Talk Elections

CO:
Clinton 46%, Trump 32%
Clinton 41%, Trump 29%, Johnson 15%, Stein 6%

FL:
Clinton 44%, Trump 39%
Clinton 41%, Trump 36%, Johnson 9%, Stein 4%

NC:
Clinton 48%, Trump 39%
Clinton 45%, Trump 36%, Johnson 9%, Stein 2%

VA:
Clinton 46%, Trump 33%
Clinton 43%, Trump 31%, Johnson 12%, Stein 5%

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/polls-clinton-running-table-key-battlegrounds-n629136

holy s***

That NC poll is beautiful!

In Colorado, Clinton leads Trump by 12 points, 41 percent to 29 percent, with Johnson at 15 percent and Stein at 6 percent.

In Florida, the Democrat is ahead of her GOP opponent by five points, 41 percent to 36 percent, with Johnson at 9 percent and Stein at 4 percent.

In the four-way North Carolina contest, it's Clinton at 45 percent, Trump at 36 percent, Johnson at 9 percent and Stein at 2 percent.

And in Virginia, Clinton gets 43 percent, Trump gets 31 percent, Johnson gets 12 percent and Stein gets 5 percent.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/polls-clinton-running-table-key-battlegrounds-n629136

VA
Clinton 43%
Trump 31
Johnson 12
Stein 5

NC
Clinton 45%
Trump 36
Johnson 9
Stein 2


FL
Clinton 41%
Trump 36
Johnson 9
Stein 4

CO
Clinton 41
Trump 29
Johnson 15
Stein 6

Lol Trump in Colorado!

Ouch.

holy christ

battleground south carolina

It looks like Trump is having a bit of trouble in these states.


That's seriously possible now.

Really goes to show you how stupid the "educated" really are

God bless the highly educated!

It's really stunning how few polls, nationally or state-wide, have Trump above 40%.  Even the "good" polls for Trump still always have him struggling to get above 41, 42 percent.

How do you think Cory Gardner will do in his 2020 reelection bid?

DEM leads the NC senate and gov races too...wow

To be fair thats without Evan Mcmullin included so that number could be a little high

Well, that's pretty neat. :D

Man, I never thought I'd say this, but... Colorado is Hillary country. This also confirms that Virginia is gone for Trump. I have to wonder, though, is it possible that North Carolina ends up to the left of Florida? That wouldn't seem to make sense, but maybe Hillary really runs up the margin in the Research Triangle, while Trump keeps Florida close, thanks to the Panhandle.

If Clinton secures North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Virginia (as current polls indicate) race is over.

This is in-line with Trump barely winning SC and barely losing GA. Maybe we'll get a 13 colony straight flush!? Glorious news in NC, CO, and VA. CO and VA are Safe D this election.

...and let's make first-class education more accessible and inexpensive (return to the old and effective liberal arts in undergraduate education) so that we never have an opening for so crass a demagogue as Donald Trump, even during an economic disaster or a military/diplomatic debacle.

 

Live shot of Paul Manafort:

()

Just a grain of salt, not much change from last months which also showed huge leads.

()

Trump up two from last poll.

()

Clinton up three from last poll.

()

Clinton up four from last poll.

()

Clinton up six from last poll.

That is a beautiful set of polls.

Even with the HB2 debacle I think the NC poll is too optimistic. Otherwise they look about right

Definitely seems to have been some tightening in Florida (or it's been less affected by the DNC and aftermath for whatever reason), but Clinton has definitely gained in PA, CO, and VA at the very least.

In before Seriously? complains of NBC's lamestream left-wing liberal media elite bias.

Trump is the gift that keeps on giving to Democrats.

Johnson getting 12% in VA surprises me. Though he won't be getting close to that number on Election Day.

NBC has polled seven swing states and Trump can't get to 40 in any of them

Clinton being below 50 isn't too bad yet given that labor day hasn't passed. But trump sub 40 on all of these in head to head is telling. Election is building toward a landslide.

Very good numbers for Johnson! (Oh, and for Hillary too.)


Well, if Trump continues as he has...

My god.

Robert C. Sarvis got 6.52% in the 2013 Governor Race. The candidates were actually kinda similar to this year.

So North Carolina is voting about one or two points more Republican than Pennsylvania? This is a weird election.

And he's taking down Burr with him. Not good!

We need to start using the 4-way race numbers as the topline. At least 3-way. Johnson's support isn't dissipating - it's growing.

