General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPA: Insider Advantage (B-) Trump +3
Link to tweet
?s=20
Post-debate poll. The same poll had Biden in the lead less than two weeks ago. Not a trend I want to accept...
Why? InsiderAdvantages Matt Towery explained why things have moved in Trumps favor:
These results indicate a stark shift in the contest. Our last survey of Pennsylvania showed Joe Biden leading Trump by three points. But that survey was before the last debate. Since the debate Trump has picked up support from younger voters, who based on our prior survey strongly oppose future lockdowns over Covid-19 spikes. Trump has also bolstered his lead among male voters by some twelve points. Biden continues to hold a seven point advantage over Trump among female voters. It would be nothing more than mere conjecture to attempt to correlate Bidens statements on energy and fracking in the last debate contest with the shift towards Trump in this survey. However, Trump saw gains even among senior voters which have not been his strong suit this election cycle. That suggests that some issue or set of events has caused a late shift in the contest.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)a kennedy
(29,660 posts)ananda
(28,860 posts)nt
SoonerPride
(12,286 posts)If we get out and vote we win and win big.
NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)To our chances in the electoral college and for unseating Toad. The debate may have swung the election. Stunned. All the snap polls showed we won it.
rzemanfl
(29,557 posts)Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)lol
Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)He had a long thread insisting the final debate would cause at least a 5 point shift in either direction. He said in that thread President Romney would be finishing up his second term right now, without Superstorm Sandy.
Now this internal poll is cataclysmic
NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)It did move the numbers by 5 points. Well almost 5 points. In the IBD/TIPP daily national tracking poll, Biden's lead went from around 3 to around 7 post-debate. Biden's lead also increased roughly by 2.5-3 points post-debate in the USC national tracking poll as well. I think it was 10, 10, and 10 in their 3 models in the last poll before the debate and now it's 13, 12 and 12. So, Biden's strong debate performance solidified his lead.
Had Toad actually won the debate, it's not hard to see IBD/TIPP showing +1 Toad or even now and USC just spitballing here 5, 7 and 7, which given it's pro-Biden lean might have indicated a 2-3 point race, which makes the EC a tossup.
As for President Obama, watch the First Ladies Documentary on CNN on Michelle Obama if it re-airs. The narrator, Robin Wright, intones "President Obama mounts a comeback victory" during their 2012 section. I truly believe SuperStorm Sandy reminded people why they liked President Obama so much and voted for him in the first place. Seeing him in action was one of the decisive moments in the campaign. Norah O'Donnell closed the 3rd debate on CBS by saying something like "even though President Obama had a strong performance tonight, all the momentum is with Mitt Romney." I remember, as I watched it live. Sandy destroyed that momentum, that the media perceived at least, and swung it back the right way.
Anyways, now that I've read more on this thread about the methodology and people behind this poll, I do agree that it's hardly a cataclysmic poll at all and is rather a push poll. The B- rating just threw me off a bit initially.
I don't think you have any idea how important a Biden win is to SO MANY people, especially me.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)zackymilly
(2,375 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)It's utter bullshit. But, I see you have taken the bait and swallowed it. Soon, you'll be in the boat.
NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)Thanks to the hard work of fellow DUers, I've come off the ledge and see this poll for what it is now. The B- rating just threw me off, initially.
mcar
(42,331 posts)Just one. No need to panic.
rzemanfl
(29,557 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)and these are the "details"
https://overland.amgreatness.com/app/uploads/2020/10/PA-POll-Oct-25th-.pdf
400LV
seems a B- is WAY too high of a grade for them.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)That's why their result is 11 points off from accurate. Way out in right field.
obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)Seeing a lot of this, and will be seeing more the next eight days.
Jamesyu
(259 posts)I wouldn't take too much stock into this one, they have trump at 14% with AA, not going to happen.
