Talk Elections

Clinton vs. Rubio

()

EDIT: Adding most recent PA-PPP poll

Clinton vs. Ryan

()

EDIT: Adding most recent PA-PPP poll

Clinton vs. Christie

()

EDIT: Adding most recent PA-Qunnipiac poll

hahaha awesome

DOMINATING

Iowa, PPP. PPP is polling North Carolina and Louisiana this weekend, and could get some interesting results. 

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()

Unless someone utterly money-bombs the Republican primaries on his behalf, I can't see Christie winning the Republican nomination. Rubio may be over-hyped.

Rubio is an early frontrunner.  He will make a fool of himself in the debates.  Guy's a lightweight.

Louisiana - PPP

Clinton.......46%
Rubio.........43%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_021413.pdf

Clinton vs. Rubio

()

President Clinton 2017-2025!! :p

You can add Louisiana to the list of states where Hillary Clinton might be competitive with a 2016 Presidential bid, at least at this stage. She has a 46/44 favorability rating in the state and has 3 points lead over Jindal (48/45) and Rubio (46/43) in hypothetical match ups. She ties Ryan at 46.

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()

I can't wait for PPP to do a poll in Arkansas.  I did a poll late last year for school and I had Hillary winning the state with 57% of the vote against Rubio

Has PPP stopped including Christie in their general election matchups because he's not competitive in the primary?

Why don't you just edit the first post each time a new poll is added, instead of making new posts for each new poll? (just an idea, not a complaint)

Re: Rubio

His performance of the rebuttal to the President's State of the Union speech indicates that he is not ready for prime time. Republicans surely liked it for policy issues, but everything else left much to be desired.

...Correction noted, and the invalid material is removed.

PPP polled Georgia and Montana this weekend. We may find such interesting.  

This is a national poll, not an Arkansas poll.  And we discussed it two weeks ago, when it was first released:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169067.0

I am updating the map at the start of the thread. So far it will take the most recent poll, once we start getting a greater volume of polls, I'll average the last 3 polls per state, or so...

Feel free to add comments, as usual.

Georgia (PPP)


Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton. 

Q6 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Hillary Clinton?

Favorable........................................................ 44%
Unfavorable .................................................... 48%
Not sure .......................................................... 8%
Q7 If the candidates for President in 2016 were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican
Marco Rubio, who would you vote for?

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 42%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 50%
Not sure .......................................................... 7%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MT_022113.pdf

Montana hasn't voted for the Democratic nominee for President since 1992, when the state split 37-35-26 Clinton-Bush-Perot. Perot likely took more votes from the elder Bush that year. It went 44-41-16 Dole-Clinton-Perot in 1996. Dubya won it 55-33 in 2000 and 59-39 in 2004. The highest percentage for any Democratic nominee for President since the LBJ blowout was 47% for Barack Obama. Kennedy lost it with a slightly-larger percentage than Obama in 1960. Of course, Presidential politics in America before 1992 now might as well be ancient history. Don't let the close election in 2008 fool you: it will go D for President only in a blowout.

Montana is a swing state with its Favorite Son its recent Governor Brian Schweitzer, but three electoral votes haven't decided a Presidential election in a very long time.   If he is a VP nominee he might not swing the state because it isn't that close; his value for Biden or Clinton would likely be in places where populist tendencies have hibernated under President Obama.

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/03/michigan-miscellany.html#more

....The Republicans could probably win Michigan if they nominated Gerald Ford, the last Republican to win the state in a close election...

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

I figure Ryan would get about the same results as Rubio.  I have seen nothing on Christie lately.

I think the trend map is more interesting than the straight up who's ahead map.  We now have quite a few Clinton vs. Rubio state polls.  Just counting polls that PPP has conducted this year on Clinton vs. Rubio, we have:

national, Jan. 3-6: Clinton +14
Florida, Jan. 11-13: Clinton +4
Minnesota, Jan. 18-20: Clinton +13
Texas, Jan. 24-27: Clinton +1
national, Jan. 31-Feb. 3: Clinton +8
Alaska, Feb. 4-5: Clinton +1
Louisiana, Feb. 8-12: Clinton +3
Montana, Feb. 15-17: Rubio +8
Georgia, Feb. 15-18: Clinton +3
Kansas, Feb. 21-24: Rubio +5
Wisconsin, Feb. 21-24: Clinton +14
Michigan, Mar. 2-4: Clinton +14

We also have the recent Quinnipiac national poll:
national, Feb. 27-Mar. 4: Clinton +16

So some disagreement about how much Clinton leads by nationally.  PPP says 8 points, and Quinnipiac says 16.  If you assume that the true national margin is the Clinton by 8 seen in that Jan. 31-Feb. 3 poll, then relative to the 2012 election, the trend would be:

Florida: R+1 (Rubio's home state)
Minnesota: D+1
Texas: D+12
Alaska: D+11
Louisiana: D+16
Montana: D+1
Georgia: D+7
Kansas: D+13
Wisconsin: D+3
Michigan: +/-0

But that doesn't seem right.  Not every state can be trending Democratic.  Remember, "trend" all has to balance out.  If, instead, we assume that the Clinton by 16 nationally number from Quinnipiac is closer to the truth, then you just add 8 points to the GOP side in every state:

Florida: R+9 (Rubio's home state)
Minnesota: R+7
Texas: D+4
Alaska: D+3
Louisiana: D+8
Montana: R+7
Georgia: R+1
Kansas: D+5
Wisconsin: R+5
Michigan: R+8

That map would be (ignore shading):

()

Perhaps that's closer to the truth, though the answer's probably somewhere in between.  If you assume that the Clinton by 14 national margin that PPP got in early Jan. is the true national margin, then you flip Georgia on the trend map:

()

There's either a north/south divide here, or a Dem. state / GOP state divide, with the more Democratic states trending Republican and vice versa.

Or, to put it another way, the polls show that, as of today, Clinton would beat Rubio by much more than the margin by which Obama beat Romney.  But most of those extra votes she would get are in the more Republican states, perhaps especially in the South.  Obama may have come closer to maxing out the Democratic vote in the North than the South.

One way to look at it is to say that Barack Obama, although an above-average vote-getter, gets polarizing results. That could be race (for which he is obviously excused) or his unusual ability to win northern suburban votes but unusual incapacity for winning rural votes. Hillary Clinton isn't as polarizing a figure, or she can win the sorts of voters that he husband won but Obama could not reach.

If she is able to win the sorts of voters who went for Barack Obama won in 2008 and 2012 and the sorts of voters that her husband won in 1992 and 1996 but Gore, Kerry, and Obama lost beginning in 2000, then this is what I can predict for 2016:

Clinton vs. Rubio

()

At this point I have no idea of how Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, or two of the three Congressional districts of Nebraska would go. It could also be that Marco Rubio fails badly to live up to the early hype and will get wiped out early.


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.   

PPP, Pennsylvania.

I have seen little on Clinton vs. Christie lately. Hillary clobbers everyone else in Pennsylvania:


H. Clinton v. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

I just love to see Texas go for Clinton in these maps.

Although I don't really think it would happen.

Where do the Iowa numbers here come from?  I don't see a general election poll for Iowa out there, but I might have missed it.

Should this thread have a map for Hillary vs. Rand Paul? He's being featured in a lot more polls than Christie is.

It seems that most Republicans other than Chris Christie -- such as Paul Ryan -- do about the same as Marco Rubio.  So far we have little other contrast in likely results between most Republican prospects other than Chris Christie with Hillary Clinton. 

There was no Iowa general election poll.

I think he used the national numbers from PPP for Iowa, because they were in the same release.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_207.pdf

Quinnipiac -- H Clinton 47. Christie 42.

I have seen little on Clinton vs. Christie lately. Hillary clobbers everyone else in Pennsylvania:



H. Clinton v. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  


[/quote]

pbrower, what is that Iowa poll in your map ?

I didn't find an Iowa poll. Where did you get it from ?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/new-york-state/release-detail?ReleaseID=1867

Nothing about Rubio, Ryan, or others who have almost no chance of winning New York.


H. Clinton v. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

Anything on Rand Paul? Would love to see how he fairs against Hillary. If he fairs much better than the other GOP potentials, he could use that as a great tool in the primary.

Well, PPP is doing a new national poll next week.

If Rand Paul finishes among the first 2 in their GOP primary poll, then Paul will be used in every state matchup against Hillary until their next national GOP poll.

PPP always uses the first 2 GOP candidates for their state polls and 1 or 2 local people against Hillary.

I wonder how's Jindal doing....

I thought he meant how Jindal was doing in the national primary matchup.

In any case, anyone want to guess what PPP's national primary numbers will look like on the GOP side?  My guess is Rubio in first and Paul in second, meaning that they'll include Paul in the general election matchups for a while?

Their FL poll suggests that Paul might even be 1st in their national primary poll.

I say:

1) Paul
2) Rubio
3) Christie
4) Ryan
5) Bush

Maybe.  We don't have a lot to go on.  The PA poll was also taken after the filibuster, and Paul was at 17% in that.  For the record, PPP's last national poll (pre-filibuster) was:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169083.0

Rubio 22%
Ryan 15%
Bush 13%
Christie 13%
Huckabee 11%
Paul 10%
Jindal 4%
Perry 3%
Martinez 1%

For this one, I could see a close race between Paul and Rubio for first place.

For a Democrat to win Texas one or two things happen:

1. Win the U.S. Popular Vote with at least 57 percent.

2. See Texas's demographics move sharply away from being advantageous with the Republicans and without needing so much rope to bring it in.


If Texas is going Democratic, so is Montana. So is Indiana. And so are North Dakota and South Dakota and the first two Congressional Districts in the state of Nebraska. Nebraska, statewide and with the 3rd Congressional District, and Kansas would be reduced to (at best) a 5-point hold for the losing Republican.

