NYT: Internal 17-state RNC polling shows Trump losing re-election

[Tender Branson]

Republicans were taken aback this past week by the results of a 17-state survey commissioned by the Republican National Committee. It found the president struggling in the Electoral College battlegrounds and likely to lose without signs of an economic rebound this fall, according to a party strategist outside the R.N.C. who is familiar with the poll’s results.

The Trump campaign’s own surveys have also shown an erosion of support, according to four people familiar with the data, as the coronavirus remains the No. 1 issue worrying voters.

Polling this early is, of course, not determinative: In 2016 Hillary Clinton also enjoyed a wide advantage in many states well before November.

Yet Mr. Trump’s best hope to win a state he lost in 2016, Minnesota, also seems increasingly challenging. A Democratic survey taken by Senator Tina Smith showed the president trailing by 10 percentage points there, according to a Democratic strategist who viewed the poll.

The private data of the two parties is largely mirrored by public surveys. Just last week, three Pennsylvania polls and two Michigan surveys were released showing Mr. Trump losing outside the margin of error. And a pair of Florida polls were released that showed Mr. Biden enjoying a slim advantage in a state that is all but essential for Republicans to retain the presidency.

“It already feels very similar to the 2008 cycle,” said Billy Piper, a Republican lobbyist and former chief of staff to Senator Mitch McConnell.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/us/politics/trump-election-briefings.html

[Podgy the Bear]

This report, as much as anything, has got to spur Republicans throughout the country that reality is going to hit hard if things go the way they are.   There is very little ticket splitting these days.  If states like NC are in play, that means Tillis is in significant trouble.

If this election is a referendum on Trump, it could be a bloodbath for the Republicans.  The current polls indicate a trend in that direction.  Yesterday's events of Trump backtracking on his ridiculous comments on disinfectants and scaling back on the daily conferences indicate that the Republican insiders and even Trump handlers are getting this message. 

[SnowLabrador]

Show us the actual numbers, cowards.

[pbrower2a]

Evidence of collapse. If Trump really had a chance following a narrow win of the Electoral College he would be keeping some of his bare losses of 2016 close... and he is not. A re-election would likely involve him trading off a bare win of 2016 for a bare loss of 2016 (basically the battleground states of one election remain close)... but that isn't happening. His bare wins include two states sharply swinging against him (Pennsylvania and Michigan). Think of the difference between 2000 and 2004; Dubya got a genuine improvement in his margins in states that he barely lost -- enough to win Iowa and New Mexico), got big improvements in some competitive states of 2000, and lost only one of his wins of 2000 (New Hampshire). Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, and New Hampshire seem to be spiraling away from him.   

Trump got away with much for a long time, and he has seemed lucky. People can confuse luck with competence, but luck is not a tangible quality of a person. Gambling casinos profit off that confusion, if you want an analogy. (If you really are good at gambling, as by counting cards, you will be told to leave the casino and not come back unless to play the slots or dice games which are pure chance. I assume that my 'luck' is at best average.

President Trump will take the hit for high unemployment. Any recovery will get recognition only after the 2020 election. He has botched the response to a natural disaster, state governors of the other Party getting ahead of him on shutting down activities likely to spread the disease and some state governors of his own Party breaking with him.  People are taking an economic hit so that they greatly reduce their chances of dying of a respiratory infection. 

And Trump gets tied to a suggestion that people can ingest or inject bleach or Lysol (R) to clean out the virus internally? (All antibiotics are in fact poisons, and they work by poisoning bacteria, yeasts, or fungi more than they poison us; they do not work against viruses that as a rule are less delicate than we are). No, I say to any fools... you wipe surfaces with bleach or Lysol (R) to surfaces that could contain the viruses or opportunistic bacteria, as I do with my steering wheel, computer keyboards, computer mouse, TV remote, and food containers brought in from the grocery store.

(The only people that I can imagine injecting bleach or Lysol (R) are IV drug users who get excited about getting the Ultimate High... and the pitch of some pushers is that that Ultimate High might kill the druggie. Entities such as the makers of Clorox (R) and Lysol (R) do not want that business.  People who do so might get posthumous recognition in the Darwin Awards for killing themselves in a particularly creative act of catastrophic stupidity).

But back to the point: Trump has never been in a position in which he could lose much from 2016 and still win re-election, as was so with Dubya in 2004. Dubya was behind, but he was gaining, and he was in a good position to exploit gaffes of John Kerry. Dubya won -- barely.           

