2016 Official Polling Map Thread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:04:44 AM
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
  2016 Official Polling Map Thread (search mode)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16
Author Topic: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread  (Read 118910 times)
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #100 on: January 16, 2014, 12:24:47 AM »

I haven't included Harper polls commissioned by an organization named "Conservative Intelligence". For much the same reason I would not include polls commissioned by the NAACP.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #101 on: January 17, 2014, 11:15:48 AM »
« Edited: January 17, 2014, 11:31:13 AM by pbrower2a »

Christie is also the only one of the Republican hopefuls who leads Hillary Clinton in the state (NC), albeit by the razor thin margin of 43/42. Clinton has small leads over Jeb Bush (46/44), Rand Paul (47/43), and Ted Cruz (47/41).

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/01/north-carolinians-strongly-back-teacher-pay-increase.html#more

NH -- Clinton vs. Christie, 43-39, J. Bush 49-38, Cruz 51-32, Paul 50-37

(Really, no change in the map. For reasons explained above I am not showing the Harper poll for "Conservative Intelligence" in Michigan.  

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





Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #102 on: January 17, 2014, 11:23:48 AM »
« Edited: January 17, 2014, 11:32:16 AM by pbrower2a »

Hillary Clinton, 47-41 over Cruz in North Carolina, 51-32 over Cruz, NH (PPP)

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



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #103 on: January 19, 2014, 12:10:28 PM »

Hillary Clinton, 47-41 over Cruz in North Carolina, 51-32 over Cruz, NH (PPP)

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




I'm surprised that Ted Cruz is polling that poorly in his home state of Texas. I was expecting him to be polling at 60%, even against Hillary Clinton.

Texas is changing my friend, and it's changing fast! Tongue

Ted Cruz does not have such a strong connection to Texas as one might expect. He was not born there, and even if he is half-Hispanic, he is the wrong sort of Hispanic. He's a right-wing Cuban-American. The vast majority of Texas Hispanics are Mexican-Americans whose political culture is closer to that of New York Jews than to right-wing Cuban-Americans in Florida. Anti-Communism is not the polestar of Mexican-American politics. He's an evangelical Christian, which is very much in the minority of Hispanics of any origin, and being part of a tradition hostile to Roman Catholicism is not good for reaching Catholic voters.   

I'm not so sure that Cuban-Americans in Florida are so right-wing as they used to be.

We shall see how well he does in Florida; PPP is polling Florida this weekend. If he isn't even close in Florida his only prospect as a Republican nominee is to go down in a crashing defeat.

Ted Cruz got elected in Texas 56-41; he did worse than Mitt Romney. He has just started a term in the US Senate, and so far he has shown himself an extremist. I'm not discussing what I do with him if he should be down worse in Florida than in North Carolina.   
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #104 on: January 20, 2014, 09:24:08 AM »
« Edited: January 20, 2014, 09:28:01 AM by pbrower2a »

Siena, New York

If the 2016 election for president was held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were:

60-32 Clinton/Christie (up from 56-40 in their Nov. poll)
55-35 Cuomo/Christie (Christie was ahead 47-42 in their Nov. poll)

(Nothing else relating to the 2016 Presidential election, but I figure that Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, and Scott Walker would do even worse in the Empire State). It is surprising that I have no matchups other than Clinton or Cuomo against Christie.

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/SNY%20January%202014%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



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #105 on: January 21, 2014, 02:45:02 PM »

Nationwide:

Quinnipiac: "Bridgegate" takes toll on Christie, now trails Clinton by 8   (Tender Branson)


46-38 Clinton/Christie (was 41-42 in their last poll)
49-39 Clinton/Paul (48-41)
49-38 Clinton/Bush (48-39)
50-35 Clinton/Cruz (50-37)

The drop-off for Christie was 9%, while it was only 2-3% for the other Republicans.

From January 15 - 19, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,933 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 2.2 percentage points. The survey includes 813 Republicans with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points and 803 Democrats with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1998
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #106 on: January 22, 2014, 03:01:27 PM »

Rutgers-Eagleton, NJ

 The 2016 presidential election is far away, but if the election for president were today, and the
candidates were [ROTATE ORDER: Republican Chris Christie and Democrat Hillary Clinton],
for whom would you vote?

REGISTERED VOTERS
Christie  34%
Clinton  55%
Someone else (vol) 3%
Don't know 8%
Unwgt N= 746

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Collapse!


