The results are in and as I set out in my final analysis of the two types of polls it was no contest.
FINAL TRACKING POLLS AGGREGATES; 11/4-7
USC Trump 46.8.% Clinton 43.6 % Trump +3.2
IBD Trump 45.0%. Clinton 43.0 Trump +2.0
PPD Trump 45.8% Clinton 45.2. % Trump +0.6
Rasmussen Trump 43% Clinton 45% Clinton +2.0
UPI/C Trump 46.1% Clinton 48.7 Clinton+2.6
ABC Trump 43% Clinton 47% Clinton+4.0
Tracking Polls Final Aggregate Clinton +0.4
MSM "One Off " polls final aggregate Clinton +4.1
In the most accurate polls from 2012 and the only ones of all final polls to predict a Trump win either they are right or the MSM polls are if it is these two there will be a revolution in polling;
IBD Final poll TRUMP +2
USC/LATimes final poll TRUMP +3.2.
Clearly the time of the radical leftist "guru" like Silver, "Forecaster" Harry Enten and Sam Wang is over and the time of a more measured centrist analytical commentator has begun.
This, the final polls, speaks for itself
************************************************************* First (Partial) post VP debate Polls;
USC/LA Times; Trump 46.6% (N/C) Clinton 42.6% (-0.3)
Rasmussen;Trump 42% (+2) Clinton 41% (-1)
Confirms all tracking polls aggregate (in green) trend to Trump. This chart runs from 1 day after the presidential debate to two days after the VP debate;
To further reinforce my analysis below here is USC/LATimes tracking poll.Trump has lead every day since September 12th to October 5th from between +1.4 to + 6.7 either they are completely wrong after having been outstanding in 2012 or Nate Silver and the "one off" polls are right.
Five Thirty Eight's Nate Silver writes ;
"Election Update: How Big Is Hillary Clinton’s Lead?"
He advises the polls have moved in her direction and her lead is "4% and she has gained three points since the debate."
Firstly the track record. I predicted Donald Trump would win the GOP nomination from the day he descended the elevator at Trump Towers. Silver gave Trump a 2% chance and doggedly held an anti-Trump line until it became obvious even to Blind Bob Trump would win.
Silver later issued a long mea culpa blaming his "punditry" but without advising his punditry stemmed fro his start on the rabidly left wing "progressive" hate site "Daily Kos" clearly early habits and prejudices are hard to shake off.
On the other hand make no bones that I am a conservative but I pride myself on being a partisan, biased conservative but a wholly realistic one. If the news or trends are bad then I advise so otherwise there is no point in blogging unless one deliberately sets out to be a firebrand with millions of followers and dollars. Alas it is just not in me to follow that path-ah principles, so costly!
I follow three tracking polls one USC/LATimes is recognized by Real Clear Politics as suitable for inclusion in their aggregate polling and UPI/C which Huffington Post Pollster uses. I also follow PPD Polling which is not so recognized but which follows USC/LATimes closely and aggregation sorts the wheat from the chaff.
In the full week AFTER debate day this is what data is to hand. I have started using the Rasmussen tracking poll as that is now reporting daily. Alas UPI/C lags by a day, sometimes two or doesn't update fully in its reporting but as can be seen the trends are clear.
Thus it would be impossible for it to move to Silver's +4 for Clinton from the tracking polls aggregate. Rasmussen's new poll for October 5th gives Trump a 1 point lead (his first since before the debate)
The bottom line is the disparity between Silver's analysis and mine is so far outside the margin of error (MOE) that there is only one conclusion, either the tracking polls with their thousands of respondents are wrong in their modelling or his traditional "one off' polls are wrong.
Either he is wrong or I am, going by his and my track record this campaign the odds I am right are in my favor.
