UPDATE POST ELECTION;One Week Post Debate Poll Analysis;Either Nate Silver is Wrong or I Am & My Record is Better

Update post election. I wrote this column on 10/04 with the basic premise that either the traditional MSM "One off" polls and their followers like erstwhile "guru" Nate Silver are right or my premise of following the trackign polls, in the aggregate is right.

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.

Post debate day, the 28th Trump had an aggregate  lead in the three polls (figures in green) of +1.7 points. On 10/04,seven days on, it was +1.8. The missing data of 10/03 will confirm Trump's lead on that day once available

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.

Vote For Gary Johnson! (In New Mexico) A Trump Win Ugly Keeps Hillary From White House?

FiveThirtyEight's supposed guru Nate "Trump has a 2% chance for the nomination" sees the possibility of Gary Johnson winning New Mexico;

"There was one poll that caught our eye, though, and it was from New Mexico. The survey, from Research & Polling Inc. for the Albuquerque Journal, showed a competitive three-way matchup, with Clinton at 35 percent, Trump at 31 percent, and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson at 24 percent. Because New Mexico hasn’t been polled much, the survey had a fair amount of influence on our forecast, reducing Clinton’s chances of winning New Mexico to 82 percent from 85 percent in the polls-only model.

Most of the time, Trump would be the beneficiary of a Clinton loss in New Mexico. But the model also assigns Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee, an outside chance — 2 or 3 percent — of winning the state. That could lead to an Electoral College deadlock that looks like this:

In this map, via 270towin.com, Clinton has 267 electoral votes, Trump has 266, and Johnson has New Mexico’s five. With no candidate possessing an Electoral College majority, the election would go to the House of Representatives, with Clinton, Trump and Johnson all eligible to receive votes.

Each candidate might be able to make a claim to legitimacy, of sorts. Trump might argue that the outcome showed that voters had profoundly rejected the status quo — and what could be a bigger rejection of the status quo than a President Trump? But more importantly, he’d have a sympathetic audience, since Republicans are likely to control the majority of congressional delegations. "

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

The question thus arises for Trump voters in New Mexico, vote for Trump and hope

Johnson takes enough support from Clinton to give the state to Trump or vote for Johnson and let him win while Trump finishes third?

The odds against Trump winning the state outright or very poor. It was won comfortably by Obama twice and Hillary has led in every poll. No commentator has considered it winnable for Trump and he has not campaigned there. In my opinion, whatever it takes to defeat Hillary and if that means voting for Johnson in the one state he has a chance and taking possibly crucial votes from Hillary then win ugly but win.

New Mexico could be crucial to the outcome not only in Silver's permutation but Trump could even lose Florida and still get the same result by winning Pennsylvania/Colorado, where he has a realistic chance, if Johnson takes the state;

Gov.Palin's Smackback To Obama Over Her Role In The Rise Of Trump

FIRST PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS A GO AT GOVERNOR PALIN (Via Politico)

The path that brought the Republican Party to nominating Donald Trump as its candidate for the White House began in 2008, President Barack Obama said in an interview published Monday, when Sarah Palin joined John McCain’s GOP ticket.

“I see a straight line from the announcement of Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential nominee to what we see today in Donald Trump, the emergence of the Freedom Caucus, the tea party, and the shift in the center of gravity for the Republican Party,” the president told New York Magazine. “Whether that changes, I think, will depend in part on the outcome of this election, but it’s also going to depend on the degree of self-reflection inside the Republican Party. There have been at least a couple of other times that I’ve said confidently that the fever is going to have to break, but it just seems to get worse.”

Pavlov could've used a Picture of Palin and a group of lib's for his theory-more effective than a gong to induce salivation.Look at them froth at mouth in the comment section



THEN GOVERNOR PALIN RESPONDS AT BREITBART

In an exclusive statement to Breitbart News, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin responded to President Obama’s comments in a recent interview with New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait that he sees “a straight line” starting from Palin’s vice presidential nomination in 2008 to the rise of the Tea Party movement and ultimately to the candidacy of Donald Trump.

In an email statement to Breitbart News, Palin wrote:

There’s a reason pro-American activists have been living rent free in President Obama’s head these past eight years. Some may feel guilty about the running tab, but I’ll just add it to his doubling of the national debt to $20 trillion. This far-left administration is the overseer of a piled-on $200 trillion unfunded liabilities bill that’s destroying our children’s future, and that’s what should occupy the President’s headspace, not some hockey mom from Alaska. He’s right though — the rise of the Trump movement began in 2008 when the “silenced majority” that’s been trampled on by both parties rose up, found their voice, and uses it mightily today.

Palin, who was an instrumental figure in the rise of the Tea Party movement and the Republican electoral victories that allowed the GOP to reclaim their House and Senate majorities, was an early supporter of Donald Trump. Her endorsement of Trump last January before the Iowa Caucuses was his first major endorsement.

