Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 12, 2019, 12:40:26 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (General) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  2016 Official Polling Map Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 28 Print
Author Topic: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread  (Read 109811 times)
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: August 22, 2013, 01:43:39 pm »
« edited: August 23, 2013, 09:07:57 am by pbrower2a »

Looking ahead to the 2016 presidential campaign, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to be the apple of Virginia voters' eyes, leading New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie 46 - 37 percent, compared to 45 - 40 percent when Quinnipiac University asked that question in July.

Christie continues to lead Vice President Joseph Biden, 44 - 37 percent today compared to 46 - 38 percent last month.

Clinton crushes Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas 53 - 34 percent. Biden tops Cruz 47 - 37 percent.


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=1940

Clinton vs. Christie





Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.




Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: August 23, 2013, 11:36:32 am »

Ohio, PPP:

Clinton 50%
Bush 36%

Clinton 45%
Christie 36%

Clinton 53%
Kasich 35%

Clinton 51%
Paul 36%

Clinton 52%
Ryan 36%


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/08/ohioans-skeptical-about-kasich-2016-and-more.html#more

Clinton vs. Christie





Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: August 23, 2013, 12:11:19 pm »
« Edited: August 23, 2013, 02:48:45 pm by pbrower2a »

Blank map.



Purpose:

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:



I will let someone else make the decision to merge this map with the others, perhaps replacing the maps involving Rubio with this one if such seems a good idea. After all, nobody seems to be paying any chances of Marco Rubio to be the next President anymore.

Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: August 23, 2013, 02:16:33 pm »

With the color scheme suggested a few posts above:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:



Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: August 23, 2013, 02:35:19 pm »
« Edited: August 23, 2013, 02:41:28 pm by pbrower2a »

With the color scheme suggested a few posts above:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton

Starting with Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Virginia, and Wyoming:



Contrast the old pattern:

 


I don't have enough data points to show a 46-43 split here, but as you can see I have a sharp contrast between someone up with 50% or more and someone up with under 50%. The justification for a 60% saturation is that the legal difference between winning 50% +1 and slightly less is significant in some places -- and because someone behind 52-47 must pull votes away from the one up 52-47 while the one down 47-45 can still win by picking up undecided votes. 


Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: August 23, 2013, 02:52:16 pm »
« Edited: August 23, 2013, 03:33:33 pm by pbrower2a »

Here is Christie for a contrast between the two patterns. The old way:

Clinton vs. Christie





White indicates a tie.

And my proposal:

White -- tie

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Clinton vs. Christie



Polls go back at least to March with Clinton vs. Christie, but you can see more contrast in color (even if I show no state giving 60% to anyone). We can easily see that the weak leads of Clinton in Arkansas and Louisiana or of Christie in Colorado (which I have cause to doubt) and Georgia aren't worth much. Clinton leads in the northeastern quadrant of the US  (except in New York and New Jersey) are not as imposing, but cutting into those will be difficult.

Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,343
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: August 24, 2013, 07:42:13 am »
« Edited: August 24, 2013, 07:24:11 pm by Mr. Morden »

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +1
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +5
NJ: Clinton +11
NY: Clinton +27
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +9
WI: Clinton +7
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+6
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+1
NJ: R+7
NY: R+1
OH: D+6
PA: no change
TX: D+7
VA: D+5
WI: no change
WY: D+13


Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: August 26, 2013, 11:10:42 am »

Should we abandon all depictions of how Rubio would do in favor of Jeb Bush?
Logged
eric82oslo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,373
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: August 26, 2013, 07:30:56 pm »
« Edited: September 20, 2013, 07:11:14 am by eric82oslo »

Here's an update with the latest state polls of August and September (up until the 20th).

Here are all the 2016 poll averages for each state so far - 22 states having been polled to date - and how far off they are compared to the actual 2012 outcomes. I'm only including the Republican candidate with the best statewide polling.