[NHI]

Evidence of collapse. If Trump really had a chance following a narrow win of the Electoral College he would be keeping some of his bare losses of 2016 close... and he is not. A re-election would likely involve him trading off a bare win of 2016 for a bare loss of 2016 (basically the battleground states of one election remain close)... but that isn't happening. His bare wins include two states sharply swinging against him (Pennsylvania and Michigan). Think of the difference between 2000 and 2004; Dubya got a genuine improvement in his margins in states that he barely lost -- enough to win Iowa and New Mexico), got big improvements in some competitive states of 2000, and lost only one of his wins of 2000 (New Hampshire). Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, and New Hampshire seem to be spiraling away from him.   

Trump got away with much for a long time, and he has seemed lucky. People can confuse luck with competence, but luck is not a tangible quality of a person. Gambling casinos profit off that confusion, if you want an analogy. (If you really are good at gambling, as by counting cards, you will be told to leave the casino and not come back unless to play the slots or dice games which are pure chance. I assume that my 'luck' is at best average.

President Trump will take the hit for high unemployment. Any recovery will get recognition only after the 2020 election. He has botched the response to a natural disaster, state governors of the other Party getting ahead of him on shutting down activities likely to spread the disease and some state governors of his own Party breaking with him.  People are taking an economic hit so that they greatly reduce their chances of dying of a respiratory infection. 

And Trump gets tied to a suggestion that people can ingest or inject bleach or Lysol (R) to clean out the virus internally? (All antibiotics are in fact poisons, and they work by poisoning bacteria, yeasts, or fungi more than they poison us; they do not work against viruses that as a rule are less delicate than we are). No, I say to any fools... you wipe surfaces with bleach or Lysol (R) to surfaces that could contain the viruses or opportunistic bacteria, as I do with my steering wheel, computer keyboards, computer mouse, TV remote, and food containers brought in from the grocery store.

(The only people that I can imagine injecting bleach or Lysol (R) are IV drug users who get excited about getting the Ultimate High... and the pitch of some pushers is that that Ultimate High might kill the druggie. Entities such as the makers of Clorox (R) and Lysol (R) do not want that business.  People who do so might get posthumous recognition in the Darwin Awards for killing themselves in a particularly creative act of catastrophic stupidity).

But back to the point: Trump has never been in a position in which he could lose much from 2016 and still win re-election, as was so with Dubya in 2004. Dubya was behind, but he was gaining, and he was in a good position to exploit gaffes of John Kerry. Dubya won -- barely.           

Sound analysis. Trump’s electoral count continues to shrink.

[here2view]

Trump could very well win, but some people on this forum really overlook just how narrow and improbable his 2016 path was.

It's extremely difficult to replicate that, let alone expand.

[Woody]

The states most hardest hit are under the supervision of democratic governors, this is literally the democrats' fault. And now Trump has to pay the price for this BS because of their incompetence.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The states most hardest hit are under the supervision of democratic governors, this is literally the democrats' fault. And now Trump has to pay the price for this BS because of their incompetence.

Don't think this virus won't reach Trump country because it will. It's just that many of these blue states have large, crowded cities where the virus is bound to spread, whereas it takes longer in more rural areas. Rural parts o fthe country aren't immune to the virus though. I don't see how you can say that someone who issued a stay at home order early on is better than someone who called the virus a hoax and suggested to infect yourself with disinfectant to prevent yourself from getting the virus.

[wbrocks67]

Trump could very well win, but some people on this forum really overlook just how narrow and improbable his 2016 path was.

It's extremely difficult to replicate that, let alone expand.

This. While Trump's 2016 win was surprising, some people give him too much credit when despite his surprise win, he still couldn't even muster 50%+ in numerous states. He won WI, MI, PA, etc. with 47-49% of the vote. And that was BEFORE all of this.

[pbrower2a]

The states most hardest hit are under the supervision of democratic governors, this is literally the democrats' fault. And now Trump has to pay the price for this BS because of their incompetence.

