New Strategies 360 Arizona: Clinton just behind Trump, trailing Rubio/Cruz

[HillOfANight]

https://twitter.com/ConsultReid/status/677196690085031936
http://www.strategies360.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/15-340-AZ-Public-Poll-Toplines.pdf
http://www.strategies360.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/15-340-AZ-Public-Poll-CrosstabsR.pdf

Rubio 53 Clinton 37
Cruz 50 Clinton 40
Trump 44 Clinton 42

In Clinton vs Trump, she gets 34% of white vote and Trump gets 22% of the Latino vote.
In Clinton vs Rubio, she gets 30% of white vote and Rubio gets 35% of the Latino vote.
In Clinton vs Cruz, she gets 33% of the white vote and Cruz gets 31% of the Latino vote.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/AZ/president/
For comparison, Obama got 32% of whites in 2012 and Romney got 25% of Latinos here.

[Tender Branson]

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

[Ebsy]

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

You always call her a trainwreck, yet you never provide any reasoning for this assertion, so one much conclude you are just full of sh**t.

[EliteLX]

That's the hispanic/educated whites demographic playing out well for 'ya, Mr. Trump!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

AZ isnt in play, Dems are focused on NV, CO & NM

[Crumpets]

A Trump-Clinton election would probably drive up turnout in Arizona dramatically among both parties. I think these numbers look pretty reasonable if that's the case.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

When Obama's approvals are as low as they are, GOP can win a close race. But, AZ isnt going to be a swing state.

[pbrower2a]

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

Arizona has gone only once for the Democratic nominee since 1948. Republicans with a 9% lead in Arizona? That fits 2008 and 2012 fairly well.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Even Sanders wouldnt beat Trump in AZ. Its not that Clinton is a trainwreak, its Obama's approvals. And a polarized electorate. DEMS arent gonna see another 2012.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Rubio wont win by 16, 9pts is about right. Carson was also leading Dems by large numberd & he isnt a factor.

[Lief 🗽]

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

You always call her a trainwreck, yet you never provide any reasoning for this assertion, so one much conclude you are just full of sh**t.

If Clinton is a "trainwreck", I'd hate to hear what the guy who is about to lose 49 out of 50 states to her is!!

[136or142]

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

Arizona has gone only once for the Democratic nominee since 1948. Republicans with a 9% lead in Arizona? That fits 2008 and 2012 fairly well.

Arizona was +9 in 2012 (Romney actually got a slightly higher share of the vote in 2012 than John McCain did in 2008) because 416,192 Arizonans are Mormons out of a population of 6,731,484 or 6.18% of the population.

Arizona may very well be a swing state in 2016. I agree it leans Republican but not by 9%

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hillary will get 44-45% of the vote against any GOPer except Trump.

[pbrower2a]

I also believe that the alleged affinity to Mexican-Americans by Cruz and Rubio because they are Hispanic is terribly overrated. Cruz and Rubio are the wrong sorts of Hispanics to appeal to Mexican-Americans anywhere. A liberal Hispanic of origins in the Dominican Republic (who would probably have about the same skin color as Barack Obama) would do well among Mexican-Americans.

Except perhaps in Texas, Mexican-Americans have become a very liberal bloc of voters. Such reflects the failure of Republicans to grasp onto the fast-growing Hispanic middle class through the anti-intellectualism and nativism that Republican pols have adapted for winning over Southern working-class white people.

[136or142]

I also believe that the alleged affinity to Mexican-Americans by Cruz and Rubio because they are Hispanic is terribly overrated. Cruz and Rubio are the wrong sorts of Hispanics to appeal to Mexican-Americans anywhere. A liberal Hispanic of origins in the Dominican Republic (who would probably have about the same skin color as Barack Obama) would do well among Mexican-Americans.

Except perhaps in Texas, Mexican-Americans have become a very liberal bloc of voters. Such reflects the failure of Republicans to grasp onto the fast-growing Hispanic middle class through the anti-intellectualism and nativism that Republican pols have adapted for winning over Southern working-class white people.

I don't think Latino Americans will respond well to Rubio's plan of essentially 10 years of indentured servitude before illegal aliens can apply to become U.S citizens.

I also doubt that that will play well with the millions of working class Americans who vote Republican.

[pbrower2a]

I also believe that the alleged affinity to Mexican-Americans by Cruz and Rubio because they are Hispanic is terribly overrated. Cruz and Rubio are the wrong sorts of Hispanics to appeal to Mexican-Americans anywhere. A liberal Hispanic of origins in the Dominican Republic (who would probably have about the same skin color as Barack Obama) would do well among Mexican-Americans.

Except perhaps in Texas, Mexican-Americans have become a very liberal bloc of voters. Such reflects the failure of Republicans to grasp onto the fast-growing Hispanic middle class through the anti-intellectualism and nativism that Republican pols have adapted for winning over Southern working-class white people.

