# Tag Archives: Gallup

## 2016 ELECTION MODEL (Nov.3): Trump 98% Win Probability

2016 ELECTION MODEL (Nov.3): Trump 98% Win Probability

Richard Charnin
Nov.3, 2016

The purpose of the Election Model  is to show the effects of changes in voter party affiliation (Dem, Rep, Ind). There are currently nine polls in the model. Each poll is shown using a) the actual poll shares and Party-ID weights and b) the actual poll shares using the Gallup party-affiliation survey. Gallup is the only poll dedicated to national voter party affiliation.

Undecided voters are allocated to derive the final adjusted TRUE poll share. Typically the challenger (in this case Trump) gets approximately 75% of the undecided vote.

Clinton leads Trump 44.9-43.3%  in the actual 9-poll average.

After adjusting the polls for the Gallup voter affiliation split (40I-32D-28R):
Trump leads Clinton 44.7-41.7% and by 336-202 EV before undecided voter allocation.
Trump leads Clinton 49.0-43.2% after undecided voter allocation.
There is a 98% probability that Trump will win the popular vote.

THE MODEL SHOWS THAT THE PRE-ELECTION POLLS ARE OVERSTATING HILLARY CLINTON’S VOTE BY INFLATING THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS COMPARED TO INDEPENDENTS AND REPUBLICANS.

As I have stated many times, each poll has a different party-ID.Theoretically, they should all have the SAME Party-ID since these are NATIONAL polls – and there is only ONE theoretical NATIONAL Party-ID split at any given point in time.

The popular Vote Win Probability and estimated Electoral Vote are calculated for each poll. The 2016 party-ID for each state is calculated by applying the  proportional  change  from the 2012 party-ID  to  the current Gallup 2016 survey Party-ID. The state votes  are calculated by applying the published national poll shares to the 2016 state party-ID. The electoral vote is then calculated.

The built-in SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS shows the effect of incremental vote shares on the total vote.

Those who have written models can appreciate the methodology. So can individuals who can apply basic logic.The model uses actual published data. If there is another quantitative modeler out there who has written a similar model to approximate the True poll shares, I would like to see it.