Other factors are involved. Frequent long-distance travelers, the first people who got COVID-19 are largely from states with Democratic governors or from states (Massachusetts, Maryland, perhaps Vermont) in which a Republican governor seems an anomaly. The other states to be hit hard are Arizona, Texas, Georgia, and Florida, where the responses have been poor. Louisiana got hit hard because of Mardi Gras revelers and because some preacher of a mega-church decided to defy COVID-19 in the Name of God. A hint: the Roman Catholic Church told priests to close churches and tell the Faithful to stay home and avoid the Mass out of fear (pardon the macabre pun) or mass death by worshipers. America does not have the mass religious gatherings that some other countries have as in Iran (Qom, the "Shiite Rome", was the nexus of mass death from COVID-19 in Iran. Fearing such, the government of Saudi Arabia shut down the Hajj. People expecting miracles at Lourdes can stay at home and pray.

Note well that New York City got hit hard once the Angel of Death went from jetliners to the subway.  Figure that jetliners and the NYC subway system are similarly crowded and that people might be traveling sick. Subway workers have been hit hard by COVID-19. In Greater Detroit, police forces including those of Detroit and of Wayne County (the county containing Detroit) got hit hard.  

Much of the Stay at Home order is intended to keep people from boarding jetliners or using mass transit and participating in mass gatherings of any kind.  Note well that the money-grubbing entertainment industry (including sports), gambling, and restaurant/bar industry have shut down. Lost revenues or law-suits? Law suits are expensive even if one 'wins'.

Count on many usual celebrations shutting down this year. Palm Sunday and Easter -- gone. Memorial Day? Likely.

...OK -- what are Democratic governors doing right? I can speak for Gretchen Whitmer. She conceded golf (but only without carts that can't be kept clean enough) and motor-boating. She also gave retail businesses the right to demand that customers wear masks. I count on merchants selling masks to those not in initial compliance -- for a price. This may be more critical than anything else.  

[Non Swing Voter]

This report, as much as anything, has got to spur Republicans throughout the country that reality is going to hit hard if things go the way they are.   There is very little ticket splitting these days.  If states like NC are in play, that means Tillis is in significant trouble.

If this election is a referendum on Trump, it could be a bloodbath for the Republicans.  The current polls indicate a trend in that direction.  Yesterday's events of Trump backtracking on his ridiculous comments on disinfectants and scaling back on the daily conferences indicate that the Republican insiders and even Trump handlers are getting this message. 

That's Trump's/and the GOP's main problem with this coronavirus crisis.  This will absolutely be a referendum on Trump election.  That's exactly what they didn't want.  Doing a Hunter biden/Ukraine smear job won't work.  Hopefully this election demolishes the current GOP for a generation and they are forced to rebrand as something better.

[Senator Spark]

Here's what the RCP polling says:

Biden: 336 EVs
Trump: 202 EVs

As a Trump supporter again, agreed that he needs to turn this around ASAP.

[Inmate Trump]

Nothing matters if turnout is low.

Low turnout benefits Republicans.

If the virus makes a rebound in or around November, people will be afraid to vote and Republicans will do everything they can to prevent voting by mail.

[Dr. Arch]

Nothing matters if turnout is low.

Low turnout benefits Republicans.

If the virus makes a rebound in or around November, people will be afraid to vote and Republicans will do everything they can to prevent voting by mail.

Turned out well for them in Wisconsin.

[Intell]

Nothing matters if turnout is low.

Low turnout benefits Republicans.

If the virus makes a rebound in or around November, people will be afraid to vote and Republicans will do everything they can to prevent voting by mail.

Turned out well for them in Wisconsin.

Yea I keep hearing this but I feel like low turnout helps democrats in 2020. There is dissatisfaction amongst white non college educated voters which caused them to turnout drastically less in 2018. Are these voters going to vote democratic probably not. Similarly black people+liberal whites have shown great turnout while I’m sure there’s center right republicans in the surburbs that didn’t vote for republicans in the midterms but aren’t going to for the democrats.

[The Mikado]

The Tina Smith internal with Biden up by 10 in MN is nice, even though obviously internals are internals. It also reinforces my hunch that 2016's 46-45 result in MN was a result of complacency and a lot of the third party protest vote in MN would drift to a Dem rather than to Trump in a more focused election.

[ProudModerate2]

The states most hardest hit are under the supervision of democratic governors, this is literally the democrats' fault. And now Trump has to pay the price for this BS because of their incompetence.

Don't think this virus won't reach Trump country because it will. It's just that many of these blue states have large, crowded cities where the virus is bound to spread, whereas it takes longer in more rural areas. Rural parts o fthe country aren't immune to the virus though. I don't see how you can say that someone who issued a stay at home order early on is better than someone who called the virus a hoax and suggested to infect yourself with disinfectant to prevent yourself from getting the virus.

