Talk Elections

Quinnipiac polls of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287

Florida

Bush 44%
Clinton 43%

Clinton 45%
Carson 43%

Clinton 44%
Fiorina 42%

Rubio 45%
Clinton 44%

Clinton 46%
Trump 41%

Biden 46%
Bush 42%

Biden 45%
Carson 42%

Biden 49%
Fiorina 38%

Biden 46%
Rubio 43%

Biden 52%
Trump 38%

Bush 45%
Sanders 41%

Carson 46%
Sanders 40%

Fiorina 42%
Sanders 41%

Rubio 46%
Sanders 41%

Sanders 46%
Trump 41%

Ohio

Bush 43%
Clinton 41%

Carson 49%
Clinton 40%

Fiorina 43%
Clinton 41%

Rubio 45%
Clinton 41%

Clinton 43%
Trump 42%

Biden 46%
Bush 37%

Carson 46%
Biden 42%

Biden 44%
Fiorina 42%

Biden 46%
Rubio 41%

Biden 49%
Trump 38%

Bush 42%
Sanders 40%

Carson 48%
Sanders 36%

Fiorina 43%
Sanders 39%

Rubio 43%
Sanders 40%

Sanders 43%
Trump 40%

Pennsylvania

Bush 46%
Clinton 40%

Carson 49%
Clinton 40%

Fiorina 45%
Clinton 41%

Rubio 45%
Clinton 42%

Clinton 44%
Trump 42%

Biden 45%
Bush 42%

Carson 47%
Biden 42%

Biden 44%
Fiorina 43%

Biden 45%
Rubio 43%

Biden 50%
Trump 40%

Bush 44%
Sanders 42%

Carson 47%
Sanders 37%

Fiorina 44%
Sanders 40%

Rubio 45%
Sanders 39%

Sanders 46%
Trump 41%

It is interesting that Clinton does better in FL against Bush and Rubio relative to OH and PA.

So based on recent polling, Carson leads Clinton in Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania…but not Florida.

Bush polling yet again up in OH, FL, and even PA?

Flat out, Jeb can win the GE in 2016. Also, big numbers for PA..

Florida (Average performance):
Biden: +7
Clinton: +1.4
Sanders: -2.2

Rubio: +1.0
Bush: +0.3
Carson: +0.3
Fiorina: -4.0
Trump: -8.0

Ohio:
Biden: +4.6
Clinton: -3.2
Sanders: -3.6

Carson: +8.3
Fiorina: +1.3
Rubio: +0.7
Bush: -1.7
Trump: -5.0

Pennsylvania:
Biden: +2.2
Sanders: -3.4
Clinton: -4.0

Carson: +8.0
Rubio: +2.3
Fiorina: +2.3
Bush: +1.7
Trump: -5.7

https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/651759063009787904

They have party ID at 35% GOP, 32% Dem -- even tho state has 1M more reg Dems

New Poll: Florida President by Quinnipiac University on 2015-10-05 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=1220151005015)

Summary: D: 46%, R: 42%, U: 9%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287)

New Poll: Ohio President by Quinnipiac University on 2015-10-05 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=3920151005015)

Summary: D: 42%, R: 46%, U: 11%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287)

New Poll: Pennsylvania President by Quinnipiac University on 2015-10-05 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=4220151005015)

Summary: D: 42%, R: 46%, U: 10%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2287)

Clinton leads Trump in all scenarios

This isn't the first poll that has showed PA and OH more Republican than FL.  All three are crucial, though, and we can win with just Romney's states and those three.

Interesting that PA is the most GOP of them all.

B-b-b-b-but wait! :( According to election analysts on Atlas and Larry Sabato (who never gets it wrong!!!1!), PA will vote at least 1000000 points to the left of turbo-elastic New Hampshire because muh inelasticity, muh demographics, muh presidential year and muh party identification. :(

Seriously though, I doubt the FL and PA numbers are right. Clinton was trailing Rubio in FL by 12 points in the last QU poll conducted 2 months ago. There's no reason to believe that her numbers have gotten so much better since then. Also, PA isn't going to be more Republican than FL. Just no. However, it will definitely be competitive IMO. (PPP will poll PA this weekend, so we're going to get a clearer picture of what's going on in the state).

Yeah, as I said before Q has been weirdly off this year, they're either the only ones right or setting themselves up for some humiliation.

Pa numbers are lacking, but poll in OH is encouraging against Trump since it is the key along with Co and NV

Their results have been all over the place, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. A major problem in 2012 and 2014 was the polls herding together. We need pollsters to put out what they actually found, instead of reweighing or discarding polls that "don't look right."

Sure - but it is a valid observation they've certainly been expecting severely depressed Dem turnout.

Quinnipiac has been consistently releasing R-leaning polls for quite a while/

As do Sanders and Biden.

The depressed Dem turnout idea might lead to a surprise on election night. Like Hillary going into Election Day down 2% or so and surprising everyone with wins in VA, CO. PA sample here is too white, it won't go red before Ohio.

What do people mean by depressed Dem. turnout?  Isn't this a poll of registered voters rather than likely voters?

