Cleaned-up 2016 Presidential election map.

[pbrower2a]

North Carolina, PPP

Clinton - 46%
Bush - 43%

Carson - 49%
Clinton - 43%

Cruz - 46%
Clinton - 45%

Fiorina - 45%
Clinton - 43%

Huckabee - 48%
Clinton - 44%

Clinton - 44%
Kasich - 42%

Rubio - 48%
Clinton - 42%

Trump - 48%
Clinton- 42%


Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Ben Carson

Hillary Clinton vs. Carly Fiorina

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

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

[pbrower2a]

PPP had nothing on Joe Biden in North Carolina.

The last binary match-ups you saw involving Joe Biden are the last ones that you are going to see unless something weird happens. Those may say more about how Hillary Clinton will do after people recognize that the server 'scandal' is a non-issue and that the death of Christopher Stevens was something that she could not stop.

I see a marked improvement for her from North Carolina alone, one that suggests that the state will be very close in 2016. We will likely see such states as Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Virginia go much more Atlas Red as the next polls come out. Those states (and New Hampshire, Ohio, and Wisconsin) get polled often.

[pbrower2a]

Something amazing -- Jeb Bush seems to be collapsing as a candidate. I would have never expected this. Is he on the brink of 'suspending' his campaign? I am contemplating dropping him in view of some of his recent, manifest failures. He is just not up to the campaign for the Presidency. 

...PPP usually has announced by now what states it will be polling  in the next week; who knows? We may be getting a poll involving an unlikely state. Kansas? Vermont? Minnesota? Idaho?

It's easy for those who have our focus on the Presidency that there will be some gubernatorial elections in Kentucky and Louisiana.  Maybe that's it.

I saw no results from Q this week.

[pbrower2a]

PPP has already announced that it will poll Iowa this weekend. I wish we could get a CO poll soon... this state has really been underpolled this election cycle. (NC probably gets polled most often, yawn)

Thank you.

Who knows? Maybe we will get general election polls from Colorado and Virginia next week from Q... they would seem to be next on the rotation. Maybe Iowa as well.

Iowa has been near the national average in most recent elections, typically about D+2. It was the tipping-point state in 2008. It typically votes in tandem with Wisconsin, which has gone wildly Democratic this year while Democrats struggle in Iowa. Even in 2004, the two states were decided by razor-thin margins.

 
Iowa should show four things:

1.  Whether Hillary Clinton has successfully fended off the Republican inquiries on the server 'scandal' to the satisfaction of Iowa voters

2. How Ted Cruz fares after approaching front-runner status

3. Whether Jeb Bush has any viability

4. Whether Iowa and Wisconsin are going in different directions in partisan affiliation.

[pbrower2a]

North Carolina, PPP
Cruz - 46%  Clinton - 45%
New Hamphire, PPP
Clinton - 50%  Cruz - 37%
Virginia, Christopher Newport University
Clinton 49  Cruz 41
Kentucky, PPP (poll from June 2015)
Cruz 48  Clinton 42
Iowa, PPP:
Clinton/Cruz: 43/43
South Carolina, PPP:
Cruz 48%  Clinton 39%
Florida, PPP:
Clinton 45%  Cruz 43%

Hillary Clinton(D) vs. Ted Cruz (R)

[pbrower2a]

A little more backtracking:

Missouri, PPP
Cruz 50% Clinton 38%
Illinois, PPP
Clinton 51%  Cruz 35%
Pennsylvania, PPP
Clinton 46 Ted Cruz 40
Michigan, PPP (no subsequent junk polls)
Clinton 49 Cruz 39
Arizona, PPP:
Cruz 44, Clinton 43

Hillary Clinton(D) vs. Ted Cruz (R)

[pbrower2a]

So far I don't see Ted Cruz doing better than any other Republican against Hillary Clinton. Again -- Iowa (which PPP does next week) should be interesting next week.  (Likewise Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Virginia... maybe even Arizona). This map suggests that he might do slightly better than Romney 2012 -- if you think that he can flip either Iowa or Colorado. He certainly won't flip Florida.

The razor-thin margin by which Ted Cruz would win Arizona suggests that he would lose Colorado while putting Arizona at risk of a Clinton victory. He's the 'wrong' sort of Hispanic to win the votes of Mexican-Americans.  

[pbrower2a]

Survey USA, WXIA-TV (NBC-11 Atlanta)

Trump 46, Clinton 37

No other binary match-ups.

In other news, Jeb Bush is way down among Republican primary voters.


Florida, Survey USA

Trump 47
Clinton 43

Carson 47
Clinton 44

Clinton 46
Bush 44

Clinton 46
Rubio 45

Clinton 48
Fiorina 42



http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/11/3/florida_decides_poll_2016_election.html#3  


Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Ben Carson

Hillary Clinton vs. Carly Fiorina

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

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

[pbrower2a]

Q will have a national poll tomorrow at 6AM EST.

