Who turns out to vote will make a big difference in the election. State polls indicate Clinton might be gaining on Trump. And a new report highlights the racial divide in perceptions of police performance. This is HuffPollster for Friday, September 30, 2016.
‘UNLIKELY VOTERS’ FAVOR CLINTON OVER TRUMP – John McCormick: “[I]n a close election like this year’s presidential race, those who aren’t currently planning to vote could matter a lot, if the campaigns can move them from the sidelines to polling places. The latest Bloomberg Politics national poll shows that Hillary Clinton has more of a stake in trying to motivate them than Donald Trump. The Bloomberg survey for the first time asked unlikely voters who they would back, if they had a change of heart and decided to cast a ballot. What it showed is greater support for Clinton than Trump among those not likely to vote, as well as a non-voter profile that skews Democratic. The findings show that those not planning to vote back Clinton over Trump, 38 percent to 27 percent, if they did indeed cast a ballot. That 11-point difference, although subject to a margin of error of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points, helps underscore the importance of turnout for the Clinton campaign.” [Bloomberg]
Millennials are less likely to vote than older age groups – Philip Bump: “[I]n the new Post-ABC poll… 41 percent of those age 18 to 29 say that they are certain to vote, with an additional 15 percent saying they’ll probably vote. Older voters are much more likely to say they’re committed to going to the polls…. If we look only at registered voters, younger people are still less likely to say they’re certain to vote than older ones, but by a smaller margin. They’re also more likely to say they’re certain to vote this November than 18-to-29-year-olds were to say it in 2012. Now, nearly two-thirds of registered voters under 30 are certain to vote, compared with 54 percent four years ago. A critical note at this point: The number of respondents in the poll who are under 30 was relatively small, meaning that the margin of error was bigger. So the bars on these charts are a bit hazier than they might look.” [WashPost]