FiveThirtyEight election forecast shows Trump ahead
Source: Politico
Political analyst Nate Silvers latest forecast has Republican nominee Donald Trump with a 15 percentage point-greater chance of beating presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton if the election were held today, according to FiveThirtyEight.
Silver's "now-cast," updated with fresh surveys on Monday, shows Trump's current likelihood of winning at 57.5 percent, compared with Clintons 42.5 percent. In the 11 battleground states, Colorado, Virginia and Michigan would go to Clinton, while Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Iowa would go to Trump.
The breakdown shifts a bit between the Electoral College and the popular vote. Silver's model currently predicts the popular vote going 45.4 percent to Trump vs. 45.1 percent to Clinton, but the Electoral College giving Trump a wider margin of victory, 285 votes and Clinton 252.6.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/fivethirtyeight-trump-winning-226114
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Can you please stop posting anything that comes from him or his site?
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Just don't approach it emotionally.
Let's see where the betting markets stand after a few days.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)elections?
Not sure why you're calling him a "jackass".
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Reasons
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)He's a snack oil salesman and you obviously bought what he was selling.
StrictlyRockers
(3,855 posts)Really.
And how does he manage to get paid when he is wrong sooooo much?
forest444
(5,902 posts)He's not running for prom king; he's a statistician - and a pretty good one. Any Democrat who chooses to look away at polls because they look bad, does so at his or her peril.
For what it's worth my Tarot cards indicate Hillary will indeed win, and she'll do so thanks in no small part to both Bernie Sanders and Gary Johnson.
I certainly hope so.
adigal
(7,581 posts)And call him names when he says Trump is ahead. Because people didn't listen about just how unpopular Hillary is. And this latest honorary position for DWS has got a lot of people I know even madder.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)If that's the best trump can do (just barely winning the EC) after his convention we are good.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)I've been afraid ever since Michael Moore said Trump was gonna win.
still_one
(92,060 posts)using reverse psychology
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)But it's still frightening to hear.
I know people in NC who have never voted & will be voting for Trump-- I just hope the Dems can iron out all of the issues we have before the election.
still_one
(92,060 posts)harrose
(380 posts)... anyone who votes for Trump is a Rethug racist, sexist homophobe who wants to return blacks to slavery, take away the vote from everyone except rich white men and roll back times to when LGBT people were stoned in the streets.
still_one
(92,060 posts)humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)I used to have confidence in Nate Silver...Is this all about the DNC emails?
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)regnaD kciN
(26,044 posts)In both of their other formulas (polls-only and polls-plus), Clinton maintains a lead.
Probably a good thing that elections aren't held after one party's convention but before the other's, isn't it?
Response to regnaD kciN (Reply #4)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)The debates are going to be frightening-- Those bounces usually stick and there's no telling what Trump will do or say against HRC.
stopbush
(24,392 posts)and if the election were held next week, Hillary would win.
Polls are not predictive. They are a snapshot in time. So unless the government decides to move the election up to TODAY, I don't see what all the worrying is about.
Chimichurri
(2,911 posts)REALforever
(69 posts)I'm not sure what the fresh new polls are, but there are some that are quite consistently outliers. Is he using those in his most recent model?
onecaliberal
(32,775 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)onecaliberal
(32,775 posts)He just needs to STFU.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Ace Rothstein
(3,140 posts)All he does is use available data.
tman
(983 posts)Relax.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)The last R to carry WI in a presidential election was Raygun in '84. The cons here hate Trump. A good number of them will vote for Gary Johnson or stay home. The only R's here who like Trump are the rural ones, and that's actually a pretty small slice of the pie.
tman
(983 posts)The forecasts are too far off the mark for me too worry about.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Even now when I travel to southwest WI, I see plenty of signs supporting him.
And worse, his new Supreme Court selection is a younger, far worse version of the guy who left the bench.
