Dear Editor: please edit this article to include the confidence interval surrounding Trump's Civis numbers. Regardless of what the interval is, Trump's Civis numbers is an incredible win for him. Let's assume Trump's true numbers intervals between, say, 13 to 19, with 16 as the mean. Do you see the REAL news here? It's not Carson, but rather it's Bush. If Bush's numbers have a similar 3 points interval, say 6 to 12 with 9 as the mean, then that definitively spells **early** trouble for Bush, because the non-overlapping nature of Trump's and Bush intervals says in no uncertain terms that Trump's lead over Bush is a **statistically significant** edge at this **early** juncture. Not just a survey sampling error aberration, but a statistically significant difference, among registered Republicans no less. That means that, at this early juncture, with the Civis report there is now definitive survey evidence that Bush's message has no traction. Evidence of it gaining traction at all? Editor, you need to rewrite the article analyzing Civis' numbers not just against natl popularity polls but on a stand-alone basis. Looked at this way, at this juncture, findings are incredibly Trump favorable and Bush unfavorable. The question now for Bush is two fold: what must he do to get **more than** his pro rata share of the undecided 24, for he can't be satisfied with just his pro rata share cuz that only locks in his sub position. And, how can he capture votes of candidates who drop out?
13
Time to pull The Authoritarian Personality off the shelf and give it another read.
Like many commentators, I'm less troubled by Trump than by the people who are finding something inspirational, something they can identify with, in his performance.
Like many commentators, I'm less troubled by Trump than by the people who are finding something inspirational, something they can identify with, in his performance.
18
Maybe the big crowds are really coming out to see the star of Celebrity Apprentice?
13
You, like many other pundits, just cannot accept the facts. This man is the Freudian ID of the Republican Party. He may not win but he clearly is in the lead.
6
Trump's everything is overstated, but 'overstated' is the wrong word frankly speaking. Trump's everything is exaggerated, inflated and overpriced, and this makes actually the engine of his campaign. It's not really too good, but anyway better than nothing (which some other candidates offer).
4
Articles like this might convince me to answer the land-line phone the next time I get a call with caller id that says "Gallop" and maybe even the other calls that I usually ignore... But, maybe not.
Its really too early to start these predictions... Relying on polls, even accurate ones, is like finding out the gender of your baby - where's the fun surprise?
Its really too early to start these predictions... Relying on polls, even accurate ones, is like finding out the gender of your baby - where's the fun surprise?
5
Just visit the yahoo comments and you will find Trump leads! America is tired of broken promises. We cannot undo the last 7-years, but we can change the future! TRUMP 2016!
9
Yahoo's comments section has always been a cesspool of racist ignorance and nativist hatred, so no surprise there.
23
Why would you want to undo 7 years of steady economic recovery?
Change the future to what? Trump hasn't come up with any substantive plans to help anyone in this country.
This isn't a box of breakfast cereal you're deciding on. Wake up and pay attention.
Change the future to what? Trump hasn't come up with any substantive plans to help anyone in this country.
This isn't a box of breakfast cereal you're deciding on. Wake up and pay attention.
16
Yes, comment sections are highly reliable sampling mechanisms.
And why in particular do you want to "undo" the last 7 years? You dug the Recession? Want to go back to double digit unemployment? Dow at 8800? US military fully engaged in two ground wars? Most people's houses worth a fraction of what they sold for a few years prior?
Ah yes, the good old days...
And why in particular do you want to "undo" the last 7 years? You dug the Recession? Want to go back to double digit unemployment? Dow at 8800? US military fully engaged in two ground wars? Most people's houses worth a fraction of what they sold for a few years prior?
Ah yes, the good old days...
37
I remember GOP crowds cheering for the number of people put to death in Texas. When the case of a terminally ill cancer patient without insurance was discussed they screamed, "Let 'em die." When a video of a gay marine was played, they booed lustily.
That is the Donald's constituency. Will they go to the trouble of voting? Perhaps they are comfortable just stewing in the juices of hate radio.
I think these people should share all their hatreds in the most vicious manner. The more that happens, the less likely any Republican can get elected.
That is the Donald's constituency. Will they go to the trouble of voting? Perhaps they are comfortable just stewing in the juices of hate radio.
I think these people should share all their hatreds in the most vicious manner. The more that happens, the less likely any Republican can get elected.
50
Silence is Bliss
2
Among likely GOP voters, according to the Pollster average of polls, Bush is FOURTH after Trump, Carson, and Cruz. Followed by Walker and Carly. What's more is that if you add up the support for the what some might call "crazy" GOP candidates - Trump, Carson, Cruz, Huckster and Santorum - they make up 47.3% of registered voters and 47.6% of likely voters. Versus 43.1% and 38.5% (!!!!), respectively, for the other 11 "grown up" Republican contenders COMBINED. The delta are "undecided" voters.
All of this means that if EVERYONE but Trump and say Bush dropped out, that among LIKELY or registered voters I think most of the "crazy" support would flow to Trump, not Bush. Remember, the GOP changed the rules so that most contests after March 15 are winner take all. So in say half the states, if Trump gets the most votes, he gets ALL the delegates. Meaning that if what I say is true...you do the math.
