Trump/Clinton Post Convention Polls "Bounces" 8/8 Tracking Polls Show Clear Clinton lead

USC/LATIMES  < link

See why the USC/Dornslife Poll is the "gold standard" of polling; Pat Caddell "Tracking polls tend to be much closer than one offs"

***********************************

It is pointless to cherry pick (if such were available at this juncture) polls that run contrary to the obvious if one wishes to keep credibility and not simply be a partisan shill like 99% of the media/blogs.  If the "honest' tracking polls show a Clinton lead outside the margin of error, as one does, then clearly she is leading.

The trackers do not show the ridiculous 15-16 point leads that some clearly wrongly weighted standard polls do but the drift of momentum is clear. Whether this has a substantial degree of timeline is to be seen over the next week but obviously the post DNC standard "bounce' plus unrelenting media attacks have hurt Trump in the polls (and in some state polling).

"The Last Refuge" sees a media/poll conspiracy (scroll down at link) and certainly in respect of the standard polls that has credibility but the trackers show, outside of the MSM narrative, a genuine lead for Clinton although at a much lower level.

USC Poll day 10 after DNC finds 8/7/16 Hillary up 4.1 points from the final day (40.6%).Clinton peaked on 8/4/16 at 45.2% (+4.6 points from end of DNC)  

Trump has declined from his post convention peak of 47.4% to now 44.0% a decline of 3.4 points. On the positive side Trump arrested severe decline and appears to have stabilized although he is in danger of dropping below 40% for the first time.

Hillary rose 0.1 from the previous day but both have been around the same for three last three days . The next few polls will indicate if Hillary's "bounce" is done and if Trump will stabilize at around this level or rise.

I will continue this post convention analysis until there is some clarity of direction for either.

6/8/2016 

TRUMP     43.8   -1.2 Points

                          CLINTON  45.0%  +1.2 Points

PPD 

As advised I'm biased but realistic, the PPD tracker shows significant rise for Clinton from 1.7 to 5.9 points in two days 

Clinton 47.3 % Trump 41.4%

FWIW Reuters tracking also shows Trump arrested his decline on 7/30 and has risen for five consecutive days to be only 2.4 points behind from 9.6 and Hillary decline commenced on 7/31 from where she has fallen 2.3 points and declined 3 days in a row

********************************************

The explanation as to why Ipsos Reuters polls were so distorted against Trump and when they started favoring him and turned against Hillary they were changed;

REUTERS JULY 14th Clinton 46.5% Trump 31.5% 

Clinton +15 points

                      REUTERS JULY 26th 
       Trump 40.2% Clinton      38.5%  Trump +1.7 points

The African American Trump support in the Reuter's Poll on July 24th was 12% which is double Romney's in 2012

 Five out of seven ain't bad 

As always, a single poll means little and the aggregate is what counts. 
The trend is, after allowing for the polling adjustment, probably correct. 

How the Dem's convention goes will determine Clinton's "bounce" and after a further two weeks a clearer picture will emerge.

Unmissable New Book "Trump the Press: Don Surber's take on how the pundits blew the 2016 Republican race"

Don Surber advised me that this book was coming and I have been checking Amazon with hope that the day would be "Der Tag"
and now it is here. For all who suffered the insufferable like Nate Silver, Harry "forecaster" Enten at Fivethirtyeight, Philip Bump,Chris Cillizza,Dana "I'll eat my column if Trump is the nominee" Milbank, in fact the entire Washington Post "press" and all the egg on their faces MSM who got Trump 100% wrong may they enjoy their permanence in history with such as "Dewey Defeats Truman". This is a delight to savor

Comments from LINK  (buy the book)

Top Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 starsJust Published and Already Great

By paul s damus,md on July 2, 2016

Format: Paperback

I do not believe any book like this has ever existed in the literature of politics or its history, certainly not of the press per se. It is written with an easy style, deceptive in its seeming simplicity and innocent humor, devoid as it is of the sneering hostility common to its protagonists, the pundit press, that renders it hard to put down as a book, all the more admirable in its message that truth is more than a match for the arrogance of the false prophet unfairly ordained. Surber has mined and quoted, without truncating in the least, the extensive column footage of political "experts" predicting the fall and humiliation of Donald Trump, often for years prior to his nomination bid. Whether you love, fear, or hate Trump, there is much to learn and even enjoy for all sides in this smoothly written and often delightful little book. The Chapter "Peak Trump" is worth the price of the book by itself and someday it will be considered a required classic for the educated journalist or connoisseur of political satire. The press itself and its monolithic motivation to rule popular opinion is examined in some detail, not in a polemic by the author, but by the press itself in its own indelible words.
Surber is a blogger now but was the political analyst of a small town newspaper for decades. He correctly called several National elections, missed others. He has the humility that gives power to his views, never blatant, always informative, always surprising. This book is a masterpiece.

