FL-PPP: Hillary leads all Pubs

[Ebsy]

PPP is not only not the finest polling company in the country nor better than Gravis, but it also garbage. Waiting to see what Vox Populi has to say here.

Vox Populi? Those people who just put out a poll of 900 people declaring that Hillary Clinton can't be trusted?

[Adam Griffin]

Hillary's not going to do as well with any minority group when compared to Obama because she is not a minority. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. Even other black candidates for statewide and federal office haven't been able to pull the numbers that Obama did nationally (93-96%, depending on the election and state). Virtually every non-Obama candidate in recent history gets 90% of the black vote. Hillary will too. The whole shtick of "the Republicans have been super bad toward blacks in the past few years and Obama levels of support are going to hold" (not necessarily mentioned in this thread, but it's out there) is ridiculous. They've been bad toward them for decades. The real question is: what will turnout look like?

Latinos and Asians are going to swing back, too, so let's not kid ourselves. It might only be to 2008 levels, but we're way out of sync with where their levels of support should be. These groups are not on their way to becoming new equivalents of the black vote in terms of support. Especially if the Republicans nominate someone who isn't a complete racist in appearance, the combination of party fatigue, her stuffiness, her race, her gender (which will affect non-white male voters to a degree, just as it will white male voters), and the historical deviation from the mean all paint the same picture.

The real question, perhaps, is whether a potential swing towards Hillary in the white female vote (and to a lesser degree, the non-white female vote) will cancel out these effects, and if not entirely, by how much.

[Ebsy]

Hillary's not going to do as well with any minority group when compared to Obama because she is not a minority. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. Even other black candidates for statewide and federal office haven't been able to pull the numbers that Obama did nationally (93-96%, depending on the election and state). Virtually every non-Obama candidate in recent history gets 90% of the black vote. Hillary will too. The whole shtick of "the Republicans have been super bad toward blacks in the past few years and Obama levels of support are going to hold" (not necessarily mentioned in this thread, but it's out there) is ridiculous. They've been bad toward them for decades. The real question is: what will turnout look like?

Latinos and Asians are going to swing back, too, so let's not kid ourselves. It might only be to 2008 levels, but we're way out of sync with where their levels of support should be. These groups are not on their way to becoming new equivalents of the black vote in terms of support. Especially if the Republicans nominate someone who isn't a complete racist in appearance, the combination of party fatigue, her stuffiness, her race, her gender (which will affect non-white male voters to a degree, just as it will white male voters), and the historical deviation from the mean all paint the same picture.

The real question, perhaps, is whether a potential swing towards Hillary in the white female vote (and to a lesser degree, the non-white female vote) will cancel out these effects, and if not entirely, by how much.

If the Republican primary goes as conservatives are planning, Latinos will be voting heavily Democratic the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of 2016. I doubt Latinos are going to forget Obama's executive orders on immigration, which are very popular. Latinos swinging towards the GOP in 2014 was largely due to the feeling that Democrats(Obama) had not done anything to stop deportations. Uncompromising support among Republican candidates to roll the executive actions back will not win many votes among Latinos, but not supporting rolling them back would be poisonous among Republicans in the primary and the general.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Her favorability is 41/51. She has to do something about that or it will be lethal against a non-joke candidate.

Both Biden and Obama are now more popular. In a few months, former Hillary supporters will be saying "I never said she was inevitable".

[IceSpear]

Her favorability is 41/51. She has to do something about that or it will be lethal against a non-joke candidate.

Both Biden and Obama are now more popular. In a few months, former Hillary supporters will be saying "I never said she was inevitable".

LOL. I think I'm gonna bookmark this comment for future comedic value. I hope you like eggs, because you'll be having a lot of them on your face this time next year.

By the way, you're objectively incorrect. According to Pollster, Hillary is in the green while Obama and Biden are in the red.

(Also, I just noticed these posts were made at the same exact time AM/PM. Weird.)