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



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #107 on: January 30, 2014, 11:30:56 PM »

Purple Strategies, Boston Globe, New Hampshire

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/30/scott-brown-tied-with-jeanne-shaheen-new-hampshire-senate-poll/cWO1QLxO95GlnG3pK7wAUM/story.html


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




Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #108 on: January 31, 2014, 04:04:07 PM »

Quinnipiac poll of Florida:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=2001

Clinton 49%
Bush 43%

Clinton 51%
Rubio 41%

Clinton 53%
Paul 38%

Clinton 51%
Christie 35%

Clinton 52%
Ryan 39%

Clinton 54%
Cruz 34%

The Christie collapse is evident in Florida, one of the two states (Ohio is the other) best described as microcosms of America. If Hillary Clinton can win Florida by a 15% margin against someone not a favorite son and by 6% against a favorite son, then she's going to win the Presidency with an Eisenhower-scale  landslide. How tough is that? Except for the LBJ landslide, the highest percentage of the total vote for a Democratic nominee since FDR in 1944 (53.39%) was Obama in 2008 (52.86%).

PPP never released its poll of Florida on the 2016 Presidential election, and I would likely average it with these results. I can't imagine Florida lurching much faster to the political left than the US as a whole.

The New Hampshire poll is probably not wrong for what it measured; it is likely obsolete.

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





Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #109 on: January 31, 2014, 04:27:45 PM »


Florida, Quinnipiac:

Clinton vs. Cruz

 Clinton 54% -- Cruz 34%

I have yet to take Ted Cruz seriously as a potential Republican nominee for the President. Republican nominees often win Florida by 10% or more ('52, '56, '72, '80, '84, and '88).  Democrats have not win Florida by more than 10% since 1948, and it was surprisingly close in the 1964 blowout by LBJ. Carter by 5.3% and Clinton by 6.3% are the two biggest margins for Democratic nominees in Florida.

In case Ted Cruz is seen as a Great Hispanic Hope for Republicans because he is a Cuban-American -- at this spread he would win the votes of Cuban-Americans who still have voodoo dolls of Fidel Castro in which they insert needles and little else among Hispanics. He would likely lose the Cuban-American vote in Florida at this spread.

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



..........................................................................

With these data points this looks much like Hillary Clinton winning about like Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1950s or the elder Bush over Dukakis in 1988. It wouldn't be long before we see some fresh Great Right Hope in polling. Ted Cruz has yet to establish himself as Presidential material. 





Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #110 on: January 31, 2014, 07:41:10 PM »
« Edited: February 02, 2014, 01:24:49 AM by pbrower2a »

This is the best scenario that I can see a Republican nominee having if he can't rely upon Florida.   He can still win:



In essence the Republican nominee has sealed every state that has gone to Dubya twice except Florida (which is lost), but the Democrat is struggling in Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. (I pick those states because Iowa, New Hampshire, and New Mexico all went for Dubya once; Wisconsin was extremely close in 2004; Pennsylvania was second-closest to being the tipping-point state in 2012, and Michigan could be volatile in the event of a disaster in the shaky automobile industry).

The Democratic nominee has locked up 225 electoral votes, and the Republican nominee has locked up 252 electoral votes. The Republican nominee can still lock up the election with Pennsylvania absolutely decisive in favor of the Republican but not absolutely necessary.  

Here are five ways with no overlap for a Democrat to win:

1. PA MI WI
   
2. PA MI NM NH

3. PA MI IA NM
   
4. PA MI IA NH

5. PA WI IA NM NH



Here are the ways in which a Republican wins, again with no overlap:

1. PA
   
2. MI IA
   
3. MI NH

4. MI WI
   
5. WI IA NH

Shift Nevada and its mere 5 electoral votes into the D category, and things get literally dicey (pun intended) for the Republican. The Democrat gets three more ways in which to win, and the Republican gets four more ways to win -- but those involve more contingencies.
 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #111 on: February 06, 2014, 06:45:08 AM »
« Edited: February 06, 2014, 02:47:46 PM by pbrower2a »

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/02/alaska-miscellany.html

Clinton 44%
Palin 43%

Bush 47%
Clinton 39%

Paul 47%
Clinton 41%

Huckabee 45%
Clinton 41%

Christie 43%
Clinton 39%

Those are very weak leads for any Republican except for Rand Paul and Jeb Bush. Alaska seems to have a strong libertarian streak (just don't take away the oil dividend!) For what it is worth, Alaska went for John McCain by a margin of 21.5% and for Romney by 14%. Alaska probably won't be competitive in 2016. If the Republican nominee can't win Alaska by at least 10%, then few people in the Eastern Time Zone are going to stay up on Election Night to see how Alaska goes.  

