NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:51:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Author Topic: NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States  (Read 13187 times)
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: November 04, 2019, 12:22:49 PM »

My takeaways (keeping in mind that this is just one poll):

- Is there really a good reason to believe that NC is more likely to flip than GA? I could see it voting 1% to the left of GA, but not more than that. It doesn’t make much sense to rate NC a Tossup and GA Lean R, if you ask me.
- MI can’t be taken granted by Democrats and is not Lean/Likely D in a close race (although I don’t buy the Trump +6 result vs. Warren in particular--their MI numbers might be too R-friendly).
- WI can’t be taken for granted by Republicans and is not Lean R in a close race, especially if there’s a collapse in R support in WOW (in line with the suburban trends we’ve seen across the country) and urban WI (especially Milwaukee) looks more like 2018 than 2016. That said, I still think it’ll be more Republican than PA at least.
- Democrats would be colossally stupid if they didn’t go all in on Florida. Conceding 29 electoral votes when their path to 270 is already fairly narrow and other swing states might be trending away from them would be beyond dumb. It will definitely require some effort, but it’s not unwinnable even in a close race.
- IA isn’t a swing state and certainly not as "elastic" as people are making it out to be, but I’m not going to dwell on that. We could see a regression to the mean here (similar to NV 2012), but if IA is even close, Democrats already have the Senate + presidency.
- I’ve said repeatedly that AZ is one of the (if not the) shakiest states for Trump, and I don’t see it voting Republican if he’s losing other swing states like WI or FL. I’d argue that this one is actually a must-win for Democrats.
- Overall pretty bad numbers for Democrats considering that Trump seems to be trailing nationally by 5-8%. They’re probably slightly favored, but the PV/EC split will probably be even more dramatic this time if they can’t win the PV by 3.5-4%.
Logged
Hindsight was 2020
Hindsight is 2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,196
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: November 04, 2019, 12:24:02 PM »

Look y’all it’s just one set of polls so lets all just rationally agree that system is broken, rural whites have effectively taken the nation hostage, and Dems will never win a presidential election again unless they throw minorities under the bus

Trump is at 30% with Latinos
My comment was a joke but still winning only 30% of a demographic isn’t a bragging point. His insane level of support from whites without college degrees is we’re he gets his power

No need to keep blowing your bullhorn against rural whites. We get it -- you really don't like them. 
Sorry but it’s hard not to notice he loses every demographic but one and it’s because of that one demographic that Trump never faces consequences for the horrible things he said or done. Sorry if I’m not being pc for you

What kind of “consequences” are you speaking of?
Let’s see he won in the first place despite the horribly stuff he said and did on the campaign trail, he wasn’t impeached the dozens of impeachable things he did in Mueller report or Stormy saga, he saw his party pick up senate seats in the midterm, and he has little to no chance of being convicted in the senate over Ukraine. All because the republicans are afraid of standing up to him because they know they stand a good chance of being primaried by some hack if they do
Logged
LAKISYLVANIA
Lakigigar
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,165
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -4.78

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: November 04, 2019, 12:37:08 PM »

Quote
There is a full year before Election Day, and a lot can change. Ms. Warren is an energetic campaigner. She could moderate her image or energize young and nonwhite voters, including the millions who might not yet even be included in a poll of today’s registered voters. Mr. Biden could lose the relatively conservative voters who currently back him; the president could be dealt irreparable political damage during the impeachment process.

This is an important section.

Quote
The major demographic cleavages of the 2016 election also remain intact. Mr. Trump struggles badly among college-educated white voters and nonwhite voters, though there are signs his standing among the latter group has improved modestly since the last presidential election. He counters with a wide lead among white voters who did not graduate from a four-year college.

Quote
The poll offers little evidence that any Democrat, including Mr. Biden, has made substantial progress toward winning back the white working-class voters who defected to the president in 2016, at least so far. All the leading Democratic candidates trail in the precincts or counties that voted for Barack Obama and then flipped to Mr. Trump.