If Texas goes Democratic, it's going to be a 40-state [plus] landslide election.

Since 1912 -- dating back 100 years -- South Carolina has voted the same as Mississippi and Alabama in all but two elections: 1960 and 1968. If ever a split, Ala. and Miss. -- which have voted alike in all elections since their first vote in 1820 (exception is 1840) -- would stay Republicans (because, long term, they vote opposite Vermont) while S.C. would flip Democratic. This is like Ind. + N.D. + S.D. + Neb. + Kan. = same since 1920. Those five states voted the same in all of 1920 to 2004. In 2008, Barack Obama flipped Ind. and Neb. #02. It was a difference in tipping point.

In recent elections, S.C. has been about 15 points more Republican than the country. Tex. has been about 20 points. We can't hold them all to a tee … but if Texas is willing to flip Democratic, it would be wise to look out for S.C. But for this to be happening, it's a likelihood than Montana will have already flipped. It would be such a national tide that Montana would come in. It's just that Democrats should be going after Montana.

If all of this is happening … Arizona is there for the Democrats.

I just have no information for Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, or either of the two Congressional districts of eastern Nebraska, and there are no good analogues for either state or those two districts. Hillary was polled for Kansas, a good analogue for Plains states other than Texas. I saw PPP polls for Montana, Louisiana, and Texas. Show me polls for Arizona, Indiana, and Mississippi and I don't white them out for lack of data. I have Missouri as a likely win for Hillary because she is ahead in Kentucky.

Texas has no good analogue, and my best guess is to describe it as "Kansas grafted onto Florida". Texas east of the I-35 corridor and Greater El Paso is probably analogous to Florida in its voting; Texas west of the I-35 corridor except for the Rio Grande Valley is much like Kansas.  The quadrilateral formed by Dallas/Fort Worth at the north, Houston in the southeast, Laredo in the southwest and Brownsville in the south would be a  swing state in most Presidential and Senatorial elections if it were a state. Kansas? We all know about Kansas. A Democratic nominee for President would have to win Florida by about 8% to break even in Texas.

If Hillary Clinton would defeat Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush in Florida, she would do just the same in Texas where those two are not well known. 

If Hillary Clinton can win Texas, she would achieve what her husband came close to doing twice but never quite did. Graft the (Bill) Clinton-but-not-Obama voters onto the Obama voters, and a Democratic nominee for President (1) gets about 57% of the popular vote, (2) wins 40 or so states, one of which is Texas, and (3) shows that the political reality of the South has changed dramatically.

re: Indiana

Indiana usually says something; it is about 10% more R than the rest of America in almost every Presidential election. Barack Obama campaigned heavily in Indiana and sank vast resources into the state to win it in 2008 and did not do so in 2012. He lost it by 10% in 2012 -- which should be a huge disappointment. Right?

Year     margin   

2012       10R
2008         1D
2004       21R
2000       16R
1996         6R*
1992         6R*
1988       20R
1984       24R
1980       18R*
1976         8R
1972       33R
1968       12R*
1964       12D[/b]
1960       10R
1956       20R
1952       17R
1948         1R
1944         7R
1940         1R

*Independent or third-party nominee may have had an effect. Bold is for the Democratic nominee winning the state. Bold indicates that the Democratic nominee won the state. Dark shades indicate electoral blowouts.

Wrong. Barack Obama campaigned extensively in Indiana in 2008 and won it -- and was effective enough in winning a raft of states that neither Gore nor Kerry won. He stayed out of Indiana in 2012 and lost it because he needed a laser focus on a small number of states that could decide the election. If he was going to win Indiana he was going to win Ohio anyway, but Ohio was easier for him to win against an opponent who could overpower him with campaign funds.   

Indiana has gone for the Republican nominee for President in 18 of the last 20 chances. This goes back to two elections involving FDR. Democratic nominees have won the popular vote 9 times and the Presidency 8 times -- and Republican nominees have won the popular vote 11 times and the Presidency 12 times.

The Republicans seem unable to win the Presidency if the Democrat loses the state by less than 11%. If Indiana votes by more than 11% for the Republican, then the Republican wins at the least the Electoral College (which is everything).

If you see the Republican nominee winning Indiana early in 2016 on Election Day but by a comparatively-small margin (let us say 7%), then it will be a bad night for the GOP.

   
 

PPP tweets:

https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/318823239453376513


That actually represents no meaningful change from their February poll, which had Christie at 42% favorable and Paul at 61% favorable among GOP primary voters.  Remains to be seen whether the lack of change in Paul's favorability portends a lack of gains in the primary matchup question.

I think that it's quite possible that Paul will have a significant bump in his polling numbers despite the static approval ratings. Looking back for comparison, this PPP poll from last year in April (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_417.pdf) shows Rubio with 53% at the time and having 10% of the vote, and the last national one (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_207.pdf) shows 54% approving with his vote share more than doubling at 22%.

Update on my trend map.  Here are the latest PPP polls:

Pennsylvania, Mar. 8-10: Clinton +15
Florida: Mar. 15-18: Clinton +16
national: Mar. 27-30: Clinton +7

That 7 point margin for Clinton just doesn't mesh with the statewide polls.  You can't have every state trending for the Dems.  That doesn't make any sense.  I'll stick with my Clinton by 14 points over Rubio estimate, which seems closer to reality, if we take into account the statewide polls.  In that case, the trends (for state polls conducted by PPP since Jan. 1) relative to 2012 would be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5

()

So we now have a new Clinton-Rubio PPP poll of KY:

Kentucky, Apr. 5-7: Clinton +6

Which more or less confirms their poll from 2012, and suggests a massive swing towards the Dems from 2012.  Much bigger than we've seen for any other state.  Again, assuming a national margin of Clinton by 14 points over Rubio, current trend map would be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5
Kentucky: D+19

()

NC is wrong. Hillary is ahead.

Correction made here:

H. Clinton v. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

Colorado checks in:

Q5 If the candidates for President in 2016 were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican
Marco Rubio, who would you vote for?

48% Hillary Clinton
..................................................
44% Marco Rubio
...................................................
8% Not sure

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  

Updating the trend map.  We now have:

Colorado, April 11-14: Clinton +3
North Carolina, April 11-14: Clinton +7
New Hampshire, April 19-21: Clinton +14

Again, assuming national Clinton margin of 14 points, trend map would now be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5
Kentucky: D+19
Colorado: R+13
North Carolina: R+1
New Hampshire: R+2

()

CO, NH, NC added. 

Why do you keep ending your posts with exactly the same phrase?

Probably copy-pasted.

Virginia, Quinnipiac. Clinton overpowers Rubio and Ryan -- nothing on Christie.

Wisconsin, Marquette University Law School.

https://law.marquette.edu/poll/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/MLSP16Toplines.pdf

Clinton 49%
Ryan 44%

Clinton 47%
Christie 40%

Clinton 50%
Walker 42%

Clinton 51%
Rubio 35%

Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

Clinton vs. Christie

()

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/06/michigan-miscellany.html

Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

Clinton vs. Christie

()

I think that you should add Paul to this map, and here is what the map looks like right now with him and Hillary.

()

Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

Clinton vs. Christie

()


Good idea, as there are enough data points to satisfy me.

Now in alphabetical order:

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Updated Clinton-Rubio trend map from PPP polls...

Virginia, May 24-26: Clinton +4
Michigan, May 30-June 2: Clinton +17

Assuming national Clinton margin of 13 points, trend map would now be:

Minnesota: R+4
Texas: D+7
Alaska: D+6
Louisiana: D+11
Montana: R+4
Georgia: D+2
Kansas: D+8
Wisconsin: R+2
Pennsylvania: D+1
Florida: D+6
Kentucky: D+20
Colorado: R+12
North Carolina: no trend
New Hampshire: R+1
Virginia: R+9
Michigan: R+2

()

We have Hillary against three different potential nominees. I can see some patterns.

Against Christie -- would Hillary really win Texas? She does win one of three imaginable tipping-point states (Pennsylvania) No way does she win Pennsylvania and Texas and still lose. Otherwise we see few states --all of which Hillary wins.

Against Paul -- she makes Kentucky close. It is possible to lose one's home state and win the Presidential election (Al Gore came close). But Kentucky is one state that Republicans absolutely must win to have a chance. He is also losing North Carolina, a state that Democratic nominees have won twice in nearly fifty years. Ugh!

Against Rubio -- she seems to combine just about every state that Obama won in 2008... and that Carter won in 1976. That would stick Rubio with about 50 electoral votes -- and fewer if Arizona goes. That would be like LBJ in 1964 in electoral results. Rubio loses his own state -- Florida -- but that could be the least of his problems.

Against Ryan -- she picks off the entire Atlantic seaboard except perhaps South Carolina. Ryan  comes to a virtual tie in Louisiana, the most Catholic state in the South except for Florida...

44-41 Christie/Clinton
46-45 Rubio/Clinton

48-32 Christie/Biden
48-35 Rubio/Biden

Favorables:

49-17 Christie
39-22 Rubio
53-44 Clinton
39-49 Biden



http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=1908

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

PPP 2016 poll of Michigan:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MI_610.pdf

Clinton 51%
Bush 37%

Clinton 44%
Christie 38%

Clinton 55%
Paul 35%

Clinton 53%
Rubio 36%

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

I don't understand people from Colorado...

No wonder with all the Mexicans there and their Spanish ...

Possible explanation. If Quinnipiac can allow polling in Spanish, then its results could easily align with the sorts of results that PPP comes up with. But it does poll Florida, which has a large Spanish-speaking population.

Any poll that undercounts Spanish-speaking people will be R-friendly in Colorado. But Colorado gets polled often, and even at that Q can adjust its methodology to allow people to respond to questions in Spanish.

