|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 05, 2020, 02:56:46 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
  FL/IL/OH-CBS/YouGov: D: Clinton in FL/OH, Sanders in IL; R: Kasich/Trump tie in OH, Trump up in FL
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: FL/IL/OH-CBS/YouGov: D: Clinton in FL/OH, Sanders in IL; R: Kasich/Trump tie in OH, Trump up in FL  (Read 4311 times)
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 13, 2016, 08:24:59 am »
« edited: March 13, 2016, 08:30:14 am by Mr. Morden »

CBS/YouGov polls of FL, IL, and OH, conducted March 9-11:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-trump-and-kasich-neck-and-neck-ohio-trump-leads-florida/












Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,940
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2016, 08:26:47 am »

Damn ... both the YouGov and the Marist polls for OH are shockingly similar to their pre-Michigan polls.

#Upset 2.0 ?
Logged
Tayya
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 400
Sweden


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2016, 08:27:41 am »

Some really strong Cruz numbers there in IL and OH. Watch out for an upset.
Logged
ProgressiveCanadian
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,695
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2016, 08:29:08 am »

Sandersmentum!!!
Logged
mds32
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,083
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2016, 08:29:34 am »

Cruz I don't think takes second in Florida.
Logged
henster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2016, 08:33:33 am »

Winning IL would be a bigger deal for Sanders than OH much more diverse and one of Hillary's home states.
Logged
Admiral Kizaru
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 560
Political Matrix
E: -3.61, S: -3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2016, 08:35:10 am »

Rubio in third in Florida? Not sure I buy that no matter how much he's appeared to have crashed recently.

And both this and NBC/WSJ have Illinois more favourable to Sanders than Ohio. Interesting.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,501
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2016, 08:35:31 am »

The idea of IL being closer than OH? I'm just not paying attention to ANY polling right now. Just strap-in and enjoy the ride.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,310
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2016, 08:36:39 am »

Compared to NBC, a better Ohio poll for TRUMP but a worse Illinois one.

I'd guess Sanders wins Ohio and Illinois at this point, not that it'll matter much.
Logged
yankeesfan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,150
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2016, 08:36:43 am »

If this was a 2 man race, Cruz would run the board in these states
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2016, 08:36:55 am »

Second choice candidates for the Republicans (note the same two names fill the top two slots in all three states):

Florida:
Cruz 29%
Kasich 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 13%

Illinois:
Kasich 24%
Cruz 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 16%

Ohio:
Cruz 24%
Kasich 21%
Trump 19%
Rubio 17%
Logged
henster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2016, 08:39:42 am »

Sanders has been in the news a lot in Chicago, maybe the Trump protest helps him with black voters also going hard against Rahm. I think winning IL would be a bigger deal than winning OH or FL.
Logged
mathstatman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,160
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2016, 08:46:35 am »

Second choice candidates for the Republicans (note the same two names fill the top two slots in all three states):

Florida:
Cruz 29%
Kasich 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 13%

Illinois:
Kasich 24%
Cruz 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 16%

Ohio:
Cruz 24%
Kasich 21%
Trump 19%
Rubio 17%

How relevant are second choices withoout IRV? I'm sure Al Gore was the 2nd choice of a lot of Nader voters in FL in 2000.
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,935
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2016, 08:48:21 am »

Ohio is bad for Sanders, Illinois is okay.

Here is the deal -

Il - 18-29 Vote - 15%
OH - 16%
FL - 9%

These numbers are too low, IOWA,NH,MI were all 18-20/21% odd.

Florida obviously has a very aging population but 9% ?

I guess this is why Bernie out-performs polls.

Ohio - Hillary is beating Bernie is the white vote by a good margin, which is why Hillary is winning!
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2016, 08:50:34 am »

Second choice candidates for the Republicans (note the same two names fill the top two slots in all three states):

Florida:
Cruz 29%
Kasich 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 13%

Illinois:
Kasich 24%
Cruz 21%
Rubio 19%
Trump 16%

Ohio:
Cruz 24%
Kasich 21%
Trump 19%
Rubio 17%

How relevant are second choices withoout IRV? I'm sure Al Gore was the 2nd choice of a lot of Nader voters in FL in 2000.

It's relevant in terms of voters potentially changing their minds at the last minute.  Late deciders are more likely to go to candidates who they'd been thinking of as their second choices.

It's also of course relevant in the context of looking ahead to post-March 15, if any of the candidates drop out (Rubio of course being the most likely).  If these three states are at all representative of states later in the calendar, then this is yet another data point suggesting that despite Trump being in the lead nationally, he won't have such an easy time picking off supporters from the candidates who drop out, should it narrow down to a 3-man or 2-man race.
Logged
Nat. Sec. Council Member Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,700
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 13, 2016, 08:52:54 am »

Sanders has been in the news a lot in Chicago, maybe the Trump protest helps him with black voters also going hard against Rahm. I think winning IL would be a bigger deal than winning OH or FL.

In terms of delegate math though, Sanders probably needs IL, MO, AND OH, assuming FL/NC are blowouts.
Logged
Sasquatch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,077


Political Matrix
E: -8.13, S: -8.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 13, 2016, 08:53:09 am »

Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,935
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 13, 2016, 08:54:06 am »

Sanders has been in the news a lot in Chicago, maybe the Trump protest helps him with black voters also going hard against Rahm. I think winning IL would be a bigger deal than winning OH or FL.

In terms of delegate math though, Sanders probably needs IL, MO, AND OH, assuming FL/NC are blowouts.

You won't get South Level blow-outs anymore, He is hitting 35% in NC/FL & is campaigning there as well - But I guess 35% is a bad result here, 40-42% is a more respectable
Logged
A Perez
Rookie
**
Posts: 231
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 13, 2016, 09:08:51 am »

In short, Clinton is about to win four of the five states that Tuesday. And Berniebots are happy  about it, LOL.
Logged
henster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 13, 2016, 09:09:21 am »

I think he could've hit 40 in VA/TX/TN if he had just put resources there, one of the reasons we saw such huge blowouts is because he basically just abandoned those states.
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,069
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2016, 09:21:13 am »

It's probably safer just to ignore all Democratic polls right now.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,541
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: March 13, 2016, 09:32:56 am »
« Edited: March 13, 2016, 09:36:42 am by Mehmentum »

2 polls showing Illinois closer than Ohio... that really doesn't seem right.  Then again, there have been bigger surprises in this race.
Logged
Skye
yeah_93
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,792
Venezuela


Political Matrix
E: 3.29, S: -1.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 13, 2016, 09:59:32 am »

Not sure I buy Sanders winning Illinois. Also, damn at Rubio in FL.
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,935
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 13, 2016, 10:10:54 am »

With the final push which is coming for the online groups, it is even beyond Michigan & much organized & much stronger.

I think we can beat the numbers of some of these states - But 9% in Ohio looks too steep.

It will be HRC's biggest coup & likewise Illinois is a big loss (Obama's home state & one of Hillary's many home states)
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,935
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 13, 2016, 10:23:24 am »

Acc. to Cross-tabs - 58% in Illinois, 26% in Blacks, 16% in Hispanics.

Michigan had 14.2% Black as does Illinois overall. Michigan had 19-20% final Black vote.

In this poll Black Vote is 26% & much higher than (say) Michigan.

So the likelihood of under-estimating the Black Voting is very limited IMO.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
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 0.878 seconds with 14 queries.