CA-SUSA: Unsurprisingly, almost all Dems beat Trump

[Mr. Morden]

SUSA poll of California, conducted March 22-25:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/04/02/surveyusa-2020-matchups-trump-biden-obama-zuckerberg/
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/04/02/poll-shows-california-voters-eager-to-push-trump-out-of-office/

UPDATE: Here are the full results:

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=82a67cd3-29dd-4a95-80fc-7c088ca84217

Biden 56%
Trump 33%

M. Obama 57%
Trump 36%

J. Brown 54%
Trump 35%

Winfrey 52%
Trump 35%

Harris 54%
Trump 35%

Hanks 51%
Trump 34%

Garcetti 49%
Trump 34%

Gillibrand 47%
Trump 33%

Zuckerberg 42%
Trump 36%

Booker 39%
Trump 35%

Holder 38%
Trump 35%

S. Brown 36%
Trump 35%

Landrieu 36%
Trump 35%

Patrick 34%
Trump 34%

[History505]

California is obviously going to be Safe D. The match-ups with the Dem tied or up 1 is just pure comical. These match-ups are still meaningless nonetheless right now.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Hard to see this as anything other than a poll of name recognition.

[MechaBambi]

There's no way Tom Hanks has a better margin of victory than Booker, Brown, or really any of these people other than the Zuck.

[Mr. Morden]

There's no way Tom Hanks has a better margin of victory than Booker, Brown, or really any of these people other than the Zuck.

I can believe that he does right now, since most people don't know who folks like Sherrod Brown and Mitch Landrieu are, whereas everyone knows who Hanks is.

I'm actually curious about whether Gillibrand's name recognition is actually any higher than Booker's (most other polls do not show that to be the case).  Because it's also possible that she does well among people who haven't heard of her in a poll of California because of some kind of gender assumptions that a female name they haven't heard of is probably a liberal Democrat.

[Tintrlvr]

There's no way Tom Hanks has a better margin of victory than Booker, Brown, or really any of these people other than the Zuck.

I can believe that he does right now, since most people don't know who folks like Sherrod Brown and Mitch Landrieu are, whereas everyone knows who Hanks is.

I'm actually curious about whether Gillibrand's name recognition is actually any higher than Booker's (most other polls do not show that to be the case).  Because it's also possible that she does well among people who haven't heard of her in a poll of California because of some kind of gender assumptions that a female name they haven't heard of is probably a liberal Democrat.

Yeah, the Gillibrand/Booker comparison is probably the most interesting part of the poll. I suspect you're right that voters are assuming that a Democratic woman they don't know is a liberal but not making the same assumption about a Democratic man they don't know. Could also be that there are a fair number of mostly liberal women who are more inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to a woman than to a man, which amounts to more or less the same thing.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Every one of those polls would suggest a pretty significant swing towards Trump from 2016.

[henster]

Hillary won Cali by 30 and the best Dem in this poll (Biden) is +23. Looks like his #'s hover around 33-35 in most cases which would be a decent improvement from '16.

[Holmes]

Trump's on track to do worse in California than 2016.

Ask yourself, what voters will Trump pick up compared to 2016, and will those voters outnumber the surge of new voters that register in the subsequent four years?

[Suburbia]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

Bush wasted millions in California while Gore ignored it. The only state Gore outspent Bush in was Florida.

[MAINEiac4434]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

Bush lost California in 2000 by more than one million votes

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

He did better in 2004.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Trump is going below 30 in California. He did terrible as a hypothetical but now that he's actually PRESIDENT? Californians will be ready to get him the f-ck out of there no matter how Titanium D the state is.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

Bush wasted millions in California while Gore ignored it. The only state Gore outspent Bush in was Florida.

Bush spent the last 2-3 days in California as polling showed him ahead or behind by a few points. Al Gore spent the last 2-3 days camped out in Florida. If a few hundred votes had swung the other way in Florida, Bush and Rove would have been mocked mercilessly.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Every one of those polls would suggest a pretty significant swing towards Trump from 2016.

With the caveat that these polls are basically meaningless and only show how well known certain candidates are, a dead cat bounce in California for Trump wouldn't be that surprising. Clinton did win it by 30% after all, and a small swing to Trump in California would obviously not be indicative of any national trend or swing.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Bush 2000 was the last time a Republican could have legitimately won California.

Had Bush won California, there would be no Florida 2000 recount and all the division since.


Trump will probably get 20%-45% of the vote in CA.

Bush wasted millions in California while Gore ignored it. The only state Gore outspent Bush in was Florida.

Bush spent the last 2-3 days in California as polling showed him ahead or behind by a few points. Al Gore spent the last 2-3 days camped out in Florida. If a few hundred votes had swung the other way in Florida, Bush and Rove would have been mocked mercilessly.

So in other words, if Nader hadn't campaigned in Florida the last few days?

[Mr. Morden]

I found a link to the full poll results here:

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=82a67cd3-29dd-4a95-80fc-7c088ca84217

and updated the OP accordingly.