Support NeoGAF

[Square2015]

This broke 3 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. presidential hopeful Donald Trump's support among Republicans has dropped 12 points in less than a week, marking the real estate mogul's biggest decline since he vaulted to the top of the field in July, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Trump was the favorite of 31 percent of Republicans in a rolling poll in the five days ended on Nov. 27. That was down from a peak of 43 percent registered on Nov. 22.

The dip follows criticism of Trump for comments he made in the aftermath of the Nov. 13 Paris attacks that killed 130 people and wounded hundreds more.

Following the attacks, Trump told an NBC News reporter that he would support requiring all Muslims within the United States to be registered to a special database, which his critics have likened to the mandatory registration of Jews in Nazi Germany.

Trump has also been criticized for flailing his arms and distorting his speech as he mocked a New York Times reporter, Serge Kovaleski, who is disabled.

Trump mocked the reporter as he defended his unsubstantiated assertion that during the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, he watched on television as "thousands and thousands" of people in New Jersey cheered while the World Trade Center fell.

Still, Trump is not the only front-runner to slide in the latest survey.

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson has seen his poll numbers drift downward and now trails Trump by more than half, with just 15 percent of Republicans polled saying they would vote for him in the same Nov. 27 poll. As recently as late October, Carson trailed Trump by only six points.

Following Carson, Florida Senator Marco Rubio and Texas Senator Ted Cruz are tied for third place, with more than 8 percent each.

Following Rubio and Cruz was former Florida Governor Jeb! Bush, with 7 percent.

The five-day rolling average sample size ranged from 464 to 347 respondents between Nov. 22 and Nov. 27, with a credibility interval of 5.2 to 6.1 percentage points.

Trump remarks becoming too offensive to the GOP, Carson continues to fall.

Build a wall if old.

 

[TheOMan]

Nate Silver getting some I told you so's ready.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Nate Silver just popped the biggest boner

 

[vicissitudes]

More likely the Nov. 22 poll was a huge outlier (having Trump at 43%) and now we're stabilizing back towards the mean.

The poll:

Trump - 31%
Carson - 15%
Rubio - 8%
Cruz - 8%
Bush - 7%

Those are great numbers for Trump and way ahead of the rest of the field. Clickbait title.

 

[B-Dubs]

Keep in mind that everyone took a drop except for Carson in this poll. It could be Nate's right and people are starting to wake up, it could also be due to the holiday messing with response rates, it could even be a correction and Trump's higher number was wrong. Taking a single poll as gospel is dumb, it could indicate a trend or be an outlier. We have no way of knowing until more come in.

 

[Veritigo_X]

More likely the Nov. 22 poll was a huge outlier (having Trump at 43%) and now we're stabilizing back towards the mean.

The poll:

Trump - 31%
Carson - 15%
Rubio - 8%
Cruz - 8%
Bush - 7%

Those are great numbers for Trump and way ahead of the rest of the field. Clickbait title.

This poll is more in line with other polls too. 43% is crazy and didn't reflect what we were seeing in every other poll.

 

[Slayven]

Is there a group of voters that do nothing but take polls?

 

[_Ryo_]

Trump is such an anomaly that I wouldn't be surprised at all if he actually went up twice as much with 23% rise by Monday. Like, him dropping in the this polls will incite his crazy base that be twice as loud in their support.

Even failing trump wins, would be crazy.

 

[titiklabingapat]

This is why you do not rely on just one poll.

 

[Manmademan]

More likely the Nov. 22 poll was a huge outlier (having Trump at 43%) and now we're stabilizing back towards the mean.

The poll:

Trump - 31%
Carson - 15%
Rubio - 8%
Cruz - 8%
Bush - 7%

Those are great numbers for Trump and way ahead of the rest of the field. Clickbait title.

this is the correct answer. I don't think any other polls were nearly that high. IIRC the 11/22 poll had Carson down in the single digits also, which would have been a ridiculous collapse for him.

 

[metalslimer]

And you can also see it's not like anyone had a huge upswing so it's not like he is still not the clear front runner. No one except Carson has really challenged him and Carson is done

 

[teruterubozu]

Isn't this a 5 day rolling poll? Seems the fluctuations are normal. This is not really a "new" poll from the Reuters/Ipsos poll posted yesterday.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Isn't this a 5 day rolling poll? Seems the fluctuations are normal.

