Hillary Clinton’s lead in the polls may be larger than it seems. Here’s why.

[NCTraveler]

In 2012, national polls in October suggested the presidential race was a virtual tie. The Real Clear Politics polling average gave Barack Obama a slight 0.7 point lead over Mitt Romney, but he actually won by almost 4 points. Of the final 11 national polls released in 2012, as reported on Real Clear Politics, 7 were a tie or had Romney ahead, while only 4 had Obama ahead.

Why were so many of the polls wrong? In part, because they failed to capture how minorities would vote. Unfortunately, some pollsters may be making the same mistakes in 2016 — and thereby underestimating Hillary Clinton’s lead in the polls.

In 2012, many polls underestimated how many minorities would vote and how many would vote for Obama. For example, a Politico poll released the morning of Election Day said the race was tied at 47 percent each for Obama and Romney. The poll said that 62 percent of Latinos supported Obama, while the exit polls reported 71 percent, and Latino Decisions reported 75 percent. Among the “another race” category, which is mostly comprised of Asian Americans, Politico reported that 47 percent supported Obama, while the exit polls reported 73 percent, and an Asian American Decisions exit poll reported 72 percent.

And Politico was not alone. A Monmouth/Survey USA poll, which had Romney leading by 3 points, suggested that Obama would barely win Latinos, 48 percent to 42 percent.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/06/20/hillary-clintons-lead-in-the-polls-may-be-larger-than-it-seems-heres-why/

[BlueCaliDem]

1. Underestimating her lead but overestimating her "disapproval" numbers. That's propaganda for ya!

The M$M are useless tools for the moneyed Libertarians and Republicans. Thank GOD net neutrality survived the courts and AT&T and other cable providers (all strongly supporting the GOP and Republicans) didn't prevail.

It's really NICE to have a strong Democrat in the White House to protect our rights!