Agreed. This is very different from previous elections as the third party candidate, Johnson this time, is actually growing not falling in the polls. He numbers in each of these 4 state polls from NBC/Marist/WSJ rose 2% compared to their last polls 3 weeks ago. (7% in FL and NC, 10% in VA, 13% in CO).

Pretty interesting how in a lot of these states, Johnson's % signified the difference between Clinton and Trump.

With Johnson up 15% in Colorado, he will have to be accepted into the debates.

That's not how it works.

State polls don't count. He has to be winning 15% of the vote NATIONALLY

A lot of people who say they are voting for Johnson (or Stein) will, in the final picture, decide not to vote . Those that will vote will vote for Clinton more than they would usually. These are mostly GOP voters after all.  So in all probability the polls are exaggerating Trump's chances.

Anyway, I'm tired and with a sh**tty WIFI connection in a bus so a question: Am I right in thinking that 1984 was the only contested election in US history where one candidate won all 13 of the original colonies?

Sure, but I doubt this effect will be worth more than a few points.


1936 works as well.

Well, FDR won all 13 colonies in 1936 even though he lost Maine and VT.  Maine was part of MA in colonial days and Maine + MA would still been FDR. VT was claimed by both NY and NH, a VT/NH combination would have gone to Landon.

Same thing in 1940, except a NH/VT combo would have been a very narrow FDR win.

Same thing in 1944, except NH/VT would have flipped to Wilkie.

So yeah, Trump is toast. 2008 is probably the best comparison right now.

You think ?

The NC number is the one that is most devastating to trump.
And seeing FL creep-up higher in Hillary's favor is also good news.

Except that's not the rule. It's 15% in specific nationwide polls. He won't get in. Objectively, he's running at around 5-10% in most national polls.

I have nothing to say about these polls, except it's RV and Marist seems to skewed a few points to the left this cycle. I haven't dig deep into the internals, but this is the "youngest male methodology."

It doesn't look like there has been much movement since they last polled in July.

This is objectively wrong. Johnson's highest in the national polls that will be used:

CNN: 13%
FOX: 12%
CBS: 12%
NBC:11%
ABC: 8%

11.2% average.

The margins are a bit overblown I guess, but Trump's definitely in trouble.

Not really if national polls have her up 8-10 right now.

The alarm bells are going off. Trump is bleeding Georgia, Arizona and South Carolina. Yet, he is campaigning in CT this weekend. There is no campaign, just rallies and social media.

In what relevant period. 11.2% is still not 15% if I was off by a few percentage points. I am mainly focused on the LV polls, not the RV ones at this stage of the game.

My guess from looking at the difference, it's the third-parties that are most likely to get whacked in the changeover (which makes sense). There are very few state poll employing LV where Johnson is close to 15%. Ditto for the 4-way trackers/LV polls.

This election is nuts. If this trend keeps up we may be looking at the first genuine landslide in decades.

If Clinton secures +8 lead nationally (as current polls indicate) race is over.

lol what

North Carolina! North Carolina!!! by 9? Christ, maybe its a little off (I can't imagine it being that different from Florida) but my god, Jeb Bush would be doing better right now.

Florida fav/unfav

Clinton: 40/54 (-14)

Trump: 31/62 (-31!!!)

Yikes.

Funny how those two are both from Florida.

NC does seem like it might be slightly high, but then again not totally inconsistent with a few of the recent polls out of Georgia and Virginia.

If this trajectory keeps up 1964 might be a better comparison

I mean, she's recently been sporting her modest "let's appeal to simple, religious, salt-of-the-earth, low-income voters" hairstyle, so it's not hard to believe these places really are locks.

Hillary always seemed more genuine and stronger candidate to me when she worked the populist working-class issues in the '08 primaries than the Hillary of the '16 primaries.

Now I haven't been paying much attention to her hairstyle or clothing, but rhetorically and substantively I think she has now successfully managed to pivot back to the "fighter for all Americans" mode, now that the primaries are over and (thanks to Bernie), we now have an extremely progressive party platform.

Not quite sure your exact meaning....  are you are saying that she has solidified support in these particular states as a result of expanding support among low-income White/Anglo undecided voters, or that somehow these states are more representative of that particular demographic? I am assuming the former, rather than the latter.

Clinton 92 and 96...

In fact, I'm suggesting that the she has already secured the places where any Democrat should be competitive.

Now she has the luxury of trying to appeal to less liberally inclined voters in traditionally red states. Hence the less manicured look.

