There are two important ratios to remember 65/35 and 55/45.

Throughout the past year those who have followed political opinion will note the consistent and reoccurring appearance of these two sets of statistical ratios.

♦ First, a variant of the ratio “65/35” shows up in random series of obscure polling questions done by alternative or social media. Three examples include two Bravo Network broadcasts asking for voter input, and another from data tech “Zip App“.

The Bravo Network were so stunned by the (65/35) results of their initial poll – they actually repeated it just to make sure.

… “the results of this poll even more surprising is that the demographics of Bravo viewers are far different than the average stereotype of Donald Trump supporter” (link)

However, it should also be noted “65/35” shows up again in the NBC poll daddy result from the Commander-in-Chief forum.

As the creator of Zip App outlines the key baseline metric is 400 random input opinion results. Once the data reaches 400 results, the resulting ratio rarely changes even with exponential increases in responses to the hundreds of thousands.

♦ The second ratio “55/45” – is a consistent ratio which shows up on within media comparative opinions which are more traditionally driven. Viewership of the Convention speeches (32.2M Trump -vs- 27.8M Clinton), is one 55/45 example. Non-adjusted battleground polling (raw data not modified) is another example of 55/45 showing up.

It’s an odd dynamic to find two consistent ratios “65/35” and “55/45” showing up repeatedly and predictably depending on the collection source. Non-traditional, or social media, matrices delivering “65/35”; and traditional matrices delivering “55/45”.

Within those two ratios there’s a pattern of consistency beyond random data. In essence, they appear too frequently to be just arbitrary coincidence.

Of course, all of the above examples are outside of the media’s ability to influence them; and quite obviously there’s no limiting denomination, no set of eligibility standards, to exclude anyone participating by giving their opinion. It’s just raw opinion data.

However, all of that said – those opinion levels still exist, regardless of anyone’s ability to filter it. And perhaps that’s why we see the New York Times quietly going back to their research mode in an effort to quantify the potential for a landslide Trump victory.

The NYT already publicly shared once before (June ’16) they were evaluating an entirely new political dynamic – SEE HERE – when they announced an adjustment to the 2012 exit poll voter data, and admitted non-white voters were statistically less influential than previously espoused. You might remember this part of their analysis:

(source)

In their latest publication the Times is revealing how the scope of the Trump vote improves almost exponentially with higher turnout amid those who historically vote the least.

[…] At the individual level, education and income are still two of the strongest predictors of whether someone will turn out at the polls.

“Most of the differences between people who vote and those who don’t vote can be accounted for by motivational reasons — levels of political interest and engagement,” said Benjamin Highton, a professor of political science at the University of California, Davis. “And levels of political interest and engagement are strongly correlated with education and income.” (read more)

In essence what the New York Times outlines is that if the general election has a higher turnout, which includes increases amid those groups who have the lowest traditional turnout, Trump will capture an exponentially large segment of that new voter bloc – because the identified Trump base is within those marginalized groups who have traditionally voted the least..

And Trump would benefit…

By a ratio of….

Wait for it….

Yup, “65/35”.

Say hello to the Monster Vote.

Go figure.

The key is going to be Monster Vote registration. If we can get massive numbers of new voters registered, the benefit for our objective should carry within the same ratio 65/35. We need to do everything within our power to ensure everyone is registered to vote. More on that will follow…