Atlas Forum

Election Archive => 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls => Topic started by: Tender Branson on January 31, 2013, 02:40:57 pm



Title: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Tender Branson on January 31, 2013, 02:40:57 pm
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Hillary Clinton?

Favorable........................................................ 50%
Unfavorable .................................................... 43%

She's universally well liked by Democrats (91/5) and a majority of independents view her positively as well (52/41).

...

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 46%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 45%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 50%
Rick Perry ....................................................... 42%

Do you think that all of Texas’ electoral votes should go to the presidential candidate who wins in the state, or do you think one electoral vote should be given to the winner of each congressional district?

51% - All of Texas’ electoral votes should go to the presidential candidate who wins the state
28% - One vote should be given to the winner of each congressional district

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_TX_013113.pdf


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Likely Voter on January 31, 2013, 02:48:14 pm
holy s--t those are some good numbers for Hillary. In the end she wont win TX but if the GOP has to spend a penny defending TX they dont stand a chance.

And Rick Perry ... LOL


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Tender Branson on January 31, 2013, 03:02:10 pm
Once Hillary starts actually running, her favorables among "Independents" will go from 52-41 to about 30-60 ... :P


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Mr. Morden on January 31, 2013, 03:49:00 pm
I don't understand how this poll is consistent with PPP's recent national poll, showing her just two points ahead of Christie nationally.  She's two points ahead of Christie nationally, but also two points ahead of him in Texas?  Either the Christie-Clinton electoral map looks really strange or one or both polls are outliers, or Clinton got a huge boost from the media glow of Benghazi hearings or her last week as Sec. of State or something.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Saff on January 31, 2013, 03:58:22 pm

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%


wat


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Buh her emails! on January 31, 2013, 04:46:59 pm
Holy s**t!!!!!!!! how many states do you think she can win?


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Liberalrocks on January 31, 2013, 05:59:54 pm

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%


wat


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 31, 2013, 06:02:43 pm
I love these numbers, but they cannot possibly be accurate.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Liberalrocks on January 31, 2013, 06:05:43 pm
I am one of the biggest Hillary Clinton fan's but raise an eyebrow as to her ability to carry Texas. However, if as stated from another poster, if she can make it competitive the GOP is going to have their a** handed to them nationally. I remember her 08 poll numbers were never horrible in Texas even if she wasnt "ahead" in Texas.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: BluegrassBlueVote on January 31, 2013, 06:07:54 pm
We all know she isn't winning Texas, but holy hell that is an absolute embarrassment for Perry. Just retire, Rick.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Maxwell on January 31, 2013, 06:23:47 pm

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%


wat

That looks like the numbers in every state with Christie v. Hillary it seems like.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Niemeyerite on January 31, 2013, 06:55:21 pm
Texas going from Safe GOP to toss-up state in only 4 years would be amazing.

Please, Hillary, run!
Please, Rick, run!


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Scott on January 31, 2013, 07:30:50 pm
(Image Link)


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Mr. Morden on January 31, 2013, 09:32:04 pm
So in the past few weeks, we've had polls from PPP showing Clinton leading Christie by 2 nationally, but also by 6 in MN and by 2 in TX.  How can all of those polls be correct?  What kind of crazy map would Christie vs. Clinton be?  (Also, Christie is a much stronger GE candidate than Rubio nationally and in MN, but not in TX.)

You might think that the party ID is wacky, but that doesn't appear to be the case.  At least, it doesn't look that crazy to me:

MN
Dem 39%
Rep 29%
Ind 33%

TX
Dem 32%
Rep 43%
Ind 25%

national
Dem 43%
Rep 34%
Ind 23%

The big thing seems to be Independents.  Christie does far worse with them in Texas than he does nationally or in MN, whereas Rubio's performance with Independents doesn't vary that much.

Indies in MN
Christie 43%
Clinton 29%

Clinton 39%
Rubio 36%

Indies in TX
Clinton 43%
Christie 37%

Clinton 46%
Rubio 40%

Indies nationally
Christie 47%
Clinton 29%

Rubio 39%
Clinton 38%

The other interesting thing here is the huge gap between Hispanics nationally and Hispanics in Texas.  Clinton does much better with Hispanics in Texas.  In fact, in this case, the difference is even bigger against Rubio:

Hispanics in Texas:
Clinton 62%
Christie 26%

Clinton 66%
Rubio 30%

Hispanics nationally:
Clinton 48%
Christie 41%

Clinton 49%
Rubio 46%

This happens even though the national poll was a few weeks ago, while the Texas poll comes just after Rubio started promoting his immigration reform.  At least in Texas, his immigration reform doesn't seem to have won him any points among Hispanics.  (Though it's unclear whether many people are paying attention to this, or Rubio's role in it.)


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Vosem on February 01, 2013, 12:00:48 am
Election Day 2016: Hillary Clinton has defeated Chris Christie in DC and Oklahoma by 45-43...


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: BaldEagle1991 on February 01, 2013, 12:00:54 am
I thought Rubio would do well with Hispanics in TX. That's surprsing.

I don't think she'll win this state, but there's no doubt now that if she does run it will be a toss-up, slight GOP lean.  


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: GMantis on February 01, 2013, 04:47:19 pm
Interestingly, the partisan divide on whether to switch to the congressional districts system in Texas is minimal, with majorities of both parties supporters being against. One think that the Democrats would like the chance of earning at least some of Texas' districts.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Asian Nazi on February 01, 2013, 05:39:27 pm
I thought Rubio would do well with Hispanics in TX. That's surprsing.
 

Having a Spanish last name will not win you the support of the Hispanic vote.  The only reason why he would get an increased support with Hispanic Texans over Generic Republican is due to the fact that he supports immigration reform, but Republican Hispanic Texans (especially the kind who would vote in a primary) probably care less about immigration than their Democratic Texan counterparts.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Mr. Morden on February 01, 2013, 07:30:33 pm
The only reason why he would get an increased support with Hispanic Texans over Generic Republican is due to the fact that he supports immigration reform, but Republican Hispanic Texans (especially the kind who would vote in a primary)

This is a general election poll.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: tmthforu94 on February 01, 2013, 07:33:42 pm
Yeah, cool. And wasn't Obama leading in some Texas polls early on? We all saw what happened there.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Tender Branson on February 02, 2013, 01:34:47 am
Yeah, cool. And wasn't Obama leading in some Texas polls early on? We all saw what happened there.

Obama never led Romney in PPP's TX polls.

Romney always led by 6-8%, but PPP last polled TX in April 2012 when Obama was really popular and having 10% leads over Romney nationally.

I think PPP once showed Obama a point ahead of Rick Perry though.

PS: of course I also think this poll is nowhere close to the end result. Hillary's best-case scenario in TX is probably something like 54-44 or so.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: NVGonzalez on February 02, 2013, 02:52:32 pm

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Chris Christie .................................................. 43%


wat


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: wan on February 02, 2013, 08:27:45 pm
Great poll.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Jbrase on February 04, 2013, 08:48:10 pm
lolno


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: pbrower2a on February 05, 2013, 08:08:17 am
1. It is early. Anyone who believes that mass sentiments of early 2013 will hold in November 2016 fools himself.

2. Any poll of Texas is suspect. The state is just too diverse and too regionally-splintered for anyone to get a good sample.  I don't care how good the pollster is -- Texas polls were simply wild last year.

3. It could be that Texans now have fatigue for the Republican Party. Although such giant cities as Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, and El Paso have or have had Democratic mayors, statewide politics has all been GOP. Such has allowed cronyism and right-wing social engineering to flourish. Texas used to be a moderate state with political figures like Lloyd Bentsen and Ann Richards. That hasn't been so for twenty years. Texas state government is Hard Right.

4. I will believe that Texas would vote for Hillary only in 2016 if the polls of the time overwhelmingly so indicate. Neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama could win the state.   Bill lost it by 5% in 1996, and Obama lost it big twice.

5. Democrats can win without Texas. The last Democratic nominee to win Texas was Jimmy Carter in 1976, and the state has drifted R since then. A Democrat wins Texas only in a landslide -- or in desperation (as in Republicans successfully getting several states to split electoral votes by Congressional district to the severe detriment of the Democratic nominee along gerrymandered lines).

6. Rick Perry is awful. He is almost as vulnerable to verbal blunders and logical miscues as Sarah Palin. Can the Republicans nominate someone that awful? If they do, then about any mainstream Democrat who is at all up to the job and does not have a working scandal... wins.

The Republicans won 24 states with someone who basically promised tax cuts on behalf of people who would get the freedom to impose more brutal management in the workplace and hasten the destruction of the environment for quick profits.

Do I contradict myself here? Sure. I have never claimed any talent for prophecy.   


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: politicallefty on February 08, 2013, 05:34:29 am
(Image Link)


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: old timey villain on February 20, 2013, 10:30:13 pm
I thought Rubio would do well with Hispanics in TX. That's surprsing.

I don't think she'll win this state, but there's no doubt now that if she does run it will be a toss-up, slight GOP lean.  