Florida, Quinnipiac

Clinton 53%
Rubio 41%

Clinton   50%
(Jeb) Bush 43%

(Biden fares badly; nothing on Christie, Paul, or Ryan). If Hillary Clinton decisively defeats Favorite Son Republicans in Florida, she probably beats any other Republican nominee in Florida.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=1910

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.


[/quote]

OH-Quinnipiac

Christie 42%
Clinton 42%

Clinton 47%
Paul 44%

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=1914

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.


[/quote]

Texas, PPP



http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_TX_703.pdf

(Hillary is shown against Christie in this poll and against imaginable Favorite-Son candidates - and not against Paul, Rubio, or Ryan.



Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Am I the only one who thinks it's too early to call the 2016 race for anyone?

No. Everyone knew in the spring of 1988 that George H W Bush was going to lose to Mike Dukakis. Whoops!

At this point I would not call a race between Chris Christie and Hillary Clinton anything but too close to predict. But the maps clearly show that Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Paul Ryan are not Presidential material. Hillary Clinton is.

Note the tie between Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie in Ohio. Ohio is about as close to a microcosm of America as any state can be, and has voted with the winner in all but two Presidential elections in the last century. Maybe Quinnipiac has some kinks to iron out in its Colorado and Ohio polls -- but Q did well in 2012.

Q was surprising because they pretty much had a Kerry landslide. Marco Rubio could easily win the presidency but I'm not predicting him or anyone to do so. Chris Christie and Hillary Clinton is a good possibility but Ben-Ghazi could come back when she least expects it. She also has a lot of ties to her "husband" not always in good ways. I think the map is very interesting as it shows a very typical election with all things being equal. The only thing is that things are never equal. Every election and in pretty much every state there are circumstances effecting voters. I agree Paul Ryan will lose early to in the middle of the primaries and so will Rand Paul. If Bob McDonnell was more popular he'd have a chance too. I can't think of a single Democrat who is electable in 2016 besides Hillary Clinton so if she runs she should be the nominee.

I think Cory Booker is a qualified nominee for the democrats, the only problem is that he has such a low name recognition outside of the northeast that he couldn't win the primaries.

Name recognition is huge in primaries. By the general election both candidates have 95% name recognition or close to it. It's all speculation right now but fun to think about.

July 5-7, 2013
Survey of 668 Iowa voters

Iowa Survey Results (PPP)

Q1If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Chris
Christie, who would you vote for?

43%  Hillary Clinton

36% Chris Christie

21% Not sure

Q2
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand
Paul, who would you vote for?

48% Hillary Clinton

37% Rand Paul

14% Not sure

Q4 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Paul
Ryan, who would you vote for?

49% Hillary Clinton

40% Paul Ryan

11% Not sure

Q5 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican
Marco Rubio, who would you vote for?

47% Hillary Clinton

35% Marco Rubio

18% Not sure

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_Iowa_7111.pdf



Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

pbrower, if you update the Clinton vs. Christie map with VA, then include the MT, NY and NH polls as well:

Christie+5 over Hillary in MT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#Montana

Hillary+5 over Christie in NH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#New_Hampshire

Hillary+27 over Christie in NY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#New_York

Here are all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 22 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Rand Paul: R +3%
+8% R improvement

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on July 22)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: Tie
+23% D improvement

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: Tie
+17% D improvement

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: Tie
+14% D improvement

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.8%
+0.8% R improvement

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +9%
+9% R improvement

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +27%
+1% R improvement

North Carolina: Hillary vs Rubio: D +7%
+9% D improvement

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: Tie
+3% R improvement

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

Texas: Hillary vs Christie: R +3.5%
+12% D improvement

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated with latest poll)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Christie: D +6.5%
+0.5% R improvement

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated July 24)


Average all 22 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: D +2.1%
+5.6% D improvement


Looks like even in the best of cases, if the Grumpy Old Party could tailormake a specific candidate for each state, they still would do quite a lot worse nationally than they did against Obama in 2012. Possibly even worse than they did in the 2008 landslide.

Hillary seems to be gaining the most traction in Rand Paul's home state of Kentucky as well as in Arkansas, while struggling the most in Chris Christie's home state of New Jersey. Overall, Hillary is doing really well in red states - including Texas, the Appalachians and the Deep South - while struggling the most against governor Christie in typically blue states, including Colorado and the Great Lakes district.


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 188 EVs
Best/Tailormade Republican: 59 EVs
Toss-up: 37 EVs
No polling: 254 EVs (almost half)

Which means that Hillary has captured 66.2% of all EVs awarded thus far, against lackluster 20.8% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York of the solidly Democratic states has been polled so far, against no less than 9 solidly Republican states - the biggest of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado and Ohio being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()

Looking good all across the south and west except in Colorado. :)


Updated with latest PPP poll of Virginia. Iowa polls updated on July 22. Wyoming poll, national averages and state map updated on July 24. Also updated with latest Alaska poll on August 4. Georgia updated with new poll August 8. Updated with the frist poll from Arkansas.

The early polling for this next election is so weird.
-We've got Hillary winning or tying most of the time in most red states that have been polled, even ones which haven't voted Democratic for decades, in some cases since Carter or even Johnson, and which Obama lost by 15-20 points.
-We see Hillary doing slightly worse than Obama in blue states, at least in the upper midwest.
-And then we have the bizarre phenomenon of Republicans being tied or in striking distance in Colorado and Ohio.

At this rate, half the country's going to be battleground states! It probably won't hold, but if that happens, it might be entertaining enough to make up for the watching-paint-dry-like Democratic primaries.

Iowa, Quinnipiac:

Clinton, Christie split 41-41

Clinton vs. Scott Walker (Republican Governor of neighboring Wisconsin) 46-39...probably a good proxy for Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, and Rick Santorum.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/iowa/release-detail?ReleaseID=1926




Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

hello pbrower!

I sent you a private message, please read it.

By all means! Probably a different thread, because too many maps in one post get confusing.

You'd need to do much archive work to do so -- and I don't consider Joe Biden a credible candidate for President. He has had plenty of chances to get the nomination and has never gotten them. The only way in which he becomes a credible candidate for President is if the Unthinkable happens to the President.


I understand that one of the reasons for nominating him for VP was that he was at the bottom in assets in possession among US Senators. He lacks the money and income sources for staging a campaign.
 

Here are the averages for the 9 national polls which have been held since December 2012:

Hillary vs Chris Christie (7 polls): Hillary +5%
Hillary vs Jeb Bush (4 polls): Hillary +9.5%
Hillary vs Rand Paul (6 polls): Hillary +9.8%
Hillary vs Marco Rubio (6 polls): Hillary +10.8%
Hillary vs Paul Ryan (5 polls): Hillary +11.6%
Hillary vs Rick Perry (1 poll): Hillary +16%

New Wyoming polls from PPP.

Christie + 28 over Hillary (56-28)
Bush + 27 over Hillary (58-31)
Ryan + 27 over Hillary (59-32)
Paul + 26 over Hillary (58-32)
Rubio + 24 over Hillary (56-32)

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_WY_724.pdf

Wyoming, PPP

Five matchups between Hillary Clinton and Republicans, and they are all roughly 32-57.   I am showing them at 60% saturation because such is closer to reality than the 52-46 split that might look somewhat close.



Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

^^ Christie winning in Texas makes all the difference. :P

Texas has essentially a single-party system for statewide politics. The Democratic Party is basically crushed in statewide politics and is basically irrelevant. The giant cities are a different matter in local politics. 

If you look at the polls, that doesn't seem to be the case for 2016 though. Chris Christie is the only one to beat Hillary in Texas at this moment, and even him just barely. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if the polling firms only interviewed 18+ individuals. Which would mean that they would miss out on all the potential 15-18 year old future voters. Plus a few of those they interviewed will not be alive 3 years from now. If only 59% of Texas voters were white in 2012 with an extremely low Hispanic turnout, imagine how the Texas electorate will look like in 2016 with a record level of Hispanic turnout due to highly energized latinos in the state.

Rubio has the best NC polling? Color me surprised.

Yeah, although only two candidates have been tried out against Hillary in your state, Rubio and Rand Paul. I'm sure Chris Christie would do better in NC as well, don't you think?

Here's the source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#North_Carolina

I think NC would be just as receptive to Christie as it was to Romney, if not more. Even so, I do think Hillary could beat Christie here (in other words, she would do better than Obama in 2012, perhaps somewhere around Obama in 2008). I'm very interested to see the polling when it's released.

Alaska, PPP. Hillary Clinton would beat Sarah Palin (not shown), but lose by margins less than 8% against everyone else.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_AK_802.pdf


Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

-PPP's newest Georgia poll finds that Hillary Clinton would have a decent shot at winning the state if there was an election today. She leads Rand Paul, who's led our most recent national GOP polling, 48/43. She also has a 47/44 advantage on Paul Ryan, a 47/43 one on Newt Gingrich, and a 51/38 one over Sarah Palin. She ties Jeb Bush at 45, and the only Republican with an advantage over her is Chris Christie at 44/42. She could make Georgia a swing state in 2016.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/08/georgia-miscellany.html

.....

Georgia has been about R+7 in 2008 and R+11 in 2012; if it is at all close for the Republican then the Democrat is going to win 375 or so electoral votes and about 54% of the popular vote. A Democrat who wins Georgia is probably winning 56% of the popular vote and at least 400 electoral votes.

I notice that PPP isn't paying attention to Rubio anymore, but it is paying attention to Jeb Bush.

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Taking all the state polls on Christie vs. Clinton so far (most recent poll from states with more than one poll), we have:

AK: Christie +8
CO: Christie +3
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +5
NJ: Clinton +11
NY: Clinton +27
OH: tie
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +5
WI: Clinton +7
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
CO: R+8
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+1
NJ: R+7
NY: R+1
OH: R+3
TX: D+7
VA: D+1
WI: no change
WY: D+13

()

So yeah, the Democratic states swing Republican, and the Republican states swing Democratic.  Thus creating a map with many more states that are close.  2012 actually had remarkably few states that were close, given that the election itself was fairly close.

