Hillary is leading Trump among white people in Colorado in that Monmouth poll.
How baked is that state to be this liberal?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2596359
The poll included one day of polling after the Sanders endorsement.
The most misunderstood aspect of "white people vote Republican" is that this is true in aggregate
because Southern white people vote in enormous numbers for Republicans, but this is not the case nationally.
Colorado is turning more blue in Presidential elections even though it is very white because it is also a very white college educated state.
Trump is leaking college educated whites all over the nation making Colorado ripe for Hillary.
In reality, when we say "white people hate blah" or "white people are blah" it's really "Southern white people." It's a mostly regional phenomenon. The rest of the nation is not nearly as divided in this regard.
Nah, I mean, actually these polls are pretty bad. That is a wide move across a variety of polls.
Clinton is still generally leading and is still generally favored but these polls are Obama/Romney polls, not dumpster fires polls.
I agree. There is definite movement
against Hillary again, which is likely due to the negative news regarding the e-mail stuff.
But I don't think they indicate any change in the race of significance. Sure, Q in Fla was bad but I don't trust them and the aggregate (I'm going to ignore the garbage Fla polls commisioned by GOPers that give hispanics 8% of the vote and I don't give a fuck if that's "wrong" because that is propaganda, not math) is still good for her. I contend it's not a swing state.
There's probably some movement away and some randomness going on but that's fine.
I think Hillary's numbers will only go up once the DNC comes around. I really believe Trump could hurt himself in the RNC for the first time ever.
Some of the reporting on polling is awful. For instance, if a poll had Hillary + 6 2 weeks ago and now has Hillary +3, that does not mean she lost support! If a pollster ran 3 independent polls in the same state at the same time, the probability of getting the same numbers all 3 times is pretty fucking low. It's how polling works. It's why we look at aggregates. But the reporters and even pollsters themselves write things like "We find support has dropped from 2 weeks ago." No, you did not find any such thing. Sure, Q can make that claim because it's an 11 point swing but the other polls like Marist cannot. A 3 point drop does NOT indicate any movement at all.
We go through this every election cycle. To quote Sam Hinkie, trust the process. Don't freak out. Some people were freaking out in 2012 and if you get that itch, remember the steady hand Pigeon and myself had for everyone.
We can look at the crosstabs and see if there's potentially any flaws. But we will look at the aggregate and we will look at the demographics of the state and we will be wise to remain calm.
BTW, the RAND corporation is going to do their polling again soon. Remember that one, with like 3500 people divided over 7 days every week? Yeah, it was the most accurate national poll in the election (in terms of differences) and I bet it will be again because its methodology seems sound and it's a different approach. I'll be posting updates to that regularly when it starts up.
https://alpdata.rand.org/index.php?page=election2016
If the 2012 model shows us anything, it's that the "tightening" first wave happened exactly now. Then there's separation in early August til the RNC (which is earlier this time around) and then the tightening til DNC and then it mostly stayed apart.
https://alpdata.rand.org/index.php?page=election2012
Once labor day comes around, the polling will start to homogenize and you'll be seeing a clearer snapshot of the election.
TL;DR I'm not worried at all. And until Black Mamba worries, you shouldn't either (and I was worried in 2014, mind you).
