2016 Official Polling Map Thread

[pbrower2a]

PPP, North Carolina. We are going to know every gust of the political winds in North Carolina from now until November 2016. This weekend, PPP polls New Hampshire.   

Huckabee: 48%
Clinton: 43%

Walker: 46%
Clinton: 43%

Cruz: 45%
Clinton: 45%

Paul: 45%
Clinton: 45%

Bush: 44%
Clinton: 45%


Christie: 41%
Clinton: 43%


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NC_41015.pdf

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

We may be missing this. Any intelligent discussion of the 2016 Presidential election begins with this undeniable reality. Assuming that there will be no blowout victory for anyone (which would make for a numbing discussion)...


A composite of Presidential elections, 1992-2012:

Deep red -- Democrats win every Presidential race.
Medium red -- Democrats win all but one Presidential race.
White -- always went with the winner
Pale blue -- went for the winner in all election, but in that exception went for the Republican
Yellow -- twice Democratic, but seeming to now drift Democratic
Green -- twice Democratic but seeming to drift Republican (Missouri in a light shade because Obama was close in 2008, others deep green)
Medium blue -- Republicans win all but one Presidential race.
Deep blue --Republicans win every Presidential race.

NE-02 is the middle box in Nebraska even if the district is Greater Omaha.

... Any information from before 1992 is irrelevant to current reality because the electoral results of 1980, 1984, and 1988 were blowouts and 1976 was so strangely different from any electoral map in the 1992 or later.  Anyone who predicts that a state in deep (or even medium) red or deep (or even medium)  blue is going to vote differently from how it has voted in the last six elections has some explaining to do. (Counter-intuitive reality exists, but it usually shows its truthfulness in ways that make it undeniable -- like West Virginia going to Bush in a close election in 2000 or  Virginia going for Obama in what long looked like a close election in 2008.   How California or Texas voted in 1976 or earlier no longer matters.  States in pale shades or white can be understood as swing states in anything near a 50-50 election.

No state is in pink, so 'reasonable swing states' according to state voting patterns of the last twenty years suggest that   

CO FL MO NV OH VA   

are the real swing states.

If you see something out of recent norms happening in Arizona or Iowa, then you can add those. I would be tempted to replace MO with NC based on 2012 based on performance in 2008 and 2012 -- but that is a quibble in a rigid system.  You might make an argument that some Democrat is a better match for states in green or that Virginia has gone Democratic twice only because of Obama and will not do so again. You can argue such and still be wrong, but you might have a reason. Polls will prove your contention or disprove it.

But if you say something like "Kansas must be getting sick of Republican pols", "the fast-growing Hispanic population dooms the Republicans in Arizona", "economic distress in the Rust Belt will cause blue-collar workers to abandon the Union Bosses for free-market solutions", or "Scott Walker is sure to win Wisconsin as a favorite son"  you have some explaining to do and a need for evidence to support your position. Polls will be adequate. 

[pbrower2a]

California, Emerson College.

Likely a junk poll, but we don't see much from California. The interpretation is even worse. It comes through the San Diego CBS station with no warranty:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/28796548/emerson-college-poll-california-may-be-in-play-for-2016-presidential-race-harris-leads-in-us-senate-race-71-support-water-use-restrictions

We don't see many polls of California, but for now this is what we have.  California media will pay attention to at the least the Senate race.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Marquette University, Wisconsin:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2015/04/16/marquette-law-school-poll-finds-walker-job-approval-down/

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

New Jersey, Quinnipiac.

Clinton (D)........ 51%
Christie (R)....... 36%

Clinton (D)....... 54%
Paul (R)........... 34%

Clinton (D)....... 56%
Huckabee (R)... 30%

Clinton (D)....... 53%
Bush (R).......... 33%

Clinton (D)........ 54%
Rubio (R).......... 34%

Clinton (D)....... 54%
Walker (R)....... 32%

Clinton (D)....... 58%
Cruz (R)........... 30%

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/nj/nj04202015_Ngf735bu.pdf

Effectively no change. New Jersey will not be competitive in 2016.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

http://www.argojournal.com/2015/03/poll-watch-emerson-college_0.html

Clinton 58%
Walker 38%

Clinton 59%
Bush 38%

Clinton 61%
Paul 36%

No change.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

http://www.argojournal.com/2015/03/poll-watch-emerson-college_0.html

Clinton 58%
Walker 38%

Clinton 59%
Bush 38%

Clinton 61%
Paul 36%

No change.

