Talk Elections

http://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/277398887805898753


http://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/277399181365243904

Yeah, as expected.

The WV and AR polls involving Hillary should also be fun.

I remember that in May 2008, we had polls that had Hillary ahead by 5 in these 3 states and Obama down by 15-20 in the same polls ... :P

I've been trying to tell you guys. Clinton's win is going to be massive. Imagine Obama's numbers with minorities, four more years of minority population growth, and Clinton out-performing him by >5% with white voters. No state will be safe.

I am sure Utah and Idaho and Oklahoma will still vote for Republicans.

If she runs, and Obama walks out of office with 55-60% ratings with a solid, rehabilitated economy and also not repeats the Clinton-Gore error of non-campaigning and chooses to campaign with Hillary, that should drive up her margins with Blacks and other minorities, she'll win quite big.

It's still way too early to say someone would easily win.

Nope. All 50 states SAFE HILLARY. 65% popular nationally, and over 400 EVs. Not a question, no point of even having an election.

::)

The Upper South's swing against Obama has nothing to do with racism. Nothing at all.

This sort of thing really makes you wonder if there mightn't be more of an underlying economic/class consciousness waiting to burst forth than any of us have given america credit for...

Obama's election could in fact just be the first part of something even bigger..  Dare we hope for some real socialism one day?

This is a map showing the difference between Obama vs. McCain and Clinton vs. McCain - using the SUSA poll from February 2008, which polled all 50 states at the same time using these 2 pairings:

()

http://www.surveyusa.com/ECV_50-State_results_030608_vs_Obama.html

http://www.surveyusa.com/ECV_50-State_results_030608_vs_Clinton.html

Too bad that neither of those two jokes is going to be the Republican candidate.

I think they used them in their matchups because they needed someone from Kentucky (Paul) and the one that led their current national GOP primary poll (Rubio).

What about Clinton vs Christie?

They are not including too many candidates right now for cost reasons I think.

Probably only a local candidate and their national GOP primary leader against Hillary.

Let's be happy that they polled a 2016 matchup at all, at this early point ... ;)

If Obama leaves with even a 45-50% approval rating, Hillary wins. Remember, these same people who won't vote for Obama but will vote for other Democrats (hmm, I wonder why) are also not going to approve of Obama in polls. Hillary will likely lose some support with Blacks, mostly in turnout. I wouldn't be surprised if they went down to 11-12% of the electorate with about 88-90% voting for Hillary. But the Asian and Hispanic proportion of the electorate will continue to grow and I don't see why Hillary won't get the same huge margins that Obama did.

Let's not. What a terrible waste of ressources that could have gone into polls about policy questions.

A considerably favorable general election prospect might end up hurting her in a hypothetical primary run as Democrats may start thinking they would have margin to spare for a more left-wing candidate as nominee.

Lief's trolling is getting better and better.

I think they just leaked the candidates she led. Christie could be beating her. (I wonder why Rubio doesn't...)

Even if she does run, I don't expect her to win states like KY or WV. National Democratic policy just isn't a fit for those states anymore.

I'm actually thrilled with this poll. It proves that this Hillary Love Fest is temporary and not reflective of one's political beliefs/actual future vote.

Hillary will obviously easily lose Kentucky. Anyone not putting on a comedy routine (my dear friend Lief) knows this.

I doubt Hillary Clinton could actually win Kentucky after a normal presidential campaign.

And if she does, she's already got a huge nationwide landslide (not impossible).

Call me skeptical.

()

Obama may be an exceptionally bad fit for Appalachia, but the Democrats' decline there is certainly not "just Obama". (Hint: The above map is the trend map from a year other than 2008 or 2012.)

So which joke is it going to be, do you think?  I guess probably Rick Perry, so he's an awfully good fit for these states.

Wasn't Rudy Giuliani leading in Connecticut and many other New England states during the days before the 08 primaries?

Dude, I'm just trying to prepare you so your world isn't rocked too hard when Clinton wins nearly every state in November 2016.

If you're not being ironic, it's for the exact same reason that Obama's not done well in that region.

I guess we shouldn't forget that Obama wasn't the only candidate in the remarkable 2008 primaries to be the subject of mass identification (for want of a better way of putting it).

All right, if that's the way you want to do it...

If Hillary Clinton can win the states that President Obama won in 2012 and the six states that Bill Clinton won in 1992 and 1996 but Obama got clobbered in in 2012, then she wins 370 electoral votes if she doesn't flip anything else.

No Presidential nominee has ever won more than 62% of the popular vote since 1900. 

There she goes!

Rubio is a political hack with huge vulnerabilities as a Presidential nominee. He won because liberal and moderate voters split a US Senate race 45-40-15 in the freak election of 2010.  He may not be as egregious as some other imagined GOP leaders. Our political system can expose serious weaknesses of any nominee.

The class of new Republican winners of 2010 in Senatorial and Gubernatorial elections so far looks like a weak lot. Senators  Ayotte? Toomey? Burr? Rubio? R. Johnson? Kirk? Coates? Rand Paul? Governors Corbett? Snyder? Kasich? Walker? Scott? Brewer? Just about any Democrat who survived the 2010 election can look strong now.   

I would advise people to not predict that anyone is going to win the Presidency in 2016 because "he can swing this key state".  If it didn't work for Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan, it is not going to work for someone who can be cast as an extremist, who has been excessively confrontational, can be linked to corruption or personal scandal, or who has questionable business practices. 