They're well outside the margin of error so they're not the 'noise' you associate with normal fluctuations. Either there was a very, very abnormal outlier, or Trump's support has genuinely fallen, or the sample has changed. Given the poll was conducted over a holiday, the last one is the most plausible, as the demographics of people willing to answer polls changes considerably over holidays. It's why nobody really bothers polling much in the two weeks run-up to Christmas, for example. Holidays tend to produce nonsense results.

 

[Diablos]

Trump at 43% was too high to begin with. Seems like we are just seeing things go back to normal. He's not in danger.

 

[teruterubozu]

But..but... Nate Silver!

 

[RedShift]

Oh, so this is only a drop compared to that poll that had him really high?

Not much of a story.

 

[freeofgreed]

More likely the Nov. 22 poll was a huge outlier (having Trump at 43%) and now we're stabilizing back towards the mean.

The poll:

Trump - 31%
Carson - 15%
Rubio - 8%
Cruz - 8%
Bush - 7%

Those are great numbers for Trump and way ahead of the rest of the field. Clickbait title.

Wasn't Cruz higher than Carson?

 

[teruterubozu]

Wasn't Cruz higher than Carson?

For like 24 hours.

 

[NYR]

"Reuters/Ipsos are losers, okay? Losers. What do they know? Nothing. Not like me. I have a great memory. Great. Speaking of great, it is time to Make America great again." - Trump

 

[freeofgreed]

For like 24 hours.

Ah, ok. Good.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Could be the beginning of a fall, but 43 sounds like higher than he ever polled. This might just be a return to the mean.

 

[Kusagari]

Reuters has been having Trump poll higher than every other outlet so I have no idea what to make of this. Even with the "drop" he's still in line with the other polls where he's dominating.

 

[NullPointer]

I made a Thanksgiving bet with my mom over Trump, because of course we did.

She wins if Trump is our next president, something she feels entirely confident in, and I win if Trump doesn't even win the Republican nod - something I figure he's lost already over the previous week but just doesn't know it yet. We've got ten whole American dollars riding on it.

Of course, the more entertaining route is the one where we both lose our bets.

(my guts tells me Rubio will get the nomination and use it to gain notoriety but will predictably lose to Hillary big time)

 

[Ovid]

I made a Thanksgiving bet with my mom over Trump, because of course we did.

She wins if Trump is our next president, something she feels entirely confident in, and I win if Trump doesn't even win the Republican nod - something I figure he's lost already over the previous week but just doesn't know it yet. We've got ten whole American dollars riding on it.

Of course, the more entertaining route is the one where we both lose our bets.

We (the country) have a lot riding on your side of the bet.

Stay strong.

 

[Stinkles]

Is there a group of voters that do nothing but take polls?

Old racists who answer landlines during dinner time.

 

[akira28]

Is there a group of voters that do nothing but take polls?

that and watch those daytime Judge Court Tv shows.

 

[airmangataosenai]

Trump more than doubles the results of his closest opponent.

HEADLINE: Trump slips in the polls!

Do these reporters simply not understand how to interpret polling results or is it intentional misrepresentation? I'm pretty sure people like Silver are guilty of intentional deceit.

 

[mclem]

We (the country) have a lot riding on your side of the bet.

Stay strong.

Actually, that got me thinking: Is it better for the country if Trump doesn't get the nomination, or is it better - long-term - if he gets the nomination but then the country rejects him heavily? It should be a wakeup call, but the hard-right supporters of him might not be particularly receptive to such a thing.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Actually, that got me thinking: Is it better for the country if Trump doesn't get the nomination, or is it better - long-term - if he gets the nomination but then the country rejects him heavily? It should be a wakeup call, but the hard-right supporters of him might not be particularly receptive to such a thing.

I think it depends on if he continues down the racist, fascist road he's been on even during the general election or if he plays more toward the center. If there's a lot of public scrutiny (even moreso than now) on his racist statements in the general and then Hillary/Bernie win in an electoral landslide I think that would be a pretty big wake up call to the GOP that the southern strategy is dead and they need to drop the dog-whistle campaigns.

 

[Machina]

Actually, that got me thinking: Is it better for the country if Trump doesn't get the nomination, or is it better - long-term - if he gets the nomination but then the country rejects him heavily? It should be a wakeup call, but the hard-right supporters of him might not be particularly receptive to such a thing.

If Trump becomes the nominee and then is soundly beaten, the crazies will actually run with the conspiracy that Trump is a Clinton double agent who set out to destroy the GOP before the election even began.