That's true.  This poll hasn't changed in the past month, since the first time you added it:

Emerson College poll of Massachusetts:

http://www.argojournal.com/2015/03/poll-watch-emerson-college_0.html

Clinton 58%
Walker 38%

Clinton 59%
Bush 38%

Clinton 61%
Paul 36%

Whoops!

[pbrower2a]

New Hampshire, PPP:

–
PPP's new New Hampshire poll finds Hillary Clinton with commanding leads over the entire Republican field in the state- she is up by anywhere from 9 to 15 points against the nine GOP contenders we tested her against. The hopefuls who come closest to Clinton are Rand Paul and Scott Walker, each of whom trail by 9 at 49/40. The ones who do the worst are Chris Christie (51/36) and Ted Cruz (52/37) who each have 15 point deficits. In between are Marco Rubio who trails by 12 at 50/38, and Jeb Bush (49/36), Ben Carson (51/38), Mike Huckabee (51/38), and Rick Perry (also 51/38) who all trail by 13 points.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NH_42115.pdf

Comments:

1. New Hampshire looks at most on the fringe of competitiveness in the 2016 election.

2. Is New Hampshire more D than Pennsylvania? The poll in which Rand Paul is ahead of Hillary Clinton (barely)  looks specious. He must have been the Flavor of the Month.

3. Does anyone still think that Mike Huckabee is anything more than a regional candidate?
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

43-40 Rice/Clinton
44-43 Clinton/Paul
44-43 Clinton/Huckabee
43-40 Clinton/Bush
45-42 Clinton/Rubio
42-39 Clinton/Christie
46-41 Clinton/Walker
47-40 Clinton/Cruz
44-37 Clinton/Fiorina
45-37 Clinton/Carson



http://gravismarketing.com/polling-and-market-research/iowa-poll-bush-leads-crowded-gop-field-rice-beats-clinton-head-to-head-43-to-40/
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Will you make Clinton vs. Rubio maps, too?

Whom do you suggest that I drop? I'm thinking of dropping Christie.

I am tempted to do so if Marco Rubio abandons all efforts  to hold his Senate seat.

[pbrower2a]

Rubio it is. Farewell, Christie!
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Why do we have no credible polls on Arizona, Georgia, or  Missouri? 

[pbrower2a]

I'd like to see these polled:

AK (does Begich have a chance should Murkowski be primaried, or would he be wise to go for the House?)
AZ (is John McCain vulnerable?)
AR (are the Bill Clinton-but not Obama states really lost forever to the Democrats?)
GA (whatever happened to a once-moderate state?)
IL (does Mark Kirk have some survival skills as a Senator?)
IN (lots of luck!)
KS (is discontent brewing with the GOP in Kansas as there seemed to be last year?)
MI (there used to be lots of crappy polls -- but no Senate race)
MN (Klobuchar in case something happens to Hillary Clinton?)
MO (once and for all -- is it at all a bellwether state)?
NE-02 (split between 2008 and 2012)
OR (new Governor)
TX (with a huge grain of salt -- the state is tough to poll)
UT (acceptance of SSM)

[pbrower2a]

54-34 Clinton/Christie
55-32 Clinton/Bush
59-30 Clinton/Rubio
58-29 Clinton/Paul
59-26 Clinton/Cruz


https://www.siena.edu/news-events/article/voters-dont-think-new-laws-will-reduce-corruption-say-cuomo-was-right-to-no
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Virginia, Christopher Newport University (never heard of them)

48-46 Bush/Clinton (Feb. poll: 48-43 Clinton)
47-45 Clinton/Christie (Feb. poll: 49-42 Clinton)
49-47 Clinton/Paul (Feb. poll: 52-42 Clinton)
49-46 Clinton/Huckabee (Feb. poll: 52-42 Clinton)
49-45 Clinton/Rubio (Feb. poll: 51-42 Clinton)
49-44 Clinton/Cruz (Feb. poll: not polled)
48-43 Clinton/Walker (Feb. poll: not polled)

How the survey was conducted:

The results of this poll are based on 658
interviews of registered Virginia voters,
including 388 on landline and 270 on cell phone,
conducted April 13-24, 2015. Percentages may
not equal 100 due to rounding. The margin of
error for the whole survey is +/- 4.6% at the 95%
level of confidence. All error margins have been
adjusted to account for the survey’s design
effect, which is 1.47 in this survey. The design
effect is a factor representing the survey’s
deviation from a simple random sample, and
takes into account decreases in precision due to
sample design and weighting procedures. In
addition to sampling error, the other potential
sources of error include non-response, question
wording, and interviewer error. The response
rate (AAPOR RRI Standard Definition) for the
survey was 19%. Five callbacks were employed
in the fielding process. Live calling was
conducted by trained interviewers at the Wason
Center for Public Policy Survey Research Lab at
Christopher Newport University. The data
reported here are weighted using an iterative
weighting process on sex, age, race and region of
residence to reflect as closely as possible the
demographic composition of registered voters in
Virginia. The survey was designed by Dr.
Quentin Kidd of the Wason Center for Public
Policy at Christopher Newport University.

http://cnu.edu/cpp/pdf/April%2027%202015%20Report%20Final.pdf
 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

When Rick Snyder announces that he is running for President, then Michigan will be polled.