All of this means that if EVERYONE but Trump and say Bush dropped out, that among LIKELY or registered voters I think most of the "crazy" support would flow to Trump, not Bush. Remember, the GOP changed the rules so that most contests after March 15 are winner take all. So in say half the states, if Trump gets the most votes, he gets ALL the delegates. Meaning that if what I say is true...you do the math.
6
If this is the kind of candidate these voters have been looking for, it's not very surprising they haven't been very politically active in the past, is it?
We always hear complaints about the people who don't vote, and accuse them of apathy. It turns out that they would have a great deal of interest if the right candidate came along. Whether this is a good thing or not, I will not venture a guess.
We always hear complaints about the people who don't vote, and accuse them of apathy. It turns out that they would have a great deal of interest if the right candidate came along. Whether this is a good thing or not, I will not venture a guess.
8
I hate to point this out (because Trump disgusts me!), but statistics can be wrong. A lot of people who don't vote in primaries MIGHT vote if someone is strongly representing their message. The bigots may turn out this time. sigh.
18
Too many polls. When you poll incessantly, it seems less impressive.
What interests me far more is the increasingly well documented links between Trumps meteoric rise in popularity as measured by campaign event turnout and white supremacy groups. I suspect for many, trump oddly provides "cover" for blatantly racist views. Because he doesn't come right out and attack groups beyond illegal immigrants, folks are free to extrapolate what they will regarding any minority groups, including African Americans.
Trump can claim any level of support he chooses. He's so adept at exaggerating, who can say whether or not he has some hidden information we don't have.
What interests me far more is the increasingly well documented links between Trumps meteoric rise in popularity as measured by campaign event turnout and white supremacy groups. I suspect for many, trump oddly provides "cover" for blatantly racist views. Because he doesn't come right out and attack groups beyond illegal immigrants, folks are free to extrapolate what they will regarding any minority groups, including African Americans.
Trump can claim any level of support he chooses. He's so adept at exaggerating, who can say whether or not he has some hidden information we don't have.
19
He was endorsed by a white supremacists group today as well as David Duke saying nice things about him that sounded like an endorsement. That should make the "right" happy.
4
I'm voting for him.
4
What we really don't know yet is if Donald Trump's numbers are boosted by the realistically angry voter who wishes to make a point before the game really begins in January or if there's genuine support for him out there, issues or no. On the other hand, he is crushing his rivals. Why? Because they still don't believe the Trump "high" is for real; they're also crippled by a lack of substance on any issue, for which Mr. Trump gets a pass. His present polling numbers could be threatened by a bold candidate but he's staked out that terrain and the others fear to contest him there knowing a bad defeat could wreck his (her) candidacy. So the party is still hostage to the extremes, "moderates" playing catch-up.
And Mr. Trump gets the "undecided" vote, a demographic that provides a buffer between the candidate and the 16 others, seen as inconsequential. Mr. Trump's lead will not go away until someone takes it away. Who's out there to do that?
And Mr. Trump gets the "undecided" vote, a demographic that provides a buffer between the candidate and the 16 others, seen as inconsequential. Mr. Trump's lead will not go away until someone takes it away. Who's out there to do that?
10
No one calls Trump out on his lack of answers. "I will be wonderful for women", "I will get rid of Obamacare and get something else wonderful". What kind of answers to questions is that? Everyone, including Fox News, appears to be afraid of him.
32
I am a civil engineer working at a large international engineering firm in Orlando, Florida. Don't believe only the under educated support this man. His name came up in a budget meeting with senior management and he is the overwhelming choice of all the stakeholders in attendance.
21
This makes sense. The Cliffnotes version is, if you don't know anything about what is going on and you have no idea who is running, pick Mr. Trump. You recognize him from reality tee vee.
17
Trump phenomenon has forced liberal media to use Oil Snake analysis of different polls . Sorry, American voters are not that stupid.
6
Try again. Liberals would be absolutely ecstatic to see this fool secure the GOP nomination. Absolutely no chance it will happen, sadly, but we can dream.
22
Be careful what you wish for.
As a liberal I am thoroughly dismayed to see how many people are lining up behind Trump. It's depressing! Then again, if you group all of his GOP opponents into the "Anyone But Trump" faction of GOP, things don't look quite as bad. I do continue to wonder at how so many people choose to reside in GOP mindset, but that's another matter.
As a liberal I am thoroughly dismayed to see how many people are lining up behind Trump. It's depressing! Then again, if you group all of his GOP opponents into the "Anyone But Trump" faction of GOP, things don't look quite as bad. I do continue to wonder at how so many people choose to reside in GOP mindset, but that's another matter.
13
Kathleen - would the "anybody but Trump" voters outnumber the "anybody but Hilary" numbers?
I'm quite certain that all the media publicity is exactly what's propelling Trump. The more attention we pay to him the better he does. This is fine - he is the dems best friend because he is ultimately unelectable.
23
Strange as this may sound I had a conversation with a rather liberal Democrat yesterday said he was thinking of phoning in favor of Donald Trump .
Like many Americans my friend and the folks in his circle are absolutely fed up with politics as usual blowhard politicians and do- nothing bureaucrats.
Like his personality or not Mr. Trump does get things done albeit as a businessman . Remember the Wolman skating rink debacle in Central Park ?