There will be odd-year elections for some important offices in Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi -- elections that might say something about 2016.

A hint: Mississippi will likely divide close to the racial split in 2016 as (I predict) in 2015. Anything that shows Democrats stronger in Kentucky or Louisiana in statewide elections will bode ill for Republicans nationally.

[pbrower2a]

)I am moving polls for Cruz into the main collection.

It's too bad that I don't have a poll to decide whom to drop. I am convinced that Jeb Bush is showing himself less than ready for a Presidential campaign -- but Mike Huckabee is beginning to look irrelevant.

[pbrower2a]

Iowa, PPP:

Clinton 45 -- Bush 40
Carson 47 -- Clinton 44
Carson 46 -- Cruz 44  
Clinton 44 -- Fiorina 43
Clinton 46 -- Huckabee 44
Clinton 43 -- Kasich 36
Clinton 43 -- Rubio 45
Clinton 44 -- Trump 44

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_IA_110415.pdf

Improvements across the board. Iowa is now a reasonably-good prospect for a Clinton victory and not a State drifting rapidly R.



Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Ben Carson

Hillary Clinton vs. Carly Fiorina

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

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





[/quote]

[pbrower2a]

Aside from Rubio, "establishment" Republicans are doing badly in Iowa. They might not hand Hillary Clinton a win on the level of Iowa 2008 for Obama...  but they are not going to swing the state.

The effect of Hillary Clinton parrying the GOP investigations has begun to show.

In contrast to earlier polls of Iowa, this is an outlier. But this follows a change in the overall environment. The pattern that I see in Iowa is what I recently saw in North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia. Hillary Clinton is gaining, and anyone confident about any Republican Presidential nominee picking off Iowa in 2016 is a fool. Iowa may not be as D as Wisconsin, with which it usually travels -- but Iowa does not have Governor Scott Walker.

I look forward to seeing a credible poll of Pennsylvania.

[pbrower2a]

I'm getting excited about the prospect of someone polling Colorado or Pennsylvania.

[pbrower2a]

Elon University, North Carolina

Clinton - 47%
Bush - 43%

Carson - 48%
Clinton - 44%

Clinton - 50%
Trump - 40%

Clinton - 48%
Fiorina - 42%

Rubio - 46%
Clinton - 45%

http://www.elon.edu/images/e-web/elonpoll/11_5_15_ElonPollEXEC.pdf



Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Ben Carson

http://www.elon.edu/images/e-web/elonpoll/11_5_15_ElonPollEXEC.pdf

Hard to believe. I'm sure that we will see another PPPpoll of North Carolina within a month, anyway.
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Carly Fiorina

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

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

[pbrower2a]

Florida

Hillary Clinton (D): 46%
Donald Trump (R): 44%

Ohio

Donald Trump (R): 45%
Hillary Clinton (D): 43%

Wisconsin

Hillary Clinton (D): 50%
Donald Trump (R): 38%

Colorado

Hillary Clinton (D): 45%
Donald Trump (R): 44%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/11/09/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/Copy%20of%20Dcorps_WV_BG_11.9.15_final.pdf

That's all there is here. The pollster may have a D bias, but except for Colorado (where we have no really recent polls) this set of binary polls largely confirms the common wisdom. It also shows that the more that people get to know Donald Trump, the less they like him.

...PPP has polled South Carolina this weekend. I expect to see no real change in South Carolina.


Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Ben Carson

http://www.elon.edu/images/e-web/elonpoll/11_5_15_ElonPollEXEC.pdf

Hard to believe. I'm sure that we will see another PPPpoll of North Carolina within a month, anyway.
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Carly Fiorina

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

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

[pbrower2a]

Didn't you say you wouldn't post polls that had a partisan agenda or something like that?

OK if --

1. Existing polls are obsolete or stale (judgement call)

2. The partisan poll is all that is available, and still makes sense. I accepted a partisan (R) poll for Idaho because I expect nobody to poll Idaho again soon.

3. It says things that don't show a ridiculous lead for someone ahead, or that someone that everyone knows is behind is much closer than anyone could expect.

I haven't seen a poll of Colorado for a long time. It also says that the Ohio race for the US Senate seat is a literal tossup (Strickland had recently had bare leads against Portman). What it says of the Strickland-Portman contest is enough to cause me to change my senate projection for Ohio from "Edge D" to "pure tossup". It also suggests that Trump is doing better in Ohio than do other recent polls.

The bigger problem with this poll is that it has match-ups involving only Trump.

There will be more polls.

Yes, this one is connected to a pro-Democratic group as is shown in its language (How Democrats Can Beat Republicans in Key States). That looks as if it is written after the polls are taken. Otherwise it looks good.

