Talk Elections

Result:

https://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/315450242/Salt-Lake-Tribune-President-Poll

lmao

Clinton: 35
Trump: 35
Johnson: 13

Oh my, tied at 35.

I love what Lee Carrillo had to say:

"Like most people, I think I'm pretty dismayed by the candidates, but I think Hillary Clinton is probably going to be … a more effective president. But I don't like either one of them," she said. "I think [Trump] is practically a maniac. Everyone talks about, 'Oh, he's so smart with money,' or whatever. I just think he has no qualifications for president, and I haven't liked one single thing I heard him say."

And the socialist is leading!

Sanders: 37
Trump: 35
Johnson: 12

Favorable numbers for the frontrunners are virtually identical:

Clinton: 21/67
Trump: 20/65

The swing in Utah in 2016 is going to be hysterical.

So that's three different polling companies that have shown Utah competitive.

Utah might end up like North Dakota in 2008. Polling could continue to show a close race, and while Trump will almost certainly still win in the end, his margin might be very underwhelming.

I'm telling you, if Clinton is leading comfortably by October and UT is still in play, drop a million or two and try to make a statement to the country by having a Democrat (the most hated Democrat) win one of the most conservative states in the union.

With 71% of voters minds made up, this is gonna be very interesting.

I don't know if dropping $1-2 million into Utah in October is really the smartest move, unless things look really locked up by then and team Hillary is just sitting on piles of money. The only downballot Democrat that would help is Doug Owens, and he seems pretty good right now anyway. Would probably be best to dump that sort of money in states like North Carolina, Georgia, or Ohio, that money can really help Democrats in Senate races there.

The UT situation reminds me of the Austrian Presidential election results in the conservative states of Tyrol and Vorarlberg:

In the 1986 presidential election (and in virtually all others), they voted for the conservative candidate Kurt Waldheim with 69% and 71%.

But in the 2016 election, they voted for the left-wing/Green candidate Van der Bellen with 51% and 59%.

Amazing. If Romney and Trump keep wailing on each other I think Clinton might be able to barely eke this one out.

Maybe do a small buy in the Republican primary race promoting Johnson - he only leads the Democrat in the race by 13, as opposed to Governor Herbert leading the Democrat by nearly 30.

I also find it interesting that Hillary polls 10% better than Obama in 2012, while she only has a favourable rating of 20% in the state ...

Probably some cross-over Romney-Mormons or additional Latino-voters with a strong hatred of Trump.

#RickGrimesVindicated

The bigger question here is, how D is Arizona right now with the Mormon and Hispanic backlash?

If these polls in Utah continue to show a close race, Arizona will certainly be in play. This is a state that she won twice, so she could do better with whites than Obama, and I think Arizona has some Jews, too, that will almost assuredly vote for her. If Trumpkin manages to win the state though, I think it'll be less than 5 points. 

Arizona was Trump +4 according to a PPP poll in mid-May.

Could be tied now. Seriously, I will love it to see Hillary shock the GOP and do a rally in Salt Lake City, just for kicks.

Turn the usual Mormon support for Republican pols tepid and intensify the Hispanic participation in the 2016 Presidential election, and Arizona goes for Hillary Clinton.

If we still get competitive Utah polls 2-3 months from now, at what point does "Swing State Utah" stop being a joke?

I'll believe it if it's still showing it in September. But like someone else said, even if it is, it'll probably end up being like the Dakotas in 2008 anyway.

There are diminishing returns. If Hillary and her allies end up raising $1-2 billion, I'd say a minor investment like that would be a good one. If UT-04 is actually in play, I could easily see the DCCC spending $1-2 million in that one district. I'd like to force Trump to play defense in Utah and I also want to give Hillary both Houses of Congress. Winning seats like UT-04 makes winning the majority in the House much easier.

(I may be dreaming, but can you imagine seeing a State of the Union with President Hillary Clinton, Vice President Elizabeth Warren, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi? I want to see that more than anything.)


