NBC-WSJ: Trump gets demolished

[DS0816]

Does anyone believe, with about 20 states lately voting for Republicans (in Democratic years) and about 20 states lately voting for Democrats (in Republican years), that a presidential election outcome will give us a winner having carried the U.S. Popular Vote by at least 16 million raw votes?

[Sir Mohamed]

That may reflect the current sentiment but national polls are pointless ten months before the general election and even before the primary voting has begun. So, I wouldn't pay to much attention to them at this very moment.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If Trump get demolished, then Obama's approvals will have recovered to 50+1%. But, probably has a 47% Approval. While Trunp has an even lower one, 42%. This is probably gonna ho down to wire. Be careful of polls showing big leads, D or R.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

If I were a Democrat I'd be dumb to not think Bernie has a certain appeal with Independent voters far more the Clinton.

[RR1997]

Not surprising. Most people (who aren't Republicans) do not like fascists.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Not surprising. Most people (who aren't Republicans) do not like fascists.

Apparently 47% of the country likes fascists, because that is Trump's actual number, as confirmed by other, more legitimate polls.

[pbrower2a]

The idea behind a Trump candidacy was that Trump would win over a Democratic crossover. To win the Presidency, any Republican must cut significantly into the Obama coalition. So far no Republican does that.

President Obama is not a failure. He is clearly far better than his awful predecessor; any Republican who offers nostalgia for the George W. Bush era will find himself facing a barrage of counter-nostalgia. Basically, "It's been tried, and proved a failure". Approval polls of Barack Obama are consistently in the middle-to-high 40s, which is enough to win re-election.

Republicans disapprove of Barack Obama the person (which may have a racist component); Democrats are disappointed that President Obama didn't get what he promised -- for which they blame Republicans. Democrats still want the Obama agenda and may want to go beyond it. So what do Republicans have to offer? Not much for Democrats.

  

 

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

You'd have to poll 80% Democrats to get those numbers. Sanders is dl doing almost as well as Mondale and Dukakis were doing at times.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

[Lief 🗽]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

Yes, he clearly gets crushed by TRUMP as this poll shows.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

Yes, he clearly gets crushed by TRUMP as this poll shows.

There must be an election. I've never understood an interest in polls.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

Yes, he clearly gets crushed by TRUMP as this poll shows.

There must be an election. I've never understood an interest in polls.

I hope Trump uses this line in the general when he's trailing. I would literally die laughing

[RFayette]

Nobody's going to win this election by more than 7 points, much less 10 or 15 points.

I think Cruz loses by 10-15%, which is basically the modern day floor and equivalent to Goldwater.  For Trump, a 2/3rds chance he loses by 10-15% and a 1/3rd chance he wins by 1-4% IMO.

There is not a chance in bloody hell Ted loses anywhere close to 10-15%. His absolute floor would be a -6% in the GE, and that's if he gets shredded in the last couple of months debate wise and what not (not happening).

Here's my reasoning.  Cruz has done absolutely nothing to reach out to any meaningful number of Obama 2012 voters on any issue.  He also doesn't have much potential to alter the electorate by bringing out non-voters, save for a handful of Evangelical Christians who were cool toward Romney.  And even that is very overstated, as Romney both did better than Bush with Evangelicals and got higher turnout.  And there's a whole litany of extreme statements and actions for Democrats to hit him on.  When swing voters get a sense of how out of the mainstream he is, the bottom will fall out.  He'll go down with the ship, but look intelligent doing it.

Trump, on the other hand, is on Trump's side.  On many issues, I expect he will fly to the center at Mach 3 the day after he clinches the nomination.  He would be the GOP nominee, but running as an effective populist 3rd party candidate.  And he has that Nixonian vibe.  He has a credible appeal to a broad swath of 2X Obama voters.  He would start off way down, and stay there more likely than not, but he has a chance if he plays his cards right.   

Still, to go from Romney -4 to Cruz -10 to -15 takes a whole lot more than just not getting any Obama '12 voters and getting some "extremism" attacks from Dems:  keep in mind, you're saying that Cruz will lose by nearly twice the margin McCain did by.  That's just absurd, IMO.  First, Clinton is less popular than Obama was in 2012 and the economy is showing some shaky signs heading into 2016.  Second, with respect to extremism, given how unpopular the GOP congressional establishment is, Cruz could definitely frame himself as being a maverick and an independent fighter, and given his general debating prowess, he could utilize his intelligence (as you put it) to re-cast himself in a more moderate image while retaining his conservative stances.

