Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 23, 2019, 02:42:43 pm
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: AndrewTX, Likely Voter)
  2016 Official Polling Map Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 28 Print
Author Topic: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread  (Read 108215 times)
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,077
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 14, 2013, 12:09:52 am »

Should this thread have a map for Hillary vs. Rand Paul? He's being featured in a lot more polls than Christie is.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 14, 2013, 08:07:14 am »

Should this thread have a map for Hillary vs. Rand Paul? He's being featured in a lot more polls than Christie is.

It seems that most Republicans other than Chris Christie -- such as Paul Ryan -- do about the same as Marco Rubio.  So far we have little other contrast in likely results between most Republican prospects other than Chris Christie with Hillary Clinton. 
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 14, 2013, 08:11:45 am »

Where do the Iowa numbers here come from?  I don't see a general election poll for Iowa out there, but I might have missed it.

Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,416
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 14, 2013, 09:42:09 am »

Where do the Iowa numbers here come from?  I don't see a general election poll for Iowa out there, but I might have missed it.

There was no Iowa general election poll.

I think he used the national numbers from PPP for Iowa, because they were in the same release.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_207.pdf
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2013, 01:12:47 pm »

Quinnipiac -- H Clinton 47. Christie 42.

I have seen little on Clinton vs. Christie lately. Hillary clobbers everyone else in Pennsylvania:



H. Clinton v. Christie



Clinton vs. Rubio




If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  


[/quote]
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,416
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2013, 01:15:41 pm »

pbrower, what is that Iowa poll in your map ?

I didn't find an Iowa poll. Where did you get it from ?
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 17, 2013, 12:06:25 pm »

Quinnipiac -- H Clinton 47. Christie 42.

pbrower, what is that Iowa poll in your map ?

I didn't find an Iowa poll. Where did you get it from ?

I checked. Dirty spectacles.



H. Clinton v. Christie



Clinton vs. Rubio




If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  


Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2013, 07:18:53 pm »


Quote
In an early look at the 2016 presidential race in New York State, voters back former Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over New Jersey Gov. Christie 59 - 32 percent.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/new-york-state/release-detail?ReleaseID=1867

Nothing about Rubio, Ryan, or others who have almost no chance of winning New York.


H. Clinton v. Christie



Clinton vs. Rubio




If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  



Logged
Mr. Illini
liberty142
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,040
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.87, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: March 20, 2013, 09:07:38 pm »

Anything on Rand Paul? Would love to see how he fairs against Hillary. If he fairs much better than the other GOP potentials, he could use that as a great tool in the primary.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,416
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2013, 11:14:12 am »

Anything on Rand Paul? Would love to see how he fairs against Hillary. If he fairs much better than the other GOP potentials, he could use that as a great tool in the primary.

Well, PPP is doing a new national poll next week.

If Rand Paul finishes among the first 2 in their GOP primary poll, then Paul will be used in every state matchup against Hillary until their next national GOP poll.

PPP always uses the first 2 GOP candidates for their state polls and 1 or 2 local people against Hillary.
Logged
Endy
Jack Enderman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,396
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2013, 09:29:43 pm »

Anything on Rand Paul? Would love to see how he fairs against Hillary. If he fairs much better than the other GOP potentials, he could use that as a great tool in the primary.

Well, PPP is doing a new national poll next week.

If Rand Paul finishes among the first 2 in their GOP primary poll, then Paul will be used in every state matchup against Hillary until their next national GOP poll.

PPP always uses the first 2 GOP candidates for their state polls and 1 or 2 local people against Hillary.

I wonder how's Jindal doing....
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: March 22, 2013, 01:44:33 am »

I wonder how's Jindal doing....

Likely terrible.  All we have is his home state:

Clinton: 48
Jindal: 45

Clinton: 46
Rubio: 43

Clinton: 46
Ryan: 46

With the favourite son effect, he only does as well as other candidates, meaning he'd likely be doing worse than either Rubio or Ryan against Hillary in other states.

I thought he meant how Jindal was doing in the national primary matchup.

In any case, anyone want to guess what PPP's national primary numbers will look like on the GOP side?  My guess is Rubio in first and Paul in second, meaning that they'll include Paul in the general election matchups for a while?
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,416
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: March 22, 2013, 01:47:40 am »

I wonder how's Jindal doing....