From what I understand, Mexican Americans aren't too fond of Cuban Americans. I mean, they're both Hispanics but they came to the US under entirely different circumstances. Cuban immigrants are still popularly known as the wealthy white elite who fled to the US because their plantations were put under govt control and still expected everyone's deepest sympathies, while the Mexican immigrants were treated like absolute sh*t south of the border (usually due to their mestizo race) and came to America only to be treated even worse. So when Marco Rubio spins a yarn about his "American Dream" I think a lot of Mexicans all execute one collective eye roll.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: King on February 21, 2013, 05:40:52 pm
I thought Rubio would do well with Hispanics in TX. That's surprsing.

I don't think she'll win this state, but there's no doubt now that if she does run it will be a toss-up, slight GOP lean.  

From what I understand, Mexican Americans aren't too fond of Cuban Americans. I mean, they're both Hispanics but they came to the US under entirely different circumstances. Cuban immigrants are still popularly known as the wealthy white elite who fled to the US because their plantations were put under govt control and still expected everyone's deepest sympathies, while the Mexican immigrants were treated like absolute sh*t south of the border (usually due to their mestizo race) and came to America only to be treated even worse. So when Marco Rubio spins a yarn about his "American Dream" I think a lot of Mexicans all execute one collective eye roll.

Plus, his last name is Rubio, which might be Cuban but is not a common surname in any of the rest of Latin America.  If you don't know who he is, or even if you have seen him on TV but know nothing about him, you'd just assume he was some Italian guy.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Obamanation on February 21, 2013, 06:42:10 pm
I thought Rubio would do well with Hispanics in TX. That's surprsing.

I don't think she'll win this state, but there's no doubt now that if she does run it will be a toss-up, slight GOP lean.  

From what I understand, Mexican Americans aren't too fond of Cuban Americans. I mean, they're both Hispanics but they came to the US under entirely different circumstances. Cuban immigrants are still popularly known as the wealthy white elite who fled to the US because their plantations were put under govt control and still expected everyone's deepest sympathies, while the Mexican immigrants were treated like absolute sh*t south of the border (usually due to their mestizo race) and came to America only to be treated even worse. So when Marco Rubio spins a yarn about his "American Dream" I think a lot of Mexicans all execute one collective eye roll.

Exactly what my Latino friends say. I couldn't have put it better myself.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: pbrower2a on February 24, 2013, 04:40:22 pm
Saying that Marco Rubio should do well among Hispanics is like saying that John Hickenlooper should deliver the German-American vote.



Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Snowstalker's Last Stand on February 24, 2013, 04:44:38 pm
Why is the black vote so Republican (Hillary is under 80%, and the Republicans are well above 10-15%)?


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Blackacre on February 24, 2013, 04:49:59 pm
Why is the black vote so Republican (Hillary is under 80%, and the Republicans are well above 10-15%)?

Because of lingering sentiments from 2008?


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Jackson on February 25, 2013, 12:10:41 am
Why is the black vote so Republican (Hillary is under 80%, and the Republicans are well above 10-15%)?

PPP is quite bad at polling black people.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: President Griffin on February 25, 2013, 12:25:26 am
Why is the black vote so Republican (Hillary is under 80%, and the Republicans are well above 10-15%)?

PPP is quite bad at polling black people.

Very much so. In GA in December, PPP found that 15% of African-Americans wanted to secede from the Union because of Obama's re-election. I also recall a PPP poll of NC (FFS, it's their home state) that said 25-30% were voting for McCrory. 


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Lief 🐋 on February 25, 2013, 06:12:37 pm
pretty big margin of error on the black people sample though, keep that in mind


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Nat. Sec. Council Member Dwarven Dragon on February 21, 2017, 12:16:24 am
Big Surprise: Texas is Safe R. Hillary maxed out the urban areas and still only got 43.2% of the vote. There just aren't enough votes to elect a democrat in Texas.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Lok on February 21, 2017, 12:25:19 am
Big Surprise: Texas is Safe R. Hillary maxed out the urban areas and still only got 43.2% of the vote. There just aren't enough votes to elect a democrat in Texas.
There is a lot of untapped potential in the suburbs.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Vosem on February 21, 2017, 12:40:14 am
Election Day 2016: Hillary Clinton has defeated Chris Christie in DC and Oklahoma by 45-43...

Haha, if only I'd used Utah and Rhode Island as the examples...


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Pericles on February 21, 2017, 01:28:45 am
Not quite unfortunately but Trump's win in Texas was surprisingly weak, his 9% margin was half that of Mitt Romney's 18% margin in 2012.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: badgate on February 21, 2017, 02:43:57 am
Big Surprise: Texas is Safe R. Hillary maxed out the urban areas and still only got 43.2% of the vote. There just aren't enough votes to elect a democrat in Texas.