I don't think Latino Americans will respond well to Rubio's plan of essentially 10 years of indentured servitude before illegal aliens can apply to become U.S citizens.

I also doubt that that will play well with the millions of working class Americans who vote Republican.

It would be fine with working-class whites, especially in the Deep and Mountain South, who think that they have nothing to lose because there is some non-white or 'un-American' underclass. The GOP has been selling ethnic privilege to poor white people while fleecing them economically. When white working-class people realize that they are being cheated, then the game is up for the Republican Party.

In any event, Mexican-Americans have never experienced the animus that blacks have experienced at the same time and place. 

Looks about right.

Trump is likely not acceptable to the majority of voters, even against a trainwreck like Hillary.

Arizona has gone only once for the Democratic nominee since 1948. Republicans with a 9% lead in Arizona? That fits 2008 and 2012 fairly well.

Arizona was +9 in 2012 (Romney actually got a slightly higher share of the vote in 2012 than John McCain did in 2008) because 416,192 Arizonans are Mormons out of a population of 6,731,484 or 6.18% of the population.

Arizona may very well be a swing state in 2016. I agree it leans Republican but not by 9%

 

Donald Trump offends so many Mormon sensibilities that he could fail to get the usual high levels of Mormon support that all Republican presidential nominees have gotten since 1948.  Without such support he could lose Arizona.

[Mr. Morden]

I don't think Latino Americans will respond well to Rubio's plan of essentially 10 years of indentured servitude before illegal aliens can apply to become U.S citizens.

I'm actually unclear on where Rubio is right now on legalization for illegal immigrants.  What is he proposing happen with the existing ~10 million or so during that 10 year period?  Would they be given status that's the same as permanent residents?  Because while I'm sure they'd mostly like to have citizenship, isn't the first concern just to have the legal right to live and work in the US?  If Rubio is suggesting having that, then that's still a big shift from the status quo.

Should note that my mother is a Canadian citizen who's been a permanent resident of the US for 60 years, never bothering to get US citizenship, because she just doesn't care enough about politics to vote.  And with a green card, she can still live and work in the US and all the rest.  Surely many of those from Mexico also care far more about being able to legally live and work in the US than about citizenship itself, no?  Though maybe that's not what Rubio's proposing?

[henster]

AZ could be a swing state just like GA but Hillary is not the candidate to flip red-leaning states. She is too polarizing and unpopular to expand the map.

[136or142]

I don't think Latino Americans will respond well to Rubio's plan of essentially 10 years of indentured servitude before illegal aliens can apply to become U.S citizens.

I'm actually unclear on where Rubio is right now on legalization for illegal immigrants.  What is he proposing happen with the existing ~10 million or so during that 10 year period?  Would they be given status that's the same as permanent residents?  Because while I'm sure they'd mostly like to have citizenship, isn't the first concern just to have the legal right to live and work in the US?  If Rubio is suggesting having that, then that's still a big shift from the status quo.

Should note that my mother is a Canadian citizen who's been a permanent resident of the US for 60 years, never bothering to get US citizenship, because she just doesn't care enough about politics to vote.  And with a green card, she can still live and work in the US and all the rest.  Surely many of those from Mexico also care far more about being able to legally live and work in the US than about citizenship itself, no?  Though maybe that's not what Rubio's proposing?

I believe he gave a fairly detailed response that should answer your question in the CNN debate from a couple days ago.  So, we should see if the transcript has been posted.

[Mr. Morden]

I don't think Latino Americans will respond well to Rubio's plan of essentially 10 years of indentured servitude before illegal aliens can apply to become U.S citizens.

I'm actually unclear on where Rubio is right now on legalization for illegal immigrants.  What is he proposing happen with the existing ~10 million or so during that 10 year period?  Would they be given status that's the same as permanent residents?  Because while I'm sure they'd mostly like to have citizenship, isn't the first concern just to have the legal right to live and work in the US?  If Rubio is suggesting having that, then that's still a big shift from the status quo.

Should note that my mother is a Canadian citizen who's been a permanent resident of the US for 60 years, never bothering to get US citizenship, because she just doesn't care enough about politics to vote.  And with a green card, she can still live and work in the US and all the rest.  Surely many of those from Mexico also care far more about being able to legally live and work in the US than about citizenship itself, no?  Though maybe that's not what Rubio's proposing?

I believe he gave a fairly detailed response that should answer your question in the CNN debate from a couple days ago.  So, we should see if the transcript has been posted.

I watched much of the debate, but I actually missed that part.  I'll go back and see if I can find it at some point.

[Torie]

Rubio said that after the border is secured, at that point the illegals who are not felons could get work permits, and after 10 years, if they continue to avoid becoming felons, they could get a green card, which means that after 15 years from the date uncertain that the borders are "secured," in theory such cohort of illegals could become citizens, if they are still alive and kicking on this mortal coil at that point.

[5280]

Is Arizona election in 2016 what Colorado was in 2000?