McClatchy-Marist Poll: Hillary starts to feel the heat already

[Tender Branson]

48-44 Clinton/Walker
49-42 Clinton/Bush
49-42 Clinton/Rubio
51-40 Clinton/Paul
51-42 Clinton/Perry
53-39 Clinton/Cruz

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1682657/mcclatchy-marist-poll-2016-nature-of-the-sample.pdf#storylink=relast

[Tender Branson]

So, Hillary already dropped 5% or so this week compared to previous polls and she'll likely drop another 5% right after she announces her run.

Creating a tied race already.

And in the end she might lose too (maybe even in a landslide).

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

[Holmes]

So, Hillary already dropped 5% or so this week compared to previous polls and she'll likely drop another 5% right after she announces her run.

Creating a tied race already.

And in the end she might lose too (maybe even in a landslide).

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

damn, own'd.

[King]

Am I missing something? She still looks solidly ahead of the field to me and her margins against Paul and Bush (the only two options remaining from the last poll) are still as large. What's with the gloating?

[Mr. Morden]

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

I tried to tell you what was going on.  I really tried.

[Tender Branson]

Am I missing something? She still looks solidly ahead of the field to me and her margins against Paul and Bush (the only two options remaining from the last poll) are still as large. What's with the gloating?

Her lead over Bush is cut in half though since their last poll. And this poll was not even done fully after her email-scandal. Most people are only reading and hearing about it over the weekend.

And as the number of her scandals increases in the next 18 months, she'll drop even more.

Just look at Walker: She leads this guy by only 4 points now, but she's universally known and Walker is only known to half of all Americans. THIS IS NOT GOING TO END WELL ! Maybe she will eventually cry her way over the finish line, like in NH once ...

[King]

Am I missing something? She still looks solidly ahead of the field to me and her margins against Paul and Bush (the only two options remaining from the last poll) are still as large. What's with the gloating?

Her lead over Bush is cut in half though since their last poll. And this poll was not even done fully after her email-scandal. Most people are only reading and hearing about it over the weekend.

Her lead has decreased since their January poll but has increased since their August 2014 poll.

Nice narrative, but it's not true. This is a pretty static change.

And again, it's all she MIGHT lose and MIGHT not end well. Okay, well, Elizabeth Warren's ceiling against Walker is losing by 4 points and her floor is McGovernesque. She's not that impressive, and rather grating to anyone who isn't an ultraliberal to be honest.

Note the strange bedfellows. If the people backing you up in arguments that Hillary isn't a sure thing are also people who want Scott Walker to be elected President, check yourself. You may be getting duped.

[King]

And again, it's all she MIGHT lose and MIGHT not end well. Okay, well, Elizabeth Warren's ceiling against Walker is losing by 4 points and her floor is McGovernesque. She's not that impressive, and rather grating who isn't an ultraliberal to be honest.

No. Just no.

So you think Warren can win? I certainly don't see it.

[Tender Branson]

Note the strange bedfellows. If the people backing you up in arguments that Hillary isn't a sure thing are also people who want Scott Walker to be elected President, check yourself. You may be getting duped.

I'm not getting "duped" by anyone. I'm just not a blind believer in the "Hillary will sail to victory next year" theory. There are too many of them here anyway. As much as I had a good feeling about Obama's election chances in 2008 and 2012, I have a bad feeling about Hillary's chances. It's a 50/50-mix of her own baggage and persona and the fact that 2016 could see record lows in turnout, like in 2000, and a Democratic fatigue after 8 years of Obama. All this is toxic and allows a Republican victory.

[pbrower2a]

So, Hillary already dropped 5% or so this week compared to previous polls and she'll likely drop another 5% right after she announces her run.

Creating a tied race already.

And in the end she might lose too (maybe even in a landslide).

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

You are absolutely right. But they are still not going to believe this. They think that no Republican can win in 2016 because of demographics, because she is a Clinton, because of the Blue Wall, because she is a woman, because Walker is an union hater who suppresses the vote (muh backlash), because Bush is a Bush,  because Paul/Carson/Cruz are nutjobs and extremists, because ...... who knows. It's just inevitable.

