I know that other people have already brought up how ridiculous those demographic turnout numbers are for that ISPOS poll, but I just wanted to add something to just how it is even more ridiculous:
Every time Clinton's constant lead is brought up in OT, there is always someone who is worried that Trump could win due to a "shy Trump voter" effect, similar to the old "Bradley Effect". The first three problems with this theory are:
- There is no indication that there couldn't also be a shy Clinton voter effect.
- The Bradley Effect was debunked by Obama's win in 2008.
- Clinton's ceiling and floor compared to Trump's show that at least a majority of the population won't even consider Trump, even if some are uneasy about voting for Clinton.
But there is one more factor, which I want to call the "David Duke Effect".
No, I am not referring to the fact that Trump was slow to disavow Duke. What I am more referring to is the fact that whenever David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana in 1991, the race ended up going to a runoff election. People were worried that "shy David Duke voters" might cause Duke, but instead the danger of Duke becoming governor caused a spike in minority turnout.
We see signs of Trump causing a "David Duke Effect" in the polls on which demographics are more excited to vote. White People are very unenthusiastic about this election, but minorities are very excited to use their vote to block Donald Trump. We also see it in stories constantly being reported about Latinos not only being excited to register to vote just to block Donald Trump, but even immigrants wanting to expedite their naturalization process just so they can block Donald Trump.
Combine that with Trump's practically nonexistent groundgame and Hillary's strong groundgame, and you have the signs of not just 2012 or 2008 minority turnout, but possibly even a record percentage of minorities voting this election.