CBS/YouGov: Clinton and Trump close in IA/OH/MI

[Sorenroy]

For some reason it's not showing my comment so I'll post it again:

Just a note, they also included a generic "other" option which got 7% in Iowa, 4% in Michigan, and 3% in Ohio in addition to 5%, 7%, and 8% Jill Stein and Gary Johnson got respectively. Because of this a total of 12%, 11%, and 11% were absorbed by "others". I just can't see that happening.

[Donnie]

How can MI be closer then OH ?? HOW ??!!!!?

These idiots from CBS/YouGov are incompetent at least.

Forget that poll.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This is why I have Michigan as a Toss-Up.

[Ebsy]

Michigan always flirts with the GOP but comes home big in the home stretch.

[PresidentSamTilden]

MI being that close is surprisingly bad. Closer margin than Ohio though is really weird. I don't know what to make of this really but overall it doesn't seem great

[amdcpus]

For some reason it's not showing my comment so I'll post it again:

Just a note, they also included a generic "other" option which got 7% in Iowa, 4% in Michigan, and 3% in Ohio in addition to 5%, 7%, and 8% Jill Stein and Gary Johnson got respectively. Because of this a total of 12%, 11%, and 11% were absorbed by "others". I just can't see that happening.

I'm guessing those were for Johnson and Stein. I looked into the methodology and they did not include Johnson and Stein. If someone wanted to choose them, they had to choose "Someone else" and type in their name. Garbage poll.

[Mehmentum]

Today I learned that Michigan will be closer than Ohio.

[JRP1994]

What this tells me, considered with the sum of evidence we have so far:

Ohio = Tossup
Iowa = Tossup
Michigan = Likely Clinton

[Kingpoleon]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

This was literally the same argument used against him in the GOP primaries.

[MT Treasurer]

Michigan = Likely Clinton

I'd say Lean Clinton. The state surprised us in the Democratic primaries and it's not that different from Pennsylvania anyway. Trump might need it if FL is slipping away from him.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

This was literally the same argument used against him in the GOP primaries.

38-42% is enough to win in a crowded field.  In a two-way race, it's losing.

[Crumpets]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

This was literally the same argument used against him in the GOP primaries.

38-42% is enough to win in a crowded field.  In a two-way race, it's losing.

This. Plus, he was able to increase his polling as the race went on, candidates dropped out, and he won more states, but undecided voters rarely broke in his favor in an individual state. Winning 20 states on election day isn't going to give him a polling boost that he can take with him and win somewhere else.

[IceSpear]

LOL at MI being closer than OH.

[pbrower2a]

The Michigan poll is junk, Clinton has a wider lead there

Ohio finally looks a little encouraging

Iowa looks like a tough one for Team Blue because every poll is in the margin of error there so they all can't be wrong

If I'm remembering right, Iowa polling in 2012 was also quite close. Obama still won it by 6.

Iowa polling in 2014 was also quite close. Ernst still won it by 8.

Don't expect a 2014 electorate in either of those states.

...Michigan usually is close in polls going into the Conventions but then slams the door on the Republicans in Presidential years.  This is normal for a Democratic blowout in November as not-so-likely voters  come to vote in November.

Ohio more D than either Iowa or Michigan? That does not usually hold. 

[dspNY]

The Michigan poll is junk, Clinton has a wider lead there

Ohio finally looks a little encouraging

Iowa looks like a tough one for Team Blue because every poll is in the margin of error there so they all can't be wrong

Also Ohio's main football team wears red and Michigan's doesn't

If I'm remembering right, Iowa polling in 2012 was also quite close. Obama still won it by 6.

Iowa polling in 2014 was also quite close. Ernst still won it by 8.

Don't expect a 2014 electorate in either of those states.

...Michigan usually is close in polls going into the Conventions but then slams the door on the Republicans in Presidential years.  This is normal for a Democratic blowout in November as not-so-likely voters  come to vote in November.

Ohio more D than either Iowa or Michigan? That does not usually hold. 

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

Yeah exactly ...

Don't get delusional ... Hillary is not a saint with sky-high favourable ratings either (not even Obama won by those margins you are dreaming of and he was actually popular).

After your "blaxicans" silliness, you should not be calling any names. Stop yourself, right now. If Trump can barely crack 40%, then there is every indication that he's headed for huge double digit losses based on college educated whites swinging heavily to Clinton. Unlike your country, we aren't all that keen on white supremacists and don't vote for them. Thank you.

Umm... neither can Hillary. Also attacking someone that criticizes your delusional analysis looks pretty pathetic. Clinton will not be getting 56-58% of the vote in swing states, she won't even be near that if the third party numbers stay as high as they are.

[Tender Branson]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

Yeah exactly ...

Don't get delusional ... Hillary is not a saint with sky-high favourable ratings either (not even Obama won by those margins you are dreaming of and he was actually popular).

After your "blaxicans" silliness, you should not be calling any names. Stop yourself, right now. If Trump can barely crack 40%, then there is every indication that he's headed for huge double digit losses based on college educated whites swinging heavily to Clinton. Unlike your country, we aren't all that keen on white supremacists and don't vote for them. Thank you.

Oh man, please stop talking.

You do realize that Hillary can't even crack 40% on her own ? And then you are assuming that she'll win swing states like OH with 56-58% ? How is that not delusional ?

And please wait first how your own country votes before you come to any conclusions about "white supremacists" ...

PS: For the 1000th time - My term "Blaxicasians" was/is not racist, it's just another term to refer to "minorities".

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Tump can only manage to get 38-42% of the vote in most polling. He's headed for double digit loses in all these states. Clinton probably gets 56-58% in Ohio if these trends keep up.

Yeah exactly ...

Don't get delusional ... Hillary is not a saint with sky-high favourable ratings either (not even Obama won by those margins you are dreaming of and he was actually popular).

After your "blaxicans" silliness, you should not be calling any names. Stop yourself, right now. If Trump can barely crack 40%, then there is every indication that he's headed for huge double digit losses based on college educated whites swinging heavily to Clinton. Unlike your country, we aren't all that keen on white supremacists and don't vote for them. Thank you.

Oh man, please stop talking.

You do realize that Hillary can't even crack 40% on her own ? And then you are assuming that she'll win swing states like OH with 56-58% ? How is that not delusional ?

And please wait first how your own country votes before you come to any conclusions about "white supremacists" ...

PS: For the 1000th time - My term "Blaxicasians" was/is not racist, it's just another term to refer to "minorities".

The fact that you don't get why people see it as both specifically racist and generically derogatory is kind of the point. 

[Virginiá]

Oh man, please stop talking.

You do realize that Hillary can't even crack 40% on her own ? And then you are assuming that she'll win swing states like OH with 56-58% ? How is that not delusional ?

And please wait first how your own country votes before you come to any conclusions about "white supremacists" ...

PS: For the 1000th time - My term "Blaxicasians" was/is not racist, it's just another term to refer to "minorities".

The fact that you don't get why people see it as both specifically racist and generically derogatory is kind of the point.  

Yep.

Seriously Tender, take it from me, an American - If anyone knows racism, it's us