 9-POLL AVERAGE Gallup Pct Stein Clinton Trump Johnson Ind 40.0% 4% 28% 44% 6% Dem 32.0% 1% 91% 6% 2% Rep 28.0% 1% 5% 90% 3% Total 92.5% 2.2% 41.7% 44.7% 3.9% Votes 119,448 2,840 53,863 57,736 5,009 EVote 538 0 202 336 0
 Nov. 3 Party ID ACTUAL Ind Dem Rep HRC Trump Ipsos 11.9% 43.5% 36.6% 42% 38% IBD 27.4% 39.9% 32.7% 44% 44% Rasmussen 32% 40% 28% 42% 45% Quinnipiac 26% 40% 34% 47% 40% Fox News 19% 43% 38% 44% 41% CNN 43% 31% 26% 49% 44% ABC 29% 37% 29% 47% 45% Gravis 27% 40% 33% 46% 45% LA Times 30% 38% 32% 43% 48% Average 27.3% 39.2% 32.1% 44.9% 43.3% GALLUP ADJUSTED Elect Vote Popular Vote Undec.Alloc. 40I-32D-28R HRC Trump HRC Trump Win Prob Win Prob Ipsos 37.9% 39.4% 232 306 73.4% 99.4% IBD 40.9% 45.8% 180 358 96.8% 99.8% Rasmussen 37.2% 47.4% 46 492 100.0% 100.0% Quinnipiac 44.7% 40.8% 335 203 6.5% 35.8% Fox News 39.6% 41.6% 218 320 79.9% 97.3% CNN 48.6% 44.4% 335 203 7.0% 13.7% ABC 46.4% 49.7% 202 336 86.5% 87.4% Gravis 42.6% 45.6% 216 322 86.7% 99.1% LA Times 40.7% 49.4% 54 484 99.9% 100.0% Average 41.7% 44.7% 202 336 87.2% 98.1%
 Sensitivity Analysis 9-Poll Average Gallup 40I-32D-28R Trump % Rep Trump 86.0% 88.0% 90.0% 92.0% 94.0% % Ind Trump 48% 45.2% 45.8% 46.3% 46.9% 47.4% 44% 43.6% 44.2% 44.7% 45.3% 45.8% 40% 42.0% 42.6% 43.1% 43.7% 44.2% Clinton 48% 41.2% 40.7% 40.1% 39.6% 39.0% 44% 42.8% 42.3% 41.7% 41.2% 40.6% 40% 44.4% 43.9% 43.3% 42.8% 42.2% Margin 48% 4.0% 5.1% 6.2% 7.3% 8.4% 44% 0.8% 1.9% 3.0% 4.1% 5.2% 40% -2.4% -1.3% -0.2% 0.9% 2.0% Vote Margin (000) 48% 4,730 6,068 7,406 8,744 10,081 44% 908 2,246 3,583 4,921 6,259 40% -2,915 -1,577 -239 1,099 2,437
 9-poll average Vote Share Electoral Vote Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Total 41.7% 44.7% 202 336 AK 29.6% 49.9% 0 3 AL 36.7% 51.4% 0 9 AR 38.6% 49.0% 0 6 AZ 36.3% 47.9% 0 11 CA 44.7% 41.3% 55 0 CO 37.6% 46.8% 0 9 CT 42.6% 40.7% 7 0 DC 66.6% 23.7% 3 0 DE 46.9% 40.0% 3 0 FL 41.2% 45.2% 0 29 GA 39.8% 48.0% 0 16 HI 46.4% 42.1% 4 0 IA 37.9% 46.4% 0 6 ID 32.1% 54.9% 0 4 IL 45.3% 42.7% 20 0 IN 38.6% 49.0% 0 11 KS 32.4% 52.7% 0 6 KY 47.9% 42.2% 8 0 LA 36.6% 46.0% 0 8 MA 43.8% 37.4% 11 0 MD 51.0% 36.9% 10 0 ME 39.2% 44.3% 0 4 MI 43.5% 44.3% 0 16 MN 43.1% 45.1% 0 10 MO 39.7% 48.4% 0 10 MS 38.8% 49.4% 0 6 MT 35.3% 52.8% 0 3 NC 43.5% 42.6% 15 0 ND 37.6% 50.4% 0 3 NE 34.8% 52.4% 0 5 NH 36.2% 46.9% 0 4 NJ 40.9% 41.4% 0 14 NM 45.8% 41.4% 5 0 NV 41.7% 44.7% 0 6 NY 48.6% 37.9% 29 0 OH 41.0% 47.1% 0 18 OK 42.1% 46.8% 0 7 OR 41.6% 43.6% 0 7 PA 46.3% 42.6% 20 0 RI 47.0% 35.5% 4 0 SC 39.7% 48.4% 0 9 SD 36.6% 50.8% 0 3 TN 37.1% 50.7% 0 11 TX 39.2% 47.9% 0 38 UT 30.3% 57.8% 0 6 VA 40.5% 47.4% 0 13 VT 46.1% 41.2% 3 0 WA 42.5% 47.0% 0 12 WI 42.2% 46.1% 0 10 WV 47.7% 39.8% 5 0 WY 25.8% 62.5% 0 3

Posted by on November 3, 2016 in 2016 election

## Is the corporate media reporting Jill Stein’s true polling numbers?

Richard Charnin
Sept. 18, 2016

Just published: 77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud

Is the corporate media reporting Jill Stein’s true polling numbers? It’s obvious that the corporate media does not want her in the debates. It would radically change the dynamic of the race.

Stein has just 3% in the polls and needed 15% to qualify for the debates. If Jill got in the debates, her visibility would skyrocket, her poll shares would increase and Hillary Clinton’s shares would decline..

How many Independent and Democratic voters even know Jill Stein?

According to the polls, 12% of respondents are Independents.But the  Gallup Party Affiliation Survey indicates the electorate consists of 42% Independents, 29% Democrats and 29% Republicans.

To believe the Media polls, you must believe that Jill Stein has just 5% of Independents and Democrats. But Bernie had 65-70% of Independents in the primaries- and Jill Stein should be doing nearly as well against Clinton in the polls.

The latest  polls show Trump tied with Clinton and surpassing her in battleground states. The Election Model indicates that he may be leading by 6%. Johnson is taking votes from Trump.  If  Stein’s share increased by 10%,  Clinton’s would decline accordingly – and  Trump would be on his way to a landslide.

Current Media Polls

……………. Pct.. Stein..Clinton.Trump..Johnson

Ind………..12%……5%….40%….40%……..5%

Dem………44%……5%….85%…..5%………5%

Rep……….44%…….0%…..5%….85%…….10%

Total……..100%….2.8%  44.4% 44.4%…. 8.4%

……………. Pct.. Stein..Clinton.Trump..Johnson

Ind………..12%……30%….15%….40%……..15%

Dem………44%……15%….70%…..5%……..10%

Rep……….44%…….0%…..5%….85%……..10%

Total……..100%….10.2%  34.8% 44.4%…. 10.6%

Election Model – Party-ID affiliation from Gallup survey and estimated poll shares.

