MI-Glengariff Group/WDIV-TV: Clinton up 4, Sanders up 19

[Tender Branson]

2-way:

43% Clinton (D)
39% Trump (R)

52% Sanders (D)
33% Trump (R)

3-way:

37% Clinton (D)
33% Trump (R)
12% Johnson (L)

...

Favourable Ratings:

50-40 Obama
43-41 Sanders
33-49 Snyder
31-57 Clinton
27-60 Trump

...

The Glengariff Group, Inc. conducted a 600-sample, live operator telephone survey of likely November 2016 Michigan general election voters. The survey was conducted from May 24-26, 2016 and has margin of error of +/-4.0% with a 95% level of confidence. 67% of respondents were interviewed by landline telephone. 33% of respondents were interviewed by cell phone telephone. This survey was conducted on behalf of the Detroit News and WDIV Local 4.

http://media.clickondetroit.com/document_dev/2016/05/31/May%202016%20Statewide%20Survey_1464708076371_6539948_ver1.0.pdf

[Ronnie]

Zzzzz, safe Clinton.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Zzzzz, safe Clinton.

Doesn't look like it.

[Xing]

If Obama's approval rating is actually +10, Hillary's got this.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Is anyone here who seriously believes that Sanders would carry Michigan by a bigger margin than Obama 2008?
It's just the latest and most conclusive evidence of how ridiculously inflated (and unlikely to hold under close scrutiny) his numbers are.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You mean the people of Michigan aren't the biggest fans of what the Clintons did to the Michigan economy with NAFTA? Who would have thought?

[ElectionsGuy]

Johnson crushing it

[Ebsy]

Awful numbers for Trump.

[psychprofessor]

In almost every state poll, Trump can't crack 40%. Scroll the top of the screen and it's amazing how he registers in the mid to high 30's everywhere.

[Matty]

If Obama's approval rating is actually +10, Hillary's got this.

Can you please explain to me why you think this when hillary's numbers are nearly as bad as trump's?

Obama's numbers are what they are now because when people look at the horrendous options we will have on the ballot in a few months, he looks better in comparison.

According to the most recent gallup data I can found, economic worry is on the rise a bit and is highest in 3 years at almost 60%, while like 70% of folks think we are heading in the wrong direction as a nation.

I don't think his favorably ratings are going to be a factor.

[Xing]

If Obama's approval rating is actually +10, Hillary's got this.

Can you please explain to me why you think this when hillary's numbers are nearly as bad as trump's?

Obama's numbers are what they are now because when people look at the horrendous options we will have on the ballot in a few months, he looks better in comparison.

According to the most recent gallup data I can found, economic worry is on the rise a bit and is highest in 3 years at almost 60%, while like 70% of folks think we are heading in the wrong direction as a nation.

I don't think his favorably ratings are going to be a factor.

Hillary's fate as at least somewhat tied to Obama's. If people generally approve of Obama, they're far more likely to vote for someone who promises to continue his policies. I was referring specifically to Michigan in this case, but if Obama's national numbers are that good on election day, I don't see any way Trump can win. There could be some oddballs who approve of Obama but vote for Trump, but there are also likely to be some who disapprove of Obama, but won't vote for Trump.

[psychprofessor]

If Obama's approval rating is actually +10, Hillary's got this.

Can you please explain to me why you think this when hillary's numbers are nearly as bad as trump's?

Obama's numbers are what they are now because when people look at the horrendous options we will have on the ballot in a few months, he looks better in comparison.

According to the most recent gallup data I can found, economic worry is on the rise a bit and is highest in 3 years at almost 60%, while like 70% of folks think we are heading in the wrong direction as a nation.

I don't think his favorably ratings are going to be a factor.

Hillary's fate as at least somewhat tied to Obama's. If people generally approve of Obama, they're far more likely to vote for someone who promises to continue his policies. I was referring specifically to Michigan in this case, but if Obama's national numbers are that good on election day, I don't see any way Trump can win. There could be some oddballs who approve of Obama but vote for Trump, but there are also likely to be some who disapprove of Obama, but won't vote for Trump.

