings, like have a regular-feature comic strip on the blog. Today's appearance of the rat just happened when I rambled into the cliche "deserting the sinking ship." That's the kind of thing I'd ordinarily reject as trite but I kept it because it let me drag up a rat. The coughing rat was drawn the other day for no particular reason, but it suggested itself after I had the idea of the SS Clinton being abandonable because of one of those shipboard diseases people get on their supposedly fun cruise ships.

Achilles said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"Is "tragectory" an Althousism meaning "fatal decline"?"

Ha ha. That's what I thought. Reminds me of the time I lost a spelling bee because I saw the ostrich in ostracize.

Spelling was corrected when Meade noticed it, shortly after it went up.


I lost a regional spelling B decades ago in 7th grade on jealous. I think somehow I said gealous. I don't know to this day what really happened.

I am haunted.

wildswan said...

Althouse said:
"You see the rats leaving, so that's all you need to know. Get out now without further investigation."

But is Paul Ryan a rat? And which one of your rats is he? Or do you have a politician rat drawing?

TonyM said...

"What puts the "ape" in apricot?"

Owen said...

rhhardin@10:22: "The principal/agent problem is that the agent begins to operate for the benefit of the agent even against the interests of the principal who hired him. A standard failure mode." A very well-characterized problem of long standing and wide application. And yet we keep forgetting it.

It ties directly IMHO to the Lord Acton quote about corruption as a function of power (or, as recently improved by some commenter whose name I am ashamed to admit I've forgotten here, corruption as a function of immunity).

John Taylor @10:30: "we gotta get outta here..." Thanks for the lyrics to one of my favorite Dylan songs. What came to me was Eric Burdon and the Animals' "We gotta get out of this place/If it's the last thing we ever do-oo..." But that is less likely and perhaps less apposite.

Bob Boyd said...

"I believe the polls accurately reflect the opinions of shut-ins with landlines who desperately want to talk to strangers." - David Burge

hombre said...

Many commenters have said that polls, particularly media polls have been promoting Hillary and that reality wouldn't be reflected until a week before the election. Well, here we are.

It is possible that the Clintons corrupt everything.

wildswan said...

If the present polls - a swing of ten points - are a response mostly to the Obamacare increases (which is very possible) then the Carlos Danger effect has not shown up. That means a Trump landslide once it's all absorbed.

There 650,000 e-mails, many classified, on Anthony Wiener's computer in a file marked "Life Insurance".

He got them in some way for some purpose from his wife, Huma Abedin, Hillary's personal assistant. The FBI director, James Comey. did not know this when he temporarily closed the investigation into how well Hillary protected national security. Comey considers that the fact that Hillary lost control of 650,000 e-mails, including many with highly classified data, is important for us to know. The Clintons and their supporters consider it unimportant. We only need to know she has a vagina and is a Democrat.

Terry said...

It is a mistake to characterize the pro-Trump people as anti-elite. This is how the elite would characterize the pro-Trump people :)
I think that the pro-Trump people would characterize themselves as an anti-aristocracy party. Look at the Tea Party. While Americans think their revolution was against the British King, it was really against the English aristocracy. The British king was really just 'first among equals.' The British aristocracy chose their ruling family from the ranks of European aristocrat families.

Rob said...

Cast my vote today for Agent Orange. He's still a gigantic jerk, and if elected he'll be a moronic failure, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to reject the cynicism of Hillary and the Democrats, to oppose their policies which will cause harm to this country and at the same time to give the finger to the New York Times and other mainstream media outlets who have abandoned even lipservice to objective journalism and to their enablers in academia.

Achilles said...

Blogger wildswan said...
If the present polls - a swing of ten points - are a response mostly to the Obamacare increases (which is very possible) then the Carlos Danger effect has not shown up. That means a Trump landslide once it's all absorbed.

The idea that the poll reflects voter opinions is a False premise.

Trump leads among independents, gets double digits among black voters, outperforms Romney among Hispanics and republicans and has a 37d-29i-29r split goes from +13C to +1D in 4 days.

The poll is meant to push an agenda, not reflect the opinions of voters.

gerry said...