Colorado, Quinnipiac

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=2004

Nothing on Bush. I see a Christie collapse in this poll. Others are essentially unchanged. Colorado elections have been decided late by GOTV drives. 

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






Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #112 on: February 06, 2014, 02:55:08 PM »
« Edited: February 20, 2014, 01:10:26 PM by pbrower2a »

Ohio, Quinnipiac

51-34 Clinton/Cruz

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=2010

Needless to say I do not take Ted Cruz seriously. I wouldn't make much of the color change, as it is a change of about 1%. In the last few elections Colorado has tended to break for Democrats late in the campaign season with Democrats turning not-so-likely voters into voters.



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



..........................................................................

With these data points this looks much like Hillary Clinton winning about like Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1950s or the elder Bush over Dukakis in 1988. It wouldn't be long before we see some fresh Great Right Hope in polling. Ted Cruz has yet to establish himself as Presidential material.  
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #113 on: February 12, 2014, 10:18:24 PM »

North Carolina, PPP:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2014/PPP_Release_NC_212.pdf

I don't map Huckabee yet. Prospects of the Republicans having command of the next Presidentiad (Ralph Waldo Emerson coined that word) now look very poor. Republicans have not lost North Carolina in a close election since 1976, when Carter depended heavily upon the South for popular and electoral votes. (2008 was not a close election, thank you).

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

Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #114 on: February 13, 2014, 06:13:38 AM »

Missing polls of Kentucky from December (PPP):

Hillary Clinton    42%    Jeb Bush            46%        
Hillary Clinton    40%     Chris Christie    44%    
Hillary Clinton    44%    Ted Cruz            41%    
Hillary Clinton    43%    Rand Paul     49%

I recall rejecting the poll involving South Carolina because the organization  commissioning  for had the word "Conservative"  in its name. Hillary Clinton would probably lose South Carolina in just about any binary matchup, but if I were to use a poll with such an ideological bias where credible I might be obliged to use polls commissioned by Left-leaning interests. I have no desire to put in a poll made on behalf of the UAW or the NAACP in Ohio.     


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


Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #115 on: February 13, 2014, 06:30:43 AM »



You've forgot to include the PPP poll from December that had Christie 4% ahead of Hillary in Kentucky.

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

Also there's the Harper poll that showed Christie ahead of Hillary in South Carolina, but I think I remember you not including it cause of the unreliableness of the pollster. Wouldn't take an earthquake for a Republican to be ahead of Hillary in SC though.

Correction made. Thank you. As elsewhere I suspect that Chris Christie has lost such crossover support as he had in other states in Kentucky as well.  But we are showing the 'fossil record' and not living reality, right?   
.........


Needless to say I do not take Ted Cruz seriously. I wouldn't make much of the color change, as it is a change of about 1%. If he is lagging in Kentucky, then he stands to lose big if the GOP nominee.



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. Cruz



..........................................................................

With these data points this looks much like Hillary Clinton winning about like Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1950s or the elder Bush over Dukakis in 1988. It wouldn't be long before we see some fresh Great Right Hope in polling. Ted Cruz has yet to establish himself as Presidential material. 



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



..........................................................................

With these data points this looks much like Hillary Clinton winning about like Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1950s or the elder Bush over Dukakis in 1988. It wouldn't be long before we see some fresh Great Right Hope in polling. Ted Cruz has yet to establish himself as Presidential material. 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #116 on: February 15, 2014, 01:36:26 AM »

In view of its dreadful record in the past, I would not trust Epic-MRA for polling in Michigan. That pollster operates only in Michigan.

It has Barack Obama down 37-61, which makes no sense in a State that went 54-45 for the President in 2012. The fault with that poll is that it has a set of "excellent-good-fair-poor" choices. "Fair" in school grading is a C, good enough through a BA degree.   

In any event, the poll is still shows much the same as an earlier and more credible poll of Michigan.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #117 on: February 18, 2014, 01:30:33 PM »

Louisiana, PPP:

Christie- 44%
Clinton- 43%

Jindal- 47%
Clinton- 45%

Paul- 47%
Clinton- 43%

Huckabee- 49%
Clinton- 44%

Bush- 50%
Clinton- 43%  

The closeness of this polling indicates that Republicans have deep trouble against Hillary Clinton 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



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #118 on: February 19, 2014, 10:32:53 AM »

Even if one thinks that slight recent leads for Hillary Clinton in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana  are unsustainable -- that if she has a 45-43 lead then the 45 is close to her ceiling in such states -- she has leads in some others consistent with at the least a near-repetition of 2012 for Barack Obama. (I do not average except within a week; obviously a PPP poll in March 2014 thoroughly supplants one from October 2013). So in such a state she might have a ceiling of 47% and win the state only if some third-party nominee guts the R total. 

