Blood Red Missouri Shock Poll -Clinton 42% Drumpf 40%

[DemocratSinceBirth]

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article69418112.html

[Gomez163]

1. No shock - red state

[ozone_man]

23. Lol!

Two Republicans are a draw.

[LonePirate]

2. All sorts of interesting polls in the past couple of weeks, some contradictory.

Recent polls have shown tight races in red AZ, GA and MO. Other polls have shown close races in FL, OH and the reliably blue but the media ignorantly claims is a swing state PA. Both trios of polls cannot be true. If the first three are true, then the latter three are completely bogus. If the latter three are true, then the first three are bogus.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. You explained it better than I could.

[HassleCat]

4. Meaningless right now.

As a Sanders supporter, I would like to believe the polls that show Bernie doing better than Hillary against Donnie Short Fingers, but I know better. Polls don't mean much until after the convention "bumps" the parties get from being on TV. Once we get into September, the polls will begin to indicate something close to the eventual result.

[jzodda]

17. Usually I agree

This time around the public has no need to get to know the candidates imo.

Everybody knows them and knows them well. Most people have made up their minds I would imagine. They hate one or the other. Both spending decades in the public square.

Missouri with a Dem ahead even in a small lead is very good news. The state has been trending right now for a few election cycles. I read (don't remember where) that its a go to place for right wing evangelicals to move there.

[Il_Coniglietto]

22. Although I agree that the accuracy of polls this far out is questionable,

these aren't states a Democrat needs to win. However, they are absolute must wins for Trump. If he's forced to spend time and money in MO, GA, AZ, UT, etc., then that's fantastic news. He could end up winning those states handily, but at what cost to his campaign in FL, OH, NC and as a whole?

It's certainly not a bad thing!

[Proud Public Servant]

6. Not necessarily

If we assume Trump will do better than average among aging, working class whites, but worse than average with minorities and evangelicals, then it explains every poll but Florida. And nothing ever explains Florida.

[The_Counsel]

11. Love Your Description of Pennsylvania!

the reliably blue but the media ignorantly claims is a swing state PA.

+ - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - +

Never understood this. For at least three straight elections the media has told us the GOP nominee had a chance in hell to carry Pennsylvania. And every time the Dem carries it easily. They even waited as long as they could to call it for Kerry in '04 to make it at least appear close, but he carried it by something like 18 points as I recall....

[Jim Lane]

19. Sorry, your recollection is way off.

In 2004, the Pennsylvania results were: Bush, 48.42%; Kerry, 50.92%.

Obama (with a Pennsylvania-born running mate) did somewhat better, beating McCain by ten points and then Romney by five. People universally consider Ohio a swing state, but Obama beat Romney by three points there, so Pennsylvania isn't all that much bluer.

[The_Counsel]

24. I Stand Corrected, Then...

Wow ... Just 1.5 points in '04? Where the hell did I get 18?? Sheesh...!

Solid and comfortable wins for Obama in '08 and '12, respectively, though ... That much I DO remember...

Need to find a way to get it done against Mr. Trump this year, though. I have a feeling all bets will be off with this guy, joke or no joke...

[Jim Lane]

25. Another correction (minor this time)

Kerry's margin was 2.5 points, not 1.5.

Obama beat Romney by only five points. If I were Trump's campaign manager in a general election against Clinton, I'd definitely be targeting Pennsylvania as one of the states I'd try to flip. In fact, I'd add Ohio (kind of obvious) and Michigan, where Trump won his primary and Clinton lost hers. To get to 270 electoral votes, the GOP needs to add 64 votes over what Romney took, plus enough additional states to counter any red-to-blue flips. The Michigan-Ohio-Pennsylvania bloc of Rust Belt states has 54 of the needed 64 votes.

[The_Counsel]

30. Like I Said: The Electoral Map May Not Look at All Familiar with Trump as GOP Nominee...

Trump would do well to try to challenge Hillary in New York and New Jersey as well. The scary thing is he has the money to do it, too. I'm looking at the map right now and can't help but get a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. Sure, both Bernie and Hillary figure to beat Trump in the EC, but ONLY if they're on point. One slip-up and it's "hello, President Trump."

In Hillary's favor (I guess), Obama lost the Michigan primary in '08 and yet still carried it in November. In fact, there were a few states Obama carried like that....

[Jim Lane]

31. I agree that Trump changes the map but I still don't see NJ and NY as targets.

Obama beat Romney by 18 points in NJ and by 28 points in NY. Trump is a New Yorker but his opponent (be it Clinton or Sanders) will also have ties to the state.

