Clinton Leads Trump by 5 Points :Reuters/Ipsos ,Reuters/Ipsos Latest Opinion poll 2016,2016 US Election prediction, US presidential Opinion poll ,US election 2016

Clinton Leads Trump by 5 Points :Reuters/Ipsos ,Reuters/Ipsos Latest Opinion poll 2016,2016 US Election prediction, US presidential Opinion poll ,US election 2016

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton leads Republican Donald Trump by 5 percentage points, according to a Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll released on Friday, keeping her advantage in a national survey while races tighten in several swing states.

The Oct. 30-Nov. 3 opinion poll showed that 44 percent of likely voters in Tuesday's election support Clinton while 39 percent support Trump.

Reuters/Ipsos
Clinton  44%
Trump  39%

Clinton's lead has varied from 4 to 7 percentage points every day over the past week in the Reuters/Ipsos poll, while other opinion polls have shown the race becoming increasingly competitive. Real Clear Politics, which averages together most national polls, estimates that Clinton's lead has dropped from 5 points at the end of last week to less than 2 points on Friday.

The Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation project shows races in Florida, North Carolina and Michigan have tilted away from Clinton over the past week and are now considered too close to call. These swing states are hotly contested because their voters can swing either to Republicans or Democrats and can be decisive in presidential elections.

Fox News
Clinton  45%
Trump  43%

The project estimates that Clinton still has a 90 percent chance of winning the election, however.

With four days before Election Day, Republicans are increasingly optimistic about Trump winning.

CNN / ORC polls: Trump strong in Nevada, Clinton rise in Florida, CNN / ORC Opinion poll, US polls, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump

CNN / ORC polls: Trump strong in Nevada, Clinton rise in Florida, CNN / ORC Opinion poll, US polls, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump

Both the Clinton and Trump campaigns have hit the ground hard in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and Pennsylvania, and new CNN/ORC polls across the four states paint a picture of a tight race to the finish in critical battlegrounds.

Clinton holds a 4-point edge among likely voters in the historically blue-tilting Pennsylvania, and Trump tops Clinton by 5 with voters in red-leaning Arizona. Though both states tilt in the same direction as their 2012 results, the leaders' margins are tighter than their predecessors' final leads were in each state.

Florida appears to be as tight a contest as ever, with Clinton at 49% among likely voters and Trump at 47%. That's an apparent shift in Clinton's direction since the last CNN/ORC poll there in September before the presidential debates began, but still a within-margin-of-error race.


In Nevada, the poll suggests the race has also shifted, with Trump now ahead there 49% to 43%, with 5% behind Libertarian Gary Johnson, compared with a two-point Clinton edge in mid-October.


Tight Senate races, too
All four of these states also have senate seats up for grabs this year, three of the four are incredibly close contests. In Florida, Marco Rubio's once wide lead over Patrick Murphy has evaporated, and the race is now a 1-point contest, 49% back Rubio, 48% Murphy. The Nevada race to replace the Senate's top Democrat Harry Reid has swung back toward Republican Joe Heck, but here too the race is within margin of error, with Heck at 49% to Catherine Cortez Masto's 47%. The margin widens slightly in Pennsylvania, where Republican incumbent Pat Toomey lags behind challenger Katie McGinty by 5 points. In Arizona, John McCain holds a wide lead over challenger Ann Kirkpatrick, topping her 52% to 39%.


The CNN/ORC polls were conducted by telephone Oct. 27-Nov. 1. Results reflect interviews with 867 registered voters and 769 likely voters in Arizona, 884 registered voters and 773 likely voters in Florida, 860 registered voters and 790 likely voters in Nevada and 917 registered voters and 799 likely voters in Pennsylvania. Results among likely voters have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 percentage points in each state.
Source: edition.cnn

Trump ahead of Clinton in latest November poll, Washington Post-ABC News Opinion poll, Latest US opinion poll 2016, US election 2016 prediction,Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump

Trump ahead of Clinton in latest November poll, Washington Post-ABC News Opinion poll, Latest US opinion poll 2016, US election 2016 prediction,Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump

The latest polls are released as the Clinton team works to contain damage from the FBI's latest email investigation.

The Washington Post-ABC News poll has Mr Trump on 46 percent to Mrs Clinton's 45 percent support – a one-point lead which is within the poll's margin of error.

When third-party candidates are asked which major-party candidate they lean towards, the margin is 48-47 to Mrs Clinton, the Washington Post said of its poll, which was carried out from Thursday to Sunday.