As a result, Democrats appear to have made little progress in reclaiming their traditional advantage in the Northern battleground states, despite their sweep there in the 2018 midterms. Respondents in these states said they voted for Democratic congressional candidates by an average of six points, all but identical to their actual winning margins.
Logged
LAKISYLVANIA
Lakigigar
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,165
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -4.78

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: November 04, 2019, 12:40:48 PM »

My takeaways (keeping in mind that this is just one poll):

- Is there really a good reason to believe that NC is more likely to flip than GA? I could see it voting 1% to the left of GA, but not more than that. It doesn’t make much sense to rate NC a Tossup and GA Lean R, if you ask me. Agree
- MI can’t be taken granted by Democrats and is not Lean/Likely D in a close race (although I don’t buy the Trump +6 result vs. Warren in particular--their MI numbers might be too R-friendly). Agree
- WI can’t be taken for granted by Republicans and is not Lean R in a close race, especially if there’s a collapse in R support in WOW (in line with the suburban trends we’ve seen across the country) and urban WI (especially Milwaukee) looks more like 2018 than 2016. That said, I still think it’ll be more Republican than PA at least. Hmm, partly agree
- Democrats would be colossally stupid if they didn’t go all in on Florida. Conceding 29 electoral votes when their path to 270 is already fairly narrow and other swing states might be trending away from them would be beyond dumb. It will definitely require some effort, but it’s not unwinnable even in a close race. They surely must go after Florida, nobody is telling that. But FL has a lot of older white voters who prefer moderate candidates. I buy that Biden will win, while Sanders and Warren will lose FL. Don't forget they overestimated Gillum in FL as well.
- IA isn’t a swing state and certainly not as "elastic" as people are making it out to be, but I’m not going to dwell on that. We could see a regression to the mean here (similar to NV 2012), but if IA is even close, Democrats already have the Senate + presidency. It's elastic and still winnable for Democrats. IA might end up being close or swing state, but I agree with your take that if IA flips, the presidency is already taken
- I’ve said repeatedly that AZ is one of the (if not the) shakiest states for Trump, and I don’t see it voting Republican if he’s losing other swing states like WI or FL. I’d argue that this one is actually a must-win for Democrats. I disagree. I think AZ will be fairly close, but still favouring Trump.
- Overall pretty bad numbers for Democrats considering that Trump seems to be trailing nationally by 5-8%. They’re probably slightly favored, but the PV/EC split will probably be even more dramatic this time if they can’t win the PV by 3.5-4%. I agree
Logged
Walmart_shopper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,515
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: November 04, 2019, 01:14:17 PM »


Why would anyone be surprised?  She has little appeal outside the Democratic base.  Won’t win next year.

And given Donald Trump's incredibly expansive, bipartisan base, obviously Trump will win 400 EVs against her.
Logged
Walmart_shopper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,515
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: November 04, 2019, 01:16:24 PM »

Gore? Michelle Obama? Karl Dean? We need backups.

Or, you know, a polling attention span of more than six hours. These numbers are largely incongruous with not only national polling bit also almost all other state polling in these states. Siena may be a fine pollster, but an outlier is still, alas, an outlier.
Logged
Walmart_shopper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,515
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: November 04, 2019, 01:20:24 PM »

Interesting:

Quote
Will vote for Trump/will vote for the Dem nominee in 2020:

Wisconsin: 40/46%
Pennsylvania: 41/45%
Florida: 39/43%
Arizona: 41/44%
Michigan: 38/41%
Iowa: 41/43%
NC: 44/45%
Right now it is clear Trump is doing better in MI than PA and WI slightly.

No it's not. Virtually all Michigan polling over the last two years showed him cratering in Michigan, but less so in Wisconsin. And the 2018 results largely tracked this. A GOP president with national approval in the low 40s doesn't win Michigan. Maybe he wins Wisconsin, but not Michigan.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: November 04, 2019, 01:24:54 PM »

Wow, five pages for a poll that just came out.