[Mr. Morden]

fav/unfav %
Carson 32/19% for +13%
Walker 33/28% for +5%
Warren 33/29% for +4%
Bush 45/42% for +3%
Huckabee 39/38% for +1%
Perry 35/38% for -3%
Biden 42/46% for -4%
Paul 35/40% for -5%
Cruz 30/37% for -7%
Clinton 41/51% for -10%
Christie 29/47% for -18%

Rubio job approval:
45% approve
40% disapprove

[Ebsy]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

[pbrower2a]

Tipping point states, binary elections, since 1988:

1988 -- Michigan
(two involving Ross Perot)
2000 -- Florida
2004 -- Ohio
2008 -- Iowa
2012 -- Colorado

2016 -- Minnesota in a D blowout
Pennsylvania in a strong D victory
Virginia in a decisive D victory or a nail-biter

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Her favorability is 41/51. She has to do something about that or it will be lethal against a non-joke candidate.

Both Biden and Obama are now more popular. In a few months, former Hillary supporters will be saying "I never said she was inevitable".

LOL. I think I'm gonna bookmark this comment for future comedic value. I hope you like eggs, because you'll be having a lot of them on your face this time next year.

By the way, you're objectively incorrect. According to Pollster, Hillary is in the green while Obama and Biden are in the red.

(Also, I just noticed these posts were made at the same exact time AM/PM. Weird.)

According to this particular poll, they're more popular.

[emailking]

PPP is not only not the finest polling company in the country nor better than Gravis, but it also garbage. Waiting to see what Vox Populi has to say here.

That doesn't really align with what you said here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=179096.msg3865884#msg3865884

Really starting to dislike Nate Silver.

He literally wouldn't have a job without accurate pollsters like PPP.

or here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=179096.msg3867202#msg3867202

A few things. First of all, acting like any pollster is "scientific" these days with the pathetically low response rates, the rise of no-landline people, etc. is stupid. I think that the old assumptions about what makes a good polling methodology need to be seriously looked at, especially because PPP, despite not doing it the "correct" way, is getting accurate results, often in races where no one else is brave enough to poll, often before anyone else has released any polls. This is not dumb luck and it's not making up numbers. They're clearly very accurate, and at the end of the day, for their clients, for political enthusiasts, for journalists, etc. that's all that matters.

That was 2013, but you were saying the same thing last November post-election.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=202694.msg4381697#msg4381697

[pbrower2a]

Some models well suit low-participation elections (mid-term elections) that usually favor the Republicans. 2010 and 2014 are examples. Some models well serve high-participation elections, typically Presidential years or those rare years in which the Presidential administration is in utter disarray (the latter, 2006).

   

[Maxwell]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

[King]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

Just read the crosstabs folks. Very liberal Democrats give Hillary relatively bad marks (20% negative); moderate Democrats give Jeb relatively good marks (23% positive). Both groups still vote Hillary. Not very hard to decipher.

[RFayette]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

Just read the crosstabs folks. Very liberal Democrats give Hillary relatively bad marks (20% negative); moderate Democrats give Jeb relatively good marks (23% positive). Both groups still vote Hillary. Not very hard to decipher.

I can believe the 20% bad marks from liberal Dems for Hillary, but I don't buy 23% positive for moderate Dems for Jeb.  I seriously doubt he has that much goodwill given his last name.  Walker is almost certainly the most electable in the current GOP field, as he's shown significant appeal to independents + can lock down his base, which Jeb has not done.

[King]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

Just read the crosstabs folks. Very liberal Democrats give Hillary relatively bad marks (20% negative); moderate Democrats give Jeb relatively good marks (23% positive). Both groups still vote Hillary. Not very hard to decipher.

I can believe the 20% bad marks from liberal Dems for Hillary, but I don't buy 23% positive for moderate Dems for Jeb.  I seriously doubt he has that much goodwill given his last name.  Walker is almost certainly the most electable in the current GOP field, as he's shown significant appeal to independents + can lock down his base, which Jeb has not done.

The poll says what the poll says 23% of Democrats say Jeb is okay compared to only 7% of Republicans for Hillary. Biden and even Obama get higher marks from Republicans than Hillary, likely because FOX has forgotten all about them and is on a 100% Hillary offensive.

Only independents/moderates matter for favorable ratings and Hillary smokes the GOP field in that subgroup.

[bedstuy]

Think about favorability this way.

In the electorate, there is your base, persuadable voters and non-persuadable voters.  Your base will basically always vote for your party and non-persuadable voters will never vote for your party. 