I think I agree that Obama +10 or higher nationally would seal the deal against Trump, but he's currently +1-5 nationally and that's where I think it will stay.  Obama +4ish nationally with the current economy would suggest a tie between Generic R and Generic D.  As long as Hillary keeps her favorables decently above Trump's, she should be OK, but don't expect a landslide.

Why not? His campaign is in debt and he has no data analytics. He eschews a robust ground operation. He relies on free media and social media. I mean, in a relatively close election, all of these factors will matter and tip states away from him.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

Eisenhower had at least a 60% approval rating for most of 1960.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

Eisenhower had at least a 60% approval rating for most of 1960.

Eisenhower offered only lukewarm support to Nixon jfern while Obama has made it clear that he fully supports Hillary and will actively campaign for her.
But then again I'm sure you knew it and you just wanted to insert your false equivalency.

[Matty]

Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

Again, and this is something I heard Donna Brazile of all people say maybe a week or 2 ago- usually approval ratings are correlated with positive views on things such as the state of the country, the economy, etc.

In this case, Americans are still relatively pessimistic about things which is why I think you can't compare this to say 1988 or 1999 where people were by all accounts pretty content financially.

I am still convinced that they are slightly inflated numbers.

[pbrower2a]

Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

Eisenhower had at least a 60% approval rating for most of 1960.

Eisenhower was still admired more for his generalship than for his Presidency.  The 60% approval is consistent with his landslide wins in 1952 and 1956.

I have my theory on why Nixon lost in 1960: he was ugly. Not in behavior, but in appearance. Hillary Clinton doesn't look all that bad.

Add to that, few Vice-Presidents ever succeed their predecessor as President by through an election after the completion of the predecessor's term.

[Eraserhead]

Awful numbers for Trump.

And Hillary.

[Dr. Arch]

As a point of reference, Obama was polling worse at this time in MI in 2008:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_mccain_vs_obama-553.html

Rasmussen   6/9 - 6/9           500 LV   --   42   45   Obama +3
SurveyUSA   5/27 - 5/27   529 RV   --   41   37   McCain +4
Detroit News   5/19 - 5/22   600 RV   --   44   40   McCain +4
Rasmussen   5/7 - 5/7           500 LV   4.5   45   44   McCain +1

Final Result in November: Obama+16.4

[pbrower2a]

As a point of reference, Obama was polling worse at this time in MI in 2008:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_mccain_vs_obama-553.html

Rasmussen   6/9 - 6/9           500 LV   --   42   45   Obama +3
SurveyUSA   5/27 - 5/27   529 RV   --   41   37   McCain +4
Detroit News   5/19 - 5/22   600 RV   --   44   40   McCain +4
Rasmussen   5/7 - 5/7           500 LV   4.5   45   44   McCain +1

Final Result in November: Obama+16.4

Of course the economy had yet to go into an undeniable tailspin...

[Dr. Arch]

As a point of reference, Obama was polling worse at this time in MI in 2008:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_mccain_vs_obama-553.html

Rasmussen   6/9 - 6/9           500 LV   --   42   45   Obama +3
SurveyUSA   5/27 - 5/27   529 RV   --   41   37   McCain +4
Detroit News   5/19 - 5/22   600 RV   --   44   40   McCain +4
Rasmussen   5/7 - 5/7           500 LV   4.5   45   44   McCain +1

Final Result in November: Obama+16.4

Of course the economy had yet to go into an undeniable tailspin...

True, but this tells us this isn't a bad result this early.

[MT Treasurer]

How in God's name is this a good poll for Hillary Clinton?

[Fusionmunster]

How in God's name is this a good poll for Hillary Clinton?

Shes polling like 2012 Obama.

[Comrade Funk]

Is anyone here who seriously believes that Sanders would carry Michigan by a bigger margin than Obama 2008?
It's just the latest and most conclusive evidence of how ridiculously inflated (and unlikely to hold under close scrutiny) his numbers are.

You need help.

[windjammer]

Guys, MI polling is always sh**tty. They always give higher rep results at the beginning of the campaign.

I'm not worried.