USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times "Daybreak" poll puts Hillary back on top

USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times ^ | 10/12/16 | USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times

[Tanniker Smith]

Statistical tie with Hillary up by .4% for the first time in weeks.

[Tanniker Smith]

Short takes:
Hillary pulled ahead with the 65+ crowd. Trump nosedived with the 18-34 folks.
He's crashing with the High School of Less people and the over 75K earners.
The Black vote is back down to 5% -- had been as high as 18-20%. His Latino support is holding (rising slightly) at 35%
The Male gap is down to 9%. He's down, she's up. First time he's under 50% with men.
Female gap is 9%. But female voters outweigh male voters in the general election.

[Darteaus94025]

This finally reflects the full effect of the Trump tape given the lag of this poll’s methodology.

Give it a week, and his 2nd debate performance will be factored in.

[Steely Tom]

The MSM-Democrats are going to run out of kitchen sinks.

[conservativepoet]

The Calvary is coming. Trump in a landslide.

[fortheDeclaration]

If it is a tie, she isn’t ahead.

[alloysteel]

Trailing indicators. The effect of the Wikileaks dump have still not worked through the polling figures.

Watching Herself try to gain equilibrium is like watching Wiley Coyote getting his latest invention to pursue the Roadrunner up and running. A few fumbles, then it looks like Herself has gotten the situation under control and aimed right.

Only to smack into a cliff face or run over the edge of a canyon. Or an anvil drops.

[LNV]

From the poll site: “Results are weighted to match demographic characteristics, such as race and gender, from the U.S. Census Current Population Survey, and are aligned to the 2012 presidential election outcome using self-reported votes in that election.”

It’s based on a 2012 turnout model, and has no method for picking up new voters.

[Talisker]

This finally reflects the full effect of the Trump tape given the lag of this poll’s methodology. Give it a week, and his 2nd debate performance will be factored in.

What rot. These polls are pure head games, with ZERO actual scientific credibility to back then up.

Gee, I'll be a part of a national influence system, but the Democrats and Hillary won't pay me off, and I'll make up questions free from any bias, and ask a tiny population I pick arbitrarily, and it will reflect a reality that not a single multinational corporation, foreign government, the United Nations, media outlet or ANY international bank wants me to speak after they all gave Hillary Clinton ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS.

Yep what could go wrong? Especially since I was wrong for a year about Trump already! The pattern these chicken gizzards make when I throw them against the wall to stick is ALWAYS dead on balls accurate (it's an industry term).

[orchestra]

Cavalry*

[txrefugee]

“Cavalry” is the word you want. Calvary is where Jesus died.

[Tanniker Smith]

It's methodology is something new, so it's accuracy is something to be determined.

OTOH, I'm not going to dismiss things out of hand because this has been the one poll that has had Trump consistently ahead for the past month.

I'd be something of a hypocrite if I suddenly started to badmouth it as soon as it turned south. Plenty of time for things to swing around.

[Talisker]

Ten thousand people everywhere and every time Trump goes somewhere, versus a couple of hundred people including her staff when Hillary speaks.

That’s the true poll.

Yet people say the few hundred for Hillary, or the few hundred in these polls, are a more accurate measurement?

Bosh.

The poll corruption is immense. If a poll accurately correlates with Trump’s turnouts, and then suddenly finds Hillary in close competition - or, absurdly, ahead - with no corresponding actual increase in speaking arena turnouts, then it’s logical to presume the poll was finally bought off by the Rats.

[CalTexan]

Maybe it is not so bad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCbEJlt02I8

[LNV]

A poll is only as good as its pollster’s assumptions, and all of the polls this year, as far as I can tell, are assuming this election will look like 2012. I think they’re wrong. If a pollster’s vision of what the electorate will look like is correct, his poll ends up being accurate. If not, the poll is off.

This poll, like most these days, releases very little of its internals, but I have reason to believe that they are way oversampling blacks. The movement of the last few days, indeed, the movement each time Trump has dropped in this poll, has been almost entirely due to huge fluctuations in black support, while white support has remained stable. If fluctuations in black support can move a poll with a sample this large, there are a LOT of blacks in the sample. Again, in 2008 and 2012 the electorate looked very different than it usually does. To assume it will look the same when a black man is not on the ballot is erroneous.

Having said that, I’m not completely dismissing the movement in this poll. Even poorly designed polls can tell you something about voter movement, even though the absolute numbers are off. Trump has lost a little ground, but not enough to lose the election. He’s still up, just not as much as he was.