Amishman
(5,557 posts)I'd love to throw that in a few faces
dsc
(52,162 posts)Here is their webiste.
https://amgreatness.com/category/center-for-american-greatness/
Amishman
(5,557 posts)Thanks. I was thinking it was just a right-wing source reporting the results, but yes Center for American Greatness paid for it
Efilroft Sul
(3,579 posts)It's as if they're trying to play Jedi mind tricks on themselves.
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)Read further. Nate says this is basically an adequate GE firm, although somewhat below average, and its troubles lie in primary polling.
That said, need further polls to confirm.
obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)More broadly, however, InsiderAdvantages problems do not stem from their polling in general elections, which has been somewhat below average but unbiased and basically adequate. Instead, it stems from their polling in primaries, as is apparent from their Pollster Scorecard:
Anyway, need further polls to confirm.
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)we did not have in our database before. Results-wise, these polls were terrible, missing by 12.4 points on average ... We also found, in accordance with the more sophisticated version of the analysis that I presented at Fordham, that their 2008 general election polling was in fact somewhat below average, rather than somewhat above average. We now account for all polls that a firm conducts within the 21 days prior to an election, rather than merely the last one. This compounded InsiderAdvantages problems because, for instance, they conducted four polls of the Democratic primary in North Carolina, all of which were poor ..."
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/pollster-scorecard-insideradvantage-be/
Tom Rivers
(459 posts)We're going to need big margins in the rest of the state, especially Philly.
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)I suspect you're spewing bullshit
Tom Rivers
(459 posts)Taking Joe's comments on energy from the last debate out of context and trying to make it like he would shut down all oil and natural gas production overnight. It was a really absurd interpretation of his position but there was a local reporter on MSNBC the next day making it like every one in Western PA was freaking out over it. I'm not spewing anything, it's important to know the line of attack that's being used against us, especially in a crucial state. We need big margins in Philly, folks in the big cities can't sit this one out.
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)No one in Philly or the surrounding burbs are going to "sit this one out".
roamer65
(36,745 posts)struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)Here is one from 10 days ago.
Donald Trump is closing the gap with Joe Biden in Pennsylvania as election day nears according to a new survey by InsiderAdvantage Chairman Matt Towery for the Center for American Greatness.
"The phone survey of 400 likely voters conducted October 12-13 showed Biden with a 3-point lead (MoE =+/- 4.9) over Trump. The recent Real Clear Politics poll average has shown Biden with a 7 point lead but thats been shrinking. The next most recent poll of Pennsylvania showed Biden with just a 2-point lead.
Towery says that This race is certainly close given that the spread is within the margin of error. However it is obvious that the Trump campaign has a problem with voters 65 and older. This is true in several battleground states, but more obvious in Pennsylvania. This is problematic given the fact that these older voters have increasingly become the base of the Republican Party. What is keeping the race so close are voters who are middle aged. Trump enjoys a huge lead among those voters and is doing better with younger voters than some polls might suggest.
It is clear that voters are split over the states rigid series of shutdowns related to COVID-19. Almost fifty-percent of voters agree with the recent WHO declaration that shutdowns are not the best alternative for future COVID spikes. And among those under 65, opposition to lockdowns is substantial. This suggests that a plan to protect seniors and to allow younger voters the ability to avoid future shutdowns of businesses and schools could be a winning combination for one of the candidates in the state.
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)There are percent capacity limits (50% of max fire marshall determined capacity) indoors and a sliding percent scare for outdoor events.
All businesses are allowed to be open albeit with mandatory face-covering restrictions.
obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)Go binge Bly Manor or something else constructive. Posting this poll is neither constructive nor useful.
Zeus69
(391 posts)Its a data point put up for discussion.
Blaukraut
(5,693 posts)This is something I've been wondering about. Could part of the huge increase in young voters be because they don't want another lockdown, so they're actually voting Trump?
