Quinnipiac National Poll: Christie+1 vs. Hillary

[Mr. Morden]

The survey includes 1,182 Republicans with a margin of error of +/- 2.9 percentage points and 1,095 Democrats with a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

So many more Republicans despite there being an overwhelming Democratic edge nationwide.

Of course we don't know their demographic weighting, so it's hard to say what that translates into in this poll.

[Mr. Morden]

Christie 47/23% for +24%
Clinton 53/42% for +11%
Ryan 38/31% for +7%
Jindal 21/15% for +6%
Walker 21/16% for +5%
Paul 34/31% for +3%
Kasich 12/9% for +3%
Rubio 26/25% for +1%
Cruz 27/27% for +/-0
Warren 17/19% for -2%
Cuomo 19/23% for -4%
Schweitzer 3/7% for -4%
O'Malley 3/9% for -6%
Bush 31/38% for -7%
Biden 37/48% for -11%
Dean 15/30% for -15%

Christie favorability by party:
Dems: +17
GOP: +33
Indies: +29

Clinton favorability by party:
Dems: +88
GOP: -61
Indies: +7

[Mr. Morden]

Oh, she is so unbeatable!

Gloating over a 1 point lead?

When Hillary is supposedly on her way to a 300+ EV victory? Yeah. And it's not really gloating; it's just meant to expose the idiotic idea that she is a sure winner. I'm in no way certain that the GOP will win in 2016.

If Christie is the nominee and emerges unscathed from the primaries, both two very dubious propositions, then the election would be a toss up, of course. On the other hand, Clinton is already presumptive nominee and leads every other Republican besides Christie. Surely you can see why people see her as the overwhelming favorite.

We have no idea what events will occur over the course of the next three years, or how the campaign will unfold, etc.  I agree that Clinton is the overwhelming favorite to win the Democratic nomination, but it's way too early to talk about overwhelming favorites for the general election.  You guys seem way too confident in this theory that Clinton is likely to steamroll through the general election because the eventual GOP nominee will get beat up in the primaries.  We have no idea how the GOP primaries are going to play out yet.

It's incredibly early.  These early polls are fun in terms of watching the demographics, and looking at Clinton's relative strength in different states, but using them to gauge her absolute strength in the general election seems misguided.  Polls can't accurately forecast presidential elections three years out.  I don't think anything can forecast presidential elections three years out.  That's way too much lead time.

[Mr. Morden]

Yes, but winning the primary is half the battle. How can any Republican possibly have a better chance than her when it's completely up in the air who will even emerge as the nominee? Christie not only has to beat Hillary, but he also has to go through Paul, Cruz, Walker, etc. first before he even gets to her.

Oh, that's not what I'm saying.  Obviously, since Clinton is a much stronger favorite to win her party's nomination than any single Republican is to win theirs, she's also the favorite on winning individual.  What I'm arguing against though is the the confidence some here have that even once the GOP nominee is crowned, that Clinton will necessarily be a big favorite against him, one on one, whoever that may be.  Maybe she will be, and maybe she won't be.  It's too early to say.  Maybe the GOP primaries will be really bloody, and weaken the eventual nominee, and maybe they won't.  There've been plenty of party nomination fights in years past that looked really bloody at the time, but the nominee brushed off the damage pretty quickly, and became a strong contender in the general election.