Talk Elections

Trump 44
Clinton 42
Johnson 5
Stein 2

https://www.stlmag.com/news/in-missouri-voter-polls-president-governor/

Must resist the urge to call junk...

I trust these guys.  They make good razors.

I don't know who these people are, but the numbers look about where I'd imagine they are.

Correlates well with the 538 Nowcast (Trump narrowly leads in MO)

If Trump does lose as badly as the polls are suggesting, MO could be quite close.

Remington is Jeff Roe (Cruz's scummy campaign manager)'s firm. I don't know if their polls are biased against Democrats or not, but they have not reason to be boosting Hillary's numbers.

New Poll: Missouri President by Other Source on 2016-08-06 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2016/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=2920160806106)

Summary: D: 42%, R: 44%, U: 7%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (https://www.stlmag.com/news/in-missouri-voter-polls-president-governor/)

he really is down double digits if his lead in MO is only 2 and only 13 in Kentucky. I want a SC poll real bad now.

Since he probably detests them both, he most likely told the firm to take an honest poll. I think these numbers right now are correct or very close to correct

This looks right, though I wish Clinton were higher.

Yeah, I've never bought this idea of MO being out of reach of Clinton. Yes, it's shifted to the right, but you do have suburban whites who voted Obama/Romney and aren't exactly thrilled by Trump.

Gut call is that Trump would win it by 3-4 right now, but really in this case, calling any state that was close in 2008 to be out of reach for Clinton, all things being equal, is pretty silly.

wow i really didn't think Clinton had any shot at missouri, but this is a right-wing pollster.

Clinton could have a chance in Missouri. However, if she campaigns and spends money in Missouri, she could alienate voters who plan on voting for Jason Kander-Senate and Chris Koster-Governor. Roy Blunt already put out ads months ago tying Kander to Clinton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iGlJF_KGF4

Their last poll was Trump +6 iirc.

Yes... but if Clinton is on the climb, how is that bad?

Clearly it will encourage ticket splitting for the Clinton/Anti-Clinton voters.

I realize the demographics have shifted there since then, and McCain didn't invest much in MO either, but I've always had trouble calling a state Obama came within a fraction of a point from winning just 8 years ago to be truly out of reach for Hillary.

This firm has released several polls in recent times, yet 538 doesn't have a rating for it. Hmm.

True. McCaskill didn't tie herself to Obama in 2012..she didn't need to. She faced the ultraconservative Todd Akin. Robin Carnahan was probably damaged from Obama's visit in 2010 against Roy Blunt. Kander could campaign with Clinton to mobilize black voters.

Not fool's gold for the Senate race.

The dem is a good candidate, but I expect Blunt to run a few points ahead of Trump.

Ultraconservative Todd Akin ? !
That's putting it mildly, don't you think ?

This may be a very partisan pollster who gets results usually more favorable to Republicans than is justified -- but for a state that went by nearly 10% against Barack Obama, this is awful.   

This company has generally been a bit GOP biased in Missouri. Given Clinton's national margin, I am not surprised to see the two essentially tied in Missouri.

Of course, at the end, Trump will win the state and Democrats will hold the governorship. Both both could be close finishes.