The newest Gravis poll for the NV Democratic caucus is a steaming pile...

[hoosierlib]

If you believe that voters 18-29 will be only 9% of total caucus goers in NV, I've got some beach front real estate for sale here in Indiana for you...

[Fawke Em]

9. And Hillary will lose the general.

She's UNELECTABLE to the substantial number of voters who aren't 1/2 the Democrats.

[mikehiggins]

10. Oh, that's just silly

This campaign will continue to the Convention and if Sanders has to give a concession speech, well, I'm sure he'll find a way to work a rigged economy and Wall Street interests into it.

The other day the campaign raised a million dollars in less than 24 hours. Okay, that's not as much as HRC can raise at a Mexican fund raiser, but it shows the Sanders campaign will not falter for lack of funds, nor for lack of enthusiastic volunteers.

Of course, with DWS still in charge you might see some problems but this time the whole world WILL be watching. If HRS's margin of victory is based on super-delegates there will be holy hell to pay.

Should be fun.

[cali]

13. Bet he doesn't take as much of a SHELLACKING in SC as Hilly did in NH

Not even close to it. Sorry, he isn't done. Hilly? Unelectable.

[karynnj]

25. not to mention nh is a purple state, SC a red one that we never win

I get that the importance of SC is the black vote, but are blacks in purple states similar to blacks in SC.

Being stronger in purple states is what makes someone stronger in the GE. So diminishing the NH win and making SC the end all and be all is silly.

[MohRokTah]

2. UNSKEW DEM POLLS!!!!! It worked SO WELL for President Romney!!!!!!

[Dawson Leery]

3. LOL!

Any poll that shows Bernie losing is garbage. Any poll showing Hillary losing is God's word.
That is what Bernites are saying.

[hoosierlib]

8. If they are fundamentally sound (PPP), I have no issue

This one is not even close...

[Dawson Leery]

12. Yesterday, PPP came out with polling showing

Hillary winning 10 of 12 states on March 1. Those polls were dismissed too by Bernie supporters.

My argument stands.

edit: By the way, Gravis had Berns taking NH in a landslide, and he did.

[JonLeibowitz]

27. And PPP's last NH poll had Hillary up by 3.

[hoosierlib]

29. For the record, the last Gravis poll in NH had her at 42% and finsihed at 38%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/Gravis__NH_Feb_2016.pdf

And in Iowa, their final poll had Hillary at 53% and she finished at 49.8%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/Gravis_Iowa_Jan_26_27_2016.pdf

Both had Clinton over performing her actual vote totals...

They are currently the outlier...

[Dawson Leery]

30. 16 is still a landslide and Gravis showed Bernie with that.

[calguy]

34. Count on the Berniacs to come in

Like a swarm of flies to denounce anything that doesn't portray Bernie as the next Messiah. I like Bernie. His rabid supporters? Not so much.

[brush]

4. 20 somethings typically turn out to vote much less frequenctly than older voters. That's not news

I was a precinct captain for Obama in '08, the last time we had a dem caucus here and most of the voters were 30 and up.

[hoosierlib]

7. But 9%?

Last edited Thu Feb 18, 2016, 09:01 PM - Edit history (1)

In 2008 it was between 14% to 18% (depending on the exit poll)...

[Jarqui]

5. Unfortunately, Gravis makes a habit of this nt

[Kentonio]

11. Nope, not even close.

http://overflow.solutions/demographic-data/what-is-the-average-age-of-the-each-state/

NH is the 4th oldest in the nation.

[1StrongBlackMan]

14. My bad ... I don't recall where I read/hear that stat? I will self-delete. Thanks ...

for setting it straight.

[hoosierlib]

15. Not trying to pile on...

http://extras.denverpost.com/census/2015/median-age-in-the-us.html

Median age in 2014 was as follows;
IA: 38.2
NH: 42.5
NV: 37.4

And in both IA and NH, 18 - 29 year olds made up 18% - 19% of the voters...

I would not expect NV turnout to be half that, especially given that the state is younger...

That's at least what I'm seeing...

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. Now that I think about it ...

it makes sense that NV would trend younger than other non-commercial/service industry/entertainment towns. I don't know what I was thinking!

But, not to be defensive ... 18-19% is not that few from the 15% I cited.

[hoosierlib]

19. Agreed...and it sure as hell ain't 9%...

If younger voters break like they have (80 / 20 for Sanders), under estimating the size of thr electorate by 5% (i.e. modeling it at 9%, while in reality its 14%), skews the poll +4% in HRC's direction..

If it is off by 10% (i.e. modeling it at 9%, while in reality its 19%), it is skewing by +8% in HRC's direction...

I hope that makes sense...

[brooklynite]

16. Here's the inaccurate Gravis poll for NH...

Gravis Marketing/One America News 2/2 - 2/4 Sanders 58 Clinton 42

[hoosierlib]

17. Overstated Hillary's strength by 4%...and by 5% in Iowa...

[Dem2]

20. I can't not say something

I'm no Gravis lover, but your post is taken out of context in order to be deliberately deceptive.

[hoosierlib]

21. Gravis consistently overestimates HRC's strength...

That's a fact and it is due to their methodology...nothing deceptive about that

[Dem2]

22. Whoosh! n/t

[hoosierlib]

23. The fuck is that supposed to mean?

[Dem2]

24. Did you look at the numbers compared to other pollsters?

They are pretty good, your objection to their numbers being high for Hillary is absolutely laughable in context and even compared to the average of polls.

[hoosierlib]

28. Let me explain it to you like I would a Republican...

Of the list you provided, only CNN, Gravis and ARG has provided polls for all three states (IA, NH and NV).

CNN has been the closest to the actual final outcome with regards to their final poll before election day.

Gravis and ARG has consistently overestimated HRC's strength.

What does that mean?
-Its means their sampling methodology is flawed.

Why do you say it is flawed?
-The Gravis poll is currently the outlier as it has Clinton with a +6 advantage.

How could it be an outlier?
-Because they are under representing the percentage of 18-29 year old voters as a share of the electorate.

Why do you say it is under represented?
- In 2008, voters 18-29 year old were 14% of the electorate and in 2016 in both IA and NH they 18% (and both states have a higher median age, i.e. less young voters).

What does that mean?
-It means that if the current trend holds of Bernie getting 85% of the 18-29 vote and their portion of the electorate is the same as it was in 2008, the poll is potentially over representing her strength by about 4 percentage points.

-Additionally it means that if Nevada follows NH and IA with the same relative turnout for those aged 18-29 (i.e. they make up 18%), Bernie is tied or ahead by a 1 or 2.

Does that make sense?

[Dem2]

31. I didn't read your post

Your headline said all I need to know about your ability to have a conversation and realize your biases. In other words, you are incapable of seeing your biases and are throwing a fit - I don't need this in my life, sorry.

[hoosierlib]

32. Lol...enjoy Saturday's disappointment

[Dem2]

33. Oh, I get it

Because I disagree with your analysis you assume I'm a fan on one of the candidates more than the other?

See, I told you that you were ruled by your biases. Thanks for proving my point.

[Dem2]

35. Final Result H53, S47

They called it remarkably accurately.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

26. I'm fine with it.

The poll that is. It lowers expectations, which makes Bernie's win or tie seem all the bigger, and helps with momentum.