[pbrower2a]

PPP, Iowa

Clinton 45% Bush 42%

Clinton 48% Carson 41%

Clinton 45% Christie 40%

Clinton 49% Cruz 42%

Clinton 46% Huckabee 44%

Clinton 45% Paul 43%

Clinton 48% Perry 41%

Clinton 46% Rubio 44%

Clinton 48% Walker 41%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/05/clinton-leads-gop-field-in-iowa-walker-leads-other-dems.html



 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Also, you messed up with Walker in NC.

Corrected.

[pbrower2a]

Also Marco Rubio leads in Montana

The Gravis poll that I used did not show a Clinton-Rubio matchup. Rubio would probably lead in Montana... and he would probably be behind in Nevada.

I do not deal in 'probably' on these maps. 

[pbrower2a]

By mistake I posted the Iowa poll over a Survey USA poll of North Carolina. Here's what I accidentally excised, and it is back for your view.

1070 November 2016 Likely Voters:

45-43 Clinton/Bush
47-43 Clinton/Paul
46-41 Clinton/Rubio
47-42 Clinton/Cruz
48-39 Clinton/Walker

44-42 Clinton/"some other Republican"

...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=e12280bf-3fbd-4bb8-876a-b484c2a95cb4

...I am treating Mike Huckabee as "some other Republican".

[pbrower2a]

PPP. Arizona.

Chris Christie .................................................. 46%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 39%

Rand Paul ....................................................... 45%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 40%

Mike Huckabee ............................................... 44%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%

Marco Rubio ................................................... 43%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%

Scott Walker ................................................... 44%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%

Ted Cruz ......................................................... 44%
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 43%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 41%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 41%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 42%
Ben Carson..................................................... 42%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 44%
Rick Perry ....................................................... 41%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/05/clinton-close-to-most-republicans-in-arizona.html

Republicans will need to defend Arizona just to protect a Senate seat. So far Arizona looks like a possible swing state in 2016.

If Hillary Clinton is winning a blowout she may be helping a Democratic nominee for the Senate with appearances... and that could be enough to flip Arizona.  Demographics could start to hurt Republicans in Arizona. as they did in Colorado and Nevada in 2008 and 2012.

 
Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul

Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker

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]

Arizona suggests that any gains that Hillary Clinton has gotten are in states that did not go for Barack Obama. Of course that is only one state; I would like to see Georgia and Missouri as well.

[pbrower2a]

Before anyone asks me why I am not using the UNH-WMUR poll for New Hampshire -- the sample is R+5. New Hampshire was D+1 in 2014. It might be appropriate for the caucuses; I expect heavy R participation in the caucuses and light D participation in the caucuses. The big one? The general election? That's the one I have my focus on.

[pbrower2a]

Before anyone asks me why I am not using the UNH-WMUR poll for New Hampshire -- the sample is R+5. New Hampshire was D+1 in 2014. It might be appropriate for the caucuses; I expect heavy R participation in the caucuses and light D participation in the caucuses. The big one? The general election? That's the one I have my focus on.

You are not using the NH poll because it shows Republicans ahead, that's the only reason.

First Mason-Dixon, now this ...

I may as well lock this thread or delete it if you are not using all polls.

It also showed Barack Obama with a 34% approval rating, which is inconsistent with the President being in the high 40s nationwide.

A caucus vote is not relevant to November 2016. The general electorate vote of 2016 will be very different from the primary of caucus vote in any state. My desire is to use polls to predict the general election.

I'm paying no attention to caucuses and primaries. 

[pbrower2a]

Sorry -- first primary in the US election. My goof.

Here's the poll, and see why I discount it:

http://cola.unh.edu/sites/cola.unh.edu/files/research_publications/gsp2015_spring_presgen050715.pdf

Granite State Poll Methodology

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's about the primary election -- not the general election! Hillary Clinton is practically a foregone conclusion in the Democratic primary; the Republicans look to have plenty of choices.

Does anyone think that the New Hampshire general election is going to go 42% Republican, 37% Democratic?

New Hampshire is close to a 50-50 split in most statewide elections.