Republicans can win the Presidential election, and hold both Houses of Congress in 2016. But that depends upon Hillary Clinton melting down politically and no Democrat being able to take her place and win -- and of course the maintenance of a political climate like that of 2010 and 2014. If that happens... you already have the material for the first chapters of The Decline and Fall of the American Empire in your hands. the first stage of Decline and Fall is that America becomes a nasty place to live for all but the elites. America begins to get a brain drain as other countries have more attractive opportunities for their kids than being migrant farm laborers, domestic servants, and sweatshop workers.

I hope that we can do better.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't see Walker as a racist; the rest is true. I can see him losing the Blue Wall and most swing states. If he can't win his own state he must win an inside straight.

The Romney campaign did attack President Obama -- but as the election showed, not on things that mattered. Romney lost because he was too much of a narcissist for enough people to trust him. But remember -- Scott Walker is a moderate on nothing. He can be defeated by showing him as an extremist who will make life miserable for people not already filthy-rich.   

[Landslide Lyndon]

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

So, Hillary already dropped 5% or so this week compared to previous polls and she'll likely drop another 5% right after she announces her run.

Creating a tied race already.

And in the end she might lose too (maybe even in a landslide).

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

Seriously?

[bedstuy]

What?  You can't just string together a few low reliability polls more than a year before election season.

For reference:

McClatchy-Marist Poll January 2011: Obama 51 - Romney 38
McClatchy-Marist Poll April 2011: Obama 46 - Romney 45

Trend: Romney +12 or +4 per month

Let's get real.  Nothing significant has happened to Hillary Clinton since she left the Secretary of State office.  There were people back then who only liked her because she was an example of a non-Obama Democrat and she seemed more hawkish and non-partisan.  Since then, people have just come back to their partisan view of her as a potential candidate.

And, on the Republican side, there's nobody who has established an appealing national persona.  Nobody has really made an impression yet. 

So, cool your jets.

[IceSpear]

So, Hillary already dropped 5% or so this week compared to previous polls and she'll likely drop another 5% right after she announces her run.

Creating a tied race already.

And in the end she might lose too (maybe even in a landslide).

I told you Hillary-fetishists early about this, but you were not listening ...

LOL, is this a joke post? "She'll likely drop 5% right after she announces her run?" "Lose in a landslide?" What exactly are you basing this on?

The fact that you're trying to spin Hillary leading by 4-14 points as a bad thing is hilarious. The last four presidential elections were decided by 4, 7, 3, and 0 points. Polls go up and down. Get some perspective please.

[Flake]

Obviously I'm not predicting the gloom and doom that Branson is saying, but this is certainly concerning.

[IceSpear]

Note the strange bedfellows. If the people backing you up in arguments that Hillary isn't a sure thing are also people who want Scott Walker to be elected President, check yourself. You may be getting duped.

I'm not getting "duped" by anyone. I'm just not a blind believer in the "Hillary will sail to victory next year" theory. There are too many of them here anyway. As much as I had a good feeling about Obama's election chances in 2008 and 2012, I have a bad feeling about Hillary's chances. It's a 50/50-mix of her own baggage and persona and the fact that 2016 could see record lows in turnout, like in 2000, and a Democratic fatigue after 8 years of Obama. All this is toxic and allows a Republican victory.

Could that have anything to do with the fact that you liked Obama but dislike Hillary? Surely not...

Democratic fatigue? That's possible, it could hurt among independents. But please knock it off with the "low turnout" talking point. Dozens (hundreds?) of polls have shown that Democrats like Hillary and are enthusiastic for her. You guys choose to ignore this to sustain your confirmation bias. Empirical evidence > comments on the Atlas Forum and NYT. Sorry, but that's a fact. And by the way, turnout was high even for Kerry, and Dems want Hillary far more than they wanted him.