1 Comment  21 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  YesNo  Report abuse

5.0 out of 5 starsThe Whole Story.

By Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. on July 7, 2016

Format: Paperback Verified Purchase

Dense.

Interesting word.

On the one hand it describes well the targets here, the "press". So dense that no amount of "obvious" can penetrate.

On the other hand, it describes the book itself, where every word on every page conveys the story to the reader.

Another reviewer describes it as "a new political classic" -- I think it may be a new genre -- one that not only explains what happened, but also provides the whole back drop so the reader can see WHY it happened.

The whole book is important and should be read in-sequence, but be prepared for some chapters to hit harder than others, I think there were a half dozen like that--particularly 34, 41 and 44.

These special chapters triggered Aha! moments for me, where with great clarity I saw for the first time things I should have seen before.

Comment  6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  YesNo  Report abuse

5.0 out of 5 starsGreat fun!

By William P. Woodall on July 6, 2016

Format: Paperback Verified Purchase

A new political classic!

This delightful book contains hundreds of quotes from the pundits, opinion 'leaders' and political 'experts' who all failed to comprehend the rise of Trump. "What fools these mortals be" was the Bard's line, but it also applies here.

But it's not just quotes; Surber's acerbic wit and analysis are also present, as in this passage:

"Only someone as entrenched in the federal government (as Witcover became after decades of covering Washington) would dismiss Trump's forty years as a chief executive officer as making him "conspicuously unqualified" to be president, especially while a community organizer with less than a term in the Senate sat at the Resolute desk in the Oval Office."

This volume should be required reading for all those studying political 'science' or journalism. Great fun!

Comment  5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  YesNo  Report abuse

5.0 out of 5 starsBuy this one.

By Arnold F. Williams on July 18, 2016

Format: Paperback Verified Purchase

I haven't enjoyed a book quite like this one EVER. In punchy, tightly written chapters, Don Surber reviews the GOP primary process, from announcements, to primaries, to majority delegate position for Donald Trump, and has a blast with the conventional wisdom of the press and the pundits (who in general performed abysmally) who got to see their predictions fail in a short time, again and again. For those of us whose humor revolves around a line that gets more meaningful over time (think of Marc Anthony's "honorable men"), this is a collection of essays and chapters not to be missed.

You want it. This is worth buying.

Comment  One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  YesNo  Report abuse

5.0 out of 5 starsOutstanding!

By Z Regime on July 4, 2016

Format: Paperback Verified Purchase

This is first rate writing. I consider Don a friend (and fellow Mountaineer!) but even if he wasn't, there is no doubt about his literary skills. The man knows how to make a case for his beliefs without being preachy or overbearing. WHEN - not if - Trump wins, this book will be looked at as one of the most sagely and prescient books in modern presidential political history.

Re; My Decision To Quit Twitter; Ace's Post Gives Reinforcement

I feel so much cleaner and better-should have done it a long time ago.
NB;When it comes to Trump's first post convention poll bounce & Don Surber's book on the MSM "pundit"fail I'll pass on the good news-but no interacting with haters.

*****************************************


From Ace of Spades HQ;

"Twitter's Stock Downgraded from "Hold" to "Sell"

—Ace

That's because it's essentially a petri dish for stupidity, cowardice, cruelty, andimpotent hatred, and we already have plenty of that without it.

Posted by Ace at 12:28 PM Comments

New Poll;Hillary 35.7% Trump 34.9% Trump 12% Black Support

Spoiler alert it's Reuters. They rejigged their voter screen which was +10 Dem so for the first time this year they are coming into balance with most other polls. 