Probably. I actually fell for that in 2008. I went out on a big limb and predicted Obama to win North Dakota that year. I remember a lot of analysts had both Dakotas as toss-ups at the end of 2008, including Charlie Cook. Admittedly, it was a gamble and I lost. Hillary would have to be up by high single-digits in the polling average at the end of October for me to ever predict her winning Utah. I'd love to see it happen, even if it meant I got a wrong prediction.

Has there ever been a state poll in any state in which the favorability of both parties' presidential nominees was below 25%?  I don't think I've ever seen anything like that.

This is insane.
Can someone explain to me why we have so many Utah polls this year?

> In before IceSpear proclaims it a junk poll because neither candidate is at or above 45%.

I think Romney should attack Trump one more time.

Because it became clear pretty quickly that this state wasn't gonna be Trump country. I think if Johnson can siphon off Trump votes, Hillary's got a chance.

At this point I would like to see some polls of Nebraska and South Dakota -- and discover whether the Zogby poll in Kansas is valid. National polls are swinging wildly.

The Zogby poll in Kansas is not valid.

There will be more polls of Kansas -- but long enough from now that the next poll will not need be averaged against the Zogby poll.

If you don't like the poll for some reason other than the poll being taken by a political party, pressure group, lobbying firm, union, or ethnic-advocacy group or that the pollster is a sham, then you will need to live with such polls as are available.

...Unlike some other poll-aggregators I do not offer running averages. A candidate can make a fool of himself; scandals can emerge.

For Zogby polls, you would probably get more accurate polls if you flipped the leading margin to the other candidate, and then double it.

New Poll: Utah President by Survey USA on 2016-06-08 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=4920160608019)

Summary: D: 35%, R: 35%, U: 16%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (https://www.scribd.com/doc/315450242/Salt-Lake-Tribune-President-Poll)

I could see Johnson getting up to 10 percent in Utah even if he only gets 2 or 3 percent nationwide.

I, for one, am taking this poll seriously. Trump should make it a point at the RNC to lambaste and completely humiliate Mitt Romney in any way possible.

I don't think that would help. I think most Utahns are Mormons/Romney lovers first and Republicans second. If anything it could drive a wedge between the GOP and the Mormons that lasts beyond a single election cycle.

It at least makes sense in Utah, due to the unique dynamics in the state.

I'd like to remind you of Kansas polls in 2014. The average of polls was off by 12 points or so.

I would not trust any Kansas poll which is not in line with the state fundamentals.

Unless Romney himself runs independently, there's just no way that Clinton wins Utah. It's not happening folks.

Romney would actually win Utah in that scenario

And probably comfortably, with Trump getting a distant 3rd. I could see something like:

Romney 50
Clinton 30
Trump 20

Romney should just run on the ballot in Utah. If the election is super close, Utah's 6 EVs could potentially keep Trump and Clinton from reaching 270 and send this to the House.

State fundamentals can change. West Virginia went for Carter in 1980 and Dukakis in 1988, It was hard for many of us to believe that the state would go for Dubya in 2000... but has become one of the most reliably R states in the US.  Now let me tell you how reliably Republican Vermont used to be.

On the other side, I was astonished to see Virginia give small lead after small lead to Barack Obama in 2008. No, the only former Confederate state to vote against Carter in 1976, a state that voted twice against Bill Clinton, and a state that had gone only once for a Republican nominee for President since 1948 (the Goldwater fiasco)... no... Virginia was not going Democratic in 2008. The fundamentals just weren't right.

Just wait for another poll of Kansas if you dislike the Zogby poll. "43" is the typical ceiling for a Democratic nominee in a Presidential election.   

Mainly because the results are wildly out of the ordinary for Utah, and they want to confirm or deny this surprising result. When Utah of all places polls like a swing state, you want to make sure the results are legitimate.

I do find it odd that she is polling 10 points better than Obama with a 20% approval rating.

When one of the deepest "red" states all the sudden looks competitive it should warrant a good number of polls from other sources to confirm it. And if it is indeed a battleground state this year then it would make sense to track it at least as much as the other fools gold states like PA and AZ.

