We can learn much about current presidential election uncertainty by thinking about pre-Brexit polling in Britain.
A New York Times story today calls into question current presidential election polling. The key claim is that a USC/LA Times poll overweights small groups thereby positively distorting Donald Trump's favorability among voters. Hedgeye Director of Research Daryl Jones discusses what this means in today's Early Look (our morning newsletter to investors):
"Interestingly, if we remove that poll from the last 10 major polls, Clinton's lead jumps to +8. Perhaps then, the non-consensus view is not that the polls are wrong and Trump still has a shot, but rather the polls are wrong and Clinton is going to win and the Democrats are going to run the table? The market might like a Clinton Presidency better than a Trump Presidency, but it probably won’t like a clean sweep by the Democrats.
That all said, anyone remember the polls before Brexit?"
Point taken. As you can see in the chart above, just before the British referendum about whether to stay or leave the European Union odds were heavily staked in favor of the stay camp. We all know how that turned out. Whether or not Clinton is actually leading in the polls doesn't necessarily matter.