NBC/WSJ National: Clinton+11 (4-way) / +14 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 12, 2024, 11:04:23 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  NBC/WSJ National: Clinton+11 (4-way) / +14 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: NBC/WSJ National: Clinton+11 (4-way) / +14  (Read 11127 times)
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,914
United States


« on: October 10, 2016, 11:50:08 AM »

Assuming a uniform swing, a 11-point Clinton win would look like:



Not as pronounced as you might think

14 point Clinton win:



But, if you bring it up to a 17-point margin:


20 point margin:


24 point margin:


Now, the flaw in this is that it doesn't factor in elasticity or trends.  For example, I'm far more worried about Alaska than Mississippi.

It won't be an even swing. The bigger swings are most likely in states that Barack Obama lost badly in 2012 (like Texas) than in states that he won by huge margins. There are more potential Romney-to-Clinton (proportionately) voters in Texas than in California, in Indiana than in Massachusetts,  or in Georgia than in Michigan. 

This scandal will strike hard and fast because it has overtones of S-E-X. M-O-N-E-Y doesn't have as swift in turning people against a political candidate than does S-E-X. There is no ambiguity.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,914
United States


« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2016, 12:35:17 PM »
« Edited: October 12, 2016, 07:05:42 AM by pbrower2a »

Quite possible, we are looking at an election result not seen in a long time...

True. The 1984 landslide victory of Ronald Reagan over Walter Mondale was 32 years ago.

Mondale was a horrible campaigner, someone nominated for his long service to his Party and being overall a decent fellow in an impossible year, running against an effective incumbent.

Donald Trump is singularly inexperienced in electoral politics; he is an awful person; he has been a poor campaign strategist; and to top it all off he has won the nomination of the challenging party in an open-seat year. Sure, the incumbent President has been one of the better Presidents in history... but that means little this time.

With someone reasonably competent running for the Presidency, like Kasich or Romney, the Republicans should be winning the Presidency decisively.    

Here are two of the worst blow-outs in open-seat elections:

1920

 

1952



In both cases the Party recently out of the White House followed a troubled President. But something is very different this time. The incumbent President isn't troubled.  

Here is the most recent case of the 'outsider' Party nominating someone to follow a troubled President:

2008

 

Even with so many things going wrong for the Republican Party at the time, Barack Obama won by Reagan-like margins... but in only about half the states. He lost by Mondale-like margins in about a third of the states.  That's how cultural polarization works.

 

Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,914
United States


« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2016, 12:42:10 PM »

Don't tell me you believe this poll?
You lot are in for a rude awakening.

Polls taken during a breaking scandal always look at first like outliers.

We will see more polls. We shall soon see whether this poll is reasonable or whether it is an outlier. I can't imagine anyone drifting toward Donald Trump, except perhaps for a sexual sadist
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,914
United States


« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2016, 09:42:22 AM »

Atlantic Magazine and PRRI corroborate this poll with another blowout lead for Hillary Clinton.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 11 queries.