That said: This poll does stink to high heaven. No way is Trump up 3% in PA.
obamanut2012
(26,076 posts)Z is not voting for Trump.
helpisontheway
(5,008 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,979 posts)By The Editors
July 21, 2016
American Greatness aims to be the leading voice of the next generation of American Conservatism.
https://amgreatness.com/2016/07/21/declaration-independence-conservative-movement/
The last "A" poll was on Oct. 23 - https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/pennsylvania/
I don't know why 538 didn't put a big " * " next to that one on their site because it is clearly "partisan" like they indicate "Public Policy Polling" is.
I think if Biden can hold at or above 50% in any poll, he may have the best chance. Those polls that do the "48% - 43% stuff, although seemingly suggesting someone is "ahead", often blow in the opposition's favor because they are apparently reflecting a larger amount of uncertainty.
Proud liberal 80
(4,167 posts)This poll is administered by a person who works for his show
vercetti2021
(10,156 posts)You cannot tell me that he's up this is such an outliner
helpisontheway
(5,008 posts)One would think it would hurt him since he is a damn idiot. How could anyone look at that damn debate and decide to vote for that fool again. Biden needs to be on the trail this week. His surrogates need to be out there. Personal I would prefer for them to solely focus on what used to be our blue wall and maybe Florida.
vercetti2021
(10,156 posts)Joe on A+ polls is still at 9 or above percent. This is a huge outliner
Statistical
(19,264 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 26, 2020, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)
https://overland.amgreatness.com/app/uploads/2020/10/PA-POll-Oct-25th-.pdfFirst the sample size is only 400 voters. For a race like PA and at this point in the race that is way too low. It means the MoE is 4.9% meaning that the +/- margin could be off by as much as 9.8% meaning not +3 Trump but actually +6.7 Biden.
If you want to run a lot of garbage polls and then just publish the results you like a large MoE is very useful. So you run a poll it shows Biden up 2 and you don't report it, you run it again and it shows Biden up 4 and you don't report it. You run it again and it shows Trump up 3 and you report that.
Most highly rated polling companies are using larger samples with smaller MoE (+/- 2%) in close states. If the race is close a wide MoE makes the results basically useless because most likely the results are going to be within the MoE (statistical tie) like this one is. The only way to avoid that it to use a larger sample with a smaller margin but if you goal is to published outliers that actually works against you.
Second is the tiny number of independents in the demographic. Independents are breaking for Biden so underrepresenting them is a way to push the results. They only makeup 8% of the poll vs the 20% normally. The poll internals show them breaking for Biden 3 to 1.
NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)Helps me spot the "Troll Polls" better. It should be noted that a 6.7 Biden lead would match the poll average in PA pretty much.
Also, helpful to know that Sean Hannity's programming director is behind this poll, as well and that independents are highly undersampled.
I dislike how the right-wing is flooding the poll market with garbage polls that are anxiety, if not outright panic-attack inducing. It'd be nice to see a lot more left-wing polling firms and respected media outlets polling. Instead we get GOP firms like Gravis, Trafalgar, Rasmussen and now Insider Advantage flooding the market. This needs to be worked on.
Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)"Trump has also bolstered his lead among male voters by some twelve points. Biden continues to hold a seven point advantage over Trump among female voters."
Hilarious. There is no planet in the universe in which a debate causes a 12 point shift among males, or that Biden leads among females by only 7 points
MoonlitKnight
(1,584 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Alhena
(3,030 posts)The poll showing Biden leading polled twice as many people and was run by a university, not Sean Hannity's programming director. Plus, the same university did another PA poll a while back that only showed a 4 point PA lead for Biden. So they show his numbers going up, not down.
So there's no reason to think the debate killed Biden in PA, and, at any rate, most Dems had already voted in PA by that time. I feel very good about PA.
BraKez2
(279 posts)400 Total
180 Dems
174 Gop
33 Ind
13 Lib
Seems off to me.
Eid Ma Clack Shaw
(490 posts)This is a clown car poll designed to placate Dear Leader or claim bragging rights in the event of an upset.