A Los Angeles Times poll just out gives Mr Trump a four-point national advantage.

However other polls have Mrs Clinton in the lead.

The BBC's poll of polls, puts Mrs Clinton ahead, though with her lead narrowing. The poll of polls looks at the five most recent national surveys and takes the median value.

And the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll on Monday gave a 44-39 lead to Mrs Clinton.

 

Presidential debate Opinion Poll 2016, Who won the third presidential debate, US Presidential debates winner, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Latest Survey US Presidential debates

Presidential debate Opinion Poll 2016, Who won the third presidential debate, US Presidential debates winner, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Latest Survey US Presidential debates

According to CNN/ORC

Hillary Clinton is the winner of the third and final presidential debate, according to voters in the first opinion polls of the night.

 

Clinton  52%
Trump  39%

One survey, conducted by CNN/ORC, found that 52 per cent of voters believe Ms Clinton won the 90-minute debate on Wednesday night compared to 39 per cent of participants who said that her rival Donald Trump won the contest.
Ms Clinton has now been declared the winner of all three televised debates by the CNN poll.

Democrats accounted for 36 per cent of the 547 registered voters surveyed , while only 29 per cent of respondents were Republicans.

According to the YouGov poll

YouGov poll also declared Ms Clinton the clear winner on Wednesday night. Out of 1,503 registered voters who tuned into the debate, 49 per cent of participants said Ms Clinton came out on top. Thirty-nine per cent of voters argued that Mr Trump won the contest while 12 per cent claimed it was a tie.

 

Clinton  49%
Trump  39%
Tie 12%

Sixty-eight per cent of voters disagreed with Mr Trump by suggesting that both candidates pledge to accept the final election results come November.

Reuters/Ipsos poll:Trump trails Clinton by 8 points after tape scandal, debate, Hillary Clinton , Donald Trump, Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll October , 

Reuters/Ipsos poll:Trump trails Clinton by 8 points after tape scandal, debate, Hillary Clinton , Donald Trump, Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll October

nald Trump has fallen further behind Hillary Clinton and now trails her by 8 points among likely voters, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, with 1 in 5 Republicans saying his vulgar comments about groping women disqualify him from the presidency.

The national tracking poll was launched after Sunday night’s second presidential debate, where Trump was pressed to explain his comments in a 2005 videotape about grabbing women’s genitalia. He described the remarks, which first surfaced on Friday, as “locker room” banter and apologized to Americans.


The poll released on Tuesday showed Clinton, the Democratic nominee, had increased her lead over Trump, the Republican nominee, to 8 percentage points on Monday from 5 points last week.

Trump was under pressure during Sunday’s debate to restore confidence in his struggling campaign after dozens of lawmakers repudiated him. He hammered Clinton’s handling of classified information while serving as secretary of state and referred to her as “the devil.” At one point, he said he would jail Clinton if he were president.

Among those who said they watched at least portions of the debate, 53 percent said Clinton won while 32 percent said Trump won. The results fell along partisan lines, however: 82 percent of Democrats felt Clinton won, while 68 percent of Republicans felt that Trump won.

Among likely voters who watched the debate, 48 percent said they supported Clinton while 38 percent supported Trump.

‘LOCKER ROOM TALK’

In the 2005 Access Hollywood video Trump boasted about making unwanted sexual advances toward women. “When you’re a star they let you do it,” he is heard saying.

Some 61 percent of those polled said that “lots of men” occasionally engage in similar conversations, and 46 percent, a plurality, said it was unfair to judge someone on conversations “that they did not intend for anyone else to hear.”

Most of those polled said they believe Trump is a sexist, but they were split on whether his comments disqualify him from being president. Some 42 percent of American adults, including 19 percent of registered Republicans, said Trump’s comments disqualified him, while 43 percent said they did not.

Among Republicans, 58 percent said they want Trump to remain atop their party’s ticket, and 68 percent said the Republican leadership should stand by him.

The video doesn’t appear to have worsened Trump’s standing among women, who mostly had a low opinion of him already, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling over the past 12 months.

When asked to pick between the two candidates, about 44 percent of women chose Clinton while 29 percent selected Trump – roughly the same proportion as measured in polls conducted before the weekend.