Apparently the 'right' Democrat can win in Arkansas. Its incumbent Democratic Senator has a slight edge in a bid for re-election in 2014.  

It certainly was not Barack Obama:


although that is better than the voting result of 2012 (61-37 Romney over Obama).


In 2008 Hillary Clinton projected to defeat John McCain, so it may not be Arkansas that has changed politically since 2008. Barack Obama is a horrible match for Arkansas, and if he is no longer relevant to Arkansas in 2016 then Hillary Clinton could win.

Of course this pollster is new to me, so expect either confirmation or repudiation by someone else. Only two potential matchups are shown.

http://freebeacon.com/tom-cotton-in-dead-heat-with-mark-pryor-for-arkansas-senate/
Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.


[/quote]

Apparently the 'right' Democrat can win in Arkansas. Its incumbent Democratic Senator has a slight edge in a bid for re-election in 2014.  

It certainly was not Barack Obama:


although that is better than the voting result of 2012 (61-37 Romney over Obama -- which is about what Reagan did to Mondale in 1984).


In 2008 Hillary Clinton projected to defeat John McCain, so it may not be Arkansas that has changed politically since 2008. Barack Obama is a horrible match for Arkansas, and if he is no longer relevant to Arkansas in 2016 then Hillary Clinton could win.

Of course this pollster is new to me, so expect either confirmation or repudiation by someone else. Only two potential matchups are shown.

http://freebeacon.com/tom-cotton-in-dead-heat-with-mark-pryor-for-arkansas-senate/
Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

This is just laughable, it really is. Clinton winning Texas? Louisiana? Georgia? Arkansas? Kentucky? If this is anywhere near accurate where in for a seismic shift in election politics.

Seismic shift? It could be that Hillary Clinton is winning back the Clinton-but-not-Obama voters while keeping the Obama voters (which include some Obama-but-not-Clinton voters).

It could also be that the Republicans have some dreadful prospects seeming to lead have the lead for the Presidential nomination. If the Republicans have the right-wing version of George McGovern or Walter Mondale, then they can lose badly in 2016.

It could also be that many Americans remain uncomfortable with the concept of a black man as President of the United States.

It's also possible that people in the Mountain and Deep South will begin to recognize Hillary Clinton as a  d@mnyankee city-slicker who either never had (like Dukakis, Kerry, or Obama) any Southern roots or lost touch with them as did Al Gore.  But at that I am discussing things that have yet to happen.

August 16-19, 2013
Survey of 721 Louisiana voters

Louisiana Survey Results (PPP)

Q4 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Jeb
Bush, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

44% Jeb Bush

12% Not sure

Q5
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Chris
Christie, who would you vote for?

42% Hillary Clinton

41% Chris Christie

18% Not sure

Q6
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand
Paul, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

45% Rand Paul

11% Not sure

Q7
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Paul
Ryan, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

46% Paul Ryan

11% Not sure
.........................................................
Clinton vs. Christie

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_821.pdf

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Fellow readers of this thread:

I am tempted to start a new thread on this line. I am not saying when, but before I do (with the suggestion that this thread be locked) I see some faults in this presentation.

First, pollsters seem to no longer take Marco Rubio seriously. I am tempted to drop maps involving him in favor of maps for Jeb Bush, whom pollsters are beginning to take seriously. I am satisfied that Marco Rubio has beyond all imaginable question shown that he is not Presidential material until at least 2020 -- if ever.

Second, I see a huge difference between being up 43-42 and being up 49-40, and this map coloring scheme makes no such distinction. If it can't show the difference between a six-point lead and a one-point lead with someone 'leading' with less than 50% of the vote, the map shows leads that mean practically nothing.  I'd like to show anyone with 40-49% support but less than a 4% margin (margin of error) with 30% saturation. Between 40% and 49% support, inclusively? Still 40% saturation. Between 50% and 54% support, inclusively?  Still 50% saturation. 

Third, I see few states that now seem likely to show a 70-30 preference for anyone. A 55% preference could be shown with a 70% saturation to signify that a state is likely out of reach because anyone with at least 55% support in a binary choice is up at least 10%. I could show 60% or higher support with 90% saturation because such shows a margin of at least 20%. 

To show what the color scheme would look like:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

()  

This map signifies nothing except to show a color scheme.

Looking ahead to the 2016 presidential campaign, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to be the apple of Virginia voters' eyes, leading New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie 46 - 37 percent, compared to 45 - 40 percent when Quinnipiac University asked that question in July.

Christie continues to lead Vice President Joseph Biden, 44 - 37 percent today compared to 46 - 38 percent last month.

Clinton crushes Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas 53 - 34 percent. Biden tops Cruz 47 - 37 percent.


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=1940

Clinton vs. Christie



()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Ohio, PPP:

Clinton 50%
Bush 36%

Clinton 45%
Christie 36%

Clinton 53%
Kasich 35%

Clinton 51%
Paul 36%

Clinton 52%
Ryan 36%


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/08/ohioans-skeptical-about-kasich-2016-and-more.html#more

Clinton vs. Christie



()

Clinton vs. Paul

()


Clinton vs. Rubio

()



Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

Blank map.

()

Purpose:

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:

()

I will let someone else make the decision to merge this map with the others, perhaps replacing the maps involving Rubio with this one if such seems a good idea. After all, nobody seems to be paying any chances of Marco Rubio to be the next President anymore.

With the color scheme suggested a few posts above:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:

()

With the color scheme suggested a few posts above:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:

()

Contrast the old pattern:

()  


I don't have enough data points to show a 46-43 split here, but as you can see I have a sharp contrast between someone up with 50% or more and someone up with under 50%. The justification for a 60% saturation is that the legal difference between winning 50% +1 and slightly less is significant in some places -- and because someone behind 52-47 must pull votes away from the one up 52-47 while the one down 47-45 can still win by picking up undecided votes. 

Here is Christie for a contrast between the two patterns. The old way:

Clinton vs. Christie



()

White indicates a tie.

And my proposal:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Clinton vs. Christie

()

Polls go back at least to March with Clinton vs. Christie, but you can see more contrast in color (even if I show no state giving 60% to anyone). We can easily see that the weak leads of Clinton in Arkansas and Louisiana or of Christie in Colorado (which I have cause to doubt) and Georgia aren't worth much. Clinton leads in the northeastern quadrant of the US  (except in New York and New Jersey) are not as imposing, but cutting into those will be difficult.

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +1
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +5
NJ: Clinton +11
NY: Clinton +27
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +9
WI: Clinton +7
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+6
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+1
NJ: R+7
NY: R+1
OH: D+6
PA: no change
TX: D+7
VA: D+5
WI: no change
WY: D+13

()

Should we abandon all depictions of how Rubio would do in favor of Jeb Bush?

Here's an update with the latest state polls of August and September (up until the 20th).

Here are all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 22 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+7% R improvement

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on July 22)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
(updated with second poll from 2012, corrected previous mistake)

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R +8%
+6% D improvement
(Corrected previous error)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +9%
+9% R improvement

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +27%
+1% R improvement

North Carolina: Hillary vs Rubio: D +7%
+9% D improvement

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement
(Updated with newest poll)

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

Texas: Hillary vs Ted Cruz: R +5%
+11% D improvement

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated with latest August poll + 3 new polls in September)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest September poll)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated July 24)


Average all 22 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: D +1.8%
+5.2% D improvement


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 214 EVs
Best/Tailormade Republican: 75 EVs
Toss-up: None
No polling: 249 EVs (almost half)

Which means that Hillary has captured an amazing 74% of all EVs awarded thus far, against disappointing 26% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York of the solidly Democratic states has been polled so far (2 if including New Jersey), against no less than 9 solidly Republican states - the biggest of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Not either to forget such states as D.C., Vermont and Hawaii. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican (in more than 50% of the cases, Christie) candidate:

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. Wyoming: D +13%
6. Texas: D +11%
7. New Jersey: R +9%
8. North Carolina: D +9%
9. Florida: D +8%
10. Colorado: R +7%
11. Pennsylvania: D +7%
12. Alaska: D +7%
13. Georgia: D +6%
14. Montana: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 14 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demograhically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Pennsylvania (Texas & North Carolina)), makes me extremely curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana, Illinois, West Virginia and even South Carolina will play out in their first poll(s). I'm sure that all of these 6 states - in particular the first five - will move considerably towards Hillary as well.

The only non-candidate state (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, has been Colorado. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.


Updated with latest PPP poll of Virginia in August as well as the 3 Virginia polls from September. Also updated with polls of New Hampshire and Wisconsin in September. Iowa polls updated on July 22. Wyoming poll, national averages and state map updated on July 24. Also updated with latest Alaska poll on August 4. Georgia updated with new poll August 8. Updated with the first poll from Arkansas. Updated with latest August polls as well. And corrected three previous errors, including Kentucky, where Hillary is currently leading in the first two polls published, not Rand Paul as my numbers have claimed thus far.

Last updated on September 20.

Hillary Clinton seems to offer the prospect of winning in part on nostalgia for Bill Clinton while keeping Obama support intact. We have yet to see patters for New England (35 EV) and California (55 EV), and once PPP releases binary matchups between Hillary Clinton and prospective R pols, we will have some questions answered. Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri (which together contain 32 electoral votes)  will be interesting if and when polled.

A Hillary Clinton win now looks like a huge Democratic win with a huge reduction in regional polarization of the electorate.

Merging in Jeb Bush; removing Marco Rubio

I anticipate binary matchups from PPP in Maine.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

()


Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()

Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

The polls might say GA will go to Hillary but I don't see that happening, it will be under 55% for the Republican but I think they will win it. 2020 I could believe it, but not 2016.