Even though I believe the numbers are little too Trump-friendly in states other than North Carolina and Florida,  it's warning sign for Democrats if they go with the wrong candidate. Liz would be riskier, and she didn't perform well with the healthcare debate in recent days and weeks. A lot of Michigan workers have their union plans for healthcare and don't want the system to be overthrown completely with a plan that costs many billions. It's much smarter (and realistic) to fix Obamacare as Joe Biden proposes.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: November 04, 2019, 01:41:32 PM »

I know Sienna is very accurate, but some of these numbers are hard to swallow. Michigan being to the right of Florida and Arizona being the biggest red flag.
Hmm... wouldn't be so sure about that. Maybe an outlier, but I think MI will vote to the right of PA at least.
I agree
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: November 04, 2019, 01:42:39 PM »

MI numbers are unrealistic,  since he leads in AZ and FL, he cant be tied in MI and NV
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: November 04, 2019, 01:43:40 PM »

My takeaways (keeping in mind that this is just one poll):

- Is there really a good reason to believe that NC is more likely to flip than GA? I could see it voting 1% to the left of GA, but not more than that. It doesn’t make much sense to rate NC a Tossup and GA Lean R, if you ask me.
- MI can’t be taken granted by Democrats and is not Lean/Likely D in a close race (although I don’t buy the Trump +6 result vs. Warren in particular--their MI numbers might be too R-friendly).
- WI can’t be taken for granted by Republicans and is not Lean R in a close race, especially if there’s a collapse in R support in WOW (in line with the suburban trends we’ve seen across the country) and urban WI (especially Milwaukee) looks more like 2018 than 2016. That said, I still think it’ll be more Republican than PA at least.
- Democrats would be colossally stupid if they didn’t go all in on Florida. Conceding 29 electoral votes when their path to 270 is already fairly narrow and other swing states might be trending away from them would be beyond dumb. It will definitely require some effort, but it’s not unwinnable even in a close race.
- IA isn’t a swing state and certainly not as "elastic" as people are making it out to be, but I’m not going to dwell on that. We could see a regression to the mean here (similar to NV 2012), but if IA is even close, Democrats already have the Senate + presidency.
- I’ve said repeatedly that AZ is one of the (if not the) shakiest states for Trump, and I don’t see it voting Republican if he’s losing other swing states like WI or FL. I’d argue that this one is actually a must-win for Democrats.
- Overall pretty bad numbers for Democrats considering that Trump seems to be trailing nationally by 5-8%. They’re probably slightly favored, but the PV/EC split will probably be even more dramatic this time if they can’t win the PV by 3.5-4%.
So just because you don't like the results you think they are R friendly? These are New York times polls. Wisconsin is absolutely tilt R in a close race and so is Michigan. I also don't buy the popular vote will be bigger for the dems. Trump will likely do better in the south than he did last time and also in Cali.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: November 04, 2019, 01:44:12 PM »

MI numbers are unrealistic,  since he leads in AZ and FL, he cant be tied in MI and NV
They are unrealistic cause you don't like them? There is so much evidence pointing to Michigan being to the right of PA right now.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,759
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: November 04, 2019, 01:46:25 PM »

MI numbers are unrealistic,  since he leads in AZ and FL, he cant be tied in MI and NV
They are unrealistic cause you don't like them? There is so much evidence pointing to Michigan being to the right of PA right now.

Biden leads by 6 in the other poll in MI and NV polling had Laxalt beating Sisolak in 2018. House effect in NV polling
Logged
krb08
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 274
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: -7.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: November 04, 2019, 01:54:53 PM »

So there could be a decent amount of Clinton-Trump voters in the Midwest? Who are these people? Clinton was an abysmal candidate for the Midwest, hardly campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin, and lost them by less than 1%. The Democratic nominee will heavily target these states in 2020, and likely won't be as unpopular as Clinton. How could Trump realistically expand his margin there?
Logged
Walmart_shopper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,515
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #114 on: November 04, 2019, 02:04:30 PM »

So there could be a decent amount of Clinton-Trump voters in the Midwest? Who are these people? Clinton was an abysmal candidate for the Midwest, hardly campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin, and lost them by less than 1%. The Democratic nominee will heavily target these states in 2020, and likely won't be as unpopular as Clinton. How could Trump realistically expand his margin there?

