Trump closes 12 point gap in latest Reuters poll

breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/30/reuters-donald-trump-closes-gap-hillary-clinton/

On August 22, Clinton led Trump by 12 points, 44.8 percent to 32.8 percent. By Aug. 27, the two candidates were neck and neck, according to Reuters.

By Aug. 29, Trump had nudged up again to 39.1 percent, while she was at 39.7 percent. He gained 6.7 points, while she lost 5.1 points during the entire seven-day period.

Twenty percent of the respondents declined to pick either of the two leaders in the poll of 1,397 likely voters, which was concluded Aug .29.

Trump’s support among Republicans climbed from 71 percent up to 78.3 percent. Clinton’s support among Democrats dipped slightly from 81.6 percent to 78.5 percent.

The poll reflects a general trend, in which Trump has managed to close much of the gap that Clinton opened in early August.

Will RCP add this poll to their average, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_DS_13/filters/LIKELY:1/dates/20160710-20160830/type/smallest
m.youtube.com/watch?v=sCKufxrKBrY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Trump leading in the polls
>Polls don't mean anything!!!!!!

>Hillary leading in the pols
>Sup Forums BTFO!

polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_DS_13/filters/LIKELY:1/dates/20160710-20160830/type/smallest

Link to original poll.

>inb4 shills latch on to that .6% lead

>breitbart

>there are still 2 months left of Drumpflets shitting up this board

It's not a Breitbart poll.

Much less than we have to listen to fucking leaves and their cuckoldry.

see Based leaf BTFO'd you

This just proves the poll methodology is shit and biased.
Theres no way he gained 7points,
occams razor says they unfudged the numbers and fired whatever shill fudged them

They didn't change the polling methodology. Hillary's not doing much campaigning, Trump's doing a shitload.

Who cares, elections will be rigged and Hillary will win even if everyone votes Trump.

The poll methodology saying Clinton was as high as she was was fucked. Democrats were over-represented, and the polls weren't normalized for it.

So Trump is tied according to Reuters, even with the "revised" polling methods that Reuters started using?

At any rate this means that Hillary can't just run out the clock, she is going to have to do something but the more she is seen the more people hate her.

We should ip ban leafs

Trump is still in second place which may as well be last. There's no way in hell he will win.

Perhaps they want to make the polls show a more 50/50 chance for Hillary so more people that are anti trump feel obliged to vote. When you are not for Hillary but Anti trump you feel less obliged to not vote if your vote doesn't really matter

I think polls are biased against Trump, to be honest. This is biased against him as well. They over sampled dems a bit here, but Trump got 10% dem support while Clinton only got 5% from Republicans.

(((You)))

Polls might just be volatile, but I agree they aren't unbiased. The funny thing is that Clinton's alt right speech just made her look retarded if anything.

I simply said that >Breitbart wasn't an argument because they didn't do the polling, it was an independent company. Hardly equal to shitting up the board.

reminder that Reuters has been championed as the best poll by the anti-Trump pundits etc and it was the most biased with a terrible methodology (11% independents when the real number is 45%)

This is really weird. Maybe the media is accepting that Trump will win, so they want to get on his good side to keep their press credentials?

dubs demand it!

There seem to be two theories about that. Trump down YUGE so his voters don't bother, or tied so anti Trumpers vote. I don't think both theories can be true, so take your pick.

Check out Nate (((Silver)))'s latest articles. He is starting to look hesitant about the Clinton bandwagon.

What evidence is there that Trump is likely to win? It all sounds like Ron Paul and Sanders internet delusion all over again.

The alt right speech made Hillary look like a nutty conspiracy theorist.

I cant trust breitbart polls and also why even look at polls before the debates?

>The funny thing is that Clinton's alt right speech just made her look retarded if anything
Yeah, I don't even know what she was trying to achieve with it. She made it sound like a bunch of internet trolls are a serious threat to the election, which made her look like some crazy tinfoil hatter.

>that pickle chilling out in the jar

I didnt bother with her speech, was it that bad? Are people likening it to her "massive rightwing conspiracy" remarks and pointing out that it wasnt a conspiracy, her husband is just a piece of shit?