Likely it becomes a tossup, as Obama lost it by "only" 7 percent. It might be very narrow democratic victory that year. But much depends on the candidates and the political cimate in 2016.

The fact that Hillary only needs the West coast in most of these maps to get over 270 is telling.

Purple poll, Virginia.

Clinton 42, Christie 40
Clinton 48, Paul 41

http://www.purplestrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/September2013VAPoll_V5.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PurplePoll+VA+September&utm_content=PurplePoll+VA+September+CID_9ce890956460af89c13b0c312ffbee86&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Click%20here%20to%20see%20the%20full%20poll%20including%20the%20Purple%20analysis%20and%20crosstabs



Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

()


Clinton vs. Christie

()

Clinton vs. Paul

()

Clinton vs. Ryan

()

White indicates a tie.

That is how things looked for Democrats in 2008 on Election night. In 2012 President Obama was ahead in four states that could decide the election and was close in another such state (North Carolina) as the networks called the West Coast states. The count made Ohio unwinnable for Romney just after 11PM eastern time.

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul (new style)

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more


()

Old way:

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

()

The new way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).

The new one involving a narrow Clinton lead over Christie in  Virginia:

 ()   

Margin-sensitive polling maps


The new way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).



blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

I am going with the margin-sensitive polling map, and I may do no maintenance on the 'classic' maps.  As I say, there's a huge difference between being up 57-41 and being up 51-48 that does not show with the 50% red saturation that fails to distinguish 50% and 59%.  At or above 50%, the nominee cannot win by picking up the undecided vote alone; the lagger must pick up support from those then likely to vote for the leader. Even at 49% support the leader can lose by losing all of the undecided  to the lagger even if such seems unlikely. (In my experience, the undecided tend to drift ineffectively and inadequately toward the eventual loser except during late-season collapses).

Having a lead of 3% and less than 50% is meaningless in predicting how that state is going, although patterns may show. For example, if Hillary Clinton is down by 6% to Chris Christie in Indiana (I chose Indiana as an example because I expect no Indiana polls for a very long time), then Christie is in trouble. After all, Democrats usually win the Presidency when Indiana is down 10% or less because Indiana is usually about R+12. Besides, if the Democratic nominee is down by that little in Indiana, he is probably ahead in a state like Florida, Ohio, or Virginia that is more D than Indiana that the Republicans cannot afford to lose.

Example: Carter lost the state by 7.6% in 1976 and barely got elected (2% in the popular vote). He lost it by 18.3% in 1980 and lost nationwide in the biggest blowout win for a challenger since FDR defeated Hoover in 1932.         

Margin-sensitive polling maps

PPP, New Hampshire -- only four electoral votes, but it could have won the 2000 election for Al Gore by itself.

When it comes to the general election Hillary Clinton leads all the Republicans in head to heads. There's two pretty clear tiers of competitiveness: Chris Christie and everyone else. Christie comes within 4 points of Clinton, trailing 43/39. Everyone else we tested trails her by somewhere in the 8-12 point range: 50/42 against Ayotte, 49/40 against Bush, 50/41 against Ryan, 51/41 against Paul, and 50/38 against Cruz. - See more at: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/09/clinton-leads-dems-paul-and-christie-tops-among-republicans-in-nh.html#more


This way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).



blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

As you can see (and the map shows it) Christie would have a significant chance to win New Hampshire, Jeb Bush practically none... and neither Paul nor Ryan has a chance in New Hampshire.

PPP, Wisconsin


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/09/ryan-fares-stronger-than-walker-for-2016-in-wisconsin.html#more

Comment: Wisconsin may be drifting right. Ryan, without a Favorite Son advantage would lose Wisconsin... but he would lose enough genuine swing states to make Wisconsin irrelevant.  

But not a sampling based upon the 2012 vote for President:



The current poll is of likely voters in midterm elections, obviously a more pressing concern in Wisconsin, as a Governorship and an open Senate seat will then be decided. In 2016 you can probably add four points to these polls for Clinton in the general election and take one away from each Republican as a potential nominee. 

.....

This way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

I've updated my averages and maps (both actual and trendline) for the 22 polled states now after the 5 polls in Virginia, Wisconsin and New Hampshire now in September. See post #109 please for the updated stats. :)

Do you remember when West Virginia went for Democratic nominees for President except during Republican landslides like 1972 and 1984? Me too. It's not going to bounce back enough for Hillary Clinton.  


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_WV_925.pdf

I'm not showing Ted Cruz.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

New Jersey Survey of 1000 Likely Voters
Conducted September 19, 2013 By Pulse Opinion Research

In thinking about the 2016 presidential election, suppose you had a choice between Republican Chris Christie and Democrat Hillary Clinton. If the election were held today would you vote for Republican Chris Christie or Democrat Hillary Clinton?

43% Chris Christie
48% Hillary Clinton
5% Some other candidate
4% Not sure

http://chpp.kean.edu/poll/new-jersey-survey-1000-likely-voters-0

Nothing shown for binary matchups.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +1
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +4
NJ: Clinton +5
NY: Clinton +27
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +2
WV: Christie +9
WI: Clinton +3
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+6
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+2
NJ: R+13
NY: R+1
OH: D+6
PA: no change
TX: D+7
VA: R+2
WV: D+18
WI: R+4
WY: D+13

()

With two more polls out the last few days - including the very first poll this season in West Virginia (the other one being in New Jersey) - it's time to update my statistics once more, now presenting the 23rd state, the ultra Republican state as of late, and the most climate sceptic of all 50 states, West Virginia.


So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 23 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+7% R improvement
Current Republican gain

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on July 22)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(updated with second poll from 2012, corrected previous mistake)

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R +8%
+6% D improvement
(Corrected previous error)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +8%
+10% R improvement
(Updated October 1)

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +27%
+1% R improvement

North Carolina: Hillary vs Rubio: D +7%
+9% D improvement
Current Democratic gain

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement
(Updated with newest poll)

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

Texas: Hillary vs Ted Cruz: R +5%
+11% D improvement

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated with latest August poll + 3 new polls in September)

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest September poll)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated July 24)


Average all 23 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: D +1.1%
+5.5% D improvement (from Obama 2012)


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 214 EVs (for a total of 14 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 80 EVs (for a total of 9 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 244 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 27 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured an amazing 73% of all EVs awarded thus far, against disappointing 27% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York of the solidly Democratic states has been polled so far (2 if including New Jersey), against no less than 10 solidly Republican states - the biggest of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont and Hawaii. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican (in more than 50% of the cases, Christie) candidate:

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. Texas: D +11%
8. New Jersey: R +9%
9. North Carolina: D +9%
10. Florida: D +8%
11. Colorado: R +7%
12. Pennsylvania: D +7%
13. Alaska: D +7%
14. Georgia: D +6%
15. Montana: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 15 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demograhically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Pennsylvania (Texas & North Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana, Illinois and even South Carolina will play out in their first poll(s). I'm pretty sure that all of these 5 states - in particular the first four - will move considerably towards Hillary as well.

The only non-candidate state (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, has been Colorado. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.


Last updated on October 1.

LMFAO. If I was a Republican I'd be praying every day Hillary doesn't run.

As for Colorado, the state is very atypical for several reasons. In most states there's backlash against Tea Party governors overreaching along with their legislators such as in NC, OH, etc. In Colorado it's the opposite at the moment, with the Democrats facing a backlash over their gun laws. Secondly, in most swing states, Democrats have a registration advantage over Republicans, but since independents skew Republican the states are competitive anyway. In Colorado it's the opposite, Republicans have a registration advantage but independents skew Democrat. I can see why Obama would have more appeal to libertarian-ish left-leaning independents in Colorado than Hillary would.

What really doesn't make any sense to me is why Hillary performs so well in Arkansas and Kentucky but not in West Virginia. AR/KY have pretty much been taken over by the GOP on all levels, but WV still has a dominant Democratic Party. You'd think she would be doing better there than in Kentucky especially.

Republicans surely wish that Wisconsin has become a showcase for the repudiation of liberalism in a state that hasn't voted for a Republican nominee for President since the Reagan blowouts through the glorious achievements of Favorite Sons Governor Scott Walker and Paul Ryan, and they would be ready to vote for just about any Republicans after the Presidential disaster that is Barack Obama.  

Clinton 51, Ryan 43
Clinton 53, Walker 41
Clinton 50, Christie 40
Clinton 55, Cruz 33

https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2013/10/29/marquette-law-school-poll-shows-walker-in-tight-race-with-burke-for-wisconsin-governor-in-2014/

Fantasy disabused. Nothing on Jeb Bush or Rand Paul.

At this point, Scott Walker looks as if he would give the worst Favorite Son performance in his own state since at least George McGovern in 1972. Ted Cruz looks as if he would be setting up an electoral disaster analogous to Barry Goldwater in 1964.  


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +1
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +4
NJ: Clinton +5
NY: Clinton +27
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
SC: Christie +5
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +2
WV: Christie +9
WI: Clinton +10
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+6
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+2
NJ: R+13
NY: R+1
OH: D+6
PA: no change
SC: D+5
TX: D+7
VA: R+2
WV: D+18
WI: D+3
WY: D+13

()

Updated on November 8 to add the latest Texas poll to the list. It didn't change much, however, it substituted Ted Cruz with Jeb Bush. The Republican lead is still 5% ahead of Hillary though. Chris Christie, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are all 4% ahead of Hillary in Texas now. Marco Rubio is 1% behind her, while Rick Perry is 4.7% behind her - quite chanceless in other words.

Update on November 2 to include the very first poll from South Carolina. Harper polling polled 3 potential Republican candidates against Hillary - Cruz, Christie and Rubio. Marco Rubio did best of the three - beating Hillary by a margin of 7 %.