Who got that resolved ? Only Donald Trump could do what bureaucrats politicians and others could not .
We know he nor anybody can fire bureaucrats but maybe Mr. Trump can 'fire them up' and actually get things done.
Stranger things have been known to happen in this country, heck we even elected a novice naïve senator from Illinois . Who would've thought?
And as Laurel said to Hardy: "Look at the mess you've gotten us into now."
I might even be willing to experiment myself by voting for Donald Trump .
Like many Americans my friend and the folks in his circle are absolutely fed up with politics as usual blowhard politicians and do- nothing bureaucrats.
Like his personality or not Mr. Trump does get things done albeit as a businessman . Remember the Wolman skating rink debacle in Central Park ?
Who got that resolved ? Only Donald Trump could do what bureaucrats politicians and others could not .
We know he nor anybody can fire bureaucrats but maybe Mr. Trump can 'fire them up' and actually get things done.
Stranger things have been known to happen in this country, heck we even elected a novice naïve senator from Illinois . Who would've thought?
And as Laurel said to Hardy: "Look at the mess you've gotten us into now."
I might even be willing to experiment myself by voting for Donald Trump .
11
A business man has a lot more dictatorial power than a POTUS. How effective will someone be, whose main appeal is alienating people, when they have to accept compromise?
6
Don’t call me a native racist because I have pride in my country and wish to see American citizens succeed- before 11 million illegal, undocumented workers.
We are spending more than we bring in because Republicans made a cult like death pledge not raise taxes! Even if we did, Democrats do not know how to spend the money wisely. They continue to fund antiquated social welfare programs which promote indentured and perpetual dependency. There is never any sensible, “BANG for the buck” policy out of Congress. Every government institution is grossly mismanaged and crippled by outdated, redundant, bureaucratic systems…. Can we agree on that?
Now we have +11 million illegal, undocumented workers who are getting a free ride on U.S. tax payer dollars. Contrary to public opinion, undocumented immigrants do not pay taxes; they have no SSN# and do not file federal returns- LIKE I DO. Undocumented immigrants send their money back to Latin America to support other family members. There is no way to deport 11 million people, but at least Trump is calling attention to a festering problem which neither party is willing to address. If Trump is insane and evil- then why don’t our elected officials demonstrate sanity and rationality by offering some pragmatic solutions? I’m all ears- and I have been for over 40 years! If Repubs and Dems can’t do it, then I’m willing to let the crazy man give it a try.
We are spending more than we bring in because Republicans made a cult like death pledge not raise taxes! Even if we did, Democrats do not know how to spend the money wisely. They continue to fund antiquated social welfare programs which promote indentured and perpetual dependency. There is never any sensible, “BANG for the buck” policy out of Congress. Every government institution is grossly mismanaged and crippled by outdated, redundant, bureaucratic systems…. Can we agree on that?
Now we have +11 million illegal, undocumented workers who are getting a free ride on U.S. tax payer dollars. Contrary to public opinion, undocumented immigrants do not pay taxes; they have no SSN# and do not file federal returns- LIKE I DO. Undocumented immigrants send their money back to Latin America to support other family members. There is no way to deport 11 million people, but at least Trump is calling attention to a festering problem which neither party is willing to address. If Trump is insane and evil- then why don’t our elected officials demonstrate sanity and rationality by offering some pragmatic solutions? I’m all ears- and I have been for over 40 years! If Repubs and Dems can’t do it, then I’m willing to let the crazy man give it a try.
9
I agree Congress is worthless, but Trump has no pragmatic solutions. He just says he will get some "Mangagement" team together but won't say what or how. What would make this amount of mystery acceptable?
Immigrants most certainly do pay taxes that are charged in cities, states and federal taxes on every retail situation that taxes. In Colorado there are crops no one but immigrants will pick- it is just a fact. What do you suggest for that?
Immigrants most certainly do pay taxes that are charged in cities, states and federal taxes on every retail situation that taxes. In Colorado there are crops no one but immigrants will pick- it is just a fact. What do you suggest for that?
30
Undocumented immigrants pay taxes every time they buy gas, clothes or new appliances. They also contribute to property taxes—a main source of school funding—when they buy or rent a house, or rent an apartment. The U.S. Social Security Administration estimated that in 2013 undocumented immigrants—and their employers—paid $13 billion in payroll taxes alone for benefits they will never receive. $100 billion in the last ten years! They do NOT qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years. The receive schooling and emergency medical care.
41
And that useless Congress will still be here and then what will Trump do? Nothing!
9
Every TV and newspaper pundit is straining to find reasons why Trump cannot win the nomination, in spite of his lead. The bottom line is that whoever wins the Republican nomination and whoever wins the general election, we, the citizens of this country all lose. It really doesn't matter if we elect a bully, a religious zealot or a woman who's relationship with the truth is very limited. They are all second or third rate but since a real leader who will do what he or she says does not seem to be on the horizon, we are stuck once again with the type of performance from our current government that generates Donald Trump.
2
Bernie Sanders.
17
Trump is just down right scary!!
This is how Hitler came to reign.
Beware.
I would first consider researching the real and sane in-depth platform of
Senator Sanders a dedicated civil servant for over 30 years and see perhaps if he can fulfill your needs for radical change before jumping on the Trump wagon of annihilation.
