Hillary Clinton's poll numbers haven't dropped at all—and this one chart proves it

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 8:19 PM GMT
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/26/1415688/-Hillary-Clinton-s-poll-numbers-haven-t-dropped-at-all-and-this-one-chart-proves-it?detail=email



    The chart above shows a combined average of every single national poll taken since March 1 of this year that pits Clinton against the 10 leading Republican candidates—197 matchups in all, courtesy of Huffington Post Pollster. The key takeaway, as you can see from the blue and red trendlines, is that the race has been remarkably static.

    In fact, at the beginning of March, Clinton led the GOP field by an average of 50.3 to 42.6, or 7.7 percentage points. Now, in late August, she leads 48.7 to 41.2, or 7.5 percent. Clinton's "collapse," in other words, is 0.2 percent! No serious analyst would consider that anything more than a rounding error. (And we're not cherry-picking the start date, either: The picture is the same if you dial it back to Jan. 1.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 8:42 PM GMT
    Uh oh!

    You mean, Southbeach, Socal and Bob3's combined total of 53 separate threads on the subject of Clinton's emails was completely in vain?
  • MarvinMartian

    Posts: 128

    Aug 27, 2015 11:47 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidUh oh!

    You mean, Southbeach, Socal and Bob3's combined total of 53 separate threads on the subject of Clinton's emails was completely in vain?

    They believe what they want to believe. Like that "unskewed polls" guy. We ever heard about that in London.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 12:00 AM GMT
    OOPS - OP, you didn't look at the detailed charts from the same site that shows the real information.

    Blue - Clinton Red - Republican

    2016 General Election: Bush vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-bush-vs-clinton.pn

    2016 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton.p

    2016 General Election: Carson vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-carson-vs-clinton.

    2016 General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-cruz-vs-clinton.pn
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 6:17 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidOOPS - OP, you didn't look at the detailed charts from the same site that shows the real information.

    Blue - Clinton Red - Republican

    2016 General Election: Bush vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-bush-vs-clinton.pn

    2016 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton.p

    2016 General Election: Carson vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-carson-vs-clinton.

    2016 General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton
    2016-general-election-cruz-vs-clinton.pn



    OOPs indeed, if you read "CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Clinton leads Carson is 67%." kinda makes your graph look a little silly.

    The larger graph I linked is more indicative of reality. There are 2 or 3 'spots' where the Republican wins. Those are called anomalies. Admittedly Republicans are trying to create a more consistent anomaly.

    Carson winning? Really?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 6:44 PM GMT
    timmm55 saidOOPs indeed, if you read "CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Clinton leads Carson is 67%." kinda makes your graph look a little silly. ....

    Carson winning? Really?

    It doesn't make the graph look "silly". It comes from the same poll. Doesn't seem like you understand what you quoted.

    The probability of Clinton leading Carson does not indicate the size of the lead. It only indicates she is ahead with a probability. It is another way of expressing confidence level associated with a margin of error. And it certainly does not indicate a trend. The info I presented, in fact, runs counter to the trend assessment reported.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 6:57 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    timmm55 saidOOPs indeed, if you read "CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Clinton leads Carson is 67%." kinda makes your graph look a little silly. ....

    Carson winning? Really?

    The probability of Clinton leading Carson does not indicate the size of the lead. It only indicates she is ahead with a probability. It is another way of expressing confidence level associated with a margin of error. And it certainly does not indicate a trend. The info I presented, in fact, runs counter to the trend assessment reported.


    It can indicate a trend, if there is a consistent graph-able line. There are a few spots, where Hillary is losing, that's it. But the dots don't connect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 7:39 PM GMT
    Who cares? If Hillary is your ideal candidate, you are seriously lacking. She is an old haggard used up bore. No party seems able to attract someone with brains, ideals and plans.