So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 24 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+7% R improvement
Current Republican gain

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
Current Democratic gain

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R +8%
+6% D improvement

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +7.8%
+10% R improvement
(Updated November 8 )

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +27%
+1% R improvement

North Carolina: Hillary vs Rubio: D +7%
+9% D improvement
Current Democratic gain

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

South Carolina: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R+7%
+3.5% D improvement
(Updated November 2)

Texas: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +5%
+11% D improvement
(Updated November 8 )

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest October poll, though Bush was not among those polled)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement


Average all 24 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: D +0.8%
+6% D improvement (from Obama 2012)


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 214 EVs (for a total of 14 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 89 EVs (for a total of 10 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 235 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 26 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured an amazing 70.6% of all EVs awarded thus far, against disappointing 29.4% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York of the solidly Democratic states has been polled so far (2 if including New Jersey), against no less than 11 solidly Republican states - the biggest of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont and Hawaii. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican (in about 50% of the cases, Christie) candidate:

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. Texas: D +11%
8. New Jersey: R +10%
9. North Carolina: D +9%
10. Florida: D +8%
11. Colorado: R +7%
12. Pennsylvania: D +7%
13. Alaska: D +7%
14. Georgia: D +6%
15. Montana: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 15 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demographically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio (Texas, North Carolina & South Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana and Illinois will play out in their first poll(s). I'm feeling quite confident that all of these 4 states will move considerably towards Hillary as well, although Illinois might possibly be less certain than the first three, as Obama used the state as his campaign base in both of his elections.

The only non-candidate state (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, has been Colorado. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.


Last updated on November 8.

Isn't this a 41/41 tie, not a 4 point Clinton lead?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/iowa/release-detail?ReleaseID=1926

Mine is based on an average of ALL possible polls, not just on the last most random poll.

No map, as this is a national survey. 

National Survey Results

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_US_110513.pdf

Exit poll, NJ gubernatorial election.
 

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/05/21324042-exit-polls-clinton-beats-christie-in-nj-in-potential-2016-matchup


Nothing on anyone else. I would guess that anyone else who has no connection to New Jersey loses New Jersey to Hillary Clinton by a margin in the high teens or even twenties.

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

PPP will be polling Maine and North Carolina this week. It may (I hope!) still offer some binary matchups in Minnesota and Texas to fill some gaps in the map from extant polls.

Arizona, Florida, Indiana (don't hold your breath!), and Missouri could be interesting.  

Texas, PPP


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/11/mixed-news-for-cruz-in-texas-polling-numbers.html#more


I get to fill two big gaps. The Republican nominee will need to win Texas by about 15% to have a strong chance of winning nationwide.  

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Approvals for President Obama have slipped badly in Maine, so Republicans ought to be able to stall the Hillary Clinton juggernaut.

Well, not in Maine for now. (PPP)


H Clinton 55 J Bush 32
H Clinton 47 Christie 39
H Clinton  57 T Cruz 30
H Clinton 57 R Paul 32

Nothing on Ryan.

North Carolina:

-Looking ahead to the 2016 Presidential race in North Carolina, Chris Christie is the only Republican who leads Hillary Clinton in the state at this early stage. He's up 46-43. Clinton leads Jeb Bush narrowly in a hypothetical contest (47/43) and then has wider leads over Rand Paul of 9 points (50/41) and Ted Cruz of 12 points (51/39). - See more at: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/11/north-carolina-miscellany.html#more

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

A new update on November 20 after Mississippi has been polled for the very first time, Colorado for the 4th time and New York for a second time.

Here's an update on November 13 to add the very first Maine poll and the second only North Carolina poll to the list. Hillary leads everyone with huge margins in Maine (even Christie), while North Carolina will be a dog fight with Christie or Bush on the GOP side. With this new poll, North Carolina changed from Democratic gain and back to Republican hold.

So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 26 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +4%
+9% R improvement
Current Republican gain

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
Current Democratic gain

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Maine: Hillary vs Christie: D +8%
+7% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Mississippi: Hillary vs Christie: R +9%
+2.5% D improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R +8%
+6% D improvement

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +7.2%
+10.6% R improvement
(Updated on November 8 )

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +21.5%
+6.5% R improvement
(Updated on November 19)

North Carolina: Hillary vs Christie: R +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

South Carolina: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R+7%
+3.5% D improvement
(Updated November 2)

Texas: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +5%
+11% D improvement
(Updated November 8 )

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest October poll, though Bush was not among those polled)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement


Average all 26 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: R +0.06%
+4.1% D improvement (from Obama 2012) [projecting an 7.9% victory for Hillary]


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 203 EVs (for a total of 14 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 110 EVs (for a total of 12 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 225 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 24 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured an impressive 64.9% of all EVs awarded thus far, against a disappointing 35.1% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York & Maine of the solidly Democratic states have been polled so far (3 if including New Jersey), against no less than 12 solidly Republican states - the biggest one of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont, Hawaii & Maryland. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican candidate (in 14 out of 25 cases, Christie is that person):

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. Texas: D +11%
8. New Jersey: R +10.6%
9. Colorado: R +9%
10. Florida: D +8%
11. Maine: R +7%
12. Pennsylvania: D +7%
13. Alaska: D +7%
14. New York: R +6.5%
15. Georgia: D +6%
16. Montana: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 16 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demographically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio (Texas & South Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana and Illinois will play out in their first poll(s). I'm feeling quite confident that all of these 4 states will move considerably towards Hillary as well, although Illinois might possibly be less certain than the first three, as Obama used the state as his campaign base in both of his elections.

The only non-candidate states (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, have been Colorado, Maine & New York. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.

The whole list of states having been polled till now, going from Democratic stronghold to Republican stronghold:

New York: D +21.5%
Pennsylvania: D +12%
Florida: D +9%
Maine: D +8%
New Jersey: D +7.2% (including Exit Poll from Governor's race)
Michigan: D +6%
Minnesota: D +6%
Ohio: D +4.5%
New Hampshire: D +4.4%
Wisconsin: D +4%
Iowa: D +4%
Virginia: D +3%
Kentucky: D +2.5%
Arkansas: D +2%
Louisiana: R +1%
Georgia: R +2%
North Carolina: R +3%
Colorado: R +4%
Texas: R +5%
Alaska: R +7%
South Carolina: R +7%
Kansas: R +7%
Montana: R +8%
Mississippi: R +9%
West Virginia: R +14%
Wyoming: R +28%


All lists and numbers above are based on no less than 66 individual polls from different pollsters. The vast majority of them conducted in 2013.

Last updated on November 20.

That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet (orange -- D sure things -- 139 electoral votes)

Siena, New York

Christie trails Hillary Clinton 56 - 40 percent and he leads Cuomo 47 - 42 percent

Only one data point, and only a subtle change, but it is in a huge state electorally. So much for Andrew Cuomo as a possible President. More significantly this is by a pollster that we haven't seen for some time.

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/sny_poll/SNY%20November%202013%20Poll%20Release%20--%20FINAL.pdf

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

I think this only shows that NYers want Cuomo to stick as their Governor and not run for President, when they already have Hillary for that.

If Cuomo were the DEM nominee, he would do no worse than Obama though in NY ...

Also: You need to re-color NJ, because the Exit Poll showed Clinton leading Christie there by only 48-44.

Done on the most recent map.

If you want more new states to be polled by PPP next weekend, you guys need to vote for either Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico or Connecticut at the top right side of this page:

http://publicpolicypolling.com/

Thanks. :)

Disappointed that Arizona isn't one of the available offers though...

Quinnipiac, Colorado:


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=1978

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Could Hillary Clinton be the first Democratic nominee for President to win Mississippi since Jimmy Carter did in 1976?


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/11/mississippi-cruz-has-a-slim-lead-in-the-primary-and-general.html

Highly unlikely.

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

I think you should add Ted Cruz and get rid of Ryan.  Hardly anyone polling on him anymore.

Even with Mississippi Christie numbers released, still looking good for Hillary. :P

I am in no rush to dump Ryan. I have suggested that PPP poll Illinois to see how both high-profile Wisconsin pols would do in Illinois. One is Paul Ryan; the other is Scott Walker.

I see Cruz doing uniformly badly, so his credibility as a candidate is unsupported. About all I can say is that he could win the Presidency if the 2016 election is ragged in much the same way as elections are rigged in Ted's father's native land.

Montana is almost all bad news for Democrats. The Democratic Governor is popular, but such is the only good news for the Democrats in Montana.


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_MT_112113.pdf

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Quinnipiac, Florida:

Even though



Such does not make a Republican win of Florida in 2016 now look likely:


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=1980


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

I dumped Marco Rubio because he was stumbling around badly, and nobody was talking about him as Presidential material. People were talking about the next-to-last Republican nominee for Vice-President for a long time... and Paul Ryan hasn't made a fool of himself yet. Well, at least not as badly as Rick Perry or Marco Rubio.

As you can see, Quinnipiac just polled Florida for several binary matchups between Hillary Clinton and several imaginable Republican nominees. Paul Ryan was one of them. Florida is a surprisingly-good microcosm of America.

I can dump Ryan in favor of Cruz -- but so far I see Cruz doing badly just about everywhere that is not a sure R state.   

pbrower, Hillary leads Bush 47-45 in the new Quinnipiac poll.

You need to change the Hillary/Bush map to a 40% shade.

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +8
FL: Clinton +4
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
ME: Clinton +8
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MS: Christie +9
MT: Christie +17
NH: Clinton +4
NJ: Clinton +4
NC: Christie +3
NY: Clinton +16
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
SC: Christie +5
TX: Christie +5
VA: Clinton +2
WV: Christie +9
WI: Clinton +10
WY: Christie +28

Clinton leads by 4 in FL, NH, and NJ.  If all of these polls reflected the true results, one of those three would be the "tipping point state".