[pbrower2a]

Where are the Michigan polls?

Junk pollster. I'd like to see someone who has a track record and isn't tied to a special interest.  

What about this then? Seems to me like this poll is very tied to a special interest.

It may be partisan, but it looks valid enough. I was leery of the Democracy Corps poll -- until it looked valid.

What have I rejected?

1. Pollsters with horrible records, like most of the single-state pollsters in Michigan and Pennsylvania. One pollster that predicted that Arizona would go to Obama in 2012 is on my execration list for that.

2. Pollsters associated with labor unions and state Chambers of Commerce.

3. Polls by active campaigns or political parties.

4. Polls in which the person ahead has less than 40% (last time I saw some college polls that showed Obama up 37-35 in Tennessee. Obama got the 37% -- and little more). That could be a valid poll, but it could also be meaningless.

Pollsters such as Marist, PPP, Q, and Selzer and even some one-state pollsters can show the changes in basic reality.  Should Q poll Pennsylvania and show a huge shift toward Hillary Clinton there, then such might reflect that the political environment has changed. Her approval ratings and prospects for winning went down while the Republicans were preparing to rake her over the coals for the server 'scandal' and the tragic death of an American diplomat in Benghazi. I see no polls from Pennsylvania since then.  For me, the real surprise would be if Pennsylvania still leaned R in Presidential match-ups.  

...the point is to reject polls with no credibility. Maybe I have my unique idea of what is credible and what isn't.

Come on! Someone could poll Pennsylvania again and give me the opportunity to either replace obsolete polls or confirm that Pennsylvania is drifting rightward. Until I see some corroboration I am not going to accept any poll that suggests that Minnesota is a likely R pick-up while Iowa is a legitimate swing state and Wisconsin is going rapidly to the Left.

In a horrible year (1972, 1984, to a lesser extent 1980 and 1988) for Democrats I expect this:

MN IL MI WI IA OH IN

In an R-leaning year like 2004 I expect this:  

IL MI MN WI IA OH IN

In a D-leaning year like 2000:

IL MI MN WI IA OH IN

In an 'average' D win like 2012

IL MI MN WI IA OH IN

Actual result because there are few Presidential elections in which the winner gets between the equivalents of 310 and 350 electoral votes, even if such is the mean victory, and only one such Presidential election since 1900. So far that is what I expect in 2016

In a near-landslide D win (1992, 1996, 2008):

IL MI WI MN IA OH IN

In a D blowout (1964)

IL MI WI IA MN OH IN

1960 and 1976 have no relevance because America is very different politically from what it was in those close elections. Carter could not have won except with the Southern states that he won. 1950s? I see Ike and Obama winning much the same swing voters in the North. 1968 is a mess.  

[pbrower2a]

Are you not going to use the SUSA MN polls?

No.  These polls have no credibility as such.

Does anyone believe that Republicans would be ahead in Minnesota when they aren't ahead in Iowa and are way behind in Wisconsin? The demographics of those states are similar.

Servey USA has a poor reputation. It doesn't pass the laugh test.

[pbrower2a]

Does anyone believe that Minnesota is more R than Florida?

The poll is so bad that it looks as if it is from the wrong state. Mississippi and Missouri both begin with the letters "MI", too, and I would believe about any polls with these results from either state.

Somebody will poll Minnesota and either corroborate or refute the recent SUSA poll.

I have rejected polls for being ridiculously D-leaning. 

[pbrower2a]

Polling results are a dynamic phenomenon. We are going to see events have their effects upon the Presidential race. We are going to see pols rise and fall, We are going to see people who seem like sure things

Such results as we have seen suggest that

(1) without a hint of a scandal to debilitate her campaign, she wins.

(2) had the server scandal and the tragic (but heroic) death of an American diplomat in Libya shown to be corruption and incompetence, respectively, then her prospective campaign would have imploded.  She got through that, and the Congressional investigation intended to put an end to her Presidential hopes itself imploded. So say most recent polls, at least as I interpret them.

(3) for a short time Vice-President Biden seemed a good proxy for a scandal-free Hillary Clinton. Polls suggested that had he sought the Presidency he would have won much like Obama did in 2008 and 2012. Much of the Clinton support would have gone to him had Hillary Clinton imploded at the Congressional investigation. But he abandoned any prospect of a run for the Presidency around the time of the formal investigation. He knew that the Republicans had nothing on her despite their complete search for scandal and incompetence.     

(4) one has little cause to believe that the political environment is different from what it was in 2008 and 2012. Hillary Clinton has no new regional or demographic strengths -- or weaknesses. At this point I figure that the 2016 election will be a near re-run of 2012.

