HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » POLL: North Carolina High...

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:38 AM

POLL: North Carolina HighPoint University: Clinton +1 with leaners, +2 w/o

Likely voters with leaners:
Clinton 43, Trump 42, Johnson 10

Likely voters w/o leaners:
Clinton 42, Trump 40, Johnson 8

http://www.highpoint.edu/src/files/2016/09/47memoA.pdf

404 likely voters, landline and cell phone, conducted 9/17 - 9/22

4.9% MOE, sample weighted based on 2008 and 2012 demographics

21 replies, 1083 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply POLL: North Carolina HighPoint University: Clinton +1 with leaners, +2 w/o (Original post)
democrattotheend Sep 2016 OP
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #1
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #2
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #3
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #4
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #5
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #7
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #10
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #12
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #14
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #15
DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2016 #17
molova Sep 2016 #6
Loki Liesmith Sep 2016 #8
CajunBlazer Sep 2016 #9
smorkingapple Sep 2016 #11
CajunBlazer Sep 2016 #13
geek tragedy Sep 2016 #16
Dawson Leery Sep 2016 #18
triron Sep 2016 #19
triron Sep 2016 #20
triron Sep 2016 #21

Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:41 AM

1. When you look at all the national aggregates Clinton is up two to four...

That suggests some of the swing states will be on a knife's edge...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #1)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:42 AM

2. want data from Colorado, Michigan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #2)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:46 AM

3. Lots of people freaking out today...

Can you think of a more self defeating emotion?

Even if I was so scared I was fouling myself I wouldn't let my enemies know.

My buddy was in the freaking Battle of Fallujah. I asked him if he was scared. He said no because it wouldn't do any good and only increase the likelihood of getting injured or killed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #3)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:51 AM

4. So odd how Democrats react

R friends are always confident, never freak out at polls.

What drives this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #4)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:56 AM

5. That's why my political hero was Bobby Kennedy...

He had boundless empathy , boundless physical courage, and boundless moral courage.


BTW, is your model based on nat'l polls, state polls or a hybrid?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #5)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:02 AM

7. State polls but

I use 2012 turnout numbers to estimate a national number and validate the runs based on the similarity to the current national polling.


My last number had a spread of 2.45 advantage Clinton. That looks fairly likely.

Can't run it now as work firewall prevents me from downloading polls from HuffPost. I expect today will put a dent in Clinton's numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #7)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:08 AM

10. Another poster was suggesting your model was based on national numbers only.

Nate is getting a lot of push back on his model . It is is not as if those questioning it are nobododies; Sam Wang, David Rothschild, and NassimTaleb are not nobodies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:12 AM

12. No I know that person, he/she has failed to understand what I'm saying from the get-go

I said that Nate Silver's model is almost entirely correlated with the national numbers. I regressed his national numbers against the moving average from huffington post and found that the national poll average explains around 60-70% of the variation in Nate's estimates of probability.

I said I could probably do almost as well as Nate just converting the national poll average into a direct probability.

but my model uses medians like Sam Wang and extrapolates missing data from trends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #12)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:21 AM

14. My eye test instructs me Clinton will win.

The same eye test that informed me of the winner, at this moment, in every election since 1976.

To be candid I don't precisely remember who I thought would win in 00.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #14)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:24 AM

15. I thought Gore would lose

I was actually a Nader advocate, until I saw what might happen. I switched over to Gore. Hope I didn't do to much damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #15)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:29 AM

17. I can't remember. I knew Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry were going to lose at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 09:59 AM

6. Romney won NC. This is good news

 

Cheer up and rec.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to molova (Reply #6)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:03 AM

8. better than I had expected for sure

All battlegrounds tightening.

could lead to a breakout either way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:06 AM

9. The title and text of your OP do not agree

In addition, on Nate Silver's website he has corrected this poll for known bias - went from Clinton +1 to a tie, and he has assigned it a relatively low weighting for accuracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:09 AM

11. Polls cannot measure turnout accurately. That's the secret sauce campaigns know about.

And it's why Plouffe and Messina are very confident of a Clinton win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to smorkingapple (Reply #11)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:13 AM

13. We had better hope so because Trump voters are more enthusistic than Clinton's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 10:29 AM

16. weighting the sample to 2008/2012 demographics seems like a very arbitrary decision

 

1) that's not necessarily a warranted assumption;

2) exit polls aren't necessarily correct in terms of demographics--they can easily undercount white voters, or nonwhite voters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 12:39 PM

18. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 01:01 PM

19. any

new early/absentee voting info?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 02:06 PM

20. knr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Original post)

Mon Sep 26, 2016, 02:42 PM

21. anyone

have updates on ballot requests by party?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread