Talk Elections

43% Trump
38% Clinton

43% Sanders
40% Trump

...

51% Cruz
34% Clinton

45% Cruz
36% Sanders

...

49% Rubio
31% Clinton

43% Rubio
37% Sanders

...

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs Poll at Fort Hays State University in Kansas of 483 Missourians was conducted March 3-10, and has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 4.6 percentage points. Margin of error among Republican respondents was plus or minus 7 percentage points, among Democrats it was 8 percentage points.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/missouri-poll-results/pdf_403071e8-60bd-5830-ad9e-0364a168dc67.html

Those are some pretty crazy numbers for Hillary vs not Trump in a former bellwether state next to the 2 states she lived in for around 45 years.

Sanders is more electable.

Missouri might vote to the right of Mississippi and South Carolina this time. Good numbers for Roy Blunt.

Saying it over and over doesn't make it true. We'll never really know who is "most electable", since all we've ever have is theory and polls 8+ months before the election.

When someone is ahead with less than 45% of the Decided, then even a 5% difference matters little. Whoever has the lower ceiling loses.

There were polls in North Dakota and South Dakota in 2008 that showed Senator Obama up 45-42, and many people made much of those. He ended up losing those two states by about 8%. But he did get his 45% in those two states!

But strange things were happening in 2008, you say? Strange things are happening this time, too.

You have seen my maps, and they basically show that someone up 49-42 (a convincing and nearly-insurmountable lead) and someone up 42-38 (a lead at the margin of error but not insurmountable) are in the same category. That is a bug that I might need to fix.  Maybe I yellow leads involving a top number under 45 to orange for a Democrat or green for a Republican.

Wow, Sanders is a lot stronger here than I would of expected.

Still, I do note that certain Hillary supporters (not necessarily you) have been quick to point out polling in the past that showed Hillary doing better than Bernie in the GE.

SANDERS isnt that much more electable,  OH and CO are still the swing states. He would be much more pragmatic with gun supporters

Exactly, and if either Clinton/Sanders lose the GE, we'll get an earful of "See, I told you Clinton/Sanders wasn't electable! Sanders/Clinton would've won easily!"

True, though it is interesting that Trump polls weaker than Cruz/Rubio in head-to-head matchups here considering how pro-Trump much of Appalachia is.  Perhaps it's also a factor of suburban/exurban Missouri completely shifting away from the Democrats altogether.

The Ozarks and Appalachia are similar in culture and economics as well as scenery (having been in southern Missouri and southern West Virginia I can hardly tell one from the other in scenery). Similarities in politics can be expected to follow.