This is how Hitler came to reign.
Beware.
I would first consider researching the real and sane in-depth platform of
Senator Sanders a dedicated civil servant for over 30 years and see perhaps if he can fulfill your needs for radical change before jumping on the Trump wagon of annihilation.
5
I still wonder how much of a ruckus there's going to be when so many Trump supporters report to the Republican primary polling places to discover they can't vote because they're either not registered Republican or registered at all. Suddenly there will be a hue and cry about the unfairness of restrictive voter registration rules and how they prevent decent citizens from voting.
Wouldn't it be ironic if Trump ended up being the candidate to encourage voter registration?
Wouldn't it be ironic if Trump ended up being the candidate to encourage voter registration?
20
Trump is the only real person among Republicans currently in the race. Trump has, alone turned the party on it's head!
The other 16 candidates are truly a not-so-great group of citizens but a completely worthless lot as far as Presidential material goes, they all know it, but with a lot of funding, voters will still vote for them, no matter what, just incredible
The other 16 candidates are truly a not-so-great group of citizens but a completely worthless lot as far as Presidential material goes, they all know it, but with a lot of funding, voters will still vote for them, no matter what, just incredible
4
Yeah he is real alright. He really is a thin-skinned, vicious narcissist who has made greed and conniving into positive traits. As a President he would be either a total failure or a total tyrant.
43
Trump the quintessential vacum cleaner salesman perfecter of the create-the-need sale! Like Ralph and Norton in The Honeymooners trying to sell vacuum cleaners Donald knocks on your door, walks into your living room and throws dirt on your perfectly clean carpet. This country is in trouble! This country is no longer great! We need a wall on the boarder, the hoards are approaching! Vote for me and you will never have a stray hippo in your gardens in New England, I guaranty it! Anyone can pretend to fix problems that don't exist. Watch the card, now where's that card! Three Card Monty mesmerizes and confounds the simple but won't address the complexities of the current global environment. We live in the greatest country in the world. That has not changed but may unless we take the manufactured fake dirt, along Donald Trump and throw both out in the gutter. Otherwise the fire he dreams of pulling Rosebud from may be our country burning.
23
You have your great '50s sitcoms confused. It was Lucy Ricardo who was trying to sell vacuum cleaners via the dirt-on-the-floor demonstration--"I Love Lucy," Season 2, Episode 10, "Sales Resistance."
3
David - Lucy tried it after she was hoodwinked by a salesperson.
5
Trump has yet to receive an actual vote
25
We can only hope "the Donald" holds on and takes the Republican nomination only to meet Bernie Sanders in the general election. Then we can watch as the billionaire and the socialist square off. My guess: Bernie will eviscerate "the Donald" in the debates. That would be must see TV.
14
Americans are smarter than you give them credit for, Scott. They will realize that socialism will eventually destroy this country.
Funny, a flavor of it seems to work well in... Canada, Australia, UK, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden...
They seem to kicking right along, undestroyed.
They seem to kicking right along, undestroyed.
17
If you have a problem with democratic socialism then you a problem with:
Social Security
Medicare
Public road and highways
Public Schools
Trash collection
Hospitals
Libraries
Veterans assistance an medical for serving you!! in senseless wars
to mention a few things that are "social" that benefit all.
Study and do your homework people before you make such uninformed positions as democratic socialism, as proposed by Senator Sanders, equals communism.
Education is a BIG problem in this country.
Social Security
Medicare
Public road and highways
Public Schools
Trash collection
Hospitals
Libraries
Veterans assistance an medical for serving you!! in senseless wars
to mention a few things that are "social" that benefit all.
Study and do your homework people before you make such uninformed positions as democratic socialism, as proposed by Senator Sanders, equals communism.
Education is a BIG problem in this country.
4
Remember all the 'front runners' of the 2012 Campaign? Herman Cain, Michelle Bachman, Newt Gingrich, etc etc - they were front and center, and then they were gone. I'm hoping for the same for Trump. As an American I find him an embarrassment. P. T. Barnum without the elephants. I do hope his bubble will burst relatively soon and he'll be gone. Also, the press could dish out a little more 'benign neglect' when it comes to Trump. Not every idiotic utterance needs to show up on the evening news.
54
I don't believe that Donald Trump polls are overstated. I have spoken with many young people twenty something and 30 something who usually vote Democrats. To my great surprise there were supporting Donald trump on issues of trade with China and immigration. I am a liberal Democrat and on these two issues I will also vote for Donald Trump, no matter how crazy the press and the Hispanics portray him. He had the guts to put forth what everybody was thinking about and never dared to mention because they are pressured to be politically correct. He didn't take the oxygen out of the Republican Party, because there was no oxygen to begin with.
12
How many is many? I'm sorry but your conversations with a handful of people don't count as meaningful data.
15
I have observed the same thing, J&G. I've been conversing a lot more often with people about the 2016 election and more of them than I would have thought are for Trump and his policies. He is definitely going to upend the election and will probably be president.
1
I see these comments here and on the Washington Post website: "I'm a liberal Democrat and I'm for Trump."
I'm convinced Trump has his staff out posting these comments--probably laying the groundwork for a third-party bid if he fails to win the Republican nomination.