Ummm...No? Have you seen how other urban areas of the country have trended once Democrats broke through? Look at NOVA, San Diego, Los Angeles, the Bay Area, Orlando, Miami, Atlanta. Hillary's numbers are by no means the Democratic ceiling, at least long-term. If Democrats can win 2/3 in Dallas; 60% in Harris and Bexar; and flip Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Williamson, and Hays, they probably win the state, or come damn-near close.

Denton may be the hardest to crack of those. Or hays


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: NOVA Green on February 21, 2017, 09:17:08 pm
Big Surprise: Texas is Safe R. Hillary maxed out the urban areas and still only got 43.2% of the vote. There just aren't enough votes to elect a democrat in Texas.

Ummm...No? Have you seen how other urban areas of the country have trended once Democrats broke through? Look at NOVA, San Diego, Los Angeles, the Bay Area, Orlando, Miami, Atlanta. Hillary's numbers are by no means the Democratic ceiling, at least long-term. If Democrats can win 2/3 in Dallas; 60% in Harris and Bexar; and flip Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Williamson, and Hays, they probably win the state, or come damn-near close.

Denton may be the hardest to crack of those. Or hays

Based upon the 2016 Presidential Swings towards Clinton in wealthy parts of Harris County, that I have pulled thus far (Still haven't run numbers on Fort Bend & Montgomery), PNM's statement regarding how once there are major breakthroughs in relatively Middle/Upper-Middle Class/Wealthy communities can swing hard and fast.... Are the numbers we are seeing in relatively wealthy Anglo areas of Harris temporary confined solely to the '16 GE, confined to one particular Republican Pres nominee, or a symptom of a major shift towards the Democratic Party at the Presidential Level (Down-ballots will likely follow soon thereafter in that scenario).

Here's a thread where various individuals have been pulling numbers from the wealthiest communities in America...

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=259050.50

The rate that things are going, PNMs numbers in Dallas, Bexar, and Harris don't look unrealistic at all in the near future.... Fort Bend was not mentioned, but looks to be a county that could well keep swing further Democratic after flipping this year for the first time in decades....

The key to making Texas more competitive is obviously also in the burbs of DFW---which is not an area of which I am personally not extremely familiar.

So @ Badgate--- why do you consider Denton (Or Hays) to be harder to crack than the others?

Curious as the reason, since you are the only resident Texan expert I have seen posted on this thread thus far.... :)




Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Jeppe on February 23, 2017, 08:04:21 am
Texas Hispanics generally have very low turnout, sometimes at about 20% of the eligible population. If future Democrats can increase that number in South Texas and the inner cities, while pulling suburbanites further to the party, then Texas is definitely winnable.

Honestly, with the trends in the Midwest, states like Arizona, Georgia, and Texas have to start being more favourable for the Dems if they want to win future elections. The white working class shift didn't happen overnight in 2016 with Trump, it's been happening since Obama's re-election in 2012, and it doesn't look like it's gonna slow anytime soon.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: RINO Tom on February 23, 2017, 11:11:53 am
Big Surprise: Texas is Safe R. Hillary maxed out the urban areas and still only got 43.2% of the vote. There just aren't enough votes to elect a democrat in Texas.
There is a lot of untapped potential in the suburbs.

What makes you say that?  Trump was the worst possible candidate for these voters, and he almost won 60% of them!  Let's stop acting like the rural areas are keeping TX red and the metro areas are just overwhelmed by rural voters.  Rural voters were EIGHT PERCENT of voters in the Texas exit polls.  That is EIGHT OUT OF ONE HUNDRED, lol.  Suburban voters made up 48% of the voters, and they voted 58% for Trump.  Republicans have Texas BECAUSE they have a solid base in the suburbs, not because the suburbs are a swing region and GOP voters outvote them/get just enough there.

The Texas exit polls match the popular vote pretty well, and some simple math says the GOP coalition was made up as follows:

54% Suburban, 35% Urban, 11% Rural.  Republicans would have won Texas without a SINGLE rural vote in 2016.  The suburbs are solidly Republican, even as they swung away.  Keep dreamin'.


Title: Re: TX-PPP: It's really early, but Hillary could take the Lone Star State
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 23, 2017, 12:03:52 pm
So in the past few weeks, we've had polls from PPP showing Clinton leading Christie by 2 nationally, but also by 6 in MN and by 2 in TX.  How can all of those polls be correct?  What kind of crazy map would Christie vs. Clinton be?

     The projected GOP candidate was different, but this post was quite prescient of the incongruities between state and national polls that contributed to the fog-of-war problem we saw in this election.