RCP Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

[bripat9643]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

All that shows is how blatant the fake news media has become in going all in for Biden.

 

[bripat9643]

Here we go again with the FAKE POLLS.

Some people just never learn. They can be lied to over and over and swallow the same garbage every time.

I get political calls, that's exactly how they come up on the caller ID. Ya know what I do? I don't answer, and then I BLOCK THE #. MILLIONS of other people are doing the same thing. So tell me again, how are these polls accurate?

They're not, period.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%. In the actual results, Hillary Clinton ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%.

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016. That is an accuracy rate of 92% in 2016.

You won't find any indicator or metric that is more accurate than polling.

The popular vote and $7 will get you a coffee at Starschmucks.

It's match play, not stroke play.....The polls are meaningless.

The polls correctly predicted the winner of 46 out of 50 states in 2016. That is a 92% accuracy rate.

It predicted the result where the winning party hadn't changed in 50 years. It failed in the 4 most crucial states.

 

[U2Edge]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

 

[U2Edge]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

2016 was an epic, once in a lifetime event! Oh wait, it happened in 2004 too ...

Nope, in 2004, RCP average of the polls correctly predicted that Bush would win the popular vote, and also correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states.

 

[U2Edge]

Here we go again with the FAKE POLLS.

Some people just never learn. They can be lied to over and over and swallow the same garbage every time.

I get political calls, that's exactly how they come up on the caller ID. Ya know what I do? I don't answer, and then I BLOCK THE #. MILLIONS of other people are doing the same thing. So tell me again, how are these polls accurate?

They're not, period.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%. In the actual results, Hillary Clinton ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%.

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016. That is an accuracy rate of 92% in 2016.

You won't find any indicator or metric that is more accurate than polling.

The popular vote and $7 will get you a coffee at Starschmucks.

It's match play, not stroke play.....The polls are meaningless.

The polls correctly predicted the winner of 46 out of 50 states in 2016. That is a 92% accuracy rate.

It predicted the result where the winning party hadn't changed in 50 years. It failed in the 4 most crucial states.

Polling predicted that 2 of those four states were too close to call, Pennsylvania and Nevada. Those states were within the margin of error for the small leads it predicted for Trump in Nevada and Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania.

Only Wisconsin and Michigan is where the polling got it wrong. But the average of polls correctly predicted the national popular vote winner and the winner in all 50 states in 2012, 2008, and 2004.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here we go again with the FAKE POLLS.

Some people just never learn. They can be lied to over and over and swallow the same garbage every time.

I get political calls, that's exactly how they come up on the caller ID. Ya know what I do? I don't answer, and then I BLOCK THE #. MILLIONS of other people are doing the same thing. So tell me again, how are these polls accurate?

They're not, period.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%. In the actual results, Hillary Clinton ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%.

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016. That is an accuracy rate of 92% in 2016.

You won't find any indicator or metric that is more accurate than polling. Is it 100% perfect, no, but its still the most accurate indicator/metric out there.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%.

What did the state polls predicts?

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016.

Which 4 states did they get wrong?

 

[Oddball]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

 

[kaz]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

2016 was an epic, once in a lifetime event! Oh wait, it happened in 2004 too ...

Nope, in 2004, RCP average of the polls correctly predicted that Bush would win the popular vote, and also correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states.

I was obviously referring to exit polling

 

[Lewdog]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Biden's lead is compounded by the fact these polls are with Trump as an incumbent candidate. That makes a HUGE difference, because it is much harder to unseat an incumbent. There have been very few one-term Presidents in the last 100 years that weren't killed/died or were pushed into office without winning an election for their position like Gerald Ford.

 

[Norman]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Historic Trumpslide moment is imminent. Every American hears the call and votes for the American president. At that point what the fake news said will have zero bearing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

 

[Oddball]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

oopsie.

 

[Rambunctious]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

If the polls were honest Trump would be 14 points ahead....last week Biden was 12 ahead now they say he is 4 points ahead....in less than a week Biden dropped 8 points?....just wait until November and shove the polls....

That's individual polls. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE AVERAGE OF THE POLLING DATA TO GET A MORE ACCURATE AND CONSISTENT VIEW.

In the average of the polling data, BIDEN was ahead by 7.5% on August 12, 2019. Today in the Average of the polls, BIDEN is ahead by 7.8%. Understand?

There is nothing accurate about the polls....there wasn't in 2016 and there isn't today...until the pollsters realize that 26% of conservatives didn't fall off the face of the earth and begin to sample select fairly they will stay wrong......