Alaska: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: R +7%
+7% D improvement
(Updated on August 4)

Arkansas: Hillary vs Chris Christie: D +2%
+22% D improvement

(Updated on August 11)

Colorado: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+7% R improvement

Florida: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +9%
+8% D improvement


Georgia: Hillary vs Christie: R +2%
+6% D improvement
(Updated August 8 )

Iowa: Hillary vs Christie: D +4%
+2% R improvement
(Updated on July 22)

Kansas: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: R +7%
+15% D improvement

Kentucky: Hillary vs Rand Paul: D +2.5%
+25% D improvement
(updated with second poll from 2012, corrected previous mistake)

Louisiana: Hillary vs Paul Ryan/Rand Paul: R +1%
+16% D improvement

Michigan: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+3.5% R improvement

Minnesota: Hillary vs Christie: D +6%
+2% R improvement

Montana: Hillary vs Marco Rubio: R +8%

+6% D improvement
(Corrected previous error)

New Hampshire: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.4%
+1.2% R improvement
(Updated with September poll)

New Jersey: Hillary vs Christie: D +9%
+9% R improvement

New York: Hillary vs Christie: D +27%
+1% R improvement

North Carolina: Hillary vs Rubio: D +7%
+9% D improvement

Ohio: Hillary vs Christie: D +4.5%
+1.5% R improvement

(Updated with newest poll)

Pennsylvania: Hillary vs Paul Ryan: D +12%
+7% D improvement


Texas: Hillary vs Ted Cruz: R +5%
+11% D improvement

Virginia: Hillary vs Christie: D +3%
+1% R improvement
(Updated with latest August poll + 3 new polls in September)

Wisconsin: Hillary vs Jeb Bush: D +4%
+3% R improvement
(Updated with latest September poll)

Wyoming: Hillary vs Christie: R +28%
+13% D improvement
(Updated July 24)


Average all 22 states: Hillary vs Best Republican: D +1.8%
+5.2% D improvement



That gives us this map right now:



Red = Democratic lead
Blue = Republican lead
Green = Exact tie
Grey = No polling yet

20% shade = 0-1% lead
30% shade = 1-3% lead
40% shade = 3-6% lead
50% shade = 6-9% lead
60% shade = 9-12% lead
70% shade = 12-15% lead
80% shade = 15-18% lead
90% shade = Above 18% lead


In the count of electoral votes, this means the current situation looks like this:

Hillary: 214 EVs
Best/Tailormade Republican: 75 EVs

Toss-up: None
No polling: 249 EVs (almost half)

Which means that Hillary has captured an amazing 74% of all EVs awarded thus far, against disappointing 26% EVs for the tailormade Republican. And only New York of the solidly Democratic states has been polled so far (2 if including New Jersey), against no less than 9 solidly Republican states - the biggest of them, Texas, included. With California added to Hillary's pie, it'll look even more promising for her. Not either to forget such states as D.C., Vermont and Hawaii. It's looking like a landslide right now, even without Colorado being in Hillary's column.


This is how the Trendline Map looks so far:




The states which right now are showing the strongest improvement for the Democratic (Hillary) or the Republican (in more than 50% of the cases, Christie) candidate:

1. Kentucky: D +25%
2. Arkansas: D +22%
3. Louisiana: D +16%
4. Kansas: D +15%
5. Wyoming: D +13%
6. Texas: D +11%
7. New Jersey: R +9%
8. North Carolina: D +9%
9. Florida: D +8%
10. Colorado: R +7%
11. Pennsylvania: D +7%
12. Alaska: D +7%
13. Georgia: D +6%
14. Montana: D +6%

All of these changes (in the 14 states above) are (more than) statistically significant. We see that (so far) Texas is experiencing a much more rapid change than other demograhically quick-changing states like Florida and Georgia. Unfortunately, the 4th quick-changing traditionally Republican state, Arizona, has still not been polled.

The strong D improvement in the Appalachian south (Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Pennsylvania (Texas & North Carolina)), makes me extremely curious to see how geographically similar states like Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana, Illinois, West Virginia and even South Carolina will play out in their first poll(s). I'm sure that all of these 6 states - in particular the first five - will move considerably towards Hillary as well.

The only non-candidate state (excluding New Jersey & Wisconsin) which have moved considerably towards Republican candidate(s) so far, has been Colorado. It will be interesting to see why this sole and very important swing state is bucking the trend which is occurring in almost the entire rest of the United States.


Updated with latest PPP poll of Virginia in August as well as the 3 Virginia polls from September. Also updated with polls of New Hampshire and Wisconsin in September. Iowa polls updated on July 22. Wyoming poll, national averages and state map updated on July 24. Also updated with latest Alaska poll on August 4. Georgia updated with new poll August 8. Updated with the first poll from Arkansas. Updated with latest August polls as well. And corrected three previous errors, including Kentucky, where Hillary is currently leading in the first two polls published, not Rand Paul as my numbers have claimed thus far.