The inverse is more true, that Obama-Trump voters arguably tipped the Rust Belt to Trump. They came back to the Dems in 2018. There is zero evidence of Trump expanding his base with new voters or Obama-Trump-Dem2018 voters once again returning to Trump en masse (one of which Trump needs to win MI/PA/WI again). In fact, it seems quite clear--the Siena outlier aside--that the Obama-Trump voters took a shot on Trump the Outsider and do not at all feel compelled to make that choice again, and they will either stay home or come home to the Dems.
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,345


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #115 on: November 04, 2019, 02:24:16 PM »

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

These are mostly pretty good polls for Trump, from a very good pollster.  Democrats shouldn't try to pick holes in them, but should recognize that Trump does have a realistic possibility of replicating his electoral inside straight from 2016.  However, neither should Republicans use these polls to assume that Trump is a strong favorite for reelection; he isn't.  It's possible to draw two inside straights in a row...but it sure isn't a good bet.

It's true that the election is still a year away.  There are one or two people here who routinely say "polls this far in advance are meaningless" -- at least when they don't like the results.  For those who really think polls are meaningless at this point, why are you wasting your time on a polling board?  Check back in July or so.

Polling this far in advance indeed has low predictive value for the state of the race a year from now.  But it's not zero, and the value is gradually increasing as the election gets closer. Also, although the polls don't tell us much about the November 2020 state of the race, they do tell us quite a lot about the state of the race now, especially when there are many polls that can be averaged together.

Those polls do tell us a story: Trump is the underdog at this point, but certainly not out of it yet.  And he does better against some candidates than others.  In particular, the large majority of polls show that Biden has the best results against Trump, and looking at the average (don't cherry pick individual polls) he does significantly better than Warren does.  

This is not just a matter of name recognition at this point.  Anyone who's following the campaign at all (and polls consistently show a record level of interest and enthusiasm for this election) knows who Warren is at this point.

Could Warren beat Trump?  Sure, it's very possible.  But at this point in the race, Biden looks like a significantly stronger candidate against Trump.  If this doesn't match your preferences, it's too bad; that's what the data says.  As an old poker buddy of mine once said: no matter how long you stare at a deuce in your hand, it will not transform into an ace.

Why is Warren running behind Biden?  Polls that probe this question, as the Upshot polls did, tend to show that she has specific weakness especially among the working class voters who, for better or worse, have a disproportionate electoral influence at this point in presidential politics.  Perhaps this isn't justified or fair, but it's the way that it is.  Again, look at the damn data.

Personally, I'll vote for any Democrat over Trump, but I'm rooting for Biden, and not just because I'm a moderate.  At this point, he has the best chance to beat Trump.  That's my ONLY concern right now, and I think it should be every Democrat's only concern.

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #116 on: November 04, 2019, 02:25:34 PM »

So there could be a decent amount of Clinton-Trump voters in the Midwest? Who are these people? Clinton was an abysmal candidate for the Midwest, hardly campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin, and lost them by less than 1%. The Democratic nominee will heavily target these states in 2020, and likely won't be as unpopular as Clinton. How could Trump realistically expand his margin there?
There are Clinton Trump voters I have talked to some who plan on voting for him.
Logged
Lord Halifax
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,304
Papua New Guinea


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #117 on: November 04, 2019, 02:37:17 PM »

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.

Lose with Warren, get a Dem landslide in 2022 and impeach Trump after taking the Senate.
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,345


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #118 on: November 04, 2019, 02:43:38 PM »

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.

Lose with Warren, get a Dem landslide in 2022 and impeach Trump after taking the Senate.

Taking the Senate isn't enough; you need 67 votes to convict and remove Trump.  But even if you manage that, Trump would still have had at least two more years to inflict further damage on the country.  And even then you're left with Pence (or whoever replaces him on the ticket) as President. 

Would you REALLY prefer four more years of Trump or Trump/Pence to four years of Biden?  Wouldn't you rather have Trump out in January 2021? 
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,019


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #119 on: November 04, 2019, 03:01:18 PM »

I still think Warren is a much weaker candidate than many realize. She has really no appeal outside of her base, and her policy ideas are not something that will play well with those not on the far left. These are the polls you have to pay attention to for the election. Nationwide polls should be ignored because it is unlikely that Trump wins the popular vote in any circumstance.