In Cincinnati last night, fewer than 1,000 people showed up for Hill.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"I believe the polls accurately reflect the opinions of shut-ins with landlines who desperately want to talk to strangers." - David Burger

The only reason I have a landline is because I am on a bundle package and when I called to drop the landline it was pointed out that it would actually cost me more money to not have a one.

roadgeek said...

Gallup surveyed me this AM, via email. I selected Trump. There were other questions about the direction of the country, was I involved in my community and so forth, but they basically just wanted to know how I'd voted. Past tense, because my wife and I voted last Friday. I believe there are about 100,000 participants in their email panel.

Terry said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
The only reason I have a landline is because I am on a bundle package and when I called to drop the landline it was pointed out that it would actually cost me more money to not have a one.

I have a land line because cell phone reception is crap at my casa, internet phone is unreliable, and a landline will work if the power goes out.
What do you use instead of a land line, Ron Winkleheimer?

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

The usual idea is that the rats help because . . .

I thought is was part and parcel of the captain going down with his ship. The sailors should stay on board to save the ship as long as possible and not abandon at first notice like the cowardly rats.

So I learned something new today.

THANKS!!!

tim in vermont said...

After Wikileaks releases the Podesta email about "getting what we need from public polls," billion dollar campaigns don't need any information from public polls, what they "need" is propaganda value.

Attached to the email was a report brimming with subtle ways to skew polls Democrat. Among them was the suggestion to get your independents from certain areas of Florida first, as these were more persuadable, ensure that the samples skewed young, oversample blacks, etc, etc, etc.

It is no surprise whatsoever that Hillary's polls came back to earth. Not even media polls want to come in too far off the final, actual, number. What propaganda value will they have next election then? It would be like eating your seed corn.

Yancey Ward said...

The 13 point lead was always the outlier. I think the election has always been much closer than many of the media polls have shown, but the trend is definitely favoring Trump. For me, one the big telling problem for Clinton was her inability to get to 48% in the national averages. You can only win with less than 48% if there is a really strong well known 3rd party candidate that draws 5+%. Right now, I think it pretty clear that Johnson and Stein combined are going to draw less than 4%. The old rule is that if the incumbent can't poll above 50% they lose on election day, but if you assume the "others" draw 4%, the rule is now if the incumbent can't poll above 48%, and Clinton polls well below that nationally, and in almost every state that one could plausibly call a toss up.

Trump's main problem as of this morning, though is this- he could win the popular vote by more than 1% and still not win the electoral college. I have long said his most likely path to victory was winning all the states Romney won, and adding Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, then adding Nevada or Iowa or maybe New Hampshire. If Kaine prevents him from winning Virginia (the reason he was selected in the first place), then Trump really needs to win a state like Wisconsin, Michigan, or Pennsylvania. This is why I still think his battle is uphill, but if his hidden support is over 3%, he could win the national vote by more than 3 or 3% and that will probably be enough to tip Virginia, too.

Mark said...

There is a reason that Democrats voted in droves against Hillary in 2008 and again in the 2016 primaries. And a lot of the votes she did get in the primaries were of the "she's inevitable so get on the bandwagon" sort.

This week, it is deja vu all over again. People are remembering again, "Oh, yeah, that's why we are disgusted and fed up with the Clintons." Some Dems are still willing to whore their souls and cast votes for her (or already have in early voting), but very few really want four years of her and Bill and Carville and Podesta and Begala and Lanny Deep Throat Davis and the rest of the Clinton operation.

Saxinis Kion said...

If I am reading the dates correctly, that is a 13 point swing in 7 days, not 13.

Bruce Hayden said...

@wildswan - not sure how many of the emails are, or should have been, classified. I think it likely that most are not. The 650k figure probably includes a lot of Weiner emails, and some after Crooked Hillary and Huma left the State Dept. besides, Huma probably did have a State.gov email account or accounts. I don't think right now if we know whether Dir Comey was convinced to reopen the investigation(s) because of classified documents, findind some of the missing 30k emails, or a lot of evidence of pay-to-play public corruption (Huma apparently was at the center, expediting much of it).

Of course, they can't release the emails to the public at this point, as requested by Crooked Hillary and a lot of Dems, because there is a decent chance that at least some of the emails contain classified information. Even one would suffice. They know this, which is why their demands to release them to the public are so disingenuous.

