Title: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Terry the Fat Shark on July 18, 2016, 05:19:26 PM MRG polls Michigan for the Presidential race.
Clinton - 34 Trump - 29 Johnson - 3 Stein - 2 Undecided - 23 http://mrgmi.com/2016/07/michigan-poll-trump-trails-clinton-by-five-percent-heading-into-gop-convention/ Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Ebsy on July 18, 2016, 05:21:02 PM Both candidates below 35 lmao. Right in the trash.
Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Terry the Fat Shark on July 18, 2016, 05:23:41 PM Both candidates below 35 lmao. Right in the trash. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: cinyc on July 18, 2016, 05:26:04 PM The Michigan-only pollsters have to be the saddest lot of pollsters in the country. Michigan has a lot of them. It could be a case where having more data isn't better.
Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it. on July 18, 2016, 06:34:04 PM Dem undecideds tho
Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Xing on July 18, 2016, 06:40:36 PM #ClintonUnder35
#TrumpUnder30 #SteinAbove1 Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Wells on July 18, 2016, 06:46:23 PM At least they got Johnson right.
Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon on July 18, 2016, 11:28:02 PM Yeah, Michigan is a Toss-Up.
Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Fmr President & Senator Polnut on July 18, 2016, 11:30:18 PM No poll from the Michigan Polling Industry will be taken seriously.
MI will not be a toss up. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Redban on July 21, 2016, 08:24:16 AM No poll from the Michigan Polling Industry will be taken seriously. MI will not be a toss up. In 2012, Romney suffered from "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt!"; and in 2008, McCain was close to Obama before the economic collapse, which hurt the auto industry significantly. Before 2008, Michigan was a legitimate toss-up (see 2004). Why, thus, do you brashly say that "MI will not be a toss up"? Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Tender Branson on July 21, 2016, 08:47:50 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up.
2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: JerryArkansas on July 21, 2016, 08:49:51 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Tender Branson on July 21, 2016, 08:51:32 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: JerryArkansas on July 21, 2016, 08:55:50 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Warren 4 Secretary of Everything on July 21, 2016, 08:59:56 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: JerryArkansas on July 21, 2016, 09:01:25 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Also it was more directed at the people on the forum who are extremely creepy when it comes to women, which is larger than I would like. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Tender Branson on July 21, 2016, 09:06:44 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Ehh, no. It doesn't have to do with her looks or something. It's simply she and her off-putting personality. There are simply much more likeable women out who'd be better qualfied than her as President. For example, I don't know if you know it or not, I used to like Merkel a few years ago (until she made that silly u-turn and welcomed the whole world to Germany and Europe with it). But other than that, my dislike of Hillary is not much different than my dislike of Putin or Erdogan (but I hate them more). So, nothing to do with gender ... Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: JerryArkansas on July 21, 2016, 09:07:30 AM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... I have no problem with accepting that she beat Sanders in the primaries. I didn't like her before that. I virtually never liked her and she remains a terrible candidate and I will keep on repeating that she's a trainwreck. Ehh, no. It doesn't have to do with her looks or something. It's simply she and her off-putting personality. There are simply much more likeable women out who'd be better qualfied than her as President. For example, I don't know if you know it or not, I used to like Merkel a few years ago (until she made that silly u-turn and welcomed the whole world to Germany and Europe with it). Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Sprouts Farmers Market ✘ on July 21, 2016, 09:43:25 AM Yeah, Michigan is a Toss-Up. Because she leads by 5 points in a junk poll?!? Please! A swing-state sure, but this ain't no toss-up. Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Liberalrocks on July 21, 2016, 04:11:59 PM I agree that MI "could" indeed be a toss-up. 2008 and 2012 might have been exceptional, with Obama on the ballot. With the "fighter for the car industry" off the ballot, it could become closer because Hillary is a terrible candidate. Unless she deploys Obama to the state a few times ... Title: Re: MRG - MI: Clinton +5 Post by: Fmr President & Senator Polnut on July 21, 2016, 06:35:11 PM Yeah, Michigan is a Toss-Up. Because she leads by 5 points in a junk poll?!? Please! A swing-state sure, but this ain't no toss-up. Yup. That's my view. |