Talk Elections

Fred Hubbell (D) - 36%
Kim Reynolds (R) - 31%
Somebody else - 7%

Trump Approval - 37/53 = -16

Ooooof lots of undecideds. Margin looks somewhat reasonable, perhaps a bit too D friendly, but I’m quite skeptical with that many who weren’t pushed

Source (podcast) https://www.emerson.edu/communication-studies/emerson-college-polling-society

>Emerson

But in line with polling for Minnesota and Wisconsin on approval of the President.

Interesting, if true. But obviously there are way to many undecideds to start writing Reynolds' eulogy just yet.

Nice to see a poll out of IA.

Many undecideds but, obviously a tossup.

Talk about surprised. Hubbell is gonna win

lol

I'm skeptical but this race is tightening under the radar.

Dems if they win Iowa can revert back to 272 format and win without the South. But given how dire Blum is, Reynolds is endangered😁

Yeah, im pretty sure Reynolds will lose this year

Iowa has been under GOP rule too long

This poll is trash. Too many undecideds.

Im less interested in the general numbers, too many undecideds. Instead, Im looking at the Trump approvals, which are more telling. If hes around 35%, then hes not winning the state, the Dems are taking 3 seats, and Hubbell is favoured.

I wish this were a better pollster than Emerson, but I'm hopeful that the "Iowa is a permanent GOP state that won't elect a Democrat again in our lifetime" narrative will die after November.

If GOP can't take Iowa, they they aren't winning the EC. It looks like partisans are coming home in ME, Iowa, and NV. And finger's crossed in MD

20%+ undecided = Trash
Emerson = Trash

Hon. Gov Reynolds <3 is queen in IA && might still win -- demcrats cannot get comfortable on EC because Trump 2016 could cancelle Obama 12 coattails: in Iowa. but, not if trump gets scandaled more/ partisans may come home to trump in 2020 re-election MD*** gov Hogan coatales transend time- will drag trump to finish line! :( uncrossed fringes and hope partisan Heller voter in Clark county, NV come to dem candydate. SEN SUSAN COLLINS! will lose to G. GRAHAM in ME and cause Trump to lose there/

I already posted some months ago that this would turn into a tossup or even into slightly Dem.

Huh, interesting - wasn't expecting that.

Safe D

What a crappy poll. Everyone hear raves that Gravis is trash yet we are giving Emerson a thumbs up? They don't even push their undecideds in any way.

Not meaningful with both candidates way below 40%. But 31% is a pretty low floor for an incumbent who was not challenged in the primary.

She passed that restrictive abortion rights bill and she hasn't been elected in her own right, except with Branstand. She wasn't gonna win a huge blowout

imagine drawing conclusions from a poll where neither candidate is above 40%.

Shy Tory effect here. Those undecides still break heavily Reynolds' way.

It will be refreshing to see Iowa's (and the Midwest's in general) total reversal in characterization as soon as they vote for literally one Democrat again. :P

More seriously, Iowa was and will be (for the foreseeable future) a swing state.  Not a surprising poll.

According to Nate Silver's "Myth of 50%", incumbent Governors and Senators can typically add 6.5% to an early prediction of how much vote they will get against an unnamed challenger. With 44% the chance of getting re-elected is just over 50%. With 43% the chance of getting re-elected is just under 50%. Chances rapidly approach one if one is above 44% or zero if the beginning number is below 43%. This holds true in both wave and non-wave elections, and it has held true in elections from 2010 to 2014. The assumption is that someone already elected has shown an ability to get a significant gain in electoral campaign from campaigning. This pattern is unreliable for appointed Senators or Governors who have never shown evidence that they can ever be elected.

But it is no longer early, so the incumbent should have numbers of at least 47% against an opponent by now to have a reasonable chance of winning.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/myth-of-incumbent-50-rule/

Dead cat bounce at best. National Dems have shown they would rather flush away their Midwestern hopes down the toilet to chase billionaire trophy wives in Atlanta and Phoenix.

Good for Hubbell.