Likely terrible.  All we have is his home state:

Clinton: 48
Jindal: 45

Clinton: 46
Rubio: 43

Clinton: 46
Ryan: 46

With the favourite son effect, he only does as well as other candidates, meaning he'd likely be doing worse than either Rubio or Ryan against Hillary in other states.

I thought he meant how Jindal was doing in the national primary matchup.

In any case, anyone want to guess what PPP's national primary numbers will look like on the GOP side?  My guess is Rubio in first and Paul in second, meaning that they'll include Paul in the general election matchups for a while?


Their FL poll suggests that Paul might even be 1st in their national primary poll.

I say:

1) Paul
2) Rubio
3) Christie
4) Ryan
5) Bush
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: March 23, 2013, 01:47:15 am »

Their FL poll suggests that Paul might even be 1st in their national primary poll.

I say:

1) Paul
2) Rubio
3) Christie
4) Ryan
5) Bush

Maybe.  We don't have a lot to go on.  The PA poll was also taken after the filibuster, and Paul was at 17% in that.  For the record, PPP's last national poll (pre-filibuster) was:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169083.0

Rubio 22%
Ryan 15%
Bush 13%
Christie 13%
Huckabee 11%
Paul 10%
Jindal 4%
Perry 3%
Martinez 1%

For this one, I could see a close race between Paul and Rubio for first place.
Logged
DS0816
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,175
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2013, 03:39:40 pm »

One way to look at it is to say that Barack Obama, although an above-average vote-getter, gets polarizing results. That could be race (for which he is obviously excused) or his unusual ability to win northern suburban votes but unusual incapacity for winning rural votes. Hillary Clinton isn't as polarizing a figure, or she can win the sorts of voters that he husband won but Obama could not reach.

If she is able to win the sorts of voters who went for Barack Obama won in 2008 and 2012 and the sorts of voters that her husband won in 1992 and 1996 but Gore, Kerry, and Obama lost beginning in 2000, then this is what I can predict for 2016:

Clinton vs. Rubio



At this point I have no idea of how Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, or two of the three Congressional districts of Nebraska would go. It could also be that Marco Rubio fails badly to live up to the early hype and will get wiped out early.


If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.   




For a Democrat to win Texas one or two things happen:

1. Win the U.S. Popular Vote with at least 57 percent.

2. See Texas's demographics move sharply away from being advantageous with the Republicans and without needing so much rope to bring it in.


If Texas is going Democratic, so is Montana. So is Indiana. And so are North Dakota and South Dakota and the first two Congressional Districts in the state of Nebraska. Nebraska, statewide and with the 3rd Congressional District, and Kansas would be reduced to (at best) a 5-point hold for the losing Republican.

If Texas goes Democratic, it's going to be a 40-state [plus] landslide election.

Since 1912 -- dating back 100 years -- South Carolina has voted the same as Mississippi and Alabama in all but two elections: 1960 and 1968. If ever a split, Ala. and Miss. -- which have voted alike in all elections since their first vote in 1820 (exception is 1840) -- would stay Republicans (because, long term, they vote opposite Vermont) while S.C. would flip Democratic. This is like Ind. + N.D. + S.D. + Neb. + Kan. = same since 1920. Those five states voted the same in all of 1920 to 2004. In 2008, Barack Obama flipped Ind. and Neb. #02. It was a difference in tipping point.

In recent elections, S.C. has been about 15 points more Republican than the country. Tex. has been about 20 points. We can't hold them all to a tee but if Texas is willing to flip Democratic, it would be wise to look out for S.C. But for this to be happening, it's a likelihood than Montana will have already flipped. It would be such a national tide that Montana would come in. It's just that Democrats should be going after Montana.

If all of this is happening Arizona is there for the Democrats.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: March 28, 2013, 10:56:33 am »


For a Democrat to win Texas one or two things happen:

1. Win the U.S. Popular Vote with at least 57 percent.

2. See Texas's demographics move sharply away from being advantageous with the Republicans and without needing so much rope to bring it in.


If Texas is going Democratic, so is Montana. So is Indiana. And so are North Dakota and South Dakota and the first two Congressional Districts in the state of Nebraska. Nebraska, statewide and with the 3rd Congressional District, and Kansas would be reduced to (at best) a 5-point hold for the losing Republican.

If Texas goes Democratic, it's going to be a 40-state [plus] landslide election.