I'm convinced Trump has his staff out posting these comments--probably laying the groundwork for a third-party bid if he fails to win the Republican nomination.
4
This reminds me of a classic strata sample problem after which Gallup killed its strata sampling: once you move your frame significantly to try to achieve preferential goals, you may throw the baby out with the water.
This was a well know problem at the time when Dewey was incorrectly predicted to beat Truman, and it looks like the author is pulling something similar here. Romney's polls of likely voters, anyone?
This was a well know problem at the time when Dewey was incorrectly predicted to beat Truman, and it looks like the author is pulling something similar here. Romney's polls of likely voters, anyone?
3
Wishful thinking, trumpeting differences that fall within the margin of sampling uncertainty, no in-depth explanation of exactly how the Civis poll works.
Not up to the NY TImes standard at all and I suggest rewriting this article.
Not up to the NY TImes standard at all and I suggest rewriting this article.
7
Trump is leading by 'whatever', but he IS leading. Why? Because the republican base, and probably a good percentage of democrats, are SICK AND TIRED of politician double-speak and hand wringing. Trump is a breath of fresh air. And yes, some of that air blows across a waste treatment facility, but he simply does not care if you like it or not.
To me it's obvious the average voter is tired of the run-of-the-mill politician. Obama was supposed be the new generation of politician. We all see what a joke that turned out to be.
I truly don't believe Trump will last another four months, but if he does, it says much more about the nation's frustration with these goofballs than it does about what Trump thinks or believes.
To me it's obvious the average voter is tired of the run-of-the-mill politician. Obama was supposed be the new generation of politician. We all see what a joke that turned out to be.
I truly don't believe Trump will last another four months, but if he does, it says much more about the nation's frustration with these goofballs than it does about what Trump thinks or believes.
9
What you appear to be saying is that many Americans are too stupid and lazy to be bothered with facts and they just want to listen to someone blather and hear what they want to say.
23
Actually, it points to the level of idiocracy that exists among some voters. They wouldn't understand the fine points of how to go about addressing a societal problem if it hit them in the face and so are swept away by braggadocio and bluster. It's all smoke and mirrors, courtesy of the Trumpster.
24
There's evidence that Nate Cohn has been consistently wrong about Trump's support. It was only last month, on July 21, that Cohn told us, confidently, that after attacking the sainted senator John McCain, Trump was finished. Then, when Trump wasn't finished, Cohn wrote an almost identical article to this one claiming that the polls are somehow defective.I am no Trump supporter - just the opposite - but I am beginning to think that when Nate Cohn says Trump is finished, it is an indicator that Trump's numbers in the polls will go up.
11
This makes sense, and I'll come out and say exactly what the article is striving so hard not to. Trump's supporters are those less likely to vote, those who don't pay attention to the issues, those who don't know his policies well, those without much education, those who, in a word, are dumb.
The only way to support Trump, really, is by being dumb or being fed up with American politics as a whole and going with the clown. For example, his number-one issue, building a wall between us and Mexico, makes ZERO sense. First, he must not know how terribly the DMZ worked out. Second, Mexico can't afford to build it and frankly neither can we without gutting military spending. Third, the destruction of the environment (which we depend upon to live) would be incalculable. Fourth, which side of the Rio Grande was he thinking, down the center? Fifth, has he never heard of ladders, tunnels, boats, and planes? The wall would be an astonishing, useless boondoggle, preventing absolutely nobody from entering the country.
So there's plenty more to be contemptuous about, but when it comes right down to it, Trump supporters are nearly always ignorant of reality, and their views just don't really matter because when the primaries come up they will have forgotten what day they'll be and miss them.
The only way to support Trump, really, is by being dumb or being fed up with American politics as a whole and going with the clown. For example, his number-one issue, building a wall between us and Mexico, makes ZERO sense. First, he must not know how terribly the DMZ worked out. Second, Mexico can't afford to build it and frankly neither can we without gutting military spending. Third, the destruction of the environment (which we depend upon to live) would be incalculable. Fourth, which side of the Rio Grande was he thinking, down the center? Fifth, has he never heard of ladders, tunnels, boats, and planes? The wall would be an astonishing, useless boondoggle, preventing absolutely nobody from entering the country.
So there's plenty more to be contemptuous about, but when it comes right down to it, Trump supporters are nearly always ignorant of reality, and their views just don't really matter because when the primaries come up they will have forgotten what day they'll be and miss them.
82
Good job. Trump's supporters like to claim that they want to be told the truth, no matter how ugly. I'd say you nailed it.
9
You have nailed exactly why Israel built a wall and reduced her terrorist attacks to a fraction, and why Saudi is now building a wall to protect against Yemen.
3
@Tom W: Perhaps we should build a wall entirely around the United States! And, if possible a dome over it all as well.......Get real!
6
Ah-HAH! Gotcha! I KNEW the Trump numbers were "cooked" and that media people were being either sloppy, dumb, stupid or crooked.
Whenever there are numbers that look wrong, always remember the Presidential election of 1948, the firrst using allegedly scientific polling data. The pollsters and news people were all so absolutely positively sure that Dewey would walk away in the Fall that they never borthered to do any further polling after the spring. The numbers quoted in late Summer and early Fall were not "cooked" but the were from a season past-over 3 months too old to be useful. This has give the world the famous photo of Harry Truman holding a front page newspaper with headlines screaming "DEWEY WINS!"