Jimbo S
(2,958 posts)Messaging
Current lack of depth in the Wisconsin Democratic Party
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Hmm. The first state to pass fair work hours, mandatory time off, workers compensation, the first state to have multiple low cost state universities, and far, far more.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)Wisconsin Democrats stay home in droves in non-presidential years, and until last year the state party was run by the comically inept Mike Tate.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)than Wanker.
Unfortunately, some on our side go out of their way to make things worse. At least we have a partial budget. But health, education, child services, roads and bridges, all took a big hit.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)Although I was born and raised in Milwaukee, approximately half of my extended family is in the Chicago area. All but one uncle and one aunt are Democrats. They are ALL huge Bears and Cubs fans... but not even Bears and Cubs fans deserve that POS Governor
On edit: I actually like the Cubs, but don't tell any of my Wisconsin friends!
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Funny thing is, Quinn had a horrible deck left to him. Blago (or as my now deceased 104 year old grandmother called him, blaggosumabitch) really screwed things up. Just as we had a chance to fix the budget, and both D and R sides were ready to talk, he called several special sessions on the budget, then did not show up. I feel sorry for Quinn. He was/is a good man.
But Rauner is a menace. Luckily he caved, because he had to. I suspect lynching was in order if he did not. But he is not defanged. He is much richer and smarter than Wanker, and that makes him more dangerous.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)to the curb. Without Koch cash Walker has only Diane Hendricks- basically Wisconsin's version of the Kochs, but nearly as rich.
Yeah, Blago screwed you guys over good. Hopefully the good people of Illinois will rid themselves of Rauner in short order!
RAFisher
(466 posts)Nate has Trump with 270 EV currently. Starting with 2012 Obama states Clinton loses Nevada, Iowa, Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio. All states that bush won in 2000 and 2004 with exception to New Hampshire going blue in 2004. That puts it as 269-269 a tie. But Silver has Trump winning Maine's 2nd congressional district putting him at 270. Nebraska and Maine are the only states that allocate EV based on congressional districts.
harun
(11,348 posts)TomCADem
(17,382 posts)...totally validates such hate. This is why I've been posting a lot of these polls, too.
In Europe, right wing nationalists have risen to prominence. Our nation has had a long history of racism. This is bigger than Hillary and the DNC.
still_one
(92,060 posts)TomCADem
(17,382 posts)Protecting Gays from Muslims...
Protecting Christians from Gays...
Protecting African Americans from Mexicans...
Protecting Police from African Americans...
Protecting Women from Rampant Violence...
Protecting Men from a Political Correct Bias from Women...
These were the messages from the RNC, and each hate filled appeal could resonate with every segment of the population.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)They have always been present, but most of the time, they were shamed into silence. Under trump, they have been empowered.
I don't mean to go Godwin here, but he is a fucking used car salesman, reality show, fascist. A damn nazi.
still_one
(92,060 posts)Tess49
(1,579 posts)bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/
uawchild
(2,208 posts)After that DUMPSTER FIRE of a convention, Trump now leads?
This can't be ignored, at least it should not be ignored -- Trump is a very real threat to win in November.
IT SHOULD NOT BE CLOSE AT ALL, let alone have Trump leading.
Who said IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID? Wasn't that Bill Clinton? THAT is very true in this election.
"Growth in white poverty fuels Trumps run: Largely ignoring the trend has consequences
The GOP overlooked the poverty that's spread to white suburbs those neglected Americans turned to Trump
by ROBERT HENNELLY
Growth in white poverty fuels Trump's run: Largely ignoring the trend has consequences
Donald Trump (Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst)
There was Donald Trump standing on the platform center stage at the Quicken Loans Arena basking in the moment the highest paid minds in media and politics told us over and over he would never have. What accounts for his improbable rise and what does it say about where our nation is really headed?
Just how did our corporate news media miss the amassing of the millions of mostly angry white voters with their pitchforks and torches that helped Trump stage a hostile takeover of the GOP?
