It appears that I’m not the only one performing this informal polling. A State Senator from Tennessee recently noted:
I took a drive through my district today and up through rural SE Kentucky. Leaves were gorgeous. Also, 56 Trump signs. 2 Hillary.
October 18, 2016
This past weekend I decided to take a 20-mile bicycle ride meandering around Montgomery County, Ohio to perform an informal survey of support for the presidential candidates… I counted 35 signs for Trump and 3 for Hillary, so we’ll round it down to an even 10:1 ratio.
It’s important to note that this is in no way a scientific poll. It reflects my sampling of front yards northwest of Dayton, Ohio near the I-75 to I-70 interchange (see below), which may be a anomalous pocket of a Trump majority. In addition, it may just be that Trump supporters are much more vociferous in displaying supportive signs in their yards.
I can say that my informal polling in 2012 showed a 2:1 advantage for Romney yard signs, so a greater quantity of signs in suburban Ohio does not necessarily lead to a national victory. The question becomes: what should we make of a 10:1 advantage of signs for Trump?
I noticed that a writer in the New York Times conducted a much broader version of my escapade.
Over the course of eight days, while traveling some 3,000 miles by motorcycle across the northern United States, I was steadily confronted by presidential yard signs. I idly recorded those in support of Donald J. Trump until, after the first few days, the number approached 100. I eventually lost count. Those in support of Hillary Clinton were comparatively easy to keep track of: I traveled nearly 2,500 miles before I saw a single one. By the end of my trip, I’d spotted a whopping five.