But they still have distortions as they show Hillary  winning white males which is just silly (as is Trump with their 12% Black support)

This poll concluded on the 21st while the RNC convention was still on and does not take full allowance for Trump's closing address so a Trump lead might be expected from their next poll.

As always, a single poll means little and the aggregate is what counts but once in a while it is OK to have fun especially when a poll gives ones side the advantage.

The trend is, after allowing for the polling adjustment, probably correct. 

How the Dem's convention goes will determine Clinton's "bounce" and after a further two weeks a clearer picture will emerge.

NB;The Reuters "likely voters" result, which polling is considered 'most accurate" has Hillary 40.8% and Trump 37.8% with a similar ascending trendline for Trump as the 'all voters" graph below.

The only other likely voters polls at RCP have Trump in the lead (slightly in the USC poll) and those are before the end of the RNC convention.

2016 Election Looks Like A Combo Of The 2000 & 2004 Elections

UPDATE 9/11

Trump has gone from 11 points behind on August 28th to just 2 having risen 5 points as Hillary dropped 5. 

Libertarian Gary Johnson and to a lesser degree the Greens Stein at 18 points (up from 16) may play the crucial "Nader" role as per 2000 when Bush won the state and the presidency.

If Trump wins New Hampshire with the aid of Johnson then he stands to almost exactly repeat G.W.Bush's Electoral College win in 2000. See analysis HERE

*******************************************************************
I wrote previously that the 2016 election is shaping up to be a rerun of the 2004 "national security" election;

"The 2004 Bush versus Kerry  election (the latter is still a major player in some way in the 2016 scenario, even as a ghostly echo) turned on national security. 

That Bush was competitive after the "stolen" election of 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote handily was enabled by the aftermath of 9/11. Bush's handling of that (pre-the Iraq invasion) and the Homeland Security success kept him competitive.

It can be fairly said that Bin laden's intervention in the campaign with his video threats ensured that, in the final analysis, national security was the paramount issue that gave Bush the narrowest of wins percentage wise of any re-elected president.

"Kerry blames defeat on Bin Laden"

Although Bush won the popular vote handily he won Ohio,and the electoral college majority by a football stadium crowd size majority and won Iowa/Colorado/New Mexico, all states that went subsequently for Obama, by wide margins.

I have little doubt that in the end the 2016 election will also like 2004,no matter the twists and turns between now and November, also come down to "who is best to answer the 3 a.m. call."  

Trump's likeabilty, which will improve over time, is not the deciding factor although his honesty, which polls shows is rated higher than Hillary's may have some input, but rather "who has the strength to keep my family safe in this dangerous world."

President Obama and Former Secretary Clinton have tried and failed. Nice, and the previous international terror examples, plus Ft.Hood, Boston, San Bernardino and Orlando stand as proof."

Subsequent polling has shown that both Trump and Clinton are the most unpopular candidates ever known.

The RCP aggregate polling has Hillary at 41% and Trump at 38% just  79% combined.

Libertarian Johnson 8% and Greens Stein 3% with 10% so unhappy with the four choices they can't make up their minds.

History shows that third, and especially fourth candidates, always decline on election day and it would be most surprising if Johnson got 8%. Green might pick up some dissatisfied Sanders voters, if they turn out which is always a problem with young voters.

The key facts are that it doesn't matter what the Johnson/Green vote is nationwide it does matter a lot what it is like in the key states. Ralph Nader took just enough votes from Al Gore in New Hampshire (3.60%) and Florida (1.93%) to ensure the eventual election of G.W. Bush who won Florida by 0.00187799158% despite getting only 2.74% nationwide.

As of today Clinton has a tiny lead in the Florida aggregate polling of  2.7 points. In Ohio Clinton's lead with the four candidates.

If Trump wins the "Romney states"  and Florida/Ohio/Pennsylvia (or Florida/Virginia/Ohio/ Iowa) he will win in the electoral college. Those states are the ones currently most effecting the Trump/Clinton race to the required 270 (actually 269 in Trump's case with Florida/Ohio/Wisconsin) electoral college votes.

2016 is shaping up to be a combination of the 2004 national security election and the 2000 election where the winner has less popular votes but won in the electoral college with the help of minor parties. Let's hope it doesn't take a 4/4 divided Supreme Court to have to decide who the winner is.