Could it be that the elites of both parties, and their media stenographers, ignored the plight of poor whites for so long that they missed the explosion in their numbers, even as they marched on the town square?
Certainly, people of such poor education and such low social circumstance could not impact the politics of a nation so wordily and wealthy as America. Perhaps, the oversight is understandable. After all, with no disposable income worth targeting, there was no reason to run any detailed analytics on poor whites, unless you were selling beer, guns and bibles.
The reality is that under the current Democratic occupant of the White House, and a Republican-controlled Congress, poverty has exploded and expanded from its traditional urban and rural concentrations into Americas white suburbs. This precipitous deterioration happened as beltway leaders of both parties put their partisan gamesmanship and personal enrichment ahead of attending to the increasing ranks of the nations poor and struggling working class of all colors.
In the early 1970s the country had well under 25 million poor people and by 2014, the more recent available data, it was approaching close to 48 million people. But the spike in the real numbers is only part of the story which could help to catapult Trump right into the White House.
According to the Brookings Institutes The Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty between 2008 and 2012 our urban poor population grew overall by 21 percent while in suburbs it more than doubled, growing by 105 percent. Almost every major metropolitan area in the country saw the number of suburban families living in high poverty and distressed neighborhoods go up.
Over the same period the percentage of white households, living in census tracts where at least 20 percent of the population is living below the poverty line, spiked from 30 percent to 37 percent. Concurrently the percentage of African-American and Latino households living in those depressed zip codes dropped by 4 percent. For foreign born families there was a 3 percent decline.
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/25/growth_in_white_poverty_fuels_trumps_run_largely_ignoring_the_trend_has_consequences/
This is why Trump's nativist populist demagoguery has traction, we ignore it at our own peril.
LonePirate
(13,407 posts)And yet his position with the voters has improved. I have no words to describe this. I simply don't understand what is happening or why.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)and people should be taking it seriously.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)I shudder to think. Like I said, he's a very real threat in November, people ignoring that have their heads in the sand.
bucolic_frolic
(43,029 posts)I am sure county Democratic HQ in most counties would be glad to
have the help of volunteers from DU
The election is not won or lost here online
It's won on turnout, GOTV, in November
My local folks have contacted me, make sure you do the same
in your community!
Clinton-Kaine 2016!
UMTerp01
(1,048 posts)I think some recent changes to the map though are NH light pink from light blue and IA from light pink from light blue the last time I looked. Hillary still ahead though.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Okay, it's not GOOD Dem news, but it is hardly proof of anything.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)This does NOT mean little, I'm afraid.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)He should be falling behind after that effed up clownfest.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)Doodley
(9,033 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)I'm still taking bets for anyone who thinks that Clinton will not win this election. Wait and see - in the end it won't even be close.
bullimiami
(13,074 posts)And it should at least be after the conventions before they start to settle down and show some consistency.
unblock
(52,113 posts)Differences between polls-only and now-cast
◾The now-cast is basically the polls-only model, except that we lie to our computer and tell it the election is today.
◾As a result, the now-cast is very aggressive. Its much more confident than polls-plus or polls-only; it weights recent polls more heavily and is more aggressive in calculating a trend line.
◾There could be some big differences around the conventions. The polls-only and polls-plus models discount polls taken just after the conventions, whereas the now-cast will work to quickly capture the convention bounce.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)tralala
(239 posts)Equinox Moon
(6,344 posts)I really don't like this "polling" thing in general. Let's talk about the issues and ability to hold that office.
Plus, let's talk about the Party and the many, many candidates running for office. The Presidential election carries too much weight.
Vinca
(50,236 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)together a winning convention!
Cattledog
(5,910 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Been there, done that in 2008 and it was not smart.
And I cannot ever get emotional about anything based on the popular vote.
This is a swing state game and people don't pay attention until voting day nears, if then.
Democat
(11,617 posts)It's not funny how this site is being taken over by pro-Trump trolls.