Trump, however, appears to be shedding support among evangelicals, who are usually a wellspring of support for Republican presidential candidates. Monday’s poll showed that Trump had only a 1-point edge over Clinton among people who identified as evangelicals. That’s down from a 12-point advantage for Trump in July.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll is conducted online in English in all 50 states. The poll of 2,386 American adults included 1,839 people who watched the debates, 1,605 people who were considered likely voters due to their registration status, voting history and stated intention to vote in the election. Among the likely voters, the poll counted 798 Democrats and 586 Republicans.

The poll has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 2 percentage points for the entire group, 3 points for likely voters and the debate watchers, 4 points for Democrats and 5 points for Republicans.

National opinion polls have measured support for the candidates in different ways this year, yet most agree that Clinton is leading and that her advantage has strengthened as the general election approaches.

RealClearPolitics, which tracks most major opinion polls, shows Clinton ahead of Trump by an average of 7 percentage points, and that her lead has grown since the middle of September.

Source: www.rawstory.com

Free Press/WXYZ-TV US Opinion poll Clinton leads over trump ,US opinion poll latest survey,Hillary Clinton,Donald Trump

Free Press/WXYZ-TV US Opinion poll Clinton leads over trump ,US opinion poll latest survey,Hillary Clinton,Donald Trump

If the result of a latest poll is to be believed, Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, is clearly in an advantageous position against her arch-rival Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump.

A new Free Press/WXYZ-TV poll released on Thursday showed Clinton regaining an 11-point, 43%-32%, lead over Trump.

Clinton 43%
Trump 32%

8

Women Africans and millennials back Clinton The poll result states that Clinton is strongly supported by WOMEN, Africans and millennials. Moreover, it is Trump's poor debate performance, revelations about his taxes and erratic behaviour, which is harming his presidential prospects.

Reuters/Ipsos poll: Clinton won first presidential debate against Trump, Democrat Hillary Clinton , Donald Trump ,US first presidential debate 2016 results,US polls 2016

Reuters/Ipsos poll: Clinton won first presidential debate against Trump,  Democrat Hillary Clinton , Donald Trump ,US  first presidential debate 2016 results,US polls 2016

A majority of Americans say Democrat Hillary Clinton won Monday night’s presidential debate, but her performance doesn’t appear to have immediately boosted her support among likely voters, according to a Reuters/Ipsos national tracking poll released on Wednesday.

First presidential debate : Who did better?
Clinton  56%
Trump  26%

 

 

 

 

 

29-sep

 

The online poll, which gathered responses from more than 2,000 people on Tuesday, found 56 percent of American adults felt that Clinton did a better job than Trump in the first of their three televised debates, compared with 26 percent who felt that Trump did better.

Of those who thought Clinton emerged the victor, 85 percent were Democrats and 22 percent were Republicans.

 

US 2016 presidential election: Double-digit win for Hillary Clinton says Indian analyst, US opinion poll 2016 latest, US polls, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Observatory Group Latest Survey 2016

US 2016 presidential election: Double-digit win for Hillary Clinton says Indian analyst, US opinion poll 2016 latest, US polls, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Observatory Group Latest Survey 2016

In my earlier article (goo.gl/ADvyPX), I had said that Hillary Clinton will win by a 9% margin. I think that is an under-estimate. Given that opinion polls are saying ‘too close to call’ (and the presidential debates yet to begin), some of you will be tempted to dismiss me as nuts. But I’ll stick to my position: The opinion poll data are at eye-catching odds with historical patterns, and clash with all reasonable assumptions about the pattern continuing. My most-preferred forecast is, in a two-way fight, 57% to Clinton and 43% for Donald Trump. If third-party candidates together poll 10%, the margin might reduce to 11%. If this prediction is accurate, 2016 will be comparable to the Eisenhower-Stevenson election of 1956, when Eisenhower won 57.4 % to Stevenson’s 42%.

Poll forecasts are not for the weak-hearted. I speak with some experience, having conducted several national opinion polls in India in the 1980s and 1990s, and getting some wrong. Armchair election analyses since then have fared considerably better! There are many reasons for opinion polls to go wrong—an unrepresentative sample maybe the most important. And in this age of fast-paced internet polling, a representative voter data sample maybe very difficult to achieve.

In contrast to polls, my forecast is based on broad historical tendencies of actual registered voters. So, there is less room to go wrong, and one can only go wrong if the pattern (who votes for whom) deviates substantially from post-war history. If American registered voters are classified into four mutually-exclusive groups—non-Hispanic Whites (hereafter Whites), Black, Hispanics, and Others—then the accompanying table outlines some basic electoral stats for 2016 estimated by using citizens, registered voters, and turnout data for the 2008- and 2012-presidential elections in the US.