I dont know if one should take SirWoodbury's words seriously or not.
My thought is that he is just saying that to troll, because I cant possibly understand that his comment is derived from any actual facts of what has transpired about how trump has completely bumbled the Pandemic (leading to the unnecessary deaths of thousands).

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump has already been impeached,  the coronavirus has excerbated his vulnerability with the rural v urban divide, with income inequality. 2016 was good economic times, now in bad economic times tax cuts are just creating huge deficits

[Orser67]

In 2006, anger at President George W. Bush and unease with the Iraq war propelled Democrats to reclaim Congress; two years later they captured the presidency thanks to the same anti-incumbent themes and an unexpected crisis that accelerated their advantage, the economic collapse of 2008. The two elections were effectively a single continuous rejection of Republican rule, as some in the G.O.P. fear 2018 and 2020 could become in a worst-case scenario.

Yes please.

If Trump did in fact lose by 5+ points, it would arguably be the first time since the Hoover administration that one party suffered such a massive repudiation in a president's first term. Carter and Bush I both lost their re-election bids fairly decisively, but neither saw much of a wave during their respective mid-terms. Ford (who obviously took office under unique circumstances) saw a massive wave in 1974, but ran a pretty close race in 1976.

[Phenix621]

It’s only April. And during huge crisis, Americans generally don’t change horses in the middle of it. Trump has historically underperformed in polls and yet still wins. See 2016. For all y’all who think this is going to be an easy democratic victory you might want to stop drinking the Biden koolaid and look at the reality. Biden is more or less in the same Clinton mold: aka running on a platform “I’m not Trump.” That is not going to win him the election.

[LiberalDem19]

If Minnesota goes by 10, Tina Smith is beating Jason Lewis, Angie Craig is getting re-elected, Collin Peterson's squeaking out another term, the state house is under DFL control, and the state senate is flipping. If Biden is winning by 6 nationally, MN being D+10 is a plausible result.

[GeorgiaModerate]

It’s only April. And during huge crisis, Americans generally don’t change horses in the middle of it. Trump has historically underperformed in polls and yet still wins. See 2016. For all y’all who think this is going to be an easy democratic victory you might want to stop drinking the Biden koolaid and look at the reality. Biden is more or less in the same Clinton mold: aka running on a platform “I’m not Trump.” That is not going to win him the election.

You are generalizing about Trump's performance relative to polls based on a sample size of one election.  In addition, it's not a very good generalization. The national polling average was very close in 2016; it was just state polls that were off, due to failure to model the educational split in preferences that had developed.  Smart pollsters have adjusted for that.

As for "I'm not Trump", that may not have been a winning strategy for the highly disliked Clinton against unknown quantity Trump, but it's likely to be much more effective for likable Biden against demonstrably incompetent and corrupt Trump.  

David Frum had a good thread on the history of elections during/following severe economic downturns that ended with this summary (click to read the whole thread, which is interesting):

https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1254037903698800640

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump has lost the 278 map, WI/Pa/MI will flip, the 260 red wall cracks starting with a Mark Kelly win in AZ, and no R has ever won without carrying AZ

[DrScholl]

It’s only April. And during huge crisis, Americans generally don’t change horses in the middle of it. Trump has historically underperformed in polls and yet still wins. See 2016. For all y’all who think this is going to be an easy democratic victory you might want to stop drinking the Biden koolaid and look at the reality. Biden is more or less in the same Clinton mold: aka running on a platform “I’m not Trump.” That is not going to win him the election.

"But 2016!" is not going to cut it anymore. Trump now has a record of almost four years of failures, corruption, mismanagement and incompetence. He's not some businessperson who never held office before who people can look at and say "well, let's give him a chance, it's something new, what's the worst that could happen?".

This crisis isn't going away any time soon and there are only six whole months until the election which doesn't leave a whole lot of time for Trump to recover, especially when the economy is going to be a mess. The unemployment numbers for the coming months are going to be terrible. This election is indictment on Trump because that is how the people are going to see it.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Another thought just occurred to me regarding the "Trump overperforms the polls" argument:

To the extent this is true, it's equally as likely that the cause is "Hillary Clinton underperforms the polls."  There's no way to choose between those two propositions based on a sample size of one election.