TX - Emerson College: Trump +6 (4 way) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 12:33:28 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  TX - Emerson College: Trump +6 (4 way) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: TX - Emerson College: Trump +6 (4 way)  (Read 3546 times)
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,457
United States


« on: September 13, 2016, 05:09:38 PM »
« edited: September 13, 2016, 05:14:57 PM by NOVA Green »

" Trump leads Clinton    in four out of six regions.   He does best in   the Houston suburbs, where his   
advantage  is   49%   to   25%. Her   greatest strength is in the   city   of Houston, where she leads 54%   to 33%.
   "   

IF this is accurate, Clinton is likely +10 in Harris County, flipping Fort Bend (Sugarland/Pearland) and keeping Republican numbers within 30% in the heavily Republican and affluent suburbs of Montgomery County (The Woodlands), which is exactly what Dems need to do to start making Texas competitive.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,457
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2016, 05:36:55 PM »

Emerson must really want a horserace and just decided to make every state they poll close!

While Emerson might be a relative junk pollster, it is worth noting that Nate Silver currently has Texas at only an 8.1% Trump lead....
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,457
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2016, 02:07:46 AM »

There is a large disaffected Conservative population that has yet to warm to Trump as myself. Intense state pride like nowhere else, and the strong country culture that makes the state Republican. Yea, I really don't see competitiveness.

I don't believe anyone is promoting the argument that Texas is competitive this election cycle, but it is definitely remarkable that it is potentially much closer than anyone might have thought.

Having lived in Texas for awhile, I do get the concept of "Texas Exceptionalism", but Texas is actually not really a "country state", considering that 80% of the population lives in basically six different huge Metro areas, and as an extremely fast growing state, not only do Republicans face a potential Latino problem if they don't change their attitudes (Circa California early 1990s), but additionally there are many migrants from all over the country relocating to work in the booming job markets of DFW, SA, Austin, and even to some extent Houston (Although there is always more of a boom-bust dynamic in Houston compared to other major cities in the state).

As I stated upthread, if Harris County moves from being a marginal Dem to a +10-15% margins, Fort Bend flips, and Montgomery County goes from an 80-20 Republican county to a 60-40 county, combined with similar movements in the suburbs/exurbs of DFW, then this state will start to become close.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,457
United States


« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2016, 02:22:19 AM »

I wonder if this is dissatisfaction with the nominees on both sides driving people to defect in states they deem safe but hang on in battleground states.

There's definitely something to this line of logic.... although one might expect to see that phenomenon materialize in the West Coast and in places like Kentucky and Tennessee which we haven't really seen.

I recall 538 having an article a month or two back of a similar nature, although I believe it was a bit more generic and was more focused on a decreased level of polarization in the Post-Obama era and shifts in the electoral coalitions. Could be mistaken in my recollection of their analysis on that one.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 13 queries.