Yancey Ward said...

And the problem with polling under 50% or whatever is that undecided break towards the non-incumbent, it is that the incumbent's support is so soft it just doesn't show up on election day/s.

Bob Boyd said...

Hillary plans election night victory fireworks in NYC.

http://www.mediaite.com/election-2016/ny-post-reveals-hillary-clintons-fireworks-triumphal-celebration-on-election-night-in-nyc/

Sebastian said...

@YW: "his most likely path to victory was winning all the states Romney won, and adding Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, then adding Nevada or Iowa or maybe New Hampshire. If Kaine prevents him from winning Virginia (the reason he was selected in the first place), then Trump really needs to win a state like Wisconsin, Michigan, or Pennsylvania. This is why I still think his battle is uphill." So the likely path is unlikely and the hill is a mountain. Too much wishful thinking going on (not by YW).

Herb said...

or they were oversampling dems and trying to convince Trump voters it was over but knew they would have to tighten to reality quickly. Im not even sure the full impact of the reopened investigation are in this poll yet.

Mark said...

If Dems had done what needed to be done and driven a wooden stake into the heart of Clintonism years ago, we would not be in this situation today.

Bruce Hayden said...

My theory is that a lot of this is the removing of the biases that we have seen in the polling esp since the Dem convention. No one has really explained the big Crooked Hillary bump after their convention. Not that many great speakers. Certainly not her, nor her daughter. And Trump sucked the O2 out of the first couple days. He is the better speaker, and his kids are much better than Chelsea. Better VP pick too. She probably wins on her spouse's ability to speak publicly over his. The answer I suspect, is that the narrative was a big Dem bounce after their convention, and polls were biased accordingly, to make the narrative seem true, primarily by grossly over sampling Dems, but also, apparently, by micro managing the sampling of demographics, such as blacks over whites, urban over rural, etc. The gross oversampling was justified based on esp 2008 Dem turnout. But nominating a corrupt woman because at one time she had a usable vagina is just not as moving or momentous as electing the first black President, who was also clean and well spoken. No polling organization wants to be as grossly off if the election is indeed close, and, in particular, if Trump wins, so they needed to wring their biases out of their "sampling" before the actual election made obvious their lies and manipulations.

David said...

A plague from both their houses.

I Callahan said...

You're gonna need a bigger boat...

shiloh said...

Keep hope alive!

and ... Follow the $$$ !!!

Bless me father for I have sinned, it has been over (40) years since my last confession and 3 mos. since my last Althouse confession. Have you missed me? Rhetorical.

Indeed, Althouse is the go to blog for acute analytical political analysis only her 90/10 con bubble can provide.

And speaking of Althouse and her acute political analysis:

My observation of the entire scene tells me Romney will have a decisive win.

If only she had heeded Nate Silver's analytical call! But alas, she was smitten w/mittens and her home boy er birthday boy, Limbaugh, who kept harping on the skewed poll nonsense the last 2 mos. of the campaign.

>

Repeating, presidential elections aren't that complicated. It's always good not to overthink!

>

Interesting Althouse stopped blogging Nate's 2016presidential prediction after it was no longer close. hmm ~ cruel neutrality be damned!

I yield back the balance of my time.

Achilles said...

I also would like to point out that this is a tracking poll.

That means it is a rolling average. In order to go from +13C to +1T in 4 days there has to be a day where Trump is +14 or a series of days to balance out the day that Hillary is +13.

Total garbage. People are not thinking and they are not even trying.

Freeman Hunt said...

If Hillary loses, this story reads like a Greek tragedy. Can you imagine? Weiner's actions ultimately bringing the whole thing down?!

mikeski said...

"Hillary plans election night victory fireworks in NYC."

And when she loses, she'll launch them anyway, and write them off as donation to the Republican party.

So, really, you're paying for them.

mikeski said...

"Weiner's actions ultimately bringing the whole thing down?!"

The Republic, saved (?) by a randy pedo. The Lord works in mysterious ways!

Hunter said...

Achilles said...
I lost a regional spelling B decades ago in 7th grade on jealous. I think somehow I said gealous. I don't know to this day what really happened.

I am haunted.