It is also a reminder not to trust in anything that seems too easy, too easily.
Whenever there are numbers that look wrong, always remember the Presidential election of 1948, the firrst using allegedly scientific polling data. The pollsters and news people were all so absolutely positively sure that Dewey would walk away in the Fall that they never borthered to do any further polling after the spring. The numbers quoted in late Summer and early Fall were not "cooked" but the were from a season past-over 3 months too old to be useful. This has give the world the famous photo of Harry Truman holding a front page newspaper with headlines screaming "DEWEY WINS!"
It is also a reminder not to trust in anything that seems too easy, too easily.
6
I would like to see a poll where those who identify themselves as supporters of Trump are asked if they would be highly likely to vote for another Republican who is running now. My belief if the Trump's polling numbers are higher because he is attracting voters that wouldn't vote for anyone else, whereas someone who votes for Marco Rubio, for example, would be more likely to consider voting for one of the others. With so many candidates you can end up with a lot of voters who have squishy support for Jindal, but would be open to voting for Huckabee, or Scott Walker. The smaller numbers are spread out a lot more. But it may be that someone who supports Trump is much less likely to transfer support to another voter. So 16% is 16%.
7
I meant transfer support to another candidate.
1
I remember the George Wallace movement, the Ross Perot campaign, and (who can forget) Herman Cain; he of the prescient book " This is Herman Cain!: My Journey to the White House". I forgot John Ashcroft. Most of these names are not even footnotes in campaign histories.
6
The difference is Trump has been leading MUCH longer than those you mention.
4
Wallace, Perot, and Ashcroft were actually on the Presidential ballot! And they had supporters willing to write checks.
4
Never underestimate the angry, unemployed, self-victimizing, xenophobic, White male mob.
70
Thanks for that insightful, cogent comment. That explains a lot.
2
We women, Latinos, African-Americans and the entire LGBT community will greatly outnumber these crazy, hate-filled white men.
4
Who invariably doesn't vote!
4
Interesting article. I have a question though. What is Trump's approval rating among all likely voters? All the polling I can find seems to be about republican approval, Latino approval, head to head ratings, but I haven't been able to find a poll showing ALL likely voters. It sure looks to me like the media, pretty much across the board, wants to keep this Trump "campaign" alive by avoiding this. I suspect that if we saw the actual numbers, it would become apparent that Trump is unelectable. Could this be because Trump is outrageous and draws attention, thereby making it easier for the media outlets to get advertising money? Or is there something worse going on?
12
Polls tracks personal feelings and intentions. Local machines turn out votes, Trump has none.
4
i love watching the media squirm when trump speaks...
4
I don't think anyone is squirming. I think it's more revulsion and embarrassment. It's like being around a one year old who has learned to say "poopy" and "ca-ca". It's funny at first, then . . .
44
The media is the only thing keeping Trump's campaign alive.
41
Actually, Trump resembles the main character in the film, "King of Comedy". His name was Rupert Pupkin, brilliantly played by Robert De Niro. Catch a clip and you'll see an uncanny resemblance to Trump's comedy act.
1
So what you're saying is that polling must be skewed.
3
Well I think everything is OK with Trump polling and he's a real leader of the race in comparison to all the rest would-be so tough contenders like Hillary or Jeb.
4
You know what's more fun than watching Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential Election?
Watching the NY Times and the rest of the establishment media jumping the shark. I live and work in Washington DC, and am thinking about taking leave from my job, renting a bus and taking visitors around town to show them network and cable news journalists and political think-tankers running around here in DC like their hair is on fire in a panic over the national poll numbers for Donald Trump they've been trying to drive down all summer.
It's not working guys. Trump is right. This is a movement.
The American people electing a President instead of the liberal elite picking one?
Three words:
Yes. We. Can.
Watching the NY Times and the rest of the establishment media jumping the shark. I live and work in Washington DC, and am thinking about taking leave from my job, renting a bus and taking visitors around town to show them network and cable news journalists and political think-tankers running around here in DC like their hair is on fire in a panic over the national poll numbers for Donald Trump they've been trying to drive down all summer.
It's not working guys. Trump is right. This is a movement.
The American people electing a President instead of the liberal elite picking one?
Three words:
Yes. We. Can.
9
The liberal elite picked George W Bush for 8 years?
11
RNC will tank him. They know that he couldn't play in the big time with real thinking opponents. He is just destroying the remnants right now of the Republican Party but they won't let it go on and allow him to be the nominee. He would be buried in a Democratic landslide victory.
You are confused. It isn't the Liberal Elite picking anyone. It's the Corporate Elite.
12
Nate, you're greatly underestimating polling firms, which already do polls of both "Registered Voters" as Civis does, and "Likely Voters", in which they apply statistical models to predict results with a sample that represents actual voter turnout (since many Americans don't turn out to vote, even if they are registered), as Civis also does.
However, Civis is only one firm, and no firm is consistently better or worse than others.
