IL-WeAskAmerica: Clinton+37, Trump+13

[RJEvans]

I can't believe these numbers on the Democratic side after what happened in MI. This is ridiculous. Simply put, Sander's shouldn't be doing this bad. At worst, this should be a 10-point race and that's where I believe this is right now. I think the pollsters are seriously underestimating youth turnout like they did in MI.

[RJEvans]

994 likely DEM voters, March 7-8:

62% Clinton
25% Sanders

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4Bi-iePG1O6bmx0c2hGNWFDRjQ/view?pref=2&pli=1

1009 likely GOP voters, March 7-8:

33% Trump
20% Cruz
18% Kasich
11% Rubio

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4Bi-iePG1O6SEFOZXp0ZFFsYWs/view?pref=2&pli=1

Either Michigan is a weird Bernie shangra-la, or polling is about to be deemed useless.

I don't think the pollsters are picking up on youth turnout. I think a lot of youth voters realize their guy is not doing well and they are beginning to turnout for him. But listen, if Clinton is winning by this margin in IL and FL, who cares if she loses OH and MO, she'll end March 15 with a 300 delegate lead and the race will be over imo. But this just does not make sense to me.

[RJEvans]

You can't dismiss every poll because of what happened in Michigan. The Cook County suburbs are much wealthier than the Detroit suburbs and they aren't going to vote for someone who wants to raise taxes through the roof. It's an entirely different ballgame in Illinois.

I don't think Sanders' tax plan matters right now. I really don't.
In MI Clinton and Sanders split 50/50 the $100k-200k income bracket. In fact, all income brackets were basically 50/50.

I get it's a different state, but for her to lead by 30-40 points in IL after losing MI by 1.5%? Come on. I still hold this is a 10-point race. I also believe IL is open primary.

[RJEvans]

You can't dismiss every poll because of what happened in Michigan. The Cook County suburbs are much wealthier than the Detroit suburbs and they aren't going to vote for someone who wants to raise taxes through the roof. It's an entirely different ballgame in Illinois.

I don't think Sanders' tax plan matters right now. I really don't.
In MI Clinton and Sanders split 50/50 the $100k-200k income bracket. In fact, all income brackets were basically 50/50.

I get it's a different state, but for her to lead by 30-40 points in IL after losing MI by 1.5%? Come on. I still hold this is a 10-point race. I also believe IL is open primary.

Do you have a link to this poll that says it's a 10 point race?

Considering that the President is from Illinois and Clinton was in his cabinet, it's not hard to believe that Clinton is leading by this much. Plus, Cook County is a huge percentage of the statewide vote and it's heavily minority.

I have no proof this is a 10-point race. I'm just pulling numbers out my ass. But it doesn't seem right that Clinton wins IL by a bigger margin than some southern states. I don't think this is a 30-40 point race. As a Clinton supporter I hope I'm wrong.

[RJEvans]

You can't dismiss every poll because of what happened in Michigan. The Cook County suburbs are much wealthier than the Detroit suburbs and they aren't going to vote for someone who wants to raise taxes through the roof. It's an entirely different ballgame in Illinois.

I don't think Sanders' tax plan matters right now. I really don't.
In MI Clinton and Sanders split 50/50 the $100k-200k income bracket. In fact, all income brackets were basically 50/50.

I get it's a different state, but for her to lead by 30-40 points in IL after losing MI by 1.5%? Come on. I still hold this is a 10-point race. I also believe IL is open primary.

Do you have a link to this poll that says it's a 10 point race?

Considering that the President is from Illinois and Clinton was in his cabinet, it's not hard to believe that Clinton is leading by this much. Plus, Cook County is a huge percentage of the statewide vote and it's heavily minority.

I have no proof this is a 10-point race. I'm just pulling numbers out my ass. But it doesn't seem right that Clinton wins IL by a bigger margin than some southern states. I don't think this is a 30-40 point race. As a Clinton supporter I hope I'm wrong.

It really depends on how big the margin in Cook County is. This electorate is blacker than Michigan and with Chicago having issues with gun violence, Clinton's position on gun control is much more favorable.

I guess we'll see in a few days. But I'll say it again, if Clinton posts 20-point margins in FL, NC and IL, it doesn't matter if she loses OH and MO, she will finish the night with a 300 delegate lead and the race will be over for Sanders no matter if he continues to the convention.

[RJEvans]

The most credible explanation about the Michigan polling debacle that I read was by the Votemaster at electoral-vote.com.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Mar10.html#item-8

The polls for the Michigan Republican primary were spot on, but those for the Democratic primary showed Hillary Clinton winning by 20 points. She lost by 1.6%. Why? The Washington Post has figured it out. Short answer: The likely voter screen was botched on account of 2008.

Long answer: It goes back to 2008. In that year, Michigan violated the rules and, like Florida, moved its primary to January. Then-chairman of the DNC, Howard Dean, announced that as punishment for violating the rules, Michigan's delegates wouldn't be seated. Barack Obama supported Dean and didn't file to be on the ballot. Hillary Clinton filed and, naturally, won although only 600,000 people voted since voters knew the results didn't matter. This year (and every year), the pollsters try to figure out who is likely to vote, the so-called "likely voter screen." One of the questions they ask is: Did you vote in the last contested Democratic primary? That was 2008 and was anomalous because the DNC said it wouldn't count. Thus the pollsters were way off in guessing who would vote.


As long as the 3/15 states didn't have any similar problems then there is no reason for pollsters to do the same mistake again.
Granted, Florida was punished too in 2008. But Obama and Edwards were on the ballot and their voters had the chance to go and pull the lever for them, and most of them they did.

I too think MI polls were wrong because of the faulty voter screen, but that's beyond my area of expertise. If it is because of the faulty voter screen that the polls going forward should be relatively accurate.

[RJEvans]

Sabato projection and 538 benchmarks are further reason why I don't think this is a 30-40 point Clinton race.