I had a chance to go to the state spelling bee once, and threw the final round. The word was "chancellor" and I knew how to spell it, but I decided I'd be clever and use the alternate British spelling "chancellour". Except, of course, there's no such alternate spelling for that particular word. So I was tossed out.

It's probably the earliest time in my life I did something impulsive and experienced the instant shock and grief of realizing "this can never be undone".

Gk1 said...

Seems like the polls are bogus or hillary is a gawdawful candidate going down to defeat. What is the likeliest explanation?

shiloh said...

"What is the likeliest explanation?"

They're both gawdawful candidates, but Trump is the bigger train wreck!

Achilles said...

Sometimes I wish I was ignorant.

The next president gets to preside over the loss of at least 20 million jobs to automated vehicles alone just including truck drivers and cab drivers.

The Dow is going to correct during their presidency.

Chinese debt is going to correct during their presidency.

US debt is going to correct during their presidency.

Total world debt is 225% of total world GDP.

Europe is going to be at war again because that is what they do.

Iran will get nukes, will most likely nuke Israel, and the Islamist movement will end.

I have not even got to grey goo scenarios or rogue AI. North Korea detonation of nukes in the ionosphere?

In so many ways nothing will matter. The Obama administration has baked the cake so to say.

Achilles said...

Blogger shiloh said...
"What is the likeliest explanation?"

They're both gawdawful candidates, but Trump is the bigger train wreck!

Such depth. I really missed your critical thinking skills. You are such an addition to any conversation.

What is the reason Trump is worse than the woman who corrupted the FBI/DOJ, put herself above the law, and seeks to destroy the rule of law? I forgot.

Brando said...

"If Hillary loses, this story reads like a Greek tragedy. Can you imagine? Weiner's actions ultimately bringing the whole thing down?!"

I don't know if I'd attribute it to Weiner and the latest Comey revelations. After all, finding out the FBI is looking at more Clinton e-mails is the equivalent of one more woman saying Trump groped her--whose mind is going to change over something we all sort of expected at this point?

I'd attribute the tightening to two things--one, bad recent Obamacare news which is depressing younger, more liberal-leaning voters. The news was sort of buried in the past couple weeks (because the media seems to think gropings and Weiner's peener are more newsworthy, and they wonder why no one respects the media?) but it could be the people affected by the exchanges still got the message. Second, it's the natural partisan tightening at the end--Republicans coming home. We're back where we were pre-debates.

This is coming down to ground game. Watch Florida.

madAsHell said...

Weiner's actions ultimately bringing the whole thing down?!

This situation was predicted by Trump in 2015. He even identified Weiner as a security risk. That's YUUUUGE!

Trump is a tremendous judge of character.

Howard said...

NPR this morning said it was normal behavior of the polls nearing the election date as the bases commit one way or another. All of their sources, including democrats and GOPers told them that Trump has no chance winning the electoral race unless he "runs the table" plus early and often Clinton voting means she is already half in the bag.

Mattman26 said...

What's the line from Spinal Tap, when fewer and fewer people are attending their shows? Something about their appeal becoming more selective . . . .

Howard said...

Brando: It always comes down to the turnout. The dems have a 10:1 advantage on the ground-game but Trump may not need to be on the ground to get the turnout he needs.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

What do you use instead of a land line, Ron Winkleheimer?

Cell phone and VOIP. The landline is actually VOIP for that matter. But all of my business conferences are via skype these days. So why have a landline where all the calls consist of somebody alerting me that they have detected viruses on my computer and want to "help" me, various shady sounding charities, and lately, Donald Trump wanting me to send him some money?

MikeR said...

Early voting. That's the poison pill of this election. Valid votes and the others.

shiloh said...

btw, keep in mind Nate's final prediction was actually skewed in favor of Willard ie 50.8% to 48.3%.

Final results: 51.1% to 47.2%.

So Nate tends to be conservative when it comes to his presidential pick!

Big Mike said...

Trump has weathered the -- pardon me for putting it this way but I can't resist -- below the belt attacks on him for being a womanizer back in the day. Meanwhile his strategy of focusing on Hillary's crookedness is being borne out by WikiLeaks and the last news that classified information appears to have made its way from her server onto the laptop of a pervert. Will it be enough to pull "leaning Hillary" states into toss-ups and toss-up states into "leans Trump"? Here in Virginia we'll find out in one week and 4 hours.

rehajm said...