I'd be shocked if a Democrat wins the governor's seat in Iowa and incumbent Scott Walker wins Wisconsin simultaneously.

I used to think that, but all the districts that are Clinton GOP districts Dems need to pickup are in IA, MN, IL, WI,  and Pa

1) Everyone's assumption that Iowa is a populist haven just because it went Obama-Trump is kind of strange to me ... well, not really from you.

2) Citation needed on that incredibly odd last part about trophy wives.

OC understood.  What's wrong with you?

Of course Iowa is a strong populist state. It had once voted reliably Dem without any real big cities or non-whites.

Second of all, the Dem embrace of pet causes of rich housewives like straw bans, gun registries, and other token social justice silliness have alienated the Midwest. I personally wish the Second Amendment was repealed, but I  know that won't play politically right now.

Sun belt billionaires will create the new #permanentmajority for Democrats.

Eat your heart out Midwestern "WWC" #populists <3.

Good to know 1%ers like you finally feel comfy among the Dems.

LOL, I wish.

Much like the shy Tories in Virginia and Alabama?

You are so annoying (in a good way). LMAO!

To be fair, they had every reason to be shy in these contests.

I see Democrats doing well in Iowa in November. They could pick up the 1st and 3rd district (I pray Steve King loses). They could carry Hubbell over the hump.

Steve King's district is considered solid R, right?

Anyway, I cannot stand Steve King and have always hoped for that racist to go into oblivion!

Its likely R, thanks to King's declining popularity, the swingyness of the district, and the fact that the tariffs are hitting the state hard.

Yeah, it's considered Solid R for the most part. It's a shame too, because King deserves to be absolutely destroyed.

The election would be over if Dems win Iowa cause a BIDEN or Booker with Tim Ryan wouldn't need VA or OH to carry the day in 2020. It just shows you how Pence isnt valuable like he was in 2016, with coal corridor.😀

It's nice to see Hubbell in the lead but I can't take this poll too seriously. I wish I could though. Those disapproval numbers for Trump are glorious!

Emerson= trash
Still give Hubble a slight edge

So, you really believe Trump has a 37/53 JA Rating in Iowa while per Suffolk he has a 46/50 JA in Nevada?

This doesn't pass the smell test as Iowa is much more friendly to Trump than Nevada.

Emerson is doing big garbage here IMO.

Comparing Iowa to Nevada is comparing apples to oranges. I'm sure Trump has a lower approval rating in Nevada than Iowa, but couldn't it be that the Suffolk was wrong in that respect?

That said, I suspect Trump is doing at least somewhat better in Iowa than the negative 16 approval rating this poll gives him.

The GOP assumed Iowa was leaning red, this state is still purple

Not that far fetched. Both Morning Consult and IA pollsters like Selzar found similar results. The thing is that while IA went to Trump, and by a large margin, its still made up of historically Democratic, WWC people. The state is experiencing the same snap-back that the entire Rust Belt is seeing, and its perfectly logical that this state, being hit by tariffs as well, would go against him.

NV, on the other hand, is rather inelastic, and has lines drawn. You cant get Trump's approval down below a certain point, because both the Democratic and Republican bases are cooked in. Unlike IA, which has swung by large margins, NV stays rather static, and has only swung hard once, in 2014 for popular governor Sandoval.

Anyway, the idea that IA is going hard anti-Trump is not one with no logic.

If that WI poll is accurate, I think Hubbell being a little ahead makes sense, even though this is Emerson.

The polls in the Midwest (Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa) clearly indicate that the Trump bloom is off.

The Trump effect is alive and well in the midterms!

The Selzer poll having Reynolds ahead by 5 in January was why I've had this as a toss up for a while actually. If she could only lead Hubbell by 5 when he was completely unknown, it seems logical it would be a toss up once his name recognition went up.

But I thought these were all safe R states now!?

The Midwest is now seeing what voting R is doing to them.

Yeah, we thought they learned in 2006/2008 too. Just wait for the next Democratic president and the GOP will be their saviors again in the next midterm.

True. Being swingy doesn't necessarily mean that they are being rational.