Trump might make NJ competitive by promising to appoint Christie as Attorney General. That would get him votes from a lot of the people who'd love to ship Christie out of the state.

Your overall warning against overconfidence is quite valid. I get MY sinking feeling in the pit of the stomach when I read about how we may be headed for a blowout win of Johnson-versus-Goldwater proportions. Overconfidence can be fatal. Here's one scenario for a Trump win based on an unfamiliar electoral map: He holds all of Romney's states, doesn't flip Florida (which was a very narrow Obama win), but instead makes a major push in the Rust Belt, especially by attacking trade agreements. He flips Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, each of which Obama carried by less than ten points. That takes him to precisely 270 votes.

As a side note, that might not mean "hello, President Trump." If he's at 270, then even one faithless elector who votes for Paul Ryan or the like would throw the election into the House of Representatives. The House must choose among the top three candidates (measured by electoral votes received, not by popular votes) and, in the House, it's one-state-one-vote. Would the House choose Trump or the Democrat or... Paul Ryan?

[Jim Lane]

20. They're not contradictory. Trump scrambles the traditional categories.

Trump, especially if running against Clinton with her record on trade agreements, could resonate with a lot of Rust Belt workers, enabling him to win Pennsylvania. As against that, Latino antipathy toward him could cost him Arizona.

Each of those states has been pretty consistent over the last several presidential elections. Each would likely stay in its accustomed camp if the Republican nominee were a conventional politician (Kasich, Bush, Walker, even Cruz). Trump, however, is different (I'm not going out on any limb here). I find it quite plausible that Trump will significantly outperform Romney in some states but fall well short of Romney's showing in others.

[iandhr]

5. We got an chance at the Senate seat as well.

[SheenaR]

7. Blood Red?

Bill won it twice and O lost by 0.1% there. It's a red state, but hardly a shock here. And every Dem got higher than 42% every GE since 88.

[Stallion]

8. Nevertheless-It Would be a Stake in the Heart for Republicans-so it would be their Blue Red State

nm

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. I honestly can't respond further because the results of the poll have me in a state of shock.

[Sky Masterson]

10. Missouri is not blood red.

..

[Attorney in Texas]

12. Is "blood red" Missouri the same state that has Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and Gov. Jay Nixon?

[Rybak187]

13. That puts her 3 points behind where Obama was in 2012 vs. Romney at about the same time.

per the 4/19/12 Rasmussen poll
and the 5/30/12 PPP poll

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I see a sea of red but I guess if you choose an arbitrary benchmark you can make the data say...

I see a sea of red but I guess if you choose an arbitrary benchmark you can make the data say anything you want:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/mo/missouri_romney_vs_obama-1800.html#polls


I lost a pound since I awoke. At this rate I will vanish by mid Summer.

[Rybak187]

16. What I was looking at was both polls that were closest in time to this poll both showed Obama at 45%

While this poll shows Hillary at 42%.

[DCBob]

15. Nice!

If true Trimp is toast.

[silvershadow]

18. Looks like she's got the Republican vote all locked up. nt

[JSup]

21. In Missouri, they've...

...been pushing Brownback style 'reforms' based on the 'wild success' in Kansas; Missourians don't seem to be falling for it being that they border Kansas and see Kansans every day coming over there to shop. The majority of Kansans live in the Eastern part of the state so MO isn't far.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/jan/18/report-kansas-residents-buy-groceries-out-state-du/
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article55209505.html
http://fox4kc.com/2016/01/17/kan-tax-increase-sends-grocery-shoppers-to-show-me-state/

And I doubt this repeal of food taxes will pass: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article61293132.html

[Iliyah]

26. They keep voting the GOP gov back in, so there it's hard find pitty for them but I do

realize that a lot of people did vote against them. I look at WI, Maine, KS, NC, and other red states.

In the red states the commoners are the ones crushed with the rich getting tax breaks and ya think the masses would understand that and vote the GOP out, but they don't and therefore, the state sinks.

Shakes head.

[riversedge]

27. Poor little robin....Walkin Walkin to Missour. Silly song but nice jingle. Thanks.

[Vote2016]

28. LOL! "We suck less than we expected to suck!" I totally want Hillary's new bumper-sticker

[tabasco]

29. LOL. "Shock poll?"

Unchanged from a month and a half ago.

http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/#MO