Interesting tweet from Nate re: the wide swings:

Esoteric hot take: If polling swings are exaggerated by non-response bias, that suggests a significant risk of systemic polling error.

Gk1 said...

A majority of the country already had Clinton fatigue and she hasn't even been inaugurated yet. I think the polls are sliding away from Cankles and will continue to do so even if she wins. Is it possible to have a negative honeymoon after the inaugural?

Achilles said...

"So Nate tends to be conservative when it comes to his presidential pick!"

But something happened to 538 between 2012 and 2016... What could it be?

And IBD has been better than 538 anyhow during and since 2012.

The only hope you have is voter fraud.

Ron Winkleheimer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sammy Finkelman said...

What probably changed is the way people reported their liklihood of voting, or maybe how undecided they were. More people maybe now "lean"

Sammy Finkelman said...

Sample ballot in New York State. Note the cross-endorsements and the candidates running on allparty lines in thiselection district:

http://nyc-static.electionhub.com/sampleballots/382426/12/2016G3V2_Style_212.pdf

Rusty said...


Iran will get nukes, will most likely nuke Israel, and the Islamist movement will end.

I've been assured that this is not possible.

eric said...

I don't believe for a minute, no matter the news, that things change in people's minds that quickly.

Instead, I think it's all structured to work together. Release the news, report the news, release your poll, and then claim the poll is the result of the news.

It's like when the markets are up or down and the news is, "Markets down on China bank news." or something. They have no idea why the markets are up or down, all they know is it's up or down and they find a reason for it. It's all BS.

This is why I believe polls aren't meant to reflect opinion until we get close to election day. Instead, they are meant to lead opinion. As we near election day, we find out if it's been working because the polls begin to actually reflect opinion.

Birkel said...

Althouse called it a disaster but it wasn't a disaster.

Cue Inigo Montoya.

Yancey Ward said...

Achilles quoting and wrote:

'"So Nate tends to be conservative when it comes to his presidential pick!"

But something happened to 538 between 2012 and 2016... What could it be?
'

Silver and 538 does very well when Democrats are truly leading the polls as verified by the final vote tallies. Almost all of Silver's reputation in political polling is based on the results of the 2008 and 2012 elections, both of which were headed by Barack Obama and his voting tallies that were solidly above 50% of the total vote.

My theory has long been this- Silver is obviously a Democrat (he doesn't really try to hide that, by the way)- and he looks for confirmation of what he wants to see happen. In 2008 and 2012, Obama ran consistently ahead of McCain and Romney after early September, though Romney pulled very close after the first debate, but by the last two weeks of both campaigns, Obama ran ahead and, in my opinion, his election was a foregone conclusion. In other words, even though all the media wanted Obama to win just as badly or more so than they want Clinton to win today, biasing the polls was never really necessary- Obama was ahead, and mostly comfortably so. Thus, Silver and 538 can use the poll aggregates and look like geniuses.

However, when Republicans run well, such as the mid-Term elections of 2010 and 2014, Silver does significantly worse predicting things more than a half-month out. Part of it is that the media is still trying to make it look like Democrats are doing really well, so the input Silver gets hurts his predictive ability because in those cases it does turn out that the polling done in all but the last week or two really is awful and biased, and only straightens out when the pollsters have to salvage their reputations by actually paying attention to who is going to show up in the voting booth. In 2008 and 2012, there was no real tightening in the last two weeks because Obama really was well ahead.

Right now, I suspect Trump is going to win the popular vote, but end up short in the electoral college (unless he can win by more than 2% nationally). Clinton is no Obama, and I don't think she has really been ahead by more than 1 or 2 percent since the end of July, and it only really looked dire to me for Trump immediately after the sex-talk tape.

shiloh said...

Reality:

Even ***if*** Hillary loses OH/NC/FL/IA/NV she still has 272 electoral votes.

Indeed, Althouse cons longgg for the good ole days of 2000! er 1980! er 1900 when women couldn't vote.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Jesus, shiloh, they must be desperate if they had to send you back in. Thanks though, we got this. See you in another four years. Take care, blessings.

Harold said...