Because if there's one thing that is for sure, the right wing hate losing, and will find any excuse to demean those that beat them.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I think it depends on if he continues down the racist, fascist road he's been on even during the general election or if he plays more toward the center. If there's a lot of public scrutiny (even moreso than now) on his racist statements in the general and then Hillary/Bernie win in an electoral landslide I think that would be a pretty big wake up call to the GOP that the southern strategy is dead and they need to drop the dog-whistle campaigns.

The estblishment figured that out a long time ago. The problem is that the establishment aren't in control, the base are, and the base care more about a candidate conforming to their beliefs than being electable. I don't see the GOP recovering for some time. In fact, my bigger worry is that in 4 or 8 years, some economic crash or some such will happen, the Democrats will be tarnished, and a Trump-like does indeed get elected.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

The estblishment figured that out a long time ago. The problem is that the establishment aren't in control, the base are, and the base care more about a candidate conforming to their beliefs than being electable. I don't see the GOP recovering for some time. In fact, my bigger worry is that in 4 or 8 years, some economic crash or some such will happen, the Democrats will be tarnished, and a Trump-like does indeed get elected.

Idunno, I think even the base will recognize they have to cut their losses at some point. They'll continue to do well in state races during midterms and such but I can't imagine them not figuring it out by 2024. By 2020 they'll have to start seriously defending places like Texas and Georgia at their current pace, and Florida won't even be a swing state (just like Virginia isn't anymore). The democrats learned from their mistakes in the 80's and I think the GOP will learn from theirs as well.


But yeah, my biggest concern is that Hillary will get in and something will happen to make her a one-term president. Historically, it's incredibly unlikely for one party to hold the presidency for four terms. It hasn't happened since FDR-Truman, if I recall. And that's really a shame because there's a lot of potential in the democratic party that should be ready for the spotlight right around the time that the pendulum swings back toward the GOP.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Idunno, I think even the base will recognize they have to cut their losses at some point. They'll continue to do well in state races during midterms and such but I can't imagine them not figuring it out by 2024. By 2020 they'll have to start seriously defending places like Texas and Georgia at their current pace, and Florida won't even be a swing state (just like Virginia isn't anymore). The democrats learned from their mistakes in the 80's and I think the GOP will learn from theirs as well.

Can you really see that? A modernization of the Republican party to look something like the British Conservative party or Malcolm Turnbull's wing of the Australian Liberal Party (i.e., the sort of modernist rightwing parties that are electorally feasible) involves embracing gay marriage, attempting to sideline outright misogyny, at least making a public sop to cracking down on racism within the party, an at least partial secularization, and so on. To get this to happen, you need candidates supporting it to get through the Republican primaries, which means having 50%+ of the party being okay with those things. I don't see 50%+ of the Republican primary demographic being okay with those things by 2024, not at all. It could be another ~20 years before the baby boomer influence is pushed out of the party enough for that to happen.

But yeah, my biggest concern is that Hillary will get in and something will happen to make her a one-term president. Historically, it's incredibly unlikely for one party to hold the presidency for four terms. It hasn't happened since FDR-Truman, if I recall. And that's really a shame because there's a lot of potential in the democratic party that should be ready for the spotlight right around the time that the pendulum swings back toward the GOP.

Where's the potential in the Democratic Party? If you're going to say Castro or Gillibrand, I'm going pre-empt you and say you're wrong.

 

[Manmademan]

Trump more than doubles the results of his closest opponent.

HEADLINE: Trump slips in the polls!

Do these reporters simply not understand how to interpret polling results or is it intentional misrepresentation? I'm pretty sure people like Silver are guilty of intentional deceit.

Tell you what. Do a casual search for "trump drops 12 points" and you'll pull a dozen articles from reputable outlets calling this the end of trump and blaming his comments on the handicapped guy as the catalyst.

Just about everyone in this thread (except for maybe OP) called this an outlier immediately, and noted how Reuters is the only one that had him over 40% to begin with, and none of us are paid political journalists.

So your only options here are to assume that major media outlets are employing people who have absolutely no idea how polls work, what outliers are, or the existence of other pollsters not named Reuters OR we can assume these journalists are perfectly aware of what they're doing and hoping that media narrative will change the shape of the race, accuracy be damned or at the very least hopping on the most sensational title they can hoping for clicks.

I'll let you figure out which one of these conclusions is more likely.