It's actually the only speech from her I ever watched but are they all shitty like this? The whole speech was namecalling against Trump, Farage and Putin and buzzwords like "muh racism".

>was it that bad?

When someone mentions Alex Jones on television, you know they're desperate.

>It's actually the only speech from her I ever watched but are they all shitty like this?
Yes. This was one of her worst though. It's one thing to attack a political candidate, it's another thing to attack the voters spring them.

Well i wont debunk any of them. There is plenty of good arguments for both sides.
However there might be more to it and the polls have to adjust

trump will win

It's a reuters poll, I just linked a Breitbart article to articulate the point. The poll is here And even 538 gives it an A- rating. I agree post debate polls will help Trump more though.

Clinton is probably clinically retarded. Don't you wonder why her rallies get almost no crowd?

I'm just fishing for (You)s m8

This.
Talking about icky things on the internet only makes you look bad, even if you only bring them up to denounce them.

>KIKEdart

Also polls matter now?

(((Monaco)))

someone please explain to an ignorant sandnigger how the fuck does these poll work ? like i get it there are trump supporters and clinton supporter and the undecided but come on how the fuck does the poll work ? one day we get trump leading the next day we get -12 ?
serious question , not even baiting

Polls are used to manipulate public opinion instead of the truth.

Is Hillary sick?

Polls are either volatile, rigged (over sampling groups that vote primarily one way), or just completely unreliable even though people are literally paid to conduct them. Another possibility is that lots of disenfranchised voters from each side saw Clinton go full retard while Trump became more presidential, so they picked Trump.

>poll of 1,397 likely voters

It depends on the methodology, there are a lot of ways you can swing a poll towards the results you want. You could disproportionately call people in one area, you could lead up the "who would you choose" question with a bunch of thinly veiled attacks on one candidate, or you could just "adjust" your results based on what you think turnout is going to be. Typically you see these wild swings when someone is trying to game the polls using techniques like this because you can never reliably get the same results when using them.

We saw a lot of this kind of stuff in the Dem primary, Clinton almost never performed at the level she was polling at, sometimes being as far as 20 points behind, pic related. One poll with Clinton up 20 would be a fluke, 3 is hard to put down as anything other than a propaganda effort. The exit polls from a lot of Dem primaries were also off from the results by a considerable amount, I truly believe that Sanders probably won the Democratic primary and Hillary stole it.

>trumpbart

You spelt 8 years wrong, leaf

After 1 year of Trump Sup Forums will be anti-Trump, take my word for it

Sup Forums always has to be edgy

What, do they only have a Wayne County phone book to choose people to poll from?

>be a pollster
>some rich Jew pays me to conduct a poll
>he wants to know who will win so he can profit off of it
>he pays me well
>give him the answer he wants
>buy a new car

Why wouldn't Sup Forums turn anti-Trump after Trump goes back on all the things he promised?

>brexit remain leading in polls
>polls literally didn't mean shit
>brexit win

This doesn't deserve it's own thread but watch this. I laughed my ass off within 15-20 seconds.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=sCKufxrKBrY

Things like that happened all over the Dem primaries. Sanders supporters thought they just had better turnout. That might have had something to do with it, but it's unrealistic to assume that high enthusiasm turnout will overcome a 25 point gap.

That's a fair sample size retard. Go read stats 101 and whats the central limit theorem.

RCP updated polls, but conviently forgot this one. Oops!

Can you give an example of a presidential election in which the race, as dictated by polls, was clearly in the favor of one candidate the whole time and they lost? This reminds me of when republicans refused to believe that Trump would win the nomination despite polls showing otherwise.

HAHA thanks user. SPLC plz go get on a treadmill.

Just like they only updated the la times poll when Hillary was ahead

>breitbart

I say polls are stupid every time.

getting harder for them to cherry pick polls.

THE NEW NEWEST RIGGING ISN'T WORKING ANYMORE!

TIME TO POLL 70% DEMOCRATS!

He's been down by 15 points in every swing state for a month now. It's over. Come out with all the rigged polls you want though.

True he needs to flip blue states not win red states.