AZ-IWS: Trump +8 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2024, 08:20:41 PM
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
  AZ-IWS: Trump +8 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: AZ-IWS: Trump +8  (Read 3885 times)
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,858
United States


« on: July 30, 2016, 06:32:52 AM »

lol

less than McCain's margin

less than Romney's margin

But close.

Such is consistent with the results of the  Presidential races of 2008 and 2012, at least in Arizona. If one wants to see Donald Trump win, then such is bad news at this stage.  Trump must win Arizona; Hillary Clinton, like all Democrats since Harry Truman, can get away with losing Arizona.

But let's remember: Hillary Clinton has the Obama machine, the slickest Presidential campaign machine since that of at least Ronald Reagan, behind her. She trusts that campaign apparatus, one that Barack Obama gave the prerogative to say no to some quixotic attempt to win a State that he had little chance to win and that would put other states at risk of loss. 

2008 and 2012 races just after the latter Party convention looked close. They did not look like the end result.  Obama gained. He turned the race into one best described as a long-shot for a Republican victory and practically compelled McCain and Romney to make high-cost gambles to improve their chances.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,858
United States


« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2016, 07:45:03 AM »

Trump +8 in a battleground state after the DNC? Cool.

Arizona was on the fringe of contention in 2008 and 2012.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.026 seconds with 13 queries.