Since 1912 -- dating back 100 years -- South Carolina has voted the same as Mississippi and Alabama in all but two elections: 1960 and 1968. If ever a split, Ala. and Miss. -- which have voted alike in all elections since their first vote in 1820 (exception is 1840) -- would stay Republicans (because, long term, they vote opposite Vermont) while S.C. would flip Democratic. This is like Ind. + N.D. + S.D. + Neb. + Kan. = same since 1920. Those five states voted the same in all of 1920 to 2004. In 2008, Barack Obama flipped Ind. and Neb. #02. It was a difference in tipping point.

In recent elections, S.C. has been about 15 points more Republican than the country. Tex. has been about 20 points. We can't hold them all to a tee but if Texas is willing to flip Democratic, it would be wise to look out for S.C. But for this to be happening, it's a likelihood than Montana will have already flipped. It would be such a national tide that Montana would come in. It's just that Democrats should be going after Montana.

If all of this is happening Arizona is there for the Democrats.

I just have no information for Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, or either of the two Congressional districts of eastern Nebraska, and there are no good analogues for either state or those two districts. Hillary was polled for Kansas, a good analogue for Plains states other than Texas. I saw PPP polls for Montana, Louisiana, and Texas. Show me polls for Arizona, Indiana, and Mississippi and I don't white them out for lack of data. I have Missouri as a likely win for Hillary because she is ahead in Kentucky.

Texas has no good analogue, and my best guess is to describe it as "Kansas grafted onto Florida". Texas east of the I-35 corridor and Greater El Paso is probably analogous to Florida in its voting; Texas west of the I-35 corridor except for the Rio Grande Valley is much like Kansas.  The quadrilateral formed by Dallas/Fort Worth at the north, Houston in the southeast, Laredo in the southwest and Brownsville in the south would be a  swing state in most Presidential and Senatorial elections if it were a state. Kansas? We all know about Kansas. A Democratic nominee for President would have to win Florida by about 8% to break even in Texas.

If Hillary Clinton would defeat Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush in Florida, she would do just the same in Texas where those two are not well known. 

If Hillary Clinton can win Texas, she would achieve what her husband came close to doing twice but never quite did. Graft the (Bill) Clinton-but-not-Obama voters onto the Obama voters, and a Democratic nominee for President (1) gets about 57% of the popular vote, (2) wins 40 or so states, one of which is Texas, and (3) shows that the political reality of the South has changed dramatically.

re: Indiana

Indiana usually says something; it is about 10% more R than the rest of America in almost every Presidential election. Barack Obama campaigned heavily in Indiana and sank vast resources into the state to win it in 2008 and did not do so in 2012. He lost it by 10% in 2012 -- which should be a huge disappointment. Right?

Year     margin   

2012       10R
2008         1D

2004       21R
2000       16R
1996         6R*
1992         6R*

1988       20R
1984       24R
1980       18R*

1976         8R
1972       33R
1968       12R*

1964       12D[/b]
1960       10R
1956       20R
1952       17R

1948         1R
1944         7R
1940         1R


*Independent or third-party nominee may have had an effect. Bold is for the Democratic nominee winning the state. Bold indicates that the Democratic nominee won the state. Dark shades indicate electoral blowouts.

Wrong. Barack Obama campaigned extensively in Indiana in 2008 and won it -- and was effective enough in winning a raft of states that neither Gore nor Kerry won. He stayed out of Indiana in 2012 and lost it because he needed a laser focus on a small number of states that could decide the election. If he was going to win Indiana he was going to win Ohio anyway, but Ohio was easier for him to win against an opponent who could overpower him with campaign funds.   

Indiana has gone for the Republican nominee for President in 18 of the last 20 chances. This goes back to two elections involving FDR. Democratic nominees have won the popular vote 9 times and the Presidency 8 times -- and Republican nominees have won the popular vote 11 times and the Presidency 12 times.

The Republicans seem unable to win the Presidency if the Democrat loses the state by less than 11%. If Indiana votes by more than 11% for the Republican, then the Republican wins at the least the Electoral College (which is everything).

If you see the Republican nominee winning Indiana early in 2016 on Election Day but by a comparatively-small margin (let us say 7%), then it will be a bad night for the GOP.

   
 
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: April 01, 2013, 09:35:36 pm »

Their FL poll suggests that Paul might even be 1st in their national primary poll.