Link to tweet
edhopper
(33,579 posts)Fox News
A-
Oct. 17-20 45% 50% Biden +5
Quinnipiac University
B+
Oct. 16-19 43% 51% Biden +8
Gravis Marketing
C
Oct. 23 44% 51% Biden +7
InsiderAdvantage
B-
Oct. 25 48% 46% Trump +3
CNN/SSRS
B/C
Oct. 15-20 43% 53% Biden +10
Public Policy Polling
B
Oct. 21-22 46% 51% Biden +5
Rasmussen Reports/Pulse Opinion Research
C+
Oct. 18-19 47% 50% Biden +3
Morning Consult
B/C
Oct. 11-20 43% 52% Biden +9
DeminPennswoods
(15,286 posts)here.
David__77
(23,396 posts)...
Rice4VP
(1,235 posts)Pennsylvania. Shrug
Pollls at this point are useless unless they are only polling people who havent voted
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)How surprising. Thanks so much for sharing that with us. Really...
NewsCenter28
(1,835 posts)if it wasn't posted here.
ooky
(8,922 posts)dware
(12,377 posts)thanks for your concern.
honest.abe
(8,678 posts)Here's his book:
Sorry for the ugly image but I wanted to show the cover.
Here are his comments on his other book:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1641770317/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_wbCbBb2G4BPZZ
Buskirk is the publisher/editor of the operation who sponsored the poll:
https://amgreatness.com/meet-the-team/
I am certain it is complete garbage. Ignore it.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)It is the most current poll in at RCP. Is it accurate or an outlier? Hard to say until more polls come in.
Traditionally, the incumbent typically gets most of the undecided vote. All thing being equal, people dislike change. But there are not a lot of undecided voters out there right now. Fewer than most elections.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)That is simply incorrect or hotly disputed:
Closer Than They Appear
by Nick Panagakis
How will undecideds vote on election day? Traditionally, there have been two schools of thought about how undecideds in trial heat match-ups will divide up at the ballot box. One is that they will break equally; the other, that they will split in proportion to poll respondents who stated a candidate preference.
But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.
The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.
The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.
In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:
DISPOSITION OF UNDECIDED VOTERS
.
Most to challenger 127
Split equally 9
Most to incumbent 19
Undec.gif (1963 bytes)
The fact that challengers received a majority of the undecided vote in 82% of the cases studied proves that undecideds do not split proportionally. If there were a tendency for them to split proportionally we would see most undecided voters moving to incumbents, since incumbents win most elections. Similarly, even accounting for sample error, its clear from the chart above that undecideds do not split equally.
For poll users and reporters this phenomenon, which we call the Incumbent Rule, means:
Incumbent races should not be characterized in terms of point spread. If a poll shows one candidate leading 50% to 40%, with 10% undecided, a 10-point spread will occur on election day only if undecideds split equally (i.e. a 55% to 45% outcome). Since most of the 10 points in the undecided category are likely to go to the challenger, polls are a lot closer than they look 50% to 40% is likely to become 52% to 48%, on election day. If a poll is a mirror of public opinion, think of an incumbent poll as one in which objects are closer than they appear.
An incumbent leading with less than 50% (against one challenger) is frequently in trouble; how much depends on how much less than 50%. A common pattern has been for incumbents ahead with 50% or less to end up losing. Final polls showing losing incumbents ahead are accurate. The important question is whether results are reported with an understanding of how undecideds decide.
Many polls may have been improperly analyzed and reported. Some postmortem accounts of polls have been inaccurate -- many polls remembered as wrong were, in fact, right. Its only natural to interpret the term "undecided" literally. But as with so many other findings in survey research, data should be analyzed according to what they mean, not what they say.
Undecided about the Incumbent
Why do undecided voters decide in favor of challengers?
It seems that undecided voters are not literally undecided, not straddling the fence unable to make a choice the traditional interpretation. An early decision to vote for the incumbent is easier because voters know incumbents best. It helps to think of undecided voters as undecided about the incumbent, as voters who question the incumbents performance in office. Most or all voters having trouble with this decision appear to end up deciding against the incumbent.
The exceptions we found to the Incumbent Rule help support the theory on why this happens.