George II
(67,782 posts)Using "Polls Only":
Chance of winning: Hillary Clinton 53.7% Donald Trump 46.2%
Electoral Vote Count: Hillary Clinton 282.9 Donald Trump 254.9 Gary Johnson 0.2
Using "Polls Plus":
Chance of winning: Hillary Clinton 58.2% Donald Trump 41.7%
Electoral Vote Count: Hillary Clinton 276.4 Donald Trump 261.1 Gary Johnson 0.6
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus
judesedit
(4,437 posts)jimlup
(7,968 posts)we'd better have a good convention bounce.
vadermike
(1,415 posts)We are in deep shit .. Plus the other polls showing trump ahead .. I think we may be toast It does t seem to matter what he says ..and he is still gaining traction We have a serious problem
Democat
(11,617 posts)A little concerned today?
oswaldactedalone
(3,489 posts)Nate was our hero in '08 and '12 and was universally praised for his models and predictions. Now, this report today and he's a villain. I like DU but there should be more objectivity here and less bashing of anything that's not for the Democrats. While Democrats make far less mistakes than the Thugs and are for more thoughtful in their positions, they're human and make mistakes as well. Stop bashing anyone who points out these mistakes or comments on bad polling and be more fair and objective.
RAFisher
(466 posts)Sometimes reality goes against preexisting beliefs. When presented with a contradiction do people accept the new reality or come up with some excuse why the facts must be wrong? I see this type of thinking on the left and right. FBI stats disprove an increase in crime? The FBI can't be trusted. Polling shows Trump up? Silver must be doing something evil.
If anyone actually read Silver they'd see he's very fair and points out shortcomings. He has different models because, by design, the main model does not factor in the convention bump. Hopefully this is all just a convention bump but we shall see.
shireen
(8,333 posts)Either his math is wrong or people are messing with him.
Hillary WILL win. No question.
Mister K
(450 posts)I do not believe they are as advanced as 538 but has their own way of doing things.
bathroommonkey76
(3,827 posts)Grey Lemercier
(1,429 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)Clinton has always been significantly ahead in the electoral prediction. Trump has made alarming progress to closing the gap, but it is still safely out of reach.
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)the forcasted prediction for actual election day shows Hillary leading.
sinkingfeeling
(51,436 posts)Oneironaut
(5,479 posts)Trump has a very good chance of winning. Democrats still seem to not take him very seriously. They won't believe it until Trump is elected.
As much as I can't stand Hillary, Trump would be a disaster. Democrats seem to be of a mind that Trump will never win, so they can just relax and sit this one out. Trump is going to ride that apathy to the White House.
RussBLib
(9,002 posts)some people obviously respond positively to all the anger and hate
those numbers should go back down after the Dem convention and Hillary will probably pull ahead again
tblue37
(65,215 posts)Scorpionflyx
(32 posts)Hope it's wrong.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)We have to work hard to GOTV for Clinton/Kaine. We cannot allow Trump to appoint judges to the SCOTUS who will set us back 50 years.
Scorpionflyx
(32 posts)Just the thought of him in office makes me sick.
VMA131Marine
(4,135 posts)haele
(12,635 posts)Two weeks from now, it will probably be Hillary with a 15 percentage lead - because at least half of the people polled aren't really thinking about who they're actually going to be voting for, or even if they get off their duffs and vote in November. Unless those surveyed also give specifics about what is important to them and why that makes them favor one candidate or another, it's pretty much an exercise in Media push-polling, and not really informative as to how a candidate is really doing. "Who will I vote for now?" is a silly question if the so-called independent voter hasn't even made up his/her mind to get out and vote because there's too much else to think about or pay attention to right now.
Unless I was part of a campaign and looking at the questions asked and how the answers were categorized so as to tweak strategy, all these polls really mean very little until late September, and even then, polls are little more than extrapolated trends with a huge margin of error and environmental factors that can affect the results.
Haele