She also wore this look on her swing to Kentucky and West Virginia for the primaries earlier this year.


West Virginia:

()
()

Michigan (a couple days ago):
()


These are compared to this look that she was sporting when the race was tighter:

()


The urban looks are usually more "volumous" and done up. When she strays from that (and puts her hair behind her ears, for example), it seems that there is usually a reason. I know this is all kind of ridiculous, but you can't tell me the image isn't deliberately managed.

Trump did it for her.

LOL.... I get what you're saying, but most guys don't really pay that much attention to that level of detail. Now, it does seem that she has managed to create potentially one of the largest gender gaps we have seen in decades, so maybe that helps with sometimes Dem/ Indies / Republican women doing the more "authentic" rugged look?

I added photos above. I know it's ridiculous, but there's a pattern to it. And a candidate's image is always carefully managed.

So, ponytail = mega landslide?

In other words, if Clinton enters the first debate like this, it's bad news for Trump.

()

ok... thanks for the photos, and get your very real point regarding imaging and optics.

Actually, this does open up an interesting side area of potential conversation about historical presidential elections and the colors of various candidates ties, and when they appear in "business casual" versus "NH sweaters", and various suit combos.

Not trying to be sarcastic, but haven't seen much Poly-Sci studies on these matters, other than the infamous "Dukakis riding around in a tank with a silly helmet" or JFK vs Nixon classic B&W debates, I don't recall reading much about candidate optics in terms of clothing and hairstyle that was considered to have made an impact.

Been awhile since Grad School, but this appears to be a new area of political-science research.

I think Trump should consider sporting a "tail" and loosen up his looks a bit in places like PA and OH, and maybe consider wearing jeans and nice button down occasionally, because otherwise he looks too much like the boss that will declare "you're fired".

In fact if he can get his hair into a pony-tail it might add some points to him in Western States where he is vulnerable like Colorado for example.

NC/VA--- I would consider he consider going with tan "business casual" suit pants and consider occasionally throwing on a polo or short sleeves on Fridays during the summer....

For ME/NH/CT---- Thinking LL Bean flannel maybe combined with a nice waterproof vest might help as we move into the Late Fall and cooler climate.

Amazing polls. Can't wait till Trump and his supporters get a big slap in the face on election night.

Dominating!

It depends upon the definition of a landslide.

Reagan 1984 (all but Minnesota and the District of Columbia) is one of the all-time slaughters in the popular vote. But in 1984 there was little state-to-state polarization as the Democratic Party was making the tradition from being a strongly-Southern party to a strongly-Northern party while being weak in both regions. The margin of Barack Obama's 2008 victory is close to those of FDR in 1944 and the elder Bush in 1988... Obama won by Reagan-like landslide margins in enough states to win, yet lost several states by 10% or more.

No Democratic nominee  has won Colorado or New Hampshire by a 10% margin since 1964, or Virginia by such a margin since FDR in 1944. We may be in unusual territory this year. But Donald Trump is also an unusually awful candidate for President, too. 

LOL, Trump gets crushed. Man, this guy is so done.

By the way, it looks like the Clinton campaign's internal polling is pretty damn good. They pulled out of CO/VA long before any public polls were showing her up double digits there.

Rather good point, actually. Keeping an eye on Clinton's campaign moves may be the best barometer we have on the election's status.

Agreed

Yep.

Lol

I'm still looking for cross tabs has anybody found any

Here's something...

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/four-takeaways-latest-battleground-polls-n629536

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/tag/election-2016/

The crosstabs for the PA Senate race are somewhat interesting:


These are the exit polls from 2012's Senate race (Casey):


Obviously the PA 2016 poll is early and things will change, and +4 years means many of those people from 2012 have moved up in the age brackets, but there are some funny changes there. I'm tempted to believe that when all is said and done, McGinty's support will more closely mirror Clinton's, even if it doesn't right now.

Just a thought.

slow your role, people. Hillary is NOT getting an over 20 point 44 state victory. at best she might get something comparable to a 1988 sized landslide (and even then the EC margin will be smaller).

Party Pooper :P

Obama in 2008 got almost the same share of the Presidential vote as George HW Bush got in 1988.

Hillary Clinton will definitely not get:

Alabama
Arkansas
Idaho
Kentucky
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Tennessee
West Virginia
Wyoming

She will certainly not get Nebraska's 3rd Congressional District.

I promise some interesting maps after the election...

Count on this: the Presidential election this time will not be interesting except for statistical freaks.