What this article should've been about is the statistical concept of margin of error. 25%, 22%, and 16%, are all statistically equivalent results when accounting for the margin of error in each poll. Please make sure to include the margin of error for each poll you cite in the future (I notice that none are listed in this article).
However, Civis is only one firm, and no firm is consistently better or worse than others.
What this article should've been about is the statistical concept of margin of error. 25%, 22%, and 16%, are all statistically equivalent results when accounting for the margin of error in each poll. Please make sure to include the margin of error for each poll you cite in the future (I notice that none are listed in this article).
8
Actually "Y" 25%, 22%, and 16%
. . ARE NOT statistically equivalent.
The other article stated that the Margin-of-Error in this poll was 4%
At a simplistic level this means
A. That the 25% figure's suspected True-Value might range from 29-21%
B. That the 16% figure might be from 12-20%
C. No overlap
-----
But it's more complicated than that, there is a BellCurve type distribution for Margins-of-Error called the "Confidence Level", and I don't believe it was quoted here
EXAMPLES:
-Assume for argument sake that the MarginOfError is just 1-percent,
. . .if I only want to be 50% confident that my prediction matches the TrueValues.
-I am guessing that the 4% MarginOfError quoted was based on either a 90, or 95% Confidence-Level
-These are "predictions" not absolutes, and we can almost never have a 100% confidence level
-------
What is correct is that based on the Confidence-Level of the Poll is that the 2 higher percentages and the 2 lower percentages are within each others Margins-of-Error, but that the highest and lowest percentages are not.
Also, at some lower level of certainty(Confidence-Level) maybe on 80% certain; 22% & 16% may not fall within each others margin-of-error
FNALLY, again, these are only predictions; albeit powerful-predictions that grow more 'certain' as the sample becomes more representative of the Real/Actual Population, and as the sample-size gets closer to the size of the Real/Actual Population that is being analyzed
. . ARE NOT statistically equivalent.
The other article stated that the Margin-of-Error in this poll was 4%
At a simplistic level this means
A. That the 25% figure's suspected True-Value might range from 29-21%
B. That the 16% figure might be from 12-20%
C. No overlap
-----
But it's more complicated than that, there is a BellCurve type distribution for Margins-of-Error called the "Confidence Level", and I don't believe it was quoted here
EXAMPLES:
-Assume for argument sake that the MarginOfError is just 1-percent,
. . .if I only want to be 50% confident that my prediction matches the TrueValues.
-I am guessing that the 4% MarginOfError quoted was based on either a 90, or 95% Confidence-Level
-These are "predictions" not absolutes, and we can almost never have a 100% confidence level
-------
What is correct is that based on the Confidence-Level of the Poll is that the 2 higher percentages and the 2 lower percentages are within each others Margins-of-Error, but that the highest and lowest percentages are not.
Also, at some lower level of certainty(Confidence-Level) maybe on 80% certain; 22% & 16% may not fall within each others margin-of-error
FNALLY, again, these are only predictions; albeit powerful-predictions that grow more 'certain' as the sample becomes more representative of the Real/Actual Population, and as the sample-size gets closer to the size of the Real/Actual Population that is being analyzed
2
At present the Trump campaign is essentially a made-in-the-media campaign with no ground operation. What remains unclear is whether it is sustainable as such, with an emphasis on showmanship and messaging galvanizing the irregular and disaffected voters in a long-term fashion fundamentally different from what we have seen in the past, or whether across time a lack of local organization and a tacit agreement among networks to reduce Trump's exposure begin to undermine his momentum. Right now covering Trump boosts ratings but at some point you want to sell him air time, not give it to him. Right now there is a segment of the public ready to respond to the points Trump raises about immigration but will they respond the same way to the same topic 7-10 months from now? It is clear Trump is a one-note band, perhaps able to command a larger percentage of potential voter support than elegant statistical methodologies can predict, but can that note not only sustain him but rally a majority of voters without some strategically-located and effective efforts to turn out the vote? Bluster and bullying may work with immigrants who cannot vote but could Trump bully Andrea Merkel, Vladimir Putin, or the shadowy leadership of ISIS? I have yet to hear Trump take on the plundering financiers of Wall Street, the narcotics traffickers found in gambling centers, or the large corporations abusing temporary work visas. Does he have, money aside, the potential to be renewed for next season?
14
this is an interesting perspective on how the voting history of the survey respondents might influence actual results. but why give us the point estimate for trump's performance in this poll if the point is to say that it is lower than in other polls? if you give us the sample error, at least we can understand which differences are statistically significant. this is important because the author is saying: "there is evidence." we need to assess how strong that evidence is.
4
"The Civis poll was conducted Aug. 10 to 19 and had a sample of 757 respondents. That sample was as much as three times larger than that of some public polls." I'm no statistician but these seem like absurdly small sample sizes for this sort of thing...
8
Not sure about the accuracy of the sample size, but I am concerned that polls in general only use landline phones for collection, regardless of their reasons or legalities. My own son and daughter in law as well as my daughter only have cell phones. While their specific reaction to a called poll is an unknown I can say for certain that they are more representative of todays "consumer" than several decades ago when cell phones were still a novelty that were backed up by a landline.