That's been a pet idea of mine for a while

Honestly, the signs for Virginia were there years beforehand. Neither age group in Virginia voted as heavily Republican as other southern states - Mostly 40% - 47%, with an average of maybe 44% or so. In 2000, Bush won 18-29yr olds comfortably. In 2004, Bush then lost 18-29yr olds by 10 points. That was a dramatic flip, and Obama's campaign clearly saw what was going on. Young voters are mostly the reason Obama won Virginia and they are the ones continuing to make Virginia Democratic as they age. Obama won 18-29yr olds by 60% and 61% in 2008, 2012, respectively. It's safe to say that the emerging voter base in VA has significantly different political choices than their parents. Combined with favorable population movement, it's a disaster for the state GOP.

Contrast to West Virginia, where Gore got blown out in 2000 among 18-29yr olds - 57 - 37 Bush, and in 2004, it was closer but almost all other age groups went hard against Democrats.

I don't think Utah has any of these characteristics - A Clinton win here, or a bare Trump win would be something of a fluke - A victim of circumstances. Not to say it couldn't set the state on a new course down the line, though. Impossible to say right now. I just wanted to add that these trends are very rarely spontaneous.

Lmao and you think that'll increase his numbers in Utah of all places?! By all means, please encourage him to do so. Maybe Gary Johnson will finish second in Utah if Trumpet continues to bash and ridicule their favorite son Willard. 

Crosstabs up.

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2016/06/14/could-bright-red-utah-go-blue-for-first-time-in-52-years-clinton-starts-off-tied-with-trump/
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=fd3a327c-92e3-437a-867c-b90ec9179363

Trump leads in Congressional District #1 39-32, trails in Congressional District #3 31-35, and runs effectively even with Clinton in Congressional District #2 36-36 and #4 34-36.

Trump leads by 19 points among Mormon voters, Clinton leads by 15 points among Non-Mormon voters, and by 38 points among voters who are not a member of an organized religion.

Trump leads by 12 among voters with a high school education. Clinton leads by 9 among voters with a 4-year college degree. Trump leads by 5 among men; Clinton leads by 5 among women.

Also amazing is that on landlines, Clinton leads 38-35, while Trump leads the online polling 36-19.

LOL, look at the age 18-34 crosstab:

Johnson 32
Clinton 26
Trump 16

What a time to be alive...

ROFLMAO

Freedom State

AZ will be solid Hillary if UT is in play. I may have to adjust my forecast.

The whites in Arizona appear to be more racist/supportive of Trump's building of a wall versus the "Jesus would welcome these people with open arms" Mormons in Utah (which is true). That's the difference.

Hence why McCain bent the knee.

But is that true of the subset of Arizona whites who are Mormon?

Depends on the Mormon; on the one hand you've got Russell Pearce, the former President of the Arizona State Senate, an odious guy who was responsible for the "papers please" law, and who affiliated with (and baptized into the LDS Church at least one) Neo-Nazis. His sons are also into the hardcore anti-immigration (and at this point its not just anti-illegal immigration) crowd.

On the other you've got Jerry Lewis (not the comedian), the State Senator who replaced Pearce when he was recalled, someone just as conservative, but less nightmarishly bigoted on immigration and so forth, and who was practically endorsed by the LDS Church.

Overall, I'd say Arizona Mormons tend to be more hardline on immigration than Utah Mormons, but there are exceptions.

If he's tied in UT, he's lost Arizona. 14 percent among Hispanics and holding level with Mitt means a loss.

I get that, but at the end of the day, does anyone really expect HILLARY CLINTON to win UTAH?! I'm one of the biggest Hillary hacks on here (hiyeeeee IceSpear) and not even I see that happening. Utahns will eventually come home to roost in November, but Trump will almost assuredly do much worse than Romney. I see a 5-10 point victory, maybe more if Johnson siphons enough votes from the #NeverTrump crowd of Mormons who are that sincere in their rejection of Trump.

Wow---- there are still 26% remaining.... was Bernie included as a write-in option in this poll? ;)