(5) Republicans need a realignment to win in the absence of the usual and obvious political disasters -- a personal scandal involving the President, an economic implosion, or some disaster of foreign policy. Ruling out those, Republicans would need one of the following:

a. a mass migration of people likely to vote Republican moving into Blue (atlas Red) states or a mass migration of people likely to vote Democratic moving out of Red (atlas Blue) states. The first happened in Colorado in the 1970s and 1980s, when conservative-leaning voters moved out of Greater Los Angeles to Colorado and took their voting habits with them. The latter happened in Greater New Orleans when (mostly poor) people hurt by Hurricane Katrina left permanently.

b. a religious revival that promotes conservative politics where such had not happened. Does anyone see that? That happened in the 1970s and led to the rise of Ronald Reagan.

c. GOP interests gaining mass trust.

d. the young-adult vote trending much more conservative than recent youth, as in the early 1980s. Generation X was much more conservative on economics than Boomers, and its earliest voters surprised everyone by voting so strongly for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Democrats tried to get the young-adult vote out those years, and it backfired. Media did not see the two Reagan landslides coming -- but they did.

Do you see any of those happening in Minnesota or elsewhere?

(6) in Senatorial and Gubernatorial races, Republicans outside of traditionally-safe states are faring far worse in approval ratings than are Democrats. Approval ratings of the Republican-dominated House of Representatives are abysmal. Such helps Democrats in the Presidential race. Sure, Chuck Grassley is doing OK in Iowa, but he has been around for decades.

(7) bad polls happen, and they are not 'bad' simply because I say so. When I see someone else getting similar results in Minnesota while I see the GOP imploding in Wisconsin and struggling in Iowa (the states most similar demographically to Minnesota) I will show those polls. Democrats did well in Minnesota in 2014 in a Republican wave year.   
 

[pbrower2a]

No way can I believe that Minnesota is more R than Florida.

[pbrower2a]

Here is the last PPP poll involving Minnesota -- from June. It is dated to the extent that it does not include Carson, Fiorina, or Trump.

No way has Minnesota drifted so far and so fast as the Survey USA poll shows in Minnesota. 

Q4 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Jeb
Bush, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 49%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 39%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%

Q5 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Chris
Christie, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 47%
Chris Christie .................................................. 37%
Not sure .......................................................... 16%

Q6 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Ted
Cruz, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 51%
Ted Cruz ......................................................... 35%
Not sure .......................................................... 14%

Q7 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Mike
Huckabee, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 50%
Mike Huckabee ............................................... 40%
Not sure .......................................................... 10%

Q8 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand
Paul, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 49%
Rand Paul ....................................................... 38%
Not sure .......................................................... 12%

Q9 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Tim
Pawlenty, who would you vote for?
Hilary Clinton .................................................. 48%
Tim Pawlenty .................................................. 42%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/06/clinton-ahead-in-minnesota.html#more

[pbrower2a]

Survey USA, WXIA-TV (NBC-11 Atlanta)

Trump 46, Clinton 37

No other binary match-ups.

In other news, Jeb Bush is way down among Republican primary voters.


Florida, Survey USA

Trump 47
Clinton 43

Carson 47
Clinton 44

Clinton 46
Bush 44

Clinton 46
Rubio 45

Clinton 48
Fiorina 42



http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/11/3/florida_decides_poll_2016_election.html#3  

Spare us the lecture and drop the act. Just say that you only include the polls you like and we'll actually believe you.

Florida -- we get a plethora of polls on Florida.

Georgia -- I hadn't seen a poll of Georgia for a very long time.

The Minnesota poll? It fails the laugh test about as badly as "The Ohio Turnpike west of Cleveland is a scenic route".

Sometimes a pollster starts doing the job well. This is not one of those times.

[pbrower2a]

We all want the polls that we like, don't we?

Some still make no sense.

It's about time for Michigan and Minnesota polls... but also polls of Georgia, too. Those are states on the reasonable fringe of contention.

[pbrower2a]

U. of Mary Washington poll of Virginia, conducted Nov. 4-9:

https://www.umw.edu/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2015/11/UMW-VA-Survey-2015_Topline-Day-One.pdf

They give results for adults, RV, and LV.  I’ll just list the RV results, because I’m lazy.  If Webb runs as an Indy:

Clinton 41%
Trump 33%
Webb 16%

Carson 41%
Clinton 38%
Webb 13%

Sanders 36%
Trump 35%
Webb 19%

Carson 39%
Sanders 35%
Webb 17%

Now if Bush is the GOP nominee and Trump runs as an Indy:

Clinton 42%
Trump 27%
Bush 22%

For obvious reasons (three-way poll, and in the last scenario a situation unlikely to occur -- Donald Trump now looks more likely to win the GOP nomination than Jeb Bush) I can't use this one.