Their final 2014 Florida poll had Crist up by 2. In 2012, they had Obama up by 1 in Florida, 5 in Ohio, and 4 in Pennsylvania. Does not seem particularly indicative of a Republican bias to me.

2014 they correctly predicted the Iowa & CO senate polls, but they were off in CO gov race. They have a bias especially in Pa, Ia& CO

A Republican winning the presidency will carry in the following order: 1) Florida and 2) Ohio. Then, with 3) Pennsylvania, it will depend on the margin in the U.S. Popular Vote.

Take this poll—immediately—and throw it in the trash.

I assume you know that Pubs do much better with Hispanics in Florida than elsewhere, right? My impression is that Pubs do best with Hispanics in Florida (Cubans), second best in Texas (the culture, and they tend to come from the more conservative parts of Mexico, and many have been US citizens for two, three or more generations now), and third best in Arizona (unusually high percentage of Evangelical Protestant Hispanics there).

Demographic change (increasing population of non-Cuban Hispanics) increasingly hurt Republicans in Florida, and so does the extreme unpopularity of the incumbent Governor -- at that compare Wisconsin and contrast Ohio. Quinnipiac may exaggerate the trend in Florida.

Note well that the most recent non-Q poll gives a tepid approval rating (45%) to Senator Marco Rubio.

Q has a historically-good record, catching R waves very well but perhaps understating D waves.

Can a state go from lean R in 2012 to Lean D in 2016? Sure. We saw a huge number of states make such a swing in 2000, but the other way.

Ben Carson is the favorite to be the President of the United States.

I know, but I was talking about this poll. If Bush is winning the Hispanic sample by 5 points (which is 26 points better than what Romney did in 2012!) and Whites by 19 points (which -surpisingly- is 5 points worse than how Romney did in 2012), he should be ahead by 3 points (45.3%-42.2%), not 1. I think it's fair to assume that Bush/Rubio/Carson are currently ahead by 4 or 5 in FL. Clinton isn't doing that much better than Obama among Whites in FL (especially in comparison to PA), which was "confirmed" by other polls as well (including PPP). 

Something is definitely fishy about these polls. Unless 2016 is a major realigning year, I can't fathom PA being more Republican than OH, and FL being by far the most Democratic of the three.

We can't reliably predict the timing of realignments. Most realignments of Presidential politics seem to occur under the cover of blowout losses for the Party that has been enduring them. 

...1976 versus 1992 and 1996. Carter barely got elected in 1976 with the aid of states that would never vote for a Democratic nominee for President for at least forty years. Carter's failed Presidency (the Reagan landslide of 1980 makes that an inevitable judgment) led to three Republican landslides before any Democrat could win again. Oddly, Bill Clinton seems similar in ideology and culture to Jimmy Carter, so it is not a matter of finding a Democratic nominee from the West Coast, Midwest (Mondale from Minnesota in 1984 was a disaster),  or New England (Dukakis from Massachusets in 1988 was a failure).  

These three Democratic wins involve the "New South" -- the South between the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the completion of the success of the Southern Strategy.  

()

It's not a perfect match (there was a third-party nominee getting lots of votes), but I am showing the one Carter win to the two (Bill) Clinton wins:

Ford, Bush, Dole -- blue
Carter, Clinton once -- pale blue
Carter, Clinton never -- yellow
Ford -- but Clinton twice -- white
Carter, Clinton twice -- red

1992 is about as clearly a Realignment election as any in the lifetimes of any reader of these forums unless one is very old. Few saw 1992 coming, and the 1992 election looked very different from that of 1976. Clinton won a raft of states -- by the 2012-2016 count 162 electoral votes (in white) -- that Carter lost in 1976. Clinton never won any of the 79 electoral votes from states that except for North Carolina voted for Carter but no other Democrat (NC in 2008 for Obama, and then barely) for President since then.

States in white other than Nevada and (once-barely) New Hampshire and New Mexico have never since voted for any Republican for President beginning in 1992.

There have been near-landslide elections for President since 1988: 1992, 1996, and 2008. 2000 and 2004 were close, and it is hard to characterize 2012 (it is close to the median for the winner in Presidential elections since 1900, but it is the only Presidential election really close to the median in electoral votes).

So why do realignments follow a succession of landslide losses?  The winning coalition typically end up with constituencies with diametrically-opposite interests and values on key issues. The winners may take for granted voters that the winners think by nature 'theirs',  that is one way to have dissatisfied voters that the Other Side can pick off.  Thus the Reagan wins depended upon putting together relatively-liberal "Rockefeller Republicans" and Southern fundamentalists who had little in common.  

Dems will keep Pa, but OH & Va are in play not necessarily FL as Dems dont have to win CO since Clinton is struggling there.

Gallup was full of *s* in 2012.

We know how reputable Gallup used to be.

Rasmussen Reports was full of *s*, with the most reputable state [Ohio], prior to the first few days of October 2008.

I don't put it past "fishy" poll results to continue to surface from one election cycle after the next.

All Hillary needs is high Black turnout in NoVA, Richmond and Philly and she's got this thing in the bag. Florida and Ohio are irrelevant.

Also you know that Cubans are a decreasing proportion of the Latino vote in Florida and are being replaced by Puerto Ricans, who are heavily democratic voting.