I suspect that if Trump takes the popular vote and loses the electoral college that every legislature that voted for The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will suddenly rescind their vote.

I'd like to see every state award EVs the same way Nebraska and Maine do. That way, my vote in NY would count.

shiloh said...

BL, who is this "they" you're referencing as I've been an independent contractor for quite some time.

Indeed as my life does not revolve around a con blog like so many of this blog's con minions

Three constants: Death, taxes and conservative hilarity at Althouse ie highly entertaining if rationed properly. Don't want to overdose.

Rusty said...

Things must be spinning out of control if the progressives have sent in Shiloh

shiloh said...

"I'd like to see every state award EVs the same way Nebraska and Maine do. That way, my vote in NY would count."

Damn, America er the Constitution er some fool who can't add has already given Republicans a leg up:

AL
ID
MT
WY
UT
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
AR
LA
MS
AL = 32,840,000 pop. = (72) electoral votes

>

CA = 39,144,000 pop. = (55) electoral votes

>

Republican electoral inequality notwithstanding, feel free to whine regardless as that's what Althouse cons do best ~ You bet'cha!

shiloh said...

Last AL should be AK ie the state w/600k pop. that gov. mama grizzly quit because everybody was pickin' on her.

Harold said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harold said...

Harold said...
One of the reasons for that numbers inequality is that the House has remained at 435 members in violation of the Constitution. 14th Amendment: 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

2010 Census California/Wyoming=66.08

California should have 66 representatives with 68 EVs.

NY would have 34 congresscritters, not 27.

If you read the plain language of the 14th amendment, it's quite clear that limiting the House membership to 435 members is unconstitutional. The number should be automatically determined after each census by dividing each of the other state's populations by the smallest state population.

Apparently, there are no longer any Indians not taxed since The Revenue Act of 1924.

Bad Lieutenant said...

feel free to whine

And feel free to deceive, demoralize, and obfuscate! The truth is that you say whatever you want, but all anyone hears is I AM A BAD PERSON REJECT ME.

So, in that sense, you're honest as the day is long.

shiloh said...

Not sure about increasing representatives because congress already has too many elected fools. Gerrymandering is a big problem ie uncontested congressional seats.

Always wondered how the Dems could hold onto the House after Nixon's/Reagan's landslides. I digress.

Re: the electoral college, take every states population as a % of the national pop. and use fractions, but that would be very messy although more democratic.

Or gasp, just go with the presidential candidate who gets the most votes. What a concept ie presidential ads in every state.

>

As always, America survives despite itself!

SukieTawdry said...

I haven't paid attention to the polls and don't read much about them so I'm wondering, have they ever described Trump as being "a slim point behind"?

Unknown said...

So master plan or not, the rats have their place!

Brando said...

"Brando: It always comes down to the turnout. The dems have a 10:1 advantage on the ground-game but Trump may not need to be on the ground to get the turnout he needs."

That's true that the GOP doesn't need ground game as much as the Dems, but it still helps--for example, the GOP has become more reliant on the elderly voters, who are more likely to need help getting to the polls (and need to know where early voting sites are so they can avoid election day crowds). It can mean the difference in very close states.

Presumably, they are quietly on it, because to me it's unfathomable that any major presidential campaign would completely forget to organize a ground game at all. If that were what made the difference in this election, it'd be legend for years to come.

damikesc said...

I'm not sure it is. It could certainly be that. It's consistent with both candidates having a remarkably committed core comprising around or just under 40% of the voters; the rest being lightly attached, not thrilled with their choice, and easily (and reversibly!) dissuaded from the position they'd settled on.

I've considered that both have very shallow support...but swings like this just seem like "really bad polling". Hillary's "huge lead" occurred about as quickly. The polls are just not good.

I don't know if I'd attribute it to Weiner and the latest Comey revelations. After all, finding out the FBI is looking at more Clinton e-mails is the equivalent of one more woman saying Trump groped her--whose mind is going to change over something we all sort of expected at this point?

"Re-opening" a "closed" investigation could well influence LIV.

Brando said...

""Re-opening" a "closed" investigation could well influence LIV."

How many of those are left, though? Plus, the polling tightening started before the Comey news--my guess is the Obamacare news discouraged some millenials. We'll see how the exit polls go next week though.