Talk Elections

Fox national poll, conducted Sept. 11-14:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/09/15/fox-news-poll-sept-15-2016/

[asked of Democrats] “Who would you rather have as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee?”

Clinton 56%
Sanders 41%

[asked of Republicans] “Who would you rather have as the Republican Party’s presidential nominee?”

Trump 52%
Someone Else 46%

Why does Fox think there's going to be a redo of the primary?

under age 35:
Sanders 77%
Clinton 19%

over age 55:
Clinton 73%
Sanders 23%

Sanders still leads among Men. He doesn't lead among whites anymore though.

interesting but irrelevant

Fox should really stop making this a thing...

Those are the numbers for likely voters.

Among registered voters both Clinton and Trump fare worse:

Clinton 52% (-4 vs. early August)
Sanders 43% (+2)

Trump 50% (nc)
Someone else 48% (-1)

Pathetic candidates. Just proves it when they do terrible in primary polls...when they already won them.

Is it really irrelevant, though?  If anything, it shows that Trump has a majority stranglehold over the party, and that his victory in the primaries wasn't simply a fluke.

But... but who cares?

I don't mind the question. There are many questions in polls that ultimately have no relevance.

I think it's interesting how on the Democratic side, this polls matches up very closely to the overall margin throughout the entire Democratic primary (if you discount the places that don't vote in the general election, Hillary is up marginally over her overall performance relative to Bernie).

The Republican side is more convoluted on account of Trump clinching prior to every state voting. If the Republican race had gone to two or three sooner than it did, I think Trump would be performing pretty close to his overall primary performance. The problem on the Republican side is that there never was "someone else" like there was on the Democratic side. I'd be more interested in seeing how the Republican electorate views Trump versus a named candidates (i.e. Cruz and Kasich).

They should have asked Democrats "Clinton or someone else". I prefer her over Bernard, but would vote not for her of the second option is "someone else".

The Republican results are the most interesting. It really shows how misguided and bigoted that party is.

Good point. She would probably be losing to "someone else". The age gap is astounding and the democrats need to pay attention to it if they want millenials in their party.

More evidence that the two parties remain divided even going into the general election.

Obviously Biden or Warren should've ran either would've defeated her in the primary. She is probably the worst nominee Ds have had since Dukakis. Would not be surprised if she came into office with a negative JA.

What's the point of these polls? I'm pretty sure that if someone asked the same question back in 2008 Obama and McCain would fare even worse.

Either Biden or Warren would have faced an uphill battle against Hillary in the primary, to say the least.  Presumably, one of the reasons Biden didn't throw his hat into the ring is that he didn't think he could win.

Don't underestimate the Clinton machine.  Obama beat her by the skin of his teeth in 2008, and he was a much stronger candidate than either Warren or Biden would have been this year.