HRC's Electoral Count back up to 304

[misterhighwasted]

270 Needed to Win!

Clinton: 304
Trump: 234

Source: Princeton Election Consortium

http://election.princeton.edu/

[Joe941]

1. Yup. I've been predicting a 300+ win.

[Thinkingabout]

2. But But But the online polls shows he is up.

[MiniMe]

3. I see 317 on electoral-vote

But NC keeps going back and forth.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

[0rganism]

4. now is when she builds up her real lead that will win the election

back in late August, she had that excellent launch out of the convention
her lead from that lasted into mid-September

i figured the gap would close from there, and it did, because there was nothing else for it to do, and there would be one or two more expansion-contraction cycles, and HRC would roll into election day with an expanding lead.
now i'm not so sure about the 3rd cycle; i don't think 39 days is enough time for two contract-and-expand cycles so HRC's campaign is probably working on their final lead now. they'll build it gradually and thoroughly with masterful debate performances and well-placed advertising, and they won't let it slip away this time. of course, it helps that the pissed-off news media is willingly switching from improbable horse-race mode back to train-wreck coverage for tRump, and he's turned off the editorial board of every major daily newspaper in America.

39 days is a long time to build and hold a lead in an election this volatile, and i'd expect tRump to get some momentum in the last 2 weeks and close the gap again, so HRC has to make this gap absolutely insurmountable. i expect her to pull ahead in Ohio and Iowa over the next 3 weeks, and with tRump's help (those meetings with Cuban immigrants combined with his illegal dealings in Castro's Cuba should make for some very interesting regional campaign ads) she'll lock Florida. i feel a big surge coming for her, and a big meltdown coming for the orange toddler.

[misterhighwasted]

5. I read a statement from a Latino polling organization.

They asked a large swath of Latino voters if they had been polled by any Republican or Trump groups.

They said only 24% answered yes.

The conclusion was that Republican/Trump pollsters were skewing the polls by intentionally omitting Latino voters.

That article was from about a month ago.

[whatthehey]

6. That's a huge ratio

Even in a heavily polled race to have 24% of a demographic subgroup who have been polled is enormous. There are 130MM voters. A typical poll is 1000 people. Even if there are no duplicates at all, to reach 24% overall would need 32000 polls. So if 24% of Latinos have been polled that's overpolling not omission.