Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy_haak
The discussion this morning on CBC was that the Latin-American vote in the advance polls in Nevada is far beyond what pollsters were predicting leading into the election. Nevada has been predicted as solidly behind Trump, but if the advance polls are a reflection, the guest on CBC was saying that it would be almost impossible for him to carry the state. I suspect that the unusual nature of this election may make polling less reliable than in previous elections; I guess we'll know for sure Monday morning though!
|
Advance polling data in Nevada tends to be very predicative of how the state will go. Because Nevada has full in-person voting every day for weeks before the election, the majority of Nevada's ballots are cast before the election. And they release detailed data of advance poll turnout which makes it easy to more or less predict who won Nevada even before the election happens.
Nate Silver, the 538 guy, noted in a commentary article that his model's inability to factor in advance polling data means that his model predicts Nevada as a tight; but given advance polling data, Clinton has probably already won Nevada... and his model noted that Trump's chances of winning without Nevada are only 9%.
Hispanic turnout is also a factor to watch in Arizona. The large Hispanic population in Arizona, combined with the high turnout and anti-Trump anger among Hispanics, may very well allow Clinton to win Arizona. People have been predicting for the past decade that Arizona is destined to transform from a red state into a blue state in the future due to growing Hispanic population (Arizona is expected to become majority Hispanic within a few decades--Hispanics are already a majority among babies born in the state) and migration to the state from the Northeast. It appears the arrival of Trumpism may have hastened that transition.