'FAITH FAMILY AMERICA' WEIGH IN

Obama: Sarah Palin More POWERFUL Than You Can Possibly Imagine

OCTOBER 03, 2016 

POLITICS

Sarah Palin is more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

That's the message coming from President Barack Obama in an interview published today in New York Magazine. While Palin's popularity has waned and her role as a Donald Trump surrogate diminished, Obama is trying to "blame" her for the rise of Trump as Republican presidential nominee.

Responding to a question, Obama said:

"I see a straight line from the announcement of Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential nominee to what we see today in Donald Trump, the emergence of the Freedom Caucus, the tea party, and the shift in the center of gravity for the Republican Party. Whether that changes, I think, will depend in part on the outcome of this election, but it’s also going to depend on the degree of self-reflection inside the Republican Party. There have been at least a couple of other times that I’ve said confidently that the fever is going to have to break, but it just seems to get worse."

Others may disagree, rather seeing Palin as becoming a voice for a conservative fervor that was stoked by Obama's liberal leadership. They would say Obama and his policies are "to blame" for Trump, not Palin.

Five Days Post Debate MSM Says Trump Lost & His "Worst Week" He's Up In Polls More Than Before Debate

The three honest tracking polls tell a remarkable story. After 5 days post the debate which according to the MSM/leftist blogosphere Hillary won easily and the MSM's almost frantic post debate Trump attacks on his "worst week" Trump is polling better than before the debate.

As of October 2nd all three trackers are in accord that Trump is leading Clinton. In the all important aggregate Trump is at +2.4 compared to the +2.1 he was on the day of the debate.

PPD has a three day rolling average so they are well past the debate and USC/LATimes and UPI/C have a seven day rolling average so there are only two more reporting days for them to also be past the debate. However the trend to Trump in all three is now clear.

The disparity between the tracking polls and the one off polls continues with the RCP aggregate head to head of Clinton +2.5 and four candidate, Clinton+2.8. Time will tell which model is correct.

NB The RCP four candidate aggregate includes the Rasmussen track Clinton +3. If that were included in the aggregate of the above three trackers Trump would still lead by 0.7 and the premise of his actually having risen since the debate would still be valid.

Tracking Poll Update;Against All MSM Memes Trump Rises Post Debate Including With Women

There are clearly two different realities regarding Trump's post debate polling. The MSM and the likes of Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight and Nate Cohn of the New York Times push the "Trump descends Hillary rises meme".

This refers to the grossly distorted CNN post debate "who won " poll (whilst 13 other polls had Trump the clear winner) and the now notorious "shape shifter" Reuters Poll which seems to adjust their findings to ensure Hillary leads.

Mason Dixon Polling gives Hillary a one point lead in Florida based on their finding that Trump has only 1% Black support in the state-a state where even Romney got 5% against President Obama!

Post debate polls Fox gives Clinton a +3 lead, Rasmussen a +1 lead and PPP, which is categorized as a Dem firm gives Clinton +4. Silver advises the post debate aggregate  lead is +3.5 but the RCP average is 2.6 (four candidates) and +3 head to head too date.

There have been no significant moves in the few post debate state polls, with Michigan and New Jersey showing a degree of movement to Trump from their previous polling, but not enough to put either in jeopardy for Clinton.

In the other reality, the reputable tracking polls USC/LATimes which is recognized by Real Clear Politics and UPI/C which is used by Huffington Post Pollster there is a very different story. Firstly UPI/C

"The UPI/CVoter daily presidential tracking poll released Saturday shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by nearly 2 percentage points.

The online poll shows Trump with 49.31 percent, to Clinton's 47.34 percent.

Trump has gained more than 3 percentage points and Clinton has lost more than 1 point over the course of seven days, the poll's full sample size."

We can see the change in Trumps deficit to lead from September 27th, the day of the debate, to the most recent poll September 29th.Thus the weeks seven day  poll includes two post debate samples but the trend is clear as five of the pre-debate polls had Trump behind, including by 2.9 points on one day

The long term trend is instructive, the trend to Trump, allowing for the ups and downs mostly caused by media beat-ups, is clear

In the USC/LA Times new poll Trump's trend line ticks back up again and his lead increased to 4.7 points. Trump has ascended sharply, allowing for the aforementioned MSM distortions since 9/22 as per the graph. 

His lead since the debate is clear (Clinton 42.2% Trump +4.7) and the poll is now 4 days post debate with only three more days to be 100% clear (it is a seven day rolling average)

 Green figures are aggregate of available tracking polls

A seemingly remarkable result is Trump gaining 2.4 points from Hillary amongst Females since the debate which runs counter to all MSM memes (and shows how smart women are)

26/9 to 10/1 changes

Females----------------------HC+9.4-----------HC+6.4------HC(-3.4)