USA Today/Suffolk National Poll: Clinton +11

[Fargobison]

Clinton 50
Trump  39

Clinton 49
Cruz 42

Kasich 46
Clinton 41

http://www.suffolk.edu/documents/SUPRC/4_25_2016_marginals.pdf

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 50
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

[MT Treasurer]

Looks about right.  I think she ends up winning Ike style against Trump and by somewhere between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 against Cruz.

If Trump somehow wins in the end, will people ever take those early general election polls seriously?

[Xing]

If Democrats play their cards right, this year could really be glorious.

[Maxwell]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 40
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

If you average the leads, It's barely different (Hillary leads, on average, 4.33 points while Bernie leads 6). Take out the person who is absolutely mathematically impossible (Kasich) and Hillary leads more than the Bernster.

[Ljube]

Looks about right.  I think she ends up winning Ike style against Trump and by somewhere between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 against Cruz.

If Trump somehow wins in the end, will people ever take those early general election polls seriously?

People should have learned by now never to take early general election polls seriously.

[YPestis25]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 40
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

If you average the leads, It's barely different (Hillary leads, on average, 4.33 points while Bernie leads 6). Take out the person who is absolutely mathematically impossible (Kasich) and Hillary leads more than the Bernster.

It actually looks like Sanders versus Cruz is 50-38 instead of 40-38, so Bernie's average lead is 9.33.

Still though, solid numbers for Hilldawg.

[DINGO Joe]

I think people have a much more decided opinion about Trump than Kasich at this point.  Kasich is pretty much a blank slate, the "not crazy" one, so you can project him to be whatever.

[pbrower2a]

2008. Obama 52.86% of the popular vote and 364 electoral votes. McCain 45.60%/173.

60% saturation, 10% or greater margin of victory

40% saturation, 5-9.99% margin of victory

20% saturation, 4.99% or lesser margin of victory

This was weird. Obama was winning some states by Reagan-like margins and losing some by Mondale-style margins. That's polarization, folks!

The most likely state that she will lose that Obama won in 2008 is Indiana. 2008 in Indiana was a freak, the result of a severe downswing in the economy, some of the highest gasoline prices ever, and a credit crunch that made a mess of the RV industry, something important in Indiana. Workers in the RV are politically conservative, but they don't like getting the shaft from politicians of the Right.  A recent poll shows her losing to Trump there.

Going from 53% to 56% of the popular vote will not be an even swing. Obama maxed out in a bunch of states. Hillary Clinton will gain more in Missouri than in Michigan.

Translating these polls to an electoral result will be tricky. I wouldn't try it:


Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or someone leading with less than 40%.  

No, I do not believe some of the anomalies. I can hardly imagine Hillary Clinton doing better in Georgia than in Michigan or Wisconsin. I can't imagine her being really close in Kentucky (that poll is from 2015). Neither can I believe that she is behind in Nevada, unless Trump gets popularity for being involved in the casino business. Utah? I saw one tie and one near-tie in which she has a slight lead.

I do not trust any poll from Texas -- that's Texas, with so many regional divides and no good analogue in any other part of America. Mississippi is intriguing.  I see few polls from the Mountain and Deep South, and if Hillary Clinton isn't getting clobbered 80-20 in the white vote, then she could win something in the Deep South.    

If she makes gains among white Southerners and Mormons, then on November 8 a lot of Republicans will be seeking something other than political news.

[pbrower2a]

Looks about right.  I think she ends up winning Ike style against Trump and by somewhere between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 against Cruz.

If Trump somehow wins in the end, will people ever take those early general election polls seriously?

People should have learned by now never to take early general election polls seriously.

Isn't it hilarious how every Democrat says "These Kasich vs. Clinton numbers are junk because <insert mental gymnastics here>" but is convinced that the Trump vs. Clinton numbers MUST be right. I think it has to do with the fact that they really hate Trump - they want him to get humiliated so badly that they aren't able to distinguish reality from wishful thinking anymore. I mean, I'm not willing to rule out a Clinton landslide (say, 380 EV or so) either if Trump is the nominee, but it's very unlikely to happen. Most Republicans will come home for him in the end and assuming he's no Democratic plant, his worst case scenario is the 2012 map - NC - AZ.

I am a Democrat, and I consider Donald Trump to be the most obnoxious candidate for President who has had a chance to win any electoral votes since George Wallace in 1968. Dubya had his faults, but he was likable enough even if he was utterly shallow.  Those Kasich-Clinton numbers mean something, namely that a reasonable Republican who says nothing stupid would win in 2016. That's what happens after eight years of one President: people want something very different.