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+13
FL: D+3
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
ME: R+7
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MS: D+3
MT: R+3
NH: R+2
NJ: R+14
NC: R+1
NY: R+10
OH: D+6
PA: no change
SC: D+5
TX: D+11
VA: R+2
WV: D+18
WI: D+3
WY: D+13

()

20% shade because the lead is only 2% with less than 50%. The correction is made.

That said, if she is doing that well against a former governor of Florida who wasn't that bad... then Hillary Clinton can overcome the usual Favorite Son effect.  Against Jeb Bush she could win easily without Florida because she would have excellent chances of winning at least three states (North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia) that a Republican nominee absolutely must win to have a chance. Basically she would have to win one of those three states (If I were her I would not count on Colorado), and Florida would be the difference between winning 300 and winning 329 electoral votes. If Rick Scott is still Governor, he probably 'delivers' Florida to the GOP through means other than campaigning.

The last poll of Georgia had a tie between Hillary and Jeb. Such may show the relevance of the Favorite Son.   

Once again time to update, after the releases of two more polls, one in Virginia, the other in New York. The number of total state polls added to the lists below has now reached 70.

One more update, on November 24, to include the two latest polls of Montana and Florida. Both polls are very god news for Republicans, in the sense that Hillary's Florida lead has been cut in more than half and GOP's lead in Montana has increased by 5% as well.

So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 26 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +4%
+9% R improvement
Current Republican gain

Florida: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+3% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
Current Democratic gain

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Maine: Hillary vs Christie: D +8%
+7% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Mississippi: Hillary vs Christie: R +9%
+2.5% D improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Rand Paul: R +13%
+1% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +7.2%
+10.6% R improvement
(Updated on November 8 )

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +20.3%
+7.9% R improvement
(Updated on November 26)

North Carolina: Hillary vs Christie: R +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement

South Carolina: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R+7%
+3.5% D improvement
(Updated November 2)

Texas: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +5%
+11% D improvement
(Updated November 8 )

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +2.5%
+1.4% R improvement
(Updated on November 26)

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest October poll, though Bush was not among those polled)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement


Average all 26 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: R +0.5%
+3.65% D improvement (from Obama 2012) [projecting an 7.5% victory for Hillary]


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 203 EVs (for a total of 14 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 110 EVs (for a total of 12 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 225 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 24 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured an impressive 64.9% of all EVs awarded thus far, against a disappointing 35.1% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York & Maine of the solidly Democratic states have been polled so far (3 if including New Jersey), against no less than 12 solidly Republican states - the biggest one of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont, Hawaii & Maryland. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican candidate (in 16 out of 26 cases, Christie is that person):

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. Texas: D +11%
8. New Jersey: R +10.6%
9. Colorado: R +9%
10. New York: R +7.9%
11. Maine: R +7%
12. Pennsylvania: D +7%
13. Alaska: D +7%
14. Georgia: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 14 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demographically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio (Texas & South Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana and Illinois will play out in their first poll(s). I'm feeling quite confident that all of these 4 states will move considerably towards Hillary as well, although Illinois might possibly be less certain than the first three, as Obama used the state as his campaign base in both of his elections.

The only non-candidate states (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, have been Colorado, Maine & New York. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.

The whole list of states having been polled till now, going from Democratic stronghold to Republican stronghold:

New York: D +20.3%
Pennsylvania: D +12%
Maine: D +8%
New Jersey: D +7.2% (including Exit Poll from Governor's race)
Michigan: D +6%
Minnesota: D +6%
Ohio: D +4.5%
New Hampshire: D +4.4%
Wisconsin: D +4%
Iowa: D +4%
Florida: D +4%
Virginia: D +2.5%
Kentucky: D +2.5%
Arkansas: D +2%
Louisiana: R +1%
Georgia: R +2%
North Carolina: R +3%
Colorado: R +4%
Texas: R +5%
Alaska: R +7%
South Carolina: R +7%
Kansas: R +7%
Mississippi: R +9%
Montana: R +13%
West Virginia: R +14%
Wyoming: R +28%


All lists and numbers above are based on no less than 70 individual polls from different pollsters. The vast majority of them conducted in 2013.

Last updated on November 26.

Florida is:

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +2%
+1% D improvement

Is right?

No, cause Jeb Bush's poll numbers are based on five local polls, while Christie strangely enough has only been polled this once in the state. It's too early to say if Bush or Christie will end up as the strongest candidate for Florida, but it might very well be Bush in the end. However, until this last poll, even Bush did horrendously in most Florida match-ups, trailing Hillary by an average of 9%.

We will get one 'new' state this weekend -- Illinois, with 20 electoral votes. It could be interesting. Without a Favorite Son running for President this time, Illinois could end up much closer in 2016. The Favorite Son effect is both additive and subtractive.

Such was true of Texas between 2004 and 2008. 

Wall Street Journal/Marist/WNBC-TV (NBC-4, New York City)


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304465604579220182335855674


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()
[/quote]

Latest update on December 9th with the 5th Colorado poll on presidential match-ups this year.

Once again time to update, after the releases of five more polls, three today, in Iowa, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and two yesterday, in Virginia and New York. The Pennsylvania poll is a semi-dramatic one, as it changes the state's status as a lean/likely D state into an absolute toss-up, as of now at least. The number of total state polls added to the lists below has thus now reached 75.

(One more update, on November 24, to include the two latest polls of Montana and Florida. Both polls are very god news for Republicans, in the sense that Hillary's Florida lead has been cut in more than half and GOP's lead in Montana has increased by 5% as well.)

So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 26 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +4.75%
+10.1% R improvement
Current Republican gain
(Updated on December 9)

Florida: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+3% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +1.7%
+4.1% R improvement
(Updated on November 27)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement
(Updated on February 26)

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on April 9)

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement
(Updated on August 21)

Maine: Hillary vs Christie: D +8%
+7% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement
(Updated on June 4)

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on January 22)

Mississippi: Hillary vs Christie: R +9%
+2.5% D improvement
(Updated on November 19)

Montana: Hillary vs Rand Paul: R +13%
+1% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated on September 18)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +7.2%
+10.6% R improvement
(Updated on November 8 )

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +20.3%
+7.9% R improvement
(Updated on November 26)

North Carolina: Hillary vs Christie: R +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +3.3%
+0.3% D improvement
(Updated on November 27)

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Christie: D +0.5%
+4.9% R improvement
(Updated on November 27)

South Carolina: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R+7%
+3.5% D improvement
(Updated on November 2)

Texas: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +5%
+11% D improvement
(Updated on November 8 )

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +2.5%
+1.4% R improvement[/color]
(Updated on November 26)

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated on October 29, though Bush was not among those polled)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on July 23)


Average all 26 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: R +1.1%
+3% D improvement (from Obama 2012) [projecting a 6.9% victory for Hillary]


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 203 EVs (for a total of 14 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 110 EVs (for a total of 12 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 225 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 24 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured a rather impressive 64.9% of all EVs awarded thus far, against a more or less disappointing 35.1% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York, Maine and New Jersey of the solidly Democratic states have been polled so far, against no less than 12 solidly Republican states - the biggest one of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont, Hawaii & Maryland. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado and Pennsylvania being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican candidate (in 17 out of 26 cases, Christie is that person):

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. Texas: D +11%
8. New Jersey: R +10.6%
9. Colorado: R +10.1%
10. New York: R +7.9%
11. Maine: R +7%
12. Alaska: D +7%
13. Georgia: D +6%
14. Pennsylvania: R +4.9%

All of these changes (in the 14 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demographically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia (Texas & South Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana and Illinois will play out in their first poll(s). I'm feeling quite confident that all of these 4 states will move considerably towards Hillary as well, although Illinois might possibly be less certain than the first three, as Obama used the state as his campaign base in both of his elections.

The whole list of states having been polled till now, going from Democratic stronghold to Republican stronghold:

New York: D +20.3%
Maine: D +8%
New Jersey: D +7.2% (including Exit Poll from Governor's race)
Current estimated/projected national average: D +6.9%
Michigan: D +6%
Minnesota: D +6%
New Hampshire: D +4.4%
Wisconsin: D +4%
Florida: D +4%
Ohio: D +3.3%
Virginia: D +2.5%
Kentucky: D +2.5%
Arkansas: D +2%
Iowa: D +1.7%
Pennsylvania: D +0.5%
Louisiana: R +1%
Georgia: R +2%
North Carolina: R +3%
Colorado: R +4.75%
Texas: R +5%
Alaska: R +7%
South Carolina: R +7%
Kansas: R +7%
Mississippi: R +9%
Montana: R +13%
West Virginia: R +14%
Wyoming: R +28%


All lists and numbers above are based on no less than 75 individual polls from different pollsters. The vast majority of them conducted in 2013.

Despite the near inmense number of bad polls for Hillary, Obama and Democrats during the past month or so, Hillary is still expected to beat the tailor-made Republican (which in 17 of 26 cases happens to be Christie) by an impressive projected 6.9% nationally.

8 or 9 states are currently way too close to call; Virginia, Kentucky, Arkansas, Iowa & Pennsylvania (all leaning towards Hillary), plus Louisiana, Georgia and North Carolina (all leaning Republican). After this last poll, Ohio could possibly be added to the too-close-to-call states, just barely leaning towards Hillary by an average of 3.3%.

Last updated on December 9.

Please everyone, use your democratic right and go and vote for one of the five so far no-polled states which might be polled by Public Policy Polling this weekend. Those five states are, in decreasing number of importance (counting from their number of Electoral Votes):

Maryland: 10 EVs
Oregon: 7 EVs
Connecticut: 7 EVs
New Mexico: 5 EVs
Rhode Island: 4 EVs

Here's the link to go to vote: http://publicpolicypolling.com/

I voted for Kentucky.  I don't see the big need for any of the states you listed to be polled yet.