SOME BASIC FACTS AND FIGURES FOR THE US 2016 ELECTION

Race/ Sex Eligible Actual voters Turnout Vote for Vote for Excess vote %D %R
to vote Clinton Trump for Clinton    
  mil mil % mil mil mil % %
Black 28.9 19.5 67.5 18.1 1.4 16.8 93 7
Hispanics 27.1 12.6 46.5 10.1 2.5 7.6 80 20
Others 13.7 6.6 48.2 4.6 2 2.6 70 30
B+H+O 691 38.7 55.5 32.8 5.9 27 84.8 15.2
Whitefemale 79.6 50.5 63.4 25.3 25.3 0 50 50
White male 74.8 45.6 61 18.2 27.4 -9.1 40 60
Whitetotal      154.4 96.1 62.2 43.5 52.6 -9.1 45.3 547
Total             224.1 135 60.2 763 58.5 17.9 56.6 43.4

Source: US Census Bureau. Voter registration data. Gallup polls 1952-2012.
Notes: You can play with the racial propensities to vote to obtain any scenario result. You will find that the probability of Trump even losing by five per cent margin is very low.

 

What matters is not the eligible population, but the actual voting population. To arrive at the latter, one goes through two transformations—from voting age population to registration, and from registration to actual voting. Turnout is the fraction of actual voters to those eligible. Differences in turnout can be meaningful: Note that while the Hispanic and Black eligible populations are near equal (around 29 million each), low registration and turnout stats for the former result in only 12.6 million Hispanic versus 19.5 million Black voters. Blacks had the highest turnout rate in 2012 (66.2%); in second place, were Whites (62%).

Voting behaviour can vary by sex, but only for Whites is this segregation estimated. I assume that for non-Whites, males and females vote with identical propensities for a Democrat or Republican. The non-whites are only a third of the population and representative male-female data are not easily available. So, my forecast, based on estimates of historical propensities to vote for each racial group, is as below (also see accompanying table).

Blacks: It is assumed that Blacks will vote 93% for Clinton and 7% for Trump—this is consistent with the historical record, and opinion polls.

Hispanics: With a two-party adjustment, Hispanics have averaged 67% for Democrats; Obama gained 68% and 72% in the 2008- and 2012-elections. The record-best for the Democrats was in 1996, when Bill Clinton obtained 77% of the two-party Hispanic vote. In 2012, Republican candidate Mitt Romney obtained 28%, and 2016 opinion polls suggest that Trump’s share of the Hispanic vote is running 4-8 percentage points lower than Romney’s.

It seems likely that Trump will receive the lowest historical Republican share of the Hispanic vote. It is unlikely that Trump will do better among Hispanics than Bob Dole did in 1996 (a 23% two-way vote). Given the particular nature of this election, it seems a safe assumption that Hispanics will vote in record amounts for Clinton, at around 80-20.
Others comprise nearly 14 million of the voting age population, but only 6.6 million of registered voters. Asian Americans account for two-thirds of Others. Seventy-three percent of Asian Americans voted for Obama in 2012.
These propensities suggest that in 2016, 38.7 million of non-Whites will vote on election-day, and approximately 85% will vote Democrat. [For the last four elections, 82% of non-whites have voted Democrat]. This implies that Trump starts with a 27 million-vote handicap (32.8 million votes for Clinton, and 5.9 million for Trump). There is likely to be very little movement in this advantage for Clinton; for any movement, Blacks will have to prefer Trump over historic margins, and Hispanics will have to move towards Trump in a very unexpected fashion. Even if it is assumed that Trump receives, among Hispanics, the average of Republican votes obtained since 1980 (33%),

Clinton’s non-white-voter advantage declines by 4 million, to 23 million. And that is still a very large disadvantage for Trump to overcome.

What about the White vote in 2016?

Sixty-nine percent of registered voters are White, comprising 50.5 million females and 45.6 million males. Why do women voters outnumber men so markedly? They live longer, and have a higher turnout. Noteworthy also is the fact that White women traditionally vote Democrat and White men traditionally vote Republican.
Estimates of the White vote (Gallup Polls) for all presidential elections from 1952-2012 indicate that on average, White voters prefer Republicans 55% to 45 %. What one needs, however, is the Republican-Democratic breakdown of White vote by sex. The result, consistent with the historical White average, is that White women split 50-50 and White men prefer Republicans 60-40. This results in a 13.2% spread (56.6-43.4) in favour of Clinton. This is our base case result.