Many challengers who did not get a majority of undecideds were recent or current holders of an office equal to the one they were seeking. Voters were equally or more familiar with the challengers past performance in a similar office, so the challenger assumed incumbent characteristics. Other exceptions include well-known challengers or short-term incumbents.
Some examples of where more undecideds voted for incumbents or split evenly:
Last year in Minnesota, where Hubert Humphrey III challenged Sen. David Durenberger; and in Nebraska, where Bob Kerrey, the former governor, challenged David Karnes, who had been appointed to his Senate seat. In 1986 in Florida, when incumbent Sen. Paula Hawkins faced ex-Gov. Bob Graham. And in Chicago in 1979, where two-year incumbent Mayor Michael Bilandic split undecided voters with challenger Jane Byrne.
These examples and similar ones account for 17 of the 28 exceptions to the Incumbent Rule that we uncovered. In some of the remaining cases, the incumbent simply turned the race around in the final days. A good example of this is the 1982 Missouri Senate race pitting incumbent John Danforth against Harriet Woods. Other exceptions can be explained by sampling error.
There is an interesting pattern in the polls where most undecideds voted for challengers. In 98 of the 127 cases (77%), the incumbents final polls standing was plus or minus four percentage points from the actual election result. The most frequent result was two points gained by the incumbent over the final poll preferences -- 24 cases in all.
In 41 cases, or 32% of the 127, the incumbent ended with less than his stated poll percentage. This means that about one in four of all 155 polls actually overstated the incumbents percentage.
Of the 127 challengers who gained more undecideds than did incumbents on election day, 78 gained 10 or more points over their stated poll percentage.
Making allowances for factors stated above, most polls appear to estimate support for the incumbent. All or most undecideds end up with the challenger regardless of the size of the undecideds.
Most troublesome are polls showing an incumbent leading but who ends up losing the election.
Some examples: In Wisconsin in 1986, incumbent Gov. Tony Earl and incumbent Attorney General Bronson LaFollette were ahead in the late polls with less than 50%, but lost by five and seven points, respectively. In 1986, one poll showed Georgia incumbent Sen. Mack Mattingly ahead by 10 points, but he gained only one more point to lose with 49%. In 1984, incumbent Illinois Sen. Charles Percy led with 45% and 49% in final polls and wound up losing the election 48% to 50%. ...
Avoiding Election Day Surprises
The overwhelming evidence is that an incumbent wont share the undecideds equally with the challenger. To suggest otherwise by emphasizing point spread or to say that an incumbent is ahead when his or her percentage is well under 50% leads to election day surprises.
https://www.pollingreport.com/incumbent.htm
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)I recall somewhere in my political science education (which took place in the late Jurassic age) being told that undecided voters break about 2 - 1 for the incumbent, and the rationale for the explanation was some version of inertia - the incumbent is the guy they know; they have uncertainty about what a new guy might do; etc. But an election with a large number of undecided voters generally indicated an electorate that either has two good choices, or is vexed between two conflicting issues. This doesn't seem to be that. If you are getting shafted in the COVID economy, or you've lost loved ones, you are most likely madder than Hell at Trump. If you are a white person in favor of "law and order," you are pro-gun, or you are anti-choice, then you are likely supporting Trump. I don't see a lot of middle ground here.
Your post is an interesting read, so thanks!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Occam's Razor- Voters know the incumbent and if they aren't already supporting him or her for re-election there is a reason.
Who knows? I do know the crosstabs on the American Greatness poll don't match up with the lion's share of other polls.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)The right is trying to spin the narrative that Trump is surging post-debate. The problem with that theory - many votes have already been cast.
On the other hand, everyone here would be horribly naive to believe that Trump can't win. We need to keep our foot on the accelerator until Joe and Kamala and the new Congress are sworn in.
krawhitham
(4,644 posts)krawhitham
(4,644 posts)DFW
(54,378 posts)The Buskirk article's use of a typical Lenin pose is supposed to be some kind of coincidence?