And I recall taking a statistics class 4++ decades ago and was surprised at how seemingly small a sample needed to be to accurately reflect the population, whether we are talking Presidential politics or breakfast cereal desires. Large samples don't really change the outcome, believe it or not. And that is also where the +/- figure comes into play. maybe 500 units gives a variable of +/- 5% and a 1500 unit might give +/- 2%. That difference is inconsequential for predictions and only serves to give the trailing (or leading) candidates a sense of confidence or failure.
And I recall taking a statistics class 4++ decades ago and was surprised at how seemingly small a sample needed to be to accurately reflect the population, whether we are talking Presidential politics or breakfast cereal desires. Large samples don't really change the outcome, believe it or not. And that is also where the +/- figure comes into play. maybe 500 units gives a variable of +/- 5% and a 1500 unit might give +/- 2%. That difference is inconsequential for predictions and only serves to give the trailing (or leading) candidates a sense of confidence or failure.
7
People were talking about how cellphones skewed political polls as far back as the '04 election at least. I'm sure that it's a more pronounced effect now, but I think we're probably still five or ten years off it being meaningful, simply because the generation that is majority cellphone-only is still (though only barely) young enough that its voter participation is very low.
2
This is an interesting if very complex analysis of polling that still doesn't address two important points:
A) Polls aren't perfect, but they're all we have to go on prior to the actual election, so now matter how much you (over)analyze the issue, the polls are still polls.
B) More importantly, pollsters and political operatives alike had better beware the power of celebrity. Trump's run is fairly unprecedented, and the very same "irregular" voters credited with his rise in the polls might just be inspired to actually show up and pull for the guy on Election Day because, hey, it's Trump.
A) Polls aren't perfect, but they're all we have to go on prior to the actual election, so now matter how much you (over)analyze the issue, the polls are still polls.
B) More importantly, pollsters and political operatives alike had better beware the power of celebrity. Trump's run is fairly unprecedented, and the very same "irregular" voters credited with his rise in the polls might just be inspired to actually show up and pull for the guy on Election Day because, hey, it's Trump.
5
I think that Trump's popularity is understated by polls because no one in the establishments can handle Trump. If Trump were elected President everything about politics would change. Lobbyists gone. Padded government payrolls, gone. Lying by politicians, gone. Illegal aliens crossing our borders and the resulting "Anchor babies", gone. Low labor participation rate, gone. Bad deals with foreign powers or anyone else, gone. Can you now see why there is such a massive campaign to stop Trump?
14
If you really believe all of that, well, Trump's got a Trump to sell you.
30
At least Trump is willing to say it. But there's the meat of the matter, and why he's walking all over the pack.
4
Sure and everyone will get a pony and eat candy for breakfast.
Who knew that Americans were so deluded? Trump did I guess.
Who knew that Americans were so deluded? Trump did I guess.
26
"An analysis of the data revealed that he fares best among voters who don’t regularly participate in primary elections" I have heard many people who have never voted in a primary say they cannot wait to do so in this one so they can vote for Trump. I've even heard Democrats who are angry about immigration say they are going to switch and vote Republican in the primary for the first time in their life so they can vote for Trump. There aren't any polls that are going to accurately portray this one. This election is like no other.
22
best, most obvious insight!
1
GOP establishment is so desperate, when all else fails attack the polls and the supporters
16
Looks like the media prefer bush
Yes, yes, but what does unskewedpolls.com say?
3
If there's validity to any of the polls, the results say something truly distressing about the polled; the reporting of the results says something indeed distressing about a sheep-like behavior in the media.
But when it comes to polling in general we remember with fondness that morning-after in 1948, the most delicious political morning in our four-score years of political awareness.
But when it comes to polling in general we remember with fondness that morning-after in 1948, the most delicious political morning in our four-score years of political awareness.
12
I am no fan of Mr. Trump or his policy positions, as much as they are articulated, but one should congratulate him on drawing people out who in the past have not shown any interest in politics. Trump's success can at least partly be attributed to the presence of a silent, if not majority, then substantial part of the electorate, who is simply sick and tired of the polished evasions, political correctness, stilted speeches and the expectations by the media and the elite, that whatever a candidate promises to the great unwashed, he can safely ignore once he has won. The Times seems to be aghast at the idea that Trump's support even among women, who he according to the Times denigrates and insults, is strong. Well, perhaps that is due to the fact that women can see what the Times and other paragons of political correctness can't, namely that people can be mad at specific people, curse them, without that being a sweeping denunciation of entire groups.
24
This sounds like another instance of the press pushing beyond reporting and into "policing" the candidacies of primary candidates. That there is "evidence to support that theory," re overestimating Trump's support, reveals little or nothing more than the polls aren't perfect and/or the methodology and science of polling isnt 100 percent accurate. Talk about overly broad. How much evidence? And how broad is the scope of the theory? That there is some puffing or even inflation, Lol, well, welcome to American political discourse. How does this differ from Herbie Hoover promising a chicken in every pot?
8
This article provides a great deal of insight and information that one could use when examining polling data. I am sorry it is not about what you wanted it to be about,
30
Why are you sorry? Polling data, unless you are Nate Silver conducting one, is all too often about as reliable as reading tea leaves. As for insight in discerning significant patterns, if any, is in the eye of the beholder. Likewise, what you may deem insightful, another might deem travelogue
Looks more like GOP elites and media are in the same boat