Barack Obama got elected from a Sure D state. Dubya got elected from a Sure R state. Bill Clinton got elected from what then seemed a Sure D state in anything other than an R blowout. The elder Bush was more ambiguous. Reagan got elected from a state that until then best described as Sure R except in D blowouts. Carter got elected once from a State then best described as Sure D except in R blowouts. Nixon? See also Reagan. LBJ got elected from what was then a very D state. Kennedy got elected from a very D state.

   

Very true. Both followings were (and to a large extent remain) incredibly devoted to their candidate.

Actual figures:

Q1 Do you approve or disapprove of President Barack Obama’s job performance?

Approve .......................................................... 38%
Disapprove...................................................... 59%

Q3 Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Rand Paul’s job performance?

Approve .......................................................... 43%
Disapprove...................................................... 39%

Q6 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Hillary Clinton?

Favorable........................................................ 48%
Unfavorable .................................................... 42%

Q7 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Marco Rubio?

Favorable........................................................ 31%
Unfavorable .................................................... 22%

Q8 If the candidates for President in 2016 were Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand Paul, who would you vote for?

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 47%
Rand Paul ....................................................... 42%

Q9 If the candidates for President in 2016 were Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Marco Rubio, who would you vote for?

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 48%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 40%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_Kentucky_1212.pdf

Looks like Kentucky would be a battleground in Clinton v Rubio race. Racist Democrats would flock to Clinton.

Maybe Clinton will get the Ds out of 1984 territory... and maybe, if she is lucky, will do as well as Gore.

Funny Paul is getting lots of the youth vote.

So only 53% of voters in KY have an opinion of Rubio, one way or the other?  Looks like he still has a lot of room for growth on name ID.  Were he to actually run and win the GOP nomination, his name ID would be much closer to Clinton's than it is now, and he'd presumably be doing better in the general election matchup with her.

Still, leaving that aside for a moment, if we do accept that Clinton-Rubio would at least be close-ish in Kentucky, is it more because of Clinton's strength or Rubio's weakness in a state like that?  Would Rubio have a problem in states like WV and KY against a Generic D?

Considering Obama '08 nearly beat Gore in KY, it's not all that high a bar. Kentucky is pretty darn inelastic. You don't sede the crazy swings present in some neighboring states.

I'm very skeptical about KY and WV actually being won by Hillary or any Democrat in general. Rubio is barely known and has much more room for growth. I think what's more likely is Hillary vastly improves on Obama in these states but loses them by single digits. The bigger risk to the GOP is Hillary appeals to enough rural whites to put states like Georgia in play while taking Virginia out of reach. I'd put NC, GA, AZ well above KY, WV for Hillary. That said, can't rule out AR either only due to the possible Clinton home state effect.

Barack Obama has no idea of how to campaign in a rural area and is a horrible match for the culture of the Appalachians and Ozarks.

Wouldn't surprise me if Rand Paul is voted out of office in '16. He's really not all that popular around here.

The first priority should be to Ditch Mitch, of course.

The key to winning Kentucky in 2016 would be to not only rack up good margins in Lexington/Louisville (Obama actually overperformed here in 2008 and 2012 for a Democrat), but to do well enough in coal country. Combining Gore/Kerry margins in rural Kentucky with Obama margins in urban Kentucky (he also did fairly well in the parts bordering Illinois and Indiana) probably makes it a Lean R state.

She wouldn't be able to rack up those urban numbers because she wouldn't be able to get that kind of turnout with blacks like Obama was able to.

She'll get a larger share of the white vote, though. That's guaranteed of the next Democratic nominee (since it probably won't be Patrick or Booker).

Bill was VERY popular here in Kentucky, but I don't think the same can be said for his wife. Like I said, this poll is probably more of a referendum on Rand Paul's laughable job as senator than anything to do with Hillary.

If she winning in KY, the she will likely win Arkansas.

The question is better restated: would Hillary Clinton win more than enough votes that went for McCain or Romney in Coal Country to offset the Obama gain of black votes in Kentucky cities? Or are Coal Country votes lost forever to the Democrats?

A hint: Kentucky does not have a large percentage of blacks. 

Count me in the pessimistic column when it comes to Hillary competing in states like WV and Kentucky.

Kentucky men and youngs prefer Jim Beam while women and olds prefer Jack Daniels!

<3 PPP crosstabs

Voice of reason!! Thank you :)

We really have no idea what will happen the next two or four years :)

Tell that to our fellow Democrats on this board who are already banking on the idea that Trump will be so bad as president that by 2020 we'll win back the White House.

Forgetting of course that even Nixon and Bush managed to win a second term.

Oh boy....

Junk Poll!

The reason why this was bumped is to remind people that we should avoid making hasty predictions for 2018 midterms and 2020 presidential election cycles. :)

Before we all knew about her emails of course...anyone not campaigning looks better.

Hahaha. Total junk. And LOL at Kentucky voting for a pro-abortion, anti-gun, anti-coal candidate for the highest office.

Nixon and Bush were not unpopular during their re-election years.

And you realize that this goes both ways, right?

Trump has three years to gain popularity and momentum. If he leaves Medicare/SS in check, passes infrastructure spending, passes tax cuts, and uses crony capitalist means to keep jobs here then he could easily win reelection.

It does go both ways but I don't care if the opposing side is banking on a Trump blowout in 2020. Let them believe whatever they want.

Correct.

lmao