[IceSpear]

Obviously I'm not predicting the gloom and doom that Branson is saying, but this is certainly concerning.

I don't see what's concerning about it. Pretty much all of the forum has already agreed long ago that Hillary is not going to win in a crushing massive landslide, and now when the numbers (against only Walker, I may add) start to reflect that, it means she's destined to keep falling and will lose in a landslide?

I mean, just another interesting phrase from that post: "she might even lose"? No sh[inks] she might lose. A presidential election is never a sure thing 20 months in advance. It's not like some elections where the person is leading by 50 points and is a foregone conclusion (*cough*).

[morgieb]

Am I missing something? She still looks solidly ahead of the field to me and her margins against Paul and Bush (the only two options remaining from the last poll) are still as large. What's with the gloating?

Apparently the poll is all adults rather than registered, let alone likely, voters.

[pbrower2a]

At this point I see nothing to indicate that the electorate is any less polarized than it was at any time since 2006. that so far is the electoral news.

[Free Bird]

IceSpear, don't tell me that a lead that substantial that you flaunting constantly being cut in HALF IN A WEEK isn't reason for alarm

[King]

Am I missing something? She still looks solidly ahead of the field to me and her margins against Paul and Bush (the only two options remaining from the last poll) are still as large. What's with the gloating?

Apparently the poll is all adults rather than registered, let alone likely, voters.

Yeah, all you progressives are going to stay home in November 2016, after watching an entire news cycle on race, and let Scott Walker be elected President because Hillary isn't "perfect" lmao. We heard the same thing about the disillusioned Obama fans who were not going to vote in 2012. They voted.

Conservatives didn't stay home in 2008 and 2012 and liberals aren't staying home in 2016.

Electorally involved people do not stay home for Presidential elections. Congress is another story because they are despised, but people will always care who the President is.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I think the electoral map favors Hilary, winning CO, NV and Pa, plus OH and NH to get over the 272 mark, just like Obama did.  Expanding it beyond that will be the question in terms of winning FL, but Hillary in my mind will win at least 290 electoral votes, at very least, especially if it is against Walker.

[Tender Branson]

All I want to say IceSpear is: Just don't be too surprised (or disappointed) if President-elect Scott Walker or Jeb Bush give their victory speech on Nov. 8, 2016 - while a (crying ?) Hillary Clinton announces her retirement from politics. For good.

Hillary A) does not fire up the Democratic base and B) she may very well be a reason why Indies will stay home in droves. It all happened back in 2000 too (and 2016 is shaping up like 2000 again). There's no reason to believe that 2016 will be a high turnout election like 2008/2012, which will favour the Republicans (especially after the Dem. disaster in 2014).

I'll ask you again how you feel about her chances in a few months when she has announced her candidacy and already has negative favorable ratings and trails Bush and Walker in the polls ...

[BlueSwan]

Honestly, I'm generally a fairly pessimistic guy when it comes to believing in my side's ability to win elections. With the exception of Bush-Kerry in 2004 I have never wrongly predicted my side to win any election, ever (yes, I really though Kerry pull win in a squeeker).

And while I see many potential issues with Hillary Clinton, including her age, dynasty fatigue (only if not running against Bush) and doubts about her dedication to the race, I really struggle to see these "scandals" as having much of an influence. All of them are pseudo-scandals at best, that I just don't see the general public caring about unless the media builds them up so much that people start to think that they are somehow substantial scandals.

Bottom line, Hillary is far from a dead cert, but at this point she is still clearly the most likely next POTUS and if she doesn't win, it is probably not going to be due to any of these scandals but to other factors, like the GOP actually nominating an exciting candidate.

[Beet]

The problem with Hillary is that any tiny little flaw in her gets blown up into the biggest thing in the press. Politico starts to turn into Fox News when it comes to her or DWS. She and Richard Nixon have the same negative relationship with the Fourth Estate. I honestly think, firmly now, that she should simply say she is not running and pass the baton on to the next generation. I have a hard time seeing her as a terribly strong candidate.