Last updated on September 20.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: August 28, 2013, 09:30:45 am »

Hillary Clinton seems to offer the prospect of winning in part on nostalgia for Bill Clinton while keeping Obama support intact. We have yet to see patters for New England (35 EV) and California (55 EV), and once PPP releases binary matchups between Hillary Clinton and prospective R pols, we will have some questions answered. Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri (which together contain 32 electoral votes)  will be interesting if and when polled.

A Hillary Clinton win now looks like a huge Democratic win with a huge reduction in regional polarization of the electorate.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: August 28, 2013, 06:02:03 pm »
« Edited: August 30, 2013, 02:55:34 am by pbrower2a »

Merging in Jeb Bush; removing Marco Rubio

I anticipate binary matchups from PPP in Maine.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush




Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul



Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.
Logged
GAworth
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,755
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: August 28, 2013, 09:41:45 pm »

The polls might say GA will go to Hillary but I don't see that happening, it will be under 55% for the Republican but I think they will win it. 2020 I could believe it, but not 2016.
Logged
President Johnson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,403
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: August 29, 2013, 06:26:24 am »

The polls might say GA will go to Hillary but I don't see that happening, it will be under 55% for the Republican but I think they will win it. 2020 I could believe it, but not 2016.

Likely it becomes a tossup, as Obama lost it by "only" 7 percent. It might be very narrow democratic victory that year. But much depends on the candidates and the political cimate in 2016.
Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,727
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: September 12, 2013, 03:35:23 pm »

The fact that Hillary only needs the West coast in most of these maps to get over 270 is telling.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #114 on: September 12, 2013, 03:36:45 pm »

Purple poll, Virginia.

Clinton 42, Christie 40
Clinton 48, Paul 41

http://www.purplestrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/September2013VAPoll_V5.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PurplePoll+VA+September&utm_content=PurplePoll+VA+September+CID_9ce890956460af89c13b0c312ffbee86&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Click%20here%20to%20see%20the%20full%20poll%20including%20the%20Purple%20analysis%20and%20crosstabs



Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush




Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul



Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.

Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #115 on: September 12, 2013, 04:01:18 pm »

The fact that Hillary only needs the West coast in most of these maps to get over 270 is telling.

That is how things looked for Democrats in 2008 on Election night. In 2012 President Obama was ahead in four states that could decide the election and was close in another such state (North Carolina) as the networks called the West Coast states. The count made Ohio unwinnable for Romney just after 11PM eastern time.

 
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #116 on: September 12, 2013, 05:40:32 pm »

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul (new style)

blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more




Old way:

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul



The new way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).

The new one involving a narrow Clinton lead over Christie in  Virginia:

    
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #117 on: September 14, 2013, 10:58:55 am »
« Edited: September 14, 2013, 01:18:06 pm by pbrower2a »

Margin-sensitive polling maps


The new way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).



blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


   

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan

Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #118 on: September 15, 2013, 10:52:29 am »

I am going with the margin-sensitive polling map, and I may do no maintenance on the 'classic' maps.  As I say, there's a huge difference between being up 57-41 and being up 51-48 that does not show with the 50% red saturation that fails to distinguish 50% and 59%.  At or above 50%, the nominee cannot win by picking up the undecided vote alone; the lagger must pick up support from those then likely to vote for the leader. Even at 49% support the leader can lose by losing all of the undecided  to the lagger even if such seems unlikely. (In my experience, the undecided tend to drift ineffectively and inadequately toward the eventual loser except during late-season collapses).

Having a lead of 3% and less than 50% is meaningless in predicting how that state is going, although patterns may show. For example, if Hillary Clinton is down by 6% to Chris Christie in Indiana (I chose Indiana as an example because I expect no Indiana polls for a very long time), then Christie is in trouble. After all, Democrats usually win the Presidency when Indiana is down 10% or less because Indiana is usually about R+12. Besides, if the Democratic nominee is down by that little in Indiana, he is probably ahead in a state like Florida, Ohio, or Virginia that is more D than Indiana that the Republicans cannot afford to lose.