Will White women turn out better than their historical average in an election in which there is a woman candidate for president, and in which women as a group have been insulted by the other presidential candidate? Perhaps not better than what Obama achieved, but equal to what he did obtain, i.e., 55%? This results in a 17% margin for Clinton (White men remain at historical average 40-60).

What about a 1980-Reagan performance by Trump, winning the White vote 61-39? This results in a narrower, but still respectable, 4% margin victory for Hillary Clinton.

Just the average of the above three simulations gives Clinton an 11% advantage. It is improbable that debates, or much else, can change this likely result. What will allow Trump to win? If Trump obtains the same White vote as Reagan obtained in 1984 (60% women and 70% men), 2016 might result in the narrowest of victories for Trump. So, all analysts have to face this question—how close is Trump to Reagan in his appeal? If not close enough, then a Clinton victory is assured.

Recent US polls are close, within ±3%; yet, my historical analysis shows that a close election is very unlikely. Can history be that wrong? If not, then why are the polls so different than the “historical” outcome?

One explanation is that it is in everyone’s interest to show that the race is too close to call. The TV networks ring in the profits—the whole globalised world is clued in. Political websites never had it so good. Why upset the profit-cart?

Democrats prefer an ex-ante close race for a high turnout. If it looks like a landslide, won’t Democrats just stay home on voting day? The Trump camp prefers a close race to help with funding. And the pollsters? After being caught by circumstances (Brexit and Trump), they are playing it safe, erring heavily on the side of caution, since nothing is gained by being an “outlier” at this early stage.

The author is senior India analyst, The Observatory Group, a New York based macro policy advisory group. He conducted several national opinion polls in India in the 1980s and 1990s, and now prefers armchair analysis to polling.

SOURCE


 

US election 2016: Who will be the King of White House, 5 battleground states decides fate,US key battleground states, Florida,Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina,US presidential Election 2016

US election 2016: Who will be the King of White House, 5 battleground states decides fate,US key battleground states, Florida,Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina,US presidential Election 2016trumpclinton3

A handful of key battleground states are likely to dictate the outcome of the US presidential election.

While there are as many as 11 real swing states in this year's election, some have a far higher number of Electoral College votes, meaning candidates will battle it out for victory in just a handful of key states.

The likely swing states are: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

However, those with the highest number of Electoral College votes are: Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio – making them key battleground states for the November election.

Florida


Florida has long been considered a critical battleground in the US elections, with its 29 Electoral College votes (the latest of which was awarded to the state in 2010) making it the joint third largest US state in terms of voter numbers.

The two largest states, California (55 EC votes) and Texas (38 EC votes) are safe Democrat and Republican states, respectively, putting additional pressure on votes won and lost in Florida.

In the 2016 election, Florida voters currently appear to favour GOP candidate Donald Trump, with the most recent poll from CNN/ORC showing Trump leading by four points in a head-to-head battle and by three points in a four-way race including Gary Johnson and Jill Stein.

But despite close races in several battleground states, an election forecast from Five Thirty Eightshows Clinton is still more likely to see victory in the November 8 election than Trump – putting her at 61.1% probability for a win, compared to Trump at just 38.9%.

So which states are the presidential nominees likely to put their energy into winning? Here, we outline the five key battleground states:

Ohio

Historically considered one of the country's most important swing states, Ohio is considered something of a predictor for how elections will play out.

No Republican presidential candidate has won an election without Ohio, and, given its oft-referenced diversity, it is also seen as something of a barometer for how the rest of the country will vote.

The latest polls suggest Trump is doing well in Ohio – leading Clinton by as much as five points and with an average of 1.2% according to Real Clear Politics.

Michigan

A safe Democrat state for almost three decades, Michigan last voted for a Republican candidate in 1988. Why the swing-state designation this year? Two words: Donald Trump.

Michigan, which in the 1970s and early 1980s was a Republican state, was tipped as a potential swing state in this year's election after Trump became the GOP nominee.

Given the state's high number of industrial workers and slow economic growth, it is believed Trump could pull off a Republican win in a state that is likely to be fed up with the status quo – with hopes from the GOP he can draw out working class people who don't usually vote.

However, thus far, Clinton remains in the lead in Michigan and is likely to put up a big fight not to lose the vote there. She is enjoying an average 5.2% lead on Trump.