If you were just trying to get the highest favorability rating, you would want a high rating among all three groups.   Because, if you start off with every Republican disliking you, your max approval rating is something like 60%.  And, you basically want to appeal to all three groups equally.

However, if you want to win an election,  your priorities are different.  You don't want the support of each group equally.  In order, you want 1. Persuadable voters 2. Your base and you don't even care about non-persuadable voters.  Because, your base will vote for almost any member of their party at the end of the day, even if they scream and cry during the primary.  We saw this with the lack of actual PUMA voters in 2008 or the lack of anti-Romney conservative voters going third party or sitting out the election in 2012. 

What actually matters is not favorability or whether the most number of people like you;  what matters is whether you can get enough votes to win. 

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

Just read the crosstabs folks. Very liberal Democrats give Hillary relatively bad marks (20% negative); moderate Democrats give Jeb relatively good marks (23% positive). Both groups still vote Hillary. Not very hard to decipher.

I can believe the 20% bad marks from liberal Dems for Hillary, but I don't buy 23% positive for moderate Dems for Jeb.  I seriously doubt he has that much goodwill given his last name.  Walker is almost certainly the most electable in the current GOP field, as he's shown significant appeal to independents + can lock down his base, which Jeb has not done.

That 23% of Democrats might be Dixiecrats or they might think that Jeb looks good compared to cranks like Cruz and Walker. But they still won't vote fr him, as King says.

[Dereich]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

Because PPP is slowly heading toward becoming a joke firm.

Just read the crosstabs folks. Very liberal Democrats give Hillary relatively bad marks (20% negative); moderate Democrats give Jeb relatively good marks (23% positive). Both groups still vote Hillary. Not very hard to decipher.

I can believe the 20% bad marks from liberal Dems for Hillary, but I don't buy 23% positive for moderate Dems for Jeb.  I seriously doubt he has that much goodwill given his last name.  Walker is almost certainly the most electable in the current GOP field, as he's shown significant appeal to independents + can lock down his base, which Jeb has not done.

Why shouldn't Bush have that much positive approval? He was the most successful governor of this state since at least Rubin Askew. I'm actually surprised his numbers aren't higher, though I suppose that relates to his name and the very conservative bloc not supporting him as much.

[Ebsy]

More like he got out of Dodge right before Florida's housing market collapsed, so Floridians don't remember that he did nothing to prevent the bubble from forming in the first place.

[HAnnA MArin County]

I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

A majority of Kentucky voters disapproved of Mitch McConnell and he had very low favorables, yet the Bluegrass State still elected him by 15-16 points. Not that surprising. High favorabilities (if that's even a word) does not guarantee a safe election.

I find it hilarious how despite how "polarizing" she is, she still defeats the establishment candidate.

[Devils30]

The reason Hillary has a strong shot in Florida is because there aren't too many swing voters in a Presidential. If she gets 36-40% of the white vote she likely wins it. Doubtful she will fall under 55% with Hispanics, could even get the same 60% Obama got nationally. Florida actually has an increasing eligible black voter population so even if turnout falls, she shouldn't lose much on Obama..maybe from like 94% to 91%.

[Xing]

Her favorability is 41/51. She has to do something about that or it will be lethal against a non-joke candidate.

Okay, so we can just ignore the part of the poll we don't like (Hillary leading everyone, even the Floridians), and only focus on the part we do like (Hillary's favorability rating) to disprove the part of the poll we don't like? Cool.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Her favorability is 41/51. She has to do something about that or it will be lethal against a non-joke candidate.

Okay, so we can just ignore the part of the poll we don't like (Hillary leading everyone, even the Floridians), and only focus on the part we do like (Hillary's favorability rating) to disprove the part of the poll we don't like? Cool.

I am a Hillary supporter. I dislike this part of the poll because it concerns me. Don't respond to people when you have no idea what you're talking about.

[Xing]

My apologies, I didn't read your post carefully enough, Still, you have to look at the poll in its entirety: Despite a negative favorability rating, she still leads all of the Republicans.

[pbrower2a]

Florida will not be the tipping-point state of 2016. More likely will be Colorado, Ohio, or Virginia in a close election... I'd say New Hampshire, but four electoral votes rarely make the difference.

Here's how I see the states lining up from Pennsylvania to North Carolina in 2016


PA
WI
IA
NH
VA
CO
OH
FL
NC