Example: Carter lost the state by 7.6% in 1976 and barely got elected (2% in the popular vote). He lost it by 18.3% in 1980 and lost nationwide in the biggest blowout win for a challenger since FDR defeated Hoover in 1932.         
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #119 on: September 18, 2013, 11:43:30 am »
« Edited: September 18, 2013, 11:47:08 am by pbrower2a »

Margin-sensitive polling maps

PPP, New Hampshire -- only four electoral votes, but it could have won the 2000 election for Al Gore by itself.

When it comes to the general election Hillary Clinton leads all the Republicans in head to heads. There's two pretty clear tiers of competitiveness: Chris Christie and everyone else. Christie comes within 4 points of Clinton, trailing 43/39. Everyone else we tested trails her by somewhere in the 8-12 point range: 50/42 against Ayotte, 49/40 against Bush, 50/41 against Ryan, 51/41 against Paul, and 50/38 against Cruz. - See more at: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/09/clinton-leads-dems-paul-and-christie-tops-among-republicans-in-nh.html#more


This way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say between  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).



blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


   

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan



As you can see (and the map shows it) Christie would have a significant chance to win New Hampshire, Jeb Bush practically none... and neither Paul nor Ryan has a chance in New Hampshire.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #120 on: September 19, 2013, 03:47:08 pm »
« Edited: September 20, 2013, 09:17:04 am by pbrower2a »

PPP, Wisconsin

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/09/ryan-fares-stronger-than-walker-for-2016-in-wisconsin.html#more

Comment: Wisconsin may be drifting right. Ryan, without a Favorite Son advantage would lose Wisconsin... but he would lose enough genuine swing states to make Wisconsin irrelevant.  

But not a sampling based upon the 2012 vote for President:


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The current poll is of likely voters in midterm elections, obviously a more pressing concern in Wisconsin, as a Governorship and an open Senate seat will then be decided. In 2016 you can probably add four points to these polls for Clinton in the general election and take one away from each Republican as a potential nominee. 

.....

This way, I believe, shows the difference between an overwhelming lead (let us say  57-42), a strong one (52-47), a significant one short of 50% (49-42),  an insignificant one (48-45 or 43-42).


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


   

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan



Logged
eric82oslo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,373
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #121 on: September 19, 2013, 05:55:47 pm »

I've updated my averages and maps (both actual and trendline) for the 22 polled states now after the 5 polls in Virginia, Wisconsin and New Hampshire now in September. See post #109 please for the updated stats. Smiley
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #122 on: September 25, 2013, 05:25:37 pm »
« Edited: September 27, 2013, 07:02:16 pm by pbrower2a »

Do you remember when West Virginia went for Democratic nominees for President except during Republican landslides like 1972 and 1984? Me too. It's not going to bounce back enough for Hillary Clinton.  

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_WV_925.pdf

I'm not showing Ted Cruz.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


   

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan




Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,528
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #123 on: September 27, 2013, 07:05:50 pm »
« Edited: October 13, 2013, 07:08:29 pm by pbrower2a »

New Jersey Survey of 1000 Likely Voters
Conducted September 19, 2013 By Pulse Opinion Research

In thinking about the 2016 presidential election, suppose you had a choice between Republican Chris Christie and Democrat Hillary Clinton. If the election were held today would you vote for Republican Chris Christie or Democrat Hillary Clinton?

43% Chris Christie
48% Hillary Clinton
5% Some other candidate
4% Not sure

http://chpp.kean.edu/poll/new-jersey-survey-1000-likely-voters-0

Nothing shown for binary matchups.


blue, Republican -- red, Democratic

30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie


   

Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Paul Ryan





Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,343
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #124 on: September 27, 2013, 08:12:16 pm »

Update on the latest statewide polls of Christie vs. Clinton:

AK: Christie +8
AR: Clinton +2
CO: Christie +1
GA: Christie +2
IA: tie
LA: Clinton +1
MI: Clinton +6
MN: Clinton +6
MT: Christie +5
NH: Clinton +4
NJ: Clinton +5
NY: Clinton +27
OH: Clinton +9
PA: Clinton +5
TX: Christie +9
VA: Clinton +2
WV: Christie +9
WI: Clinton +3
WY: Christie +28

The swing from the 2012 election would then be:

AK: D+6
AR: D+26
CO: R+6
GA: D+6
IA: R+6
LA: D+21
MI: R+3
MN: R+1
MT: D+9
NH: R+2
NJ: R+13
NY: R+1
OH: D+6
PA: no change
TX: D+7
VA: R+2
WV: D+18
WI: R+4
WY: D+13


Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 28 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC