2016 Official Polling Map Thread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:04:36 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  2016 Official Polling Map Thread (search mode)
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16
Author Topic: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread  (Read 119030 times)
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2013, 09:19:29 PM »

PPP 2016 poll of Michigan:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MI_610.pdf

Clinton 51%
Bush 37%

Clinton 44%
Christie 38%

Clinton 55%
Paul 35%

Clinton 53%
Rubio 36%

Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.

Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2013, 11:47:50 AM »

I don't understand people from Colorado...

No wonder with all the Mexicans there and their Spanish ...

Possible explanation. If Quinnipiac can allow polling in Spanish, then its results could easily align with the sorts of results that PPP comes up with. But it does poll Florida, which has a large Spanish-speaking population.

Any poll that undercounts Spanish-speaking people will be R-friendly in Colorado. But Colorado gets polled often, and even at that Q can adjust its methodology to allow people to respond to questions in Spanish.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2013, 12:00:04 PM »

Florida, Quinnipiac

Clinton 53%
Rubio 41%

Clinton   50%
(Jeb) Bush 43%

(Biden fares badly; nothing on Christie, Paul, or Ryan). If Hillary Clinton decisively defeats Favorite Son Republicans in Florida, she probably beats any other Republican nominee in Florida.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=1910

Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.


[/quote]
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #28 on: July 03, 2013, 12:16:17 PM »
« Edited: July 05, 2013, 10:39:19 PM by pbrower2a »

Texas, PPP


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_TX_703.pdf

(Hillary is shown against Christie in this poll and against imaginable Favorite-Son candidates - and not against Paul, Rubio, or Ryan.



Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.


Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #29 on: July 05, 2013, 10:50:47 PM »

Am I the only one who thinks it's too early to call the 2016 race for anyone?

No. Everyone knew in the spring of 1988 that George H W Bush was going to lose to Mike Dukakis. Whoops!

At this point I would not call a race between Chris Christie and Hillary Clinton anything but too close to predict. But the maps clearly show that Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Paul Ryan are not Presidential material. Hillary Clinton is.

Note the tie between Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie in Ohio. Ohio is about as close to a microcosm of America as any state can be, and has voted with the winner in all but two Presidential elections in the last century. Maybe Quinnipiac has some kinks to iron out in its Colorado and Ohio polls -- but Q did well in 2012.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #30 on: July 11, 2013, 04:47:43 PM »

July 5-7, 2013
Survey of 668 Iowa voters

Iowa Survey Results (PPP)

Q1If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Chris
Christie, who would you vote for?

43%  Hillary Clinton

36% Chris Christie

21% Not sure

Q2
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand
Paul, who would you vote for?

48% Hillary Clinton

37% Rand Paul

14% Not sure

Q4 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Paul
Ryan, who would you vote for?

49% Hillary Clinton

40% Paul Ryan

11% Not sure

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

47% Hillary Clinton

35% Marco Rubio

18% Not sure

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_Iowa_7111.pdf



Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #31 on: July 17, 2013, 08:07:20 AM »

pbrower, if you update the Clinton vs. Christie map with VA, then include the MT, NY and NH polls as well:

Christie+5 over Hillary in MT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#Montana

Hillary+5 over Christie in NH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#New_Hampshire

Hillary+27 over Christie in NY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#New_York

I had a good reason for not showing the NH poll -- namely that both potential candidates had less than 40% of the likely vote. The undecided are obviously so large in number with a 37-32 split that I chose not to include it.  Otherwise, OK for Montana and New York.

Now, for Virginia --

Clinton 45-40 over Christie
Clinton 51-37 over Paul

Nothing on Clinton vs. Rubio or Clinton vs. Ryan from Quinnipiac this time, although there are some earlier polls (whether by PPP or Quinnipiac).

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/virginia/release-detail?ReleaseID=1923




Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #32 on: July 23, 2013, 07:57:57 AM »
« Edited: September 12, 2013, 04:05:32 PM by pbrower2a »

Iowa, Quinnipiac:

Clinton, Christie split 41-41

Clinton vs. Scott Walker (Republican Governor of neighboring Wisconsin) 46-39...probably a good proxy for Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, and Rick Santorum.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/iowa/release-detail?ReleaseID=1926




Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #33 on: July 23, 2013, 06:54:27 PM »


hello pbrower!