Luckily Oregon is leading though, yet I personally voted for Maryland. :P

Ohio, Quinnipiac:

In an early look at the 2016 run for the White House, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gets 42 percent to 41 percent for New Jersey Republican Gov. Christopher Christie in Ohio. Secretary Clinton tops Gov. John Kasich 49 - 38 percent and leads other Republicans:

    50 - 37 percent over former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush;
    48 - 39 percent over U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida;
    50 - 40 percent over U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky;
    49 - 41 percent over U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
    50 - 35 percent over U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=1985

Pennsylvania, PPP:

Christie 48%, Clinton 44%
Clinton 48%, Bush 44%
Clinton 51%, Paul 43%
Clinton 51%, Santorum 42%
Clinton 53%, Cruz 41%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_PA_112713.pdf

Chris Christie must be an unusually-good match for Pennsylvania but not so good a match for Ohio. Go figure.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

pbrower, Christie is actually leading Hillary in Iowa and Virginia.

The Iowa poll is commissioned by an entity that has the word "conservative" in its name.
   
Re: VA-Polling Company/WomanTrend/Washington Free Beacon: Christie ahead
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2013, 12:34:39 pm »    

It should be noted that the Washington Free Beacon is a conservative newspaper and that the owner of the Polling Company is a former aide to Newt Gingrich.

Iowa and Virginia get polled often enough.

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +8
FL: Clinton +4
GA: Christie +2
IA: Christie +5
LA: Clinton +1
ME: Clinton +8
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MS: Christie +9
MT: Christie +17
NH: Clinton +4
NJ: Clinton +4
NC: Christie +3
NY: Clinton +18
OH: Clinton +1
PA: Christie +4
SC: Christie +5
TX: Christie +5
VA: Christie +2
WV: Christie +9
WI: Clinton +10
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+13
FL: D+3
GA: D+6
IA: R+11
LA: D+21
ME: R+7
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MS: D+3
MT: R+3
NH: R+2
NJ: R+14
NC: R+1
NY: R+8
OH: R+2
PA: R+9
SC: D+5
TX: D+11
VA: R+6
WV: D+18
WI: D+3
WY: D+13

()

Republicans seem to be reversing the Democratic trend of the last six years or so in Colorado.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_CO_120913.pdf

Note, though:

Very Republican sample at 47-46 Obama-Romney, though.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

National, Pew Research:

In a hypothetical general election matchup, Clinton has an edge over Christie and a double-digit lead against anyone else. She leads:

    Christie 48-45;
    Rubio 52-42;
    Bush 53-41;
    Paul 55-40;
    Ryan 56-40;
    Perry 58-37;
    Cruz 57-35;
    Palin 59-36.

Christie does better among Democrats and moderates against Clinton than his fellow Republicans. He also does better among men, which a Republican needs to offset the Democrats’ usual lead among women.

“He chips away a little,” said Miringoff. “But Clinton has her way with the crowd.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/12/10/211208/hillary-clinton-dominates-early.html#storylink=cpy

My interpretation based on how the undecided would go: they either do not vote or go ineffectively to the loser. Hillary Clinton would win much like Obama in 2012 against Christie, roughly 51.5-48.5 (I don't like decimals, but they are close enough to split the vote some, probably about 6-4 for Christie). Hillary would lose the undecided about 7-3 against Bush or Rubio. With the others the undecided are almost all on the Right, and they would go R about 9-1.

Christie 51-48   Kennedy 1960
    Rubio 55-45  Eisenhower 1952
    Bush 56-44   GHW Bush 1988
    Paul 56-44    GHW Bush 1988
    Ryan 57-43   Reagan 1980
    Perry 59-41  Reagan 1980
    Cruz 58-42   Reagan 1980
    Palin 60-40   LBJ 1964

...If anyone is thinking about Sarah Palin as the Great Female Hope for the GOP, she still has one gigantic weakness: her mangled language will offend anyone whose first language is not English, whether that language is German or Tagalog, Russian or Arabic, Hindi or Chinese, or Farsi or Vietnamese.     

In view of his ability to cut even a small deal with Democratic Senator Patty Murray, his stock has probably risen since this poll. I am not abandoning him yet.

Huh?  Pew Research?

Monmouth, NJ


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

Why NJ is blue in the Clinton vs. Bush map?

Intended for Christie. Corrected.

December 5-8, 2013
Survey of 1,034 Michigan voters (PPP)

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_MI_121113.pdf

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


 ()  

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul


()


Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

()

The very latest poll I've added is the PPP poll of Kentucky, which shifts that state from leaning Hillary by 2.5% versus Rand Paul into a leaning Republican state with Jeb Bush and Christie both beating the presumptive Democratic nominee by 4%, both being polled for the first time against Hillary in the state.

Current update as of December 22.

Adding the four latest polls on North Carolina, Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania to the already extensive state-wide poll database we've been collecting this year.

The number of total state polls added to the lists below has thus now reached 81.

So here they are - all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 26 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement
Current Democratic gain
(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +4.75%
+10.1% R improvement
Current Republican gain
(Updated on December 9)

Florida: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+3% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +0.4%
+5.4% R improvement
(Updated on December 17)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement
(Updated on February 26)

Kentucky: Hillary vs Christie/Jeb Bush: R +4%
+19% D improvement
(Updated on December 22)

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement
(Updated on August 21)

Maine: Hillary vs Christie: D +8%
+7% R improvement
(Updated on November 13)

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+5% R improvement
(Updated on December 12)

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on January 22)

Mississippi: Hillary vs Christie: R +9%
+2.5% D improvement
(Updated on November 19)

Montana: Hillary vs Rand Paul: R +13%
+1% D improvement
(Updated on November 24)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated on September 18)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +5.5%
+12.3% R improvement
(Updated on December 12)

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +20.3%
+7.9% R improvement
(Updated on November 26)

North Carolina: Hillary vs Christie: R +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated on December 13)

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +3.3%
+0.3% D improvement
(Updated on November 27)

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Christie: D +0.7%
+4.7% R improvement
(Updated on December 19)

South Carolina: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R+7%
+3.5% D improvement
(Updated on November 2)

Texas: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +5%
+11% D improvement
(Updated on November 8 )

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +2.5%
+1.4% R improvement
(Updated on November 26)

West Virginia: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +14%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on October 1)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated on October 29, though Bush was not among those polled)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated on July 23)


Average all 26 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: R +1.6%
+2.7% D improvement (from Obama 2012) [projecting a 6.6% victory for Hillary]


That gives us this map right now:

()

Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

Green = toss up
20% shade = 0.1-1% lead
30% shade = 1.1-3% lead
40% shade = 3.1-6% lead
50% shade = 6.1-9% lead
60% shade = 9.1-12% lead
70% shade = 12.1-15% lead
80% shade = 15.1-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18.1% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 195 EVs (for a total of 13 states)
Best/Tailormade Republican: 118 EVs (for a total of 13 states)
Toss-up: None
No polling: 225 EVs [almost half, including California] (for a total of 24 states + D.C.)

Which means that Hillary has captured a rather impressive 62.3% of all EVs awarded thus far, against a more or less disappointing 37.7% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York, Maine and New Jersey of the solidly Democratic states have been polled so far, against no less than 12 solidly Republican states - the biggest one of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Neither to forget such states as D.C., Vermont, Hawaii & Maryland. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado and Pennsylvania being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:

()


The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican candidate (in 18 out of 26 cases, Christie is that person):

1. Arkansas: D +22%
2. Kentucky: D +19%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. West Vriginia: D +13%
6. Wyoming: D +13%
7. New Jersey: R +12.3%
8. Texas: D +11%
9. Colorado: R +10.1%
10. New York: R +7.9%
11. Maine: R +7%
12. Alaska: D +7%
13. Georgia: D +6%
14. Iowa: R +5.4%
15. Michigan: R +5%
16. Pennsylvania: R +4.7%

All of these changes (in the 16 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demographically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia (Texas & South Carolina)), makes me curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana and Illinois will play out in their first poll(s). I'm feeling quite confident that all of these 4 states will move considerably towards Hillary as well, although Illinois might possibly be less certain than the first three, as Obama used the state as his campaign base in both of his elections.

The whole list of states having been polled till now, going from Democratic stronghold to Republican stronghold:

New York: D +20.3%
Maine: D +8%

Currently estimated/projected national average: D +6.6%

Minnesota: D +6%
New Jersey: D +5.5% (including Exit Poll from Governor's race)
Michigan: D +4.5%
New Hampshire: D +4.4%
Wisconsin: D +4%
Florida: D +4%
Ohio: D +3.3%
Virginia: D +2.5%
Arkansas: D +2%
Pennsylvania: D +0.7%
Iowa: D +0.4%

Louisiana: R +1%
Georgia: R +2%
North Carolina: R +3%
Kentucky: R +4%
Colorado: R +4.75%
Texas: R +5%
Alaska: R +7%
South Carolina: R +7%
Kansas: R +7%
Mississippi: R +9%
Montana: R +13%
West Virginia: R +14%
Wyoming: R +28%


All lists and numbers above are based on no less than 81 individual polls from different pollsters. The vast majority of them conducted in 2013.

Despite the near inmense number of bad polls for Hillary, Obama and Democrats during the past month or so, Hillary is still expected to beat the tailor-made Republican (which in 18 of 26 cases happens to be Christie) by an impressive projected 6.6% nationally.

7 or 8 states are currently way too close to call; Virginia, Arkansas, Pennsylvania & Iowa (all leaning towards Hillary), plus Louisiana, Georgia and North Carolina (all leaning Republican). After the last Ohio poll, Ohio could possibly be added to the too-close-to-call states, just barely leaning towards Hillary by an average of 3.3%.

Last updated on December 22.