New Quinnipiac poll: Clinton +10 in PA

"PA is a swing state!"-- Sup Forumstard who never followed an election before this year.

toppest of keks. Try finding a path to 270 for Trump without Pennsylvania.

Other urls found in this thread:

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_trump_vs_clinton-5596.html
ksn.com/2016/08/09/ksn-news-poll-shows-donald-trump-losing-ground-in-kansas/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

+8.8
Jesus Christ it's literally over.

Shut the fuck up faggot.
Saged.

>its the same dutch fag in every thread
shouldn't you be like smoking weed or something

This is going to be like when Reagen win 49 states. Hillary could win 40 states.

Clinton is so far ahead in Colorado she pulled all ads from the state. It's not even a battleground anymore.

Latest New Hampshire poll also had her up +15.

Try again.

>Those sample sizes
>Undersampling (R)'s and (I)'s
>Oversampling D's

Get in what you can now because we all know either Trump destroys her in the debates or Wikileaks does or even better both.

I hope you fucking die.

Americans smoke more weed than Dutch people.

Guess I'm #FeelingTheJohnson, OP

>This triggers the trumplet

>SAMPLE SIZES UNDER 50,000 NEED NOT APPLY
>FAKE AND GAY
>SAMPLE SIZES UNDER 50,000 NEED NOT APPLY
>FAKE AND GAY
>SAMPLE SIZES UNDER 50,000 NEED NOT APPLY
>FAKE AND GAY
>SAMPLE SIZES UNDER 50,000 NEED NOT APPLY
>FAKE AND GAY
>SAMPLE SIZES UNDER 50,000 NEED NOT APPLY
>FAKE AND GAY

I love it when you losers get mad because reality contradicts your echo chamber. kys

lmao, yeah some random retard from Sup Forums understands polling better than actual professionals. Whatever, bub.

>weedorado
>blue

*red

These trumpfags are so pathetic
The election was over weeks ago. Welcome Madam President, willya. Don't cry too much, Trump never had a chance, the sooner your realize that, the happier you'll be

Why does "The Most Accurate Scenario" have Virginia red? It's moved into the solidly blue column. Clinton pulled all ads from the state. Trump has no chance there.

Trump can't afford to spend any time or money in Pennsylvania. He needs to do everything he can to flip back Georgia and South Carolina.

Hell, for that matter he's only up 3 points in Texas. In TEXAS. This campaign is so incredibly fucked...

and cats are much doggier than dogs

Quinnipiac has a liberal bias

Quinnipiac is right wing

WAHHH

Because it's a old one, I will update it.

You guys had a good game though.

If people are actually theorizing that your candidate actually wants to lose, someone is fucking up.

That would have worked had he not chosen Pence as his running mate.

>hasn't ever taken a statistics course

>Triggered Trump fags in full damage control
Your tears nourish me.

>Hell, for that matter he's only up 3 points in Texas. In TEXAS. This campaign is so incredibly fucked...
is there a new Texas poll out?

>thinks people will vote for a fucking woman in new hampshire

you're a professional in polls?

Retard:

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_trump_vs_clinton-5596.html

Also, fresh poll out of Kansas shows Trump only up +5. In deep red KANSAS!

ksn.com/2016/08/09/ksn-news-poll-shows-donald-trump-losing-ground-in-kansas/

Monmouth, Quinnipiac, Marist, ABCNews/WashPo, Fox News, and CNN/ORC are all among the best pollsters in the business, retard. They know what they're doing better than some random shithead on Sup Forums who doesn't even understanding basic statistics.

Is there a new Texas poll?

Texas was very pro-Cruz, so it doesn't surprise me.

>polls matter before the debates.

Welcome to your first election new friend.

Kansas isn't deep red, it's an Arkansas red. They're not a near red as Oklahoma.

and then suddenly can discard a poll with a different point of view?

Then why do most of those consistently poll more Democrats than Republicans.

Pro tip: they're in Hillary's pocket.

Are you brain damaged? You look at the averages. When all the best pollsters consistently show you getting BTFO, that means you're getting BTFO.

You stupid idiot, polls let you know current public opinion. Nobody said they predicted the election.

nobody cares about your rigged lugenpresse polls
sage

This is the same argument the "unskew the polls" idiots made in 2012. It was wrong then and it's wrong now:

>The basic premise of the unskewers is wrong. Most pollsters don’t weight their results by party self-identification, which polls get by asking a question like “generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a….” Party identification is an attitude, not a demographic. There isn’t some national number from the government that tells us how many Democrats and Republicans there are in the country. Some states collect party registration data, but many states do not. Moreover, party registration is not the same thing as party identification. In a state like Kentucky, for example, there are a lot more registered Democrats than registered Republicans, but more voters identified as Republican in the 2014 election exit polls.

>A person’s party identification can shift, and therefore the overall balance between parties does too. Democrats have typically had an advantage in self-identification — a 4 percentage point edge in 2000, a 7-point advantage in 2008 and a 6-point edge in 2012, according to exit polls — but they had no advantage in the 2004 election. Since 1952, however, almost every presidential election has featured a Democratic advantage in party identification.

>And it’s not crazy to think Democrats will have an advantage in party identification in 2016. With a controversial nominee, many Republicans might not want to identify with the GOP, and may be calling themselves independents.

The opinion of the public is irrelevant before the debates. Discussing it is a waste of time

Sup Forums, you're done for. Be on the right side of history, at least.

Wait till after labor day.. Is this your first election?

...