I sent you a private message, please read it.

By all means! Probably a different thread, because too many maps in one post get confusing.

You'd need to do much archive work to do so -- and I don't consider Joe Biden a credible candidate for President. He has had plenty of chances to get the nomination and has never gotten them. The only way in which he becomes a credible candidate for President is if the Unthinkable happens to the President.


I understand that one of the reasons for nominating him for VP was that he was at the bottom in assets in possession among US Senators. He lacks the money and income sources for staging a campaign.
 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2013, 03:53:37 AM »
« Edited: September 12, 2013, 04:07:00 PM by pbrower2a »


Wyoming, PPP

Five matchups between Hillary Clinton and Republicans, and they are all roughly 32-57.   I am showing them at 60% saturation because such is closer to reality than the 52-46 split that might look somewhat close.



Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #35 on: July 26, 2013, 12:24:47 PM »

^^ Christie winning in Texas makes all the difference. Tongue

Texas has essentially a single-party system for statewide politics. The Democratic Party is basically crushed in statewide politics and is basically irrelevant. The giant cities are a different matter in local politics. 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #36 on: August 04, 2013, 08:36:41 AM »
« Edited: August 06, 2013, 12:58:22 PM by pbrower2a »



Alaska, PPP. Hillary Clinton would beat Sarah Palin (not shown), but lose by margins less than 8% against everyone else.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_AK_802.pdf


Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.

Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #37 on: August 08, 2013, 05:21:17 PM »

-PPP's newest Georgia poll finds that Hillary Clinton would have a decent shot at winning the state if there was an election today. She leads Rand Paul, who's led our most recent national GOP polling, 48/43. She also has a 47/44 advantage on Paul Ryan, a 47/43 one on Newt Gingrich, and a 51/38 one over Sarah Palin. She ties Jeb Bush at 45, and the only Republican with an advantage over her is Chris Christie at 44/42. She could make Georgia a swing state in 2016.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/08/georgia-miscellany.html

.....

Georgia has been about R+7 in 2008 and R+11 in 2012; if it is at all close for the Republican then the Democrat is going to win 375 or so electoral votes and about 54% of the popular vote. A Democrat who wins Georgia is probably winning 56% of the popular vote and at least 400 electoral votes.

I notice that PPP isn't paying attention to Rubio anymore, but it is paying attention to Jeb Bush.

Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.

Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #38 on: August 11, 2013, 08:30:30 AM »
« Edited: August 11, 2013, 08:47:36 AM by pbrower2a »

Apparently the 'right' Democrat can win in Arkansas. Its incumbent Democratic Senator has a slight edge in a bid for re-election in 2014.  

It certainly was not Barack Obama:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

although that is better than the voting result of 2012 (61-37 Romney over Obama).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

In 2008 Hillary Clinton projected to defeat John McCain, so it may not be Arkansas that has changed politically since 2008. Barack Obama is a horrible match for Arkansas, and if he is no longer relevant to Arkansas in 2016 then Hillary Clinton could win.

Of course this pollster is new to me, so expect either confirmation or repudiation by someone else. Only two potential matchups are shown.

http://freebeacon.com/tom-cotton-in-dead-heat-with-mark-pryor-for-arkansas-senate/
Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.


[/quote]
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #39 on: August 11, 2013, 08:48:38 AM »
« Edited: August 11, 2013, 09:52:46 PM by pbrower2a »


Apparently the 'right' Democrat can win in Arkansas. Its incumbent Democratic Senator has a slight edge in a bid for re-election in 2014.  

It certainly was not Barack Obama:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

although that is better than the voting result of 2012 (61-37 Romney over Obama -- which is about what Reagan did to Mondale in 1984).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

In 2008 Hillary Clinton projected to defeat John McCain, so it may not be Arkansas that has changed politically since 2008. Barack Obama is a horrible match for Arkansas, and if he is no longer relevant to Arkansas in 2016 then Hillary Clinton could win.

Of course this pollster is new to me, so expect either confirmation or repudiation by someone else. Only two potential matchups are shown.

http://freebeacon.com/tom-cotton-in-dead-heat-with-mark-pryor-for-arkansas-senate/
Clinton vs. Christie



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.


Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #40 on: August 21, 2013, 03:19:00 PM »
« Edited: August 21, 2013, 03:21:17 PM by pbrower2a »


Apparently the 'right' Democrat can win in Arkansas. Its incumbent Democratic Senator has a slight edge in a bid for re-election in 2014.  

It certainly was not Barack Obama:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

although that is better than the voting result of 2012 (61-37 Romney over Obama -- which is about what Reagan did to Mondale in 1984).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

In 2008 Hillary Clinton projected to defeat John McCain, so it may not be Arkansas that has changed politically since 2008. Barack Obama is a horrible match for Arkansas, and if he is no longer relevant to Arkansas in 2016 then Hillary Clinton could win.

Of course this pollster is new to me, so expect either confirmation or repudiation by someone else. Only two potential matchups are shown.

(maps excised)





This is just laughable, it really is. Clinton winning Texas? Louisiana? Georgia? Arkansas? Kentucky? If this is anywhere near accurate where in for a seismic shift in election politics.

Seismic shift? It could be that Hillary Clinton is winning back the Clinton-but-not-Obama voters while keeping the Obama voters (which include some Obama-but-not-Clinton voters).

It could also be that the Republicans have some dreadful prospects seeming to lead have the lead for the Presidential nomination. If the Republicans have the right-wing version of George McGovern or Walter Mondale, then they can lose badly in 2016.

It could also be that many Americans remain uncomfortable with the concept of a black man as President of the United States.

It's also possible that people in the Mountain and Deep South will begin to recognize Hillary Clinton as a  d@mnyankee city-slicker who either never had (like Dukakis, Kerry, or Obama) any Southern roots or lost touch with them as did Al Gore.  But at that I am discussing things that have yet to happen.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #41 on: August 21, 2013, 03:28:14 PM »
« Edited: August 21, 2013, 03:29:50 PM by pbrower2a »

August 16-19, 2013
Survey of 721 Louisiana voters

Louisiana Survey Results (PPP)

Q4 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Jeb
Bush, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

44% Jeb Bush

12% Not sure

Q5
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Chris
Christie, who would you vote for?

42% Hillary Clinton

41% Chris Christie

18% Not sure

Q6
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rand
Paul, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

45% Rand Paul

11% Not sure

Q7
If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Paul
Ryan, who would you vote for?

44% Hillary Clinton

46% Paul Ryan

11% Not sure
.........................................................
Clinton vs. Christie

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_821.pdf



Clinton vs. Paul




Clinton vs. Rubio





Clinton vs. Ryan



White indicates a tie.



Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #42 on: August 21, 2013, 03:50:33 PM »

Fellow readers of this thread:

I am tempted to start a new thread on this line. I am not saying when, but before I do (with the suggestion that this thread be locked) I see some faults in this presentation.

First, pollsters seem to no longer take Marco Rubio seriously. I am tempted to drop maps involving him in favor of maps for Jeb Bush, whom pollsters are beginning to take seriously. I am satisfied that Marco Rubio has beyond all imaginable question shown that he is not Presidential material until at least 2020 -- if ever.

Second, I see a huge difference between being up 43-42 and being up 49-40, and this map coloring scheme makes no such distinction. If it can't show the difference between a six-point lead and a one-point lead with someone 'leading' with less than 50% of the vote, the map shows leads that mean practically nothing.  I'd like to show anyone with 40-49% support but less than a 4% margin (margin of error) with 30% saturation. Between 40% and 49% support, inclusively? Still 40% saturation. Between 50% and 54% support, inclusively?  Still 50% saturation. 

Third, I see few states that now seem likely to show a 70-30 preference for anyone. A 55% preference could be shown with a 70% saturation to signify that a state is likely out of reach because anyone with at least 55% support in a binary choice is up at least 10%. I could show 60% or higher support with 90% saturation because such shows a margin of at least 20%. 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #43 on: August 21, 2013, 04:18:45 PM »
« Edited: August 23, 2013, 09:09:32 AM by pbrower2a »

To show what the color scheme would look like:

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

 

This map signifies nothing except to show a color scheme.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #44 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
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #45 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
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #46 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
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #47 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
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #48 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
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


« Reply #49 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
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.613 seconds with 10 queries.