Pennsylvania

…is a state Clinton will be keen to hang on to, with its residents having voted Democrat throughout the 1990s to the present day.

Once historically considered a battleground state, with 20 Electoral College votes up for grabs, it does appear that Clinton may be on her way to securing another Democrat victory there – where she currently is leading Trump by an average of just over 6%.

However, the GOP has slowly been gaining on the Democrats in Pennsylvania, and Trump is likely to hone in on the state as a potentially attainable one.

North Carolina

Currently nail-bitingly close, an average of polls from Real Clear Politics showing Clinton is leading Trump by just 0.6% in North Carolina.

Given the state's results in the last election – in which the Republicans won the state by just 2% – it seems North Carolina is set to be a swing state with no current indicator of how the votes will be cast.

In the 2012 election, it was the second closest race after Florida, according to 270toWin, making it once again a key battleground state for this year's candidates. There are a total of 15 Electoral College votes up for grabs in North Carolina, so a win here could give a much-needed boost come election day.

Source::

NYT: We Gave Four Good Pollsters the Same Raw Data. They Had Four Different Results,US Opinion poll 2016,US Presidential Election survey Result

NYT: We Gave Four Good Pollsters the Same Raw Data. They Had Four Different Results,US Opinion poll 2016,US Presidential Election survey Result

You’ve heard of the “margin of error” in polling. Just about every article on a new poll dutifully notes that the margin of error due to sampling is plus or minus three or four percentage points.

But in truth, the “margin of sampling error” – basically, the chance that polling different people would have produced a different result – doesn't even come close to capturing the potential for error in surveys.

Polling results rely as much on the judgments of pollsters as on the science of survey methodology. Two good pollsters, both looking at the same underlying data, could come up with two very different results.

How so? Because pollsters make a series of decisions when designing their survey, from determining likely voters to adjusting their respondents to match the demographics of the electorate. These decisions are hard. They usually take place behind the scenes, and they can make a huge difference.

To illustrate this, we decided to conduct a little experiment. On Monday, in partnership with Siena College, the Upshot published a poll of 867 likely Florida voters. Our poll showed Hillary Clinton leading Donald J. Trump by one percentage point.

We decided to share our raw data with four well-respected pollsters and asked them to estimate the result of the poll themselves.

Here’s who joined our experiment:

• Charles Franklin, of the Marquette Law School Poll, a highly regarded public poll in Wisconsin.

• Patrick Ruffini, of Echelon Insights, a Republican data and polling firm.

• Margie OmeroRobert Green and Adam Rosenblatt, of Penn Schoen Berland Research, a Democratic polling and research firm that conducted surveys for Mrs. Clinton in 2008.

• Sam Corbett-DaviesAndrew Gelman and David Rothschild, of Stanford University, Columbia University and Microsoft Research. They’re at the forefront of using statistical modeling in survey research.

Here’s what they found:

Pollster Clinton Trump Margin
Charles Franklin 42% 39% Clinton +3%
Marquette Law      
Patrick Ruffini 39% 38% Clinton +1%
Echelon Insights      
Omero, Green, Rosenblatt 42% 38% Clinton +4%
Penn Schoen Berland Research      
Corbett-Davies, Gelman, Rothschild 40% 41% Trump +1%
Stanford University/Columbia University/Microsoft Research      
NYT Upshot/Siena College 41% 40% Clinton +1%

How to make the sample representative?

Pollsters usually make statistical adjustments to make sure that their sample represents the population – in this case, voters in Florida. They usually do so by giving more weight to respondents from underrepresented groups. But this is not so simple.

What source? Most public pollsters try to reach every type of adult at random and adjust their survey samples to match the demographic composition of adults in the census. Most campaign pollsters take surveys from lists of registered voters and adjust their sample to match information from the voter file.

Which variables? What types of characteristics should the pollster weight by? Race, sex and age are very standard. But what about region, party registration, education or past turnout?

How? There are subtly different ways to weight a survey. One of our participants doesn’t actually weight the survey in a traditional sense, but builds a statistical model to make inferences about all registered voters (the same technique that yields our pretty dot maps).

Who is a likely voter?

There are two basic ways that our participants selected likely voters:

Self-reported vote intention Public pollsters often use the self-reported vote intention of respondents to choose who is likely to vote and who is not.

Vote history Partisan pollsters often use voter file data on the past vote history of registered voters to decide who is likely to cast a ballot, since past turnout is a strong predictor of future turnout.

 

1 2 3 10