Usually I agree with your posts, but this one I'm strongly against (granted, I am a Cruz supporter at this point, so take it with a grain of salt).   I think Cruz's absolute floor is -10% and that his median is probably Clinton +4, with a reasonable (but not great) chance of a Cruz victory.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

Yes, he clearly gets crushed by TRUMP as this poll shows.

There must be an election. I've never understood an interest in polls.

I hope Trump uses this line in the general when he's trailing. I would literally die laughing

I can't figure out if you support him or not? He's down by almost as much as Reagan was to Mondale.

[DS0816]

If I were a Democrat I'd be dumb to not think Bernie has a certain appeal with Independent voters far more the Clinton.

There are a lot of people who think the national voting electorate is the same one from the 1970s to 1990s. Perhaps it was a personally appealing time in their lives.

[Sir Mohamed]

The idea behind a Trump candidacy was that Trump would win over a Democratic crossover. To win the Presidency, any Republican must cut significantly into the Obama coalition. So far no Republican does that.

President Obama is not a failure. He is clearly far better than his awful predecessor; any Republican who offers nostalgia for the George W. Bush era will find himself facing a barrage of counter-nostalgia. Basically, "It's been tried, and proved a failure". Approval polls of Barack Obama are consistently in the middle-to-high 40s, which is enough to win re-election.

Republicans disapprove of Barack Obama the person (which may have a racist component); Democrats are disappointed that President Obama didn't get what he promised -- for which they blame Republicans. Democrats still want the Obama agenda and may want to go beyond it. So what do Republicans have to offer? Not much for Democrats.

I think that Kasich does that. He often talks about coming together, especially both parties.

[RINO Tom]

I'm still inclined to believe that Clinton is a better general election candidate than Sanders, but that question is a lot more up in the air than it used to be.

[Nyvin]

But Bernie is so unelectable!

Yup. Glad you're finally coming around.

Yes, he clearly gets crushed by TRUMP as this poll shows.

There must be an election. I've never understood an interest in polls.

I hope Trump uses this line in the general when he's trailing. I would literally die laughing

I can't figure out if you support him or not? He's down by almost as much as Reagan was to Mondale.

What the hell are you talking about?

[pbrower2a]

The idea behind a Trump candidacy was that Trump would win over a Democratic crossover. To win the Presidency, any Republican must cut significantly into the Obama coalition. So far no Republican does that.

President Obama is not a failure. He is clearly far better than his awful predecessor; any Republican who offers nostalgia for the George W. Bush era will find himself facing a barrage of counter-nostalgia. Basically, "It's been tried, and proved a failure". Approval polls of Barack Obama are consistently in the middle-to-high 40s, which is enough to win re-election.

Republicans disapprove of Barack Obama the person (which may have a racist component); Democrats are disappointed that President Obama didn't get what he promised -- for which they blame Republicans. Democrats still want the Obama agenda and may want to go beyond it. So what do Republicans have to offer? Not much for Democrats.

I think that Kasich does that. He often talks about coming together, especially both parties.

Yes, Kasich is clearly the most potent in the GE if the base can swallow him.  Kasich has 1920 return to normalcy potential, particularly if Sanders pulls Clinton any further left.  I think that would amount to reverse 2008 numbers in the GE.  I might support him depending on how universal his re-work of Obamacare would be.

Kasich is so far behind the leaders that he can't get the nomination. He is less extreme than any Republican running for the nomination except Christie... who has the same problem.

The Base nominates; registered voters elect.

[MasterJedi]

Dems are well positioned to win in a wave.

I don't think Sanders or Clinton winning over Trump translates into a wave per se. They very likely will win back the Senate but the House I don't think they'll come close.

[pbrower2a]

The House elections are fixed indefinitely.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

If I were a Democrat I'd be dumb to not think Bernie has a certain appeal with Independent voters far more the Clinton.

There are a lot of people who think the national voting electorate is the same one from the 1970s to 1990s. Perhaps it was a personally appealing time in their lives.

It's not the same but for Danders to get elected he'd have to move to Canada.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems will do better in the House than you think 15/20 seats are their targets. But, they will be fine.