This election is far from a slam dunk to get Trump out of office.
Logged
bilaps
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,789
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #120 on: November 04, 2019, 03:12:40 PM »

So there could be a decent amount of Clinton-Trump voters in the Midwest? Who are these people? Clinton was an abysmal candidate for the Midwest, hardly campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin, and lost them by less than 1%. The Democratic nominee will heavily target these states in 2020, and likely won't be as unpopular as Clinton. How could Trump realistically expand his margin there?

The inverse is more true, that Obama-Trump voters arguably tipped the Rust Belt to Trump. They came back to the Dems in 2018. There is zero evidence of Trump expanding his base with new voters or Obama-Trump-Dem2018 voters once again returning to Trump en masse (one of which Trump needs to win MI/PA/WI again). In fact, it seems quite clear--the Siena outlier aside--that the Obama-Trump voters took a shot on Trump the Outsider and do not at all feel compelled to make that choice again, and they will either stay home or come home to the Dems.

If you actualy have read the article you would see that Cohn says that Obama Trump voters are sticking with Trump
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,019


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #121 on: November 04, 2019, 03:25:54 PM »

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.

Lose with Warren, get a Dem landslide in 2022 and impeach Trump after taking the Senate.

Taking the Senate isn't enough; you need 67 votes to convict and remove Trump.  But even if you manage that, Trump would still have had at least two more years to inflict further damage on the country.  And even then you're left with Pence (or whoever replaces him on the ticket) as President. 

Would you REALLY prefer four more years of Trump or Trump/Pence to four years of Biden?  Wouldn't you rather have Trump out in January 2021? 

Right. All of these scenarios are up in the air. I personally fear a President Pence over a President Trump because Pence is more shrewd and probably more dangerous than Trump. The country seems to be humming along despite Trump's incompetence. Pence could really do some damage.

I think Trump would be thrilled with a Warren nomination and it would probably be his best bet to stay in the White House.
Logged
MplsDem
Rookie
**
Posts: 87


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #122 on: November 04, 2019, 03:42:14 PM »

I'm looking at the crosstabs, and noticing that this poll's sample deviates pretty significantly from the 2016 exit polls.  Examples:  In PA, 2016 exits for education level showed 22 HS diploma or less, 30 some college, 29 bachelors deg, 19 postgrad.  This poll's sample shows 37-28-21-14.  In MI, 2016 exits showed some college or less 58%, bachelors degree or higher 42%.  This pol's sample has those numbers at 69-30.  Also in MI, 2016 exits showed party ID at 40 Dem, 31 Rep, 29 Ind.  This polls sample is 29-24-44.  Not saying that these numbers are necessarily wrong, but it would be interesting to hear the pollster's explanation as to why they think the 2020 electorate will look so much different than in 2016.
Logged
History505
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #123 on: November 04, 2019, 03:46:29 PM »

Biden continues to be the strongest out of the three (him, Sanders, and Warren). Still, 1-5 point leads against Trump against in these battleground states means it could go either way.
Logged
McGarnagle
SomethingPolitical
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,613


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #124 on: November 04, 2019, 03:47:00 PM »

These polls don't look rosy, but I'm not about to start worrying until I see more data come out over the coming months. Election Day is still a year away.

This is reputable pollster - but at this juncture, it is still an outlier too. We will need more data, closer to the election, to make a more reliable projection.

At this point in 2015, how much was Hillary leading Trump in these states? By 6? By 8? By 10?

My point is, a lot can happen over the course of a year, and if Democrats won firm majorities in WI, MI and PA in 2018, they could do it again in 2020, regardless of what a single poll 364 days before the fact says.

That isn't to say this poll is junk, but it is to say that if you're a Democrat and you're worried the sky is falling based off the poll, you're basing that assumption on incomplete information well before the fact.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  
« 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 0.071 seconds with 13 queries.