I say:

1) Paul
2) Rubio
3) Christie
4) Ryan
5) Bush

Maybe.  We don't have a lot to go on.  The PA poll was also taken after the filibuster, and Paul was at 17% in that.  For the record, PPP's last national poll (pre-filibuster) was:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169083.0

Rubio 22%
Ryan 15%
Bush 13%
Christie 13%
Huckabee 11%
Paul 10%
Jindal 4%
Perry 3%
Martinez 1%

For this one, I could see a close race between Paul and Rubio for first place.


PPP tweets:

https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/318823239453376513

Quote
Rand Paul's favorability with GOP primary voters nationally: 60%. Chris Christie's: 41%

That actually represents no meaningful change from their February poll, which had Christie at 42% favorable and Paul at 61% favorable among GOP primary voters.  Remains to be seen whether the lack of change in Paul's favorability portends a lack of gains in the primary matchup question.
Logged
Spiral
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,307
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: April 01, 2013, 10:54:45 pm »

Their FL poll suggests that Paul might even be 1st in their national primary poll.

I say:

1) Paul
2) Rubio
3) Christie
4) Ryan
5) Bush

Maybe.  We don't have a lot to go on.  The PA poll was also taken after the filibuster, and Paul was at 17% in that.  For the record, PPP's last national poll (pre-filibuster) was:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169083.0

Rubio 22%
Ryan 15%
Bush 13%
Christie 13%
Huckabee 11%
Paul 10%
Jindal 4%
Perry 3%
Martinez 1%

For this one, I could see a close race between Paul and Rubio for first place.


PPP tweets:

https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/318823239453376513

Quote
Rand Paul's favorability with GOP primary voters nationally: 60%. Chris Christie's: 41%

That actually represents no meaningful change from their February poll, which had Christie at 42% favorable and Paul at 61% favorable among GOP primary voters.  Remains to be seen whether the lack of change in Paul's favorability portends a lack of gains in the primary matchup question.

I think that it's quite possible that Paul will have a significant bump in his polling numbers despite the static approval ratings. Looking back for comparison, this PPP poll from last year in April shows Rubio with 53% at the time and having 10% of the vote, and the last national one shows 54% approving with his vote share more than doubling at 22%.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: April 06, 2013, 07:42:45 pm »

Update on my trend map.  Here are the latest PPP polls:

Pennsylvania, Mar. 8-10: Clinton +15
Florida: Mar. 15-18: Clinton +16
national: Mar. 27-30: Clinton +7

That 7 point margin for Clinton just doesn't mesh with the statewide polls.  You can't have every state trending for the Dems.  That doesn't make any sense.  I'll stick with my Clinton by 14 points over Rubio estimate, which seems closer to reality, if we take into account the statewide polls.  In that case, the trends (for state polls conducted by PPP since Jan. 1) relative to 2012 would be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5


Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: April 15, 2013, 09:04:32 am »

So we now have a new Clinton-Rubio PPP poll of KY:

Kentucky, Apr. 5-7: Clinton +6

Which more or less confirms their poll from 2012, and suggests a massive swing towards the Dems from 2012.  Much bigger than we've seen for any other state.  Again, assuming a national margin of Clinton by 14 points over Rubio, current trend map would be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5
Kentucky: D+19


Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,416
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: April 22, 2013, 01:51:48 pm »

NC is wrong. Hillary is ahead.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: April 22, 2013, 09:22:34 pm »


NC is wrong. Hillary is ahead.


Correction made here:

H. Clinton v. Christie



Clinton vs. Rubio




If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  


Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: April 23, 2013, 06:48:21 pm »

Colorado checks in:

Q5 If the candidates for President in 2016 were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican
Marco Rubio, who would you vote for?

48% Hillary Clinton
..................................................
44% Marco Rubio
...................................................
8% Not sure



Clinton vs. Rubio




If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.  
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,492
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: April 27, 2013, 08:28:55 am »

Updating the trend map.  We now have:

Colorado, April 11-14: Clinton +3
North Carolina, April 11-14: Clinton +7
New Hampshire, April 19-21: Clinton +14

Again, assuming national Clinton margin of 14 points, trend map would now be:

Minnesota: R+5
Texas: D+6
Alaska: D+5
Louisiana: D+10
Montana: R+5
Georgia: D+1
Kansas: D+7
Wisconsin: R+3
Michigan: R+6
Pennsylvania: no trend
Florida: D+5
Kentucky: D+19
Colorado: R+13
North Carolina: R+1
New Hampshire: R+2


Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,676
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: April 29, 2013, 01:43:59 pm »

Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



Clinton vs. Christie






CO, NH, NC added. 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 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