The polls accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in the 2016 election. That is a 92% accuracy rate.

Then one would think if they tried they could do better with the presidential race.....they must be off on purpose...thanks for pointing that out....

 

[Two Thumbs]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Propaganda is very effective. The idea that anyone would toss out a thriving economy for biden is mind boggling.

 

[Aldo Raine]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Fake Nuz, they certainly did not in 1984. And that is off the top of my head.

 

[kyzr]

Hey U2, we've all seen this movie before, here is what the 2020 version will look like

 

[U2Edge]

Here we go again with the FAKE POLLS.

Some people just never learn. They can be lied to over and over and swallow the same garbage every time.

I get political calls, that's exactly how they come up on the caller ID. Ya know what I do? I don't answer, and then I BLOCK THE #. MILLIONS of other people are doing the same thing. So tell me again, how are these polls accurate?

They're not, period.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%. In the actual results, Hillary Clinton ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%.

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016. That is an accuracy rate of 92% in 2016.

You won't find any indicator or metric that is more accurate than polling. Is it 100% perfect, no, but its still the most accurate indicator/metric out there.

The polls correctly predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the national Popular vote in 2016. It was predicted by an average of the polling data that she would win the national popular vote by 3.1%.

What did the state polls predicts?

Going to individual state polling in 2016, polling accurately predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016.

Which 4 states did they get wrong?

Nevada - predicting a Trump victory, but really a TOSS UP since the margin was only 0.8%, well bellow 3% and inside the margin of error. Polling was actually accurate because it was close and within the margin of error.

Pennsylvania - predicting a Clinton victory, but really a TOSS up since the margin was only 1.9%, below 3% and inside the margin of error. Polling was actually accurate because it was close and within the margin of error.

Michigan - predicting a Clinton victory by 3.4%

Wisconsin - predicting a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

 

[U2Edge]

Real Clear Politics Average of the polls: Trump/Clinton2016 vs. Trump/Biden2020

In the Real Clear Politics Average of the Polls, Clinton trailed Trump at two different points, May 22, 2016 to May 25, 2016 by 0.2%, and July 29, 2016 to July 30, 2016 by 1.2%.

By contrast, Joe Biden has NEVER trailed Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls. Joe Biden has been ahead of Trump every day in the Average of the polls. Joe Biden's weakest margin over Trump was January 13, 2020 to January 18, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%, and January 23, 2020 to January 25, 2020 when BIDEN led Trump by 4.0%.

As of today, BIDEN leads Trump in the Real Clear Politics average of the polls for August 19, 2020 by 7.8%.

Back on August 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Trump by 5.5%.


What this tells us is that BIDEN is doing significantly better than Clinton against Trump when it comes to national polling.

Clinton was ahead of Trump in the RCP average of national polls on election day by 3.1% and ended up winning the national popular vote by 2.1%

It should be noted that no sitting President has ever been re-elected without winning the popular vote either by a plurality or a majority.

Biden's lead is compounded by the fact these polls are with Trump as an incumbent candidate. That makes a HUGE difference, because it is much harder to unseat an incumbent. There have been very few one-term Presidents in the last 100 years that weren't killed/died or were pushed into office without winning an election for their position like Gerald Ford.

William Howard Taft
Herbert Hoover
Jimmy Carter
George H.W. Bush

Trump is the only President of the last 75 years besides Jimmy Carter to face two consecutive quarters of economic contraction IN THE YEAR HE IS TRYING TO BE RE-ELECTED. 1st Quarter of GDP economic contract was a negative 6%. The 2nd Quarter Of GDP Economic contraction was a RECORD negative 33%. Two consecutive quarters of GDP economic contraction is the technical definition of a RECESSION!
The third Quarter numbers won't come out until October 30th, just four days before election day and long after millions of people will have already mailed in their votes.

Trump is dealing with a far worse economic contraction than Jimmy Carter and worse unemployment than Jimmy Carter had in 1980. He is also dealing with a pandemic that has killed nearly 180,000 Americans is burning through the country out of control.

All the social and economic indicators show Trump is well positioned to be defeated on November 3, 2020.

 

[U2Edge]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

The polls, both in states and nationally significantly narrowed for Hillary Clinton. I would say that is unlikely to happen for BIDEN. The country is in the worst recession since the 1930s and TRUMP is the incumbent President taking the blame for that. There are less undecided voters this time, and no significant third party candidates. Two months from now, its likely Biden will still be at the same points in these states and nationally which will be significantly better than where Hillary was at that time.

 

[U2Edge]

In 2016, polling correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote and the winner in 46 out of 50 states.

Trump's victory in 2016 was a FLUKE, a rare event unlikely to be repeated for a very long time.

Essentially what your doing by reposting that video is like reposting the video of a 80 yard pass play for a touchdown to win a football game in the final 5 seconds of a game. Sure, it has happened, but its very rare. To always depend on such a scenario in order to win will lead to failure and disappointment.

As I already pointed out, the game is match play not stroke play....The popular vote is fucking meaningless when you're going to win NY and CA by 20 points.

So stuff that in you pipe and smoke it.

That still does not negate the fact that POLLING predicted the winner in 46 out 50 states in 2016! That's a 92% accuracy rate.

Deflection from the overall point.

The pollsters got the numbers wrong where they most mattered....The odds makers and the media blabbermouths looked like total fools....The end EC vote wasn't even close.

After that, the pre-election polls, with the exception of the '72 blowout, have always skewed in favor of the democrat for as long as I've been paying attention....And RCP is nothing more than an average of deliberately distorted information....GIGO.

Not so. Lets examine the only 4 states where the pollsters got it wrong.

NEVADA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Trump victory of 0.8%. That was well below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Nevada by 2.3%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case 0.8% for a Trump victory.
POLLING IN NEVADA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%. That was below the 3% threshold under which a state becomes a TOSS UP do to polling margin of error. Donald Trump ended up winning Pennsylvania by 0.7%. So although the polling failed to predict the winner in this state, it correctly predicted it was a TOSS UP and could go either way given the margin was below 3%, in this case a predicted 1.9% win for Clinton that turned out to be a 0.7% win for Trump.
POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA IN 2016: ACCURATE predicting a close race that was a TOSS UP.

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%. That was above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan by 0.3%. So the polling in Michigan proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.3%.
POLLING IN MICHIGAN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%. That was well above the 3% threshold for the margin of error under which a state can be seen as a TOSS UP. Donald Trump ended up winning Wisconsin by 0.7%. So the polling in Wisconsin proved to be inaccurate because it predicted a Clinton victory above the margin of error threshold of 3% and Trump won by 0.7%.
POLLING IN WISCONSIN IN 2016: INACCURATE predicting a Clinton victory above the margin of error.


So the polling was really accurate in 48 of 50 states, rather than just 46 of 50 states once we considered that the polling correctly predicted very tight races in Pennsylvania and Nevada which made them toss up's because they were within the margin of error for polling.

Finally, while Wisconsin's polling results look wildly off the mark, it should be noted that in 2012, MITT ROMNEY received 1,407,966 votes and lost to Barack Obama by 7 percentage points. Barack Obama got 1,620,985 votes in Wisconsin 2012.
Fast forward to 2016 and Donald Trump received 1,405,284 votes. That was nearly 3,000 LESS votes than Mitt Romney in 2012 and Mitt Romney lost by 7 percentage points. Hillary received 1,382,536 votes nearly 240,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012. So it turns out that Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin can be explained entirely by Democratic voter turnout. Trump did not not have a winning hand in Wisconsin in terms of number of votes. There was no significant switch of Democrats voting for the Republican candidate Trump. We know that because Trump got 3,000 less votes than Mitt Romney in 2012. So the polling data for Wisconsin in this light was actually correct. It failed to predict that many people who supported Hillary Clinton ended up sitting at home on election day. These voters answered correctly when asked who they would vote for, but simply did not make it to the voting booth. Voter Turnout is key in elections and Hillary Clinton never visited Wisconsin during her entire Campaign. Visits and money spent directly influence voter turnout.

With that in mind, polling was accurate in 49 out of 50 states in 2016 since polling only measures who one favors, not who shows up at the polls on election day.


NOW for the real Kicker. RCP average of the polls correctly predicted the winner in all 50 states and the national popular vote in the 2012, 2008, and 2004 elections!

PENNSYLVANIA: The RCP average predicted a narrow Clinton victory of 1.9%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up more than 9%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.4%

MICHIGAN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 3.4%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 8%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.7%

WISCONSIN: The RCP average predicted a Clinton victory by 6.5%.

On this day in 2016, they had Hillary up by 9.4%.
Now they have Biden up by 6.5%

oopsie.

One day in August. Clinton's leads in those states narrowed. Biden's lead is unlikely to.