Donald Trump scares me for his belligerency.  Every President can be expected to do something aggressive on occasion. But this said, Donald Trump seems ready to beat someone up at every turn. He has said bigoted things and not backed down from them when told of the human consequences.

After eight years of one President, people want something different in style, and after eight years of a cautious President who respects precedent and legal nicety more than  emotion and popular sentiment, who prefers nuance to bellicose confrontation, Donald Trump offers much the opposite. When such leads from one good President to another good President with largely a change of style, as from Eisenhower to Kennedy, we are fine. Obama to Trump would be like Eisenhower to... I doubt that you want to see what I think.

Yes, the projections of Kasich winning over both Clinton and Sanders says something: that in 2020 the incumbent Democrat who does defeat Donald Trump will almost certainly face a challenger much more competent than Donald Trump. Failure as President means defeat. Maybe the Republicans have their equivalent of Bill Clinton who can defeat a President who is basically more of the same that we will still associate with Barack Obama.

Sometimes, polling maps simply show elections that simply do not happen. We saw this with a bunch of matchups that I no longer show. Rubio? Walker? Bush? Huckabee? Carson? Fiorina? Do you care now?

I showed much the same in 2012. Example: Sarah Palin was going to lose about 440-100 in the Electoral College.   

Four years from now the political climate can go from this:



Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or  someone leading with less than 40%.   

to something like this:

Hillary Clinton vs. John Kasich

 

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or  someone leading with less than 40%.   

Could Hillary Clinton be as ineffective at meeting the political realities of 2017-2020 as Jimmy Carter between 1977 and 1980? Maybe. Just maybe. 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 40
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

If you average the leads, It's barely different (Hillary leads, on average, 4.33 points while Bernie leads 6). Take out the person who is absolutely mathematically impossible (Kasich) and Hillary leads more than the Bernster.

That's because I made a mistake and it's
Sanders 50
Cruz 38

That kind of changes your averaging.

[IceSpear]

Looks about right.  I think she ends up winning Ike style against Trump and by somewhere between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 against Cruz.

If Trump somehow wins in the end, will people ever take those early general election polls seriously?

People should have learned by now never to take early general election polls seriously.

Isn't it hilarious how every Democrat says "These Kasich vs. Clinton numbers are junk because <insert mental gymnastics here>" but is convinced that the Trump vs. Clinton numbers MUST be right. I think it has to do with the fact that they really hate Trump - they want him to get humiliated so badly that they aren't able to distinguish reality from wishful thinking anymore. I mean, I'm not willing to rule out a Clinton landslide (say, 380 EV or so) either if Trump is the nominee, but it's very unlikely to happen. Most Republicans will come home for him in the end and assuming he's no Democratic plant, his worst case scenario is the 2012 map - NC - AZ.

I think the logic is that Kasich/Sanders haven't been scrutinized as heavily, whereas Hillary and Trump have already been to hell and back multiple times. That said, it's still early and doesn't mean very much. But it means more than it does for relatively untouched candidates.

[HAnnA MArin County]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 50
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

As usual, nobody cares since he isn't going to be the nominee.

[dspNY]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 50
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

Because he's irrelevant at this stage in the race

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Kasich and Sanders are irrelevances... frankly, so are national polls at this point.

[pbrower2a]

Kasich and Sanders are irrelevances... frankly, so are national polls at this point.

I prefer state polls because... well, 2000. So far they show Hillary Clinton winning just about everything that Obama won in 2012 while expanding the map (especially if the nominee is Donald Trump).

A two-way race in which the Democrat wins by 10-12% of the popular vote? Not since 1940!

[jaichind]

Kasich and Sanders are irrelevances... frankly, so are national polls at this point.

I prefer state polls because... well, 2000. So far they show Hillary Clinton winning just about everything that Obama won in 2012 while expanding the map (especially if the nominee is Donald Trump).

A two-way race in which the Democrat wins by 10-12% of the popular vote? Not since 1940!

1964?

[IceSpear]

As usual, Bernie does better.

Sanders 52
Trump 37

Sanders 50
Cruz 38

Sanders 44
Kasich 43

As usual, nobody cares since he isn't going to be the nominee.

I don't know why they're even still polling him. They stopped testing Hillary in the general in early April of 08 despite the race being much closer.