On the other side, republicans could be close to their ceilings in such states as Colorado and Iowa, and a recent 46-45 lead  for a Republican could end up 52-47 for Clinton.

In 2008 we saw polls with Obama up 45-44 in North Dakota and South Dakota. He ended up losing those states something like 54-46.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #119 on: February 19, 2014, 11:03:21 AM »
« Edited: February 19, 2014, 06:14:05 PM by pbrower2a »

It's telling that Ted Cruz was not shown in the PPP poll of Louisiana. In view of his poor performances he seems to now get the neglect that he deserves as a potential Republican nominee. I have kept polling for him separate from that for Bush, Christie, Paul, and Ryan.

This may show more relevance to the 2016 election: the voting behavior of the states from 1992 to 2012 in Presidential elections. So here we go:

all Republican (6R): navy 101
all but once Republican (5R, 1D): 55
4 Republican, 2 Democratic: 61
split evenly: 38
for the winner every time (4 Democratic, 2 Republican): 24
all but once Democratic (1R, 5D): red 15
all Democratic (6D): maroon 243

   
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #120 on: February 20, 2014, 12:11:02 PM »

Ohio update from Quinnipiac:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=2010

A Republican nominee could have a difficult time winning Indiana if he loses Ohio by 9% or more. 51% is close to the max-out position for any Democrat in Ohio -- unless there's a 60-40 split of the popular vote. 


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




Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #121 on: February 20, 2014, 01:07:52 PM »


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Needless to say I do not take Ted Cruz seriously. I wouldn't make much of the color change, as it is a change of about 1%.

Quinnipiac asked about Cruz in Ohio:

51 - 34 percent over U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=2010

Enough said.





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



..........................................................................

With these data points this looks much like Hillary Clinton winning about like Eisenhower over Stevenson in the 1950s or the elder Bush over Dukakis in 1988. It wouldn't be long before we see some fresh Great Right Hope in polling. Ted Cruz has yet to establish himself as Presidential material. 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #122 on: February 24, 2014, 03:05:25 PM »
« Edited: February 24, 2014, 06:13:24 PM by pbrower2a »

Kansas, PPP:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surprisingly close. Hillary Clinton's ceiling in Kansas is probably around 45% (which is about how Carter did in Kansas in 1976) because the state is Kansas. As I have said elsewhere on some other states,  Kansas may never vote for a Democratic nominee for President, but when it is close, then things are very bad for the Republican. Only one Republican breaks the magic 50% line against Hillary Clinton at this stage. They probably all would.  If the Devil ran as a Republican nominee in Kansas, he'd probably win.  










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




Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #123 on: February 24, 2014, 06:13:56 PM »

How come you have Hillary beating Rand Paul and Chris Christie in Kansas?

Not any more.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


« Reply #124 on: February 27, 2014, 06:56:04 AM »

Quinnipiac, Pennsylvania

Clinton 46%
Christie 41%

Clinton 53%
Paul 38%

Clinton 54%
Cruz 34%

Clinton 53%
Bush 36%

Clinton 53%
Santorum 37%

Nothing on Ryan... or Huckabee. Christie still has (or has regained) some recognition as a moderate, or else the bridge scandal seems to not trouble Pennsylvanians as severely as it has done recently. Maybe the concern about manipulation of traffic to punish contrary politicians doesn't seem possible or relevant in Pennsylvania.  What had been a Christie lead over Clinton in the last Quinnipiac poll has gone -- and how!

The others ... well, in essence these make Hillary Clinton's lags in Kansas look trivial by contrast. Kansas is very sure R, and Pennsylvania is close to the tipping point. Win a state like Pennsylvania by 5% and you win the Presidential election.

Hillary Clinton is well above 50% against the others. Not only must the others win over every potential undecided voter; they must cut into the usual D vote in Pennsylvania, which is asking for the impossible -- barring a breaking scandal or a huge cultural change that favors just about any right-wing Republican. Against those, she wins with a margin ranging from those characteristic of Eisenhower in the 1950s to Reagan in 1984.

   

.........................


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





Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16  
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 0.48 seconds with 10 queries.