…………… Pct.. Stein..Clinton.Trump..Johnson

Ind………..42%…35%…20%….25%……20%

Dem ……..29%…20%…70%……5%……..5%

Rep……….29%….2%…..2%…..80% ……16%

Total……..100%..21.1%.29.3% 35.2%….14.4%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

Posted by on September 18, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

## Strange polls: Jill Stein at 1% and just 14% of respondents are Independents?

Richard Charnin
August 7, 2016

Strange polls: Jill Stein at 1% and just 14% of respondents are Independents?

According to the Ipsos/Reuters poll,  only 14% of respondents were Independents and Jill Stein had just 2% of Independents. These results are implausible.

The latest Gallup Party-ID survey indicates that 42% are Independents, 28% Democrats and 28% Republicans. The 2-party shares:  60% Independents, 40% Democrats. http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

Are we expected to believe that all of Sanders’ primary voters have gone to Clinton and Trump?  http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=7324

 Ipsos Pct Stein Clinton Trump Johnson Ind 14% 2% 46% 46% 6% Dem 47% 1% 81% 18% 0% Rep 39% 1% 5% 80% 14% Total 100% 1.14% 46.31% 46.22% 6.33%

If Stein matched Sanders’  primary shares of Independents and Democrats, she could win a fair election. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sGxtIofohrj3POpwq-85Id2_fYKgvgoWbPZacZw0XlY/edit#gid=610570359

 Party-ID Gallup Survey Stein (est) Clinton (est) Trump (est) Johnson (est) Ind 42% 45% 30% 10% 15% Dem 29% 40% 50% 5% 5% Rep 29% 5% 5% 80% 10% Total 100% 31.95% 28.55% 28.85% 10.65% Votes 129,106 41,249 36,860 37,247 13,750 Elect Vote 538 308 3 227 0

In the primaries (25 exit and 2 entrance polls) Bernie Sanders had  65% of Independents, but just 45.3% of the total vote.

The 42I-28D-28R Gallup Party-ID survey equates to  60I-40D in the primaries. Using this split for the 27 adjusted exit polls, Clinton needed 83.4% of Democrats to match the recorded vote. The adjusted polls indicate that Sanders had 64.6% of Independents.

This is highly anomalous.  http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls

 Exit Poll States Gallup Pct Sanders Clinton IND 60.0% 64.6% 35.4% Dem 40.0% 16.6% 83.4% Recorded Match 100.0% 45.3% 54.7% Recorded Vote 45.3% 54.7%

If  Sanders had 37% of Democrats, he would have had a total 53.6% share.

 Exit Poll States Gallup Pct Sanders Clinton IND 60.0% 64.6% 35.4% Dem 40.0% 37.0% 63.0% Est. True Vote 100.0% 53.6% 46.4% Recorded 45.3% 54.7%

Jill Stein Polling Sensitivity analysis

Assuming Independents are 40% of the electorate, then for Jill Stein to have
5%(implausible), she needs 12% of Independents and 0% of Democrats and Republicans.
10%(conservative), she needs 17% of Independents and 5% of Democrats and Republicans.
20%(plausible), she needs 35% of Independents and 10% of Democrats and Republicans.
30%(optimistic), she needs 52% of Independents and 15% of Democrats and Republicans.

Sanders had  52% of Independents in the 11 RED states. Clinton needed an IMPLAUSIBLE 97% of Democrats to match the recorded vote.

Sanders had  an estimated 65% of Independents in the 40 BLUE/OTHER states. If he had 30% of Democrats, he would have had 51%.

 RED STATES Pct Sanders Clinton IND 58.6% 52.0% 48.0% Req. to Match Dem 41.4% 3.0% 97.0% Calc Match 100.0% 31.7% 68.3% Recorded 31.7% 68.3% OTHER STATES IND 60.0% 65.0% 35.0% Dem 40.0% 30.3% 69.8% Calc Match 100.0% 51.1% 48.9% Total Vote 51.1% 48.9% RED STATES 2-party Recorded 160 IND IND Sanders EV AL 37.6% 57.6% 19.8% 9 AR 39.6% 57.5% 31.0% 6 FL 44.5% 59.3% 34.1% 29 GA 38.7% 55.7% 28.3% 16 LA 58.9% 73.4% 24.6% 8 MS 37.4% 55.5% 16.6% 6 NC 45.5% 58.0% 42.8% 15 SC 38.0% 55.2% 26.1% 9 TN 39.0% 58.5% 32.9% 11 TX 41.7% 58.8% 33.7% 38 VA 38.6% 55.0% 35.4% 13 avg 41.8% 58.6% 29.6% Weighted Avg 42.0% 58.5% 31.7%