More Dismal Poll Numbers for Hillary Clinton

[applegrove]

More Dismal Poll Numbers for Hillary Clinton

By Ed Kilgore at NY Magazine

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/more-dismal-poll-numbers-for-hillary-clinton.html#

"SNIP..............


Yesterday, a lot of Democrats were upset about Quinnipiac battleground-state polls that showed Trump even with or leading Hillary Clinton in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. But there were mitigating factors: The Q-polls had been giving bad news to Hillary Clinton all year, and there were other recent polls showing her still holding a robust lead. Still, those thinking she was in the process of building a landslide were disabused of the idea. Moreover, the polls have been showing that the FBI's announcement of its findings in the email case were hurting rather than helping her.

Today you can expect an even stronger reaction to a CBS/New York Times national poll showing a 40/40 dead heat between Clinton and Trump. The tie isn't broken when Gary Johnson is added to the mix; it's then 36/36 with 12 for the Libertarian. The last couple of polls from this outlet showed Clinton with a comfortable if not overwhelming lead.

The timing of this poll probably had a lot to do with the results: It was taken beginning the very day the FBI findings on Clinton's email usage were revealed, subsequently dominating the news the whole time these pollsters were in the field. So it probably represents a peak reaction to that event. Unsurprisingly, Clinton's ratings for being "honest and trustworthy" took a dive, to a dismal 28/67, as did her favorability ratio (28/54), shown as basically equal to Trump's (30/54).

If there's any silver lining for Democrats in these numbers, it's that a poll taken at the worst possible time still showed her even with Trump. He's not rising in the polls, either; she's dropping. The subsequent endorsement she received from Bernie Sanders has probably improved her standing among both Democrats (where this poll gave her a 58/19 favorability ratio) and independents (19/62). And at present, it's a fair guess her convention will be better managed and more positive than Trump's. Even with this latest poll, FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver's polls-only projection gives Clinton a 66 percent probability of winning, though Trump's odds have risen from 20 percent to 34 percent in pretty short order. And she got some good news, ironically, from Fox's state polling, which showed her up ten points in Colorado and seven in Virginia, reinforcing the theory that she'll do well in battleground states with a concentration of college-educated white voters and Latinos.



................SNIP"

[zappaman]

1. Oh no!

This is concerning!!11!!

[OnDoutside]

4. This is what you should concentrate on

"If there's any silver lining for Democrats in these numbers, it's that a poll taken at the worst possible time still showed her even with Trump. "

[applegrove]

10. +100

[brush]

2. Yesterday there were four polls that had Clinton up in the high single figure . . .

and low double figure territtory, yet you persist.

[applegrove]

3. I want us to hunker down and fight. I don't want us losing heart because it may not be a

blowout. And we need to not get disheartened.

[brush]

5. You don't want people to get disheartened but you use a headline like that?

Of, I get it. It's reverse psychology.

[applegrove]

7. I was thinking people might read the whole article. The author says exactly that.

Called being grounded. Better to suffer a 'loss' early and redouble our efforts.

"SNIP...........


But as I observed yesterday, it's really time for people expecting a runaway Clinton landslide to get a grip. It could still happen, particularly if the focus on the emails fades and Trump's divisive character and dubious "ideas" get more attention, but a close race remains likely. And in a close race, adverse polls are going to happen.


..............SNIP"

[zappaman]

6. Uh huh.

[Doctor Jack]

8. So old news then?

These are polls we have known about since early in the week and run counter to what we have seen with other polls since. So, who gives a fuck?

[dubyadiprecession]

9. Take into account that green party and libertarian poll numbers usually shrink...

to a few points by election day. The Clintons know how to win general elections, its Trump that can't get out of his own way.

[liberalmuse]

11. I was shocked...

when my sister told me she's voting for Jill Stein because "we live in a blue state". I wonder how many people in blue states are going to do the same. If enough people do this, then we're fucked, just like the in the Trumpence logo.

[m-lekktor]

12. I am not shocked at all I Know quite a few who are doing that.nt

[liberalmuse]

13. I know a few fellow Bernie supporters...

who plan to vote for him regardless. I used to be the far lefty in the family, but I may as well be a Republican these days. Who in the hell is Jill Stein? I have a few months to try to convince her not to even risk a Drumpf presidency, but to be honest, I was so shocked that I didn't even say anything.

[LuvLoogie]

16. You have to present it as a percentages game. Ask her who is more likely to advance a humanitarian,

progressive agenda. Not the waiving banners and slogans, but the actual gaining of ground over the next four years. Jill Stein will not even run for Congress, so she has NO chance of advancing anything on her bucket list.

Bernie Sanders understands that his bucket list is only viable by having it carried by the Democratic Party collective united against the opposition. He is joining his effort to the cause, because the opposition is so destructive when given a chance. It always takes more effort and time to build something that to destroy it.

Think of the time, money, resources, brainpower, man-hours and foot-pounds it took to build the World Trade Center. Compare that to the same it took to detroy it in a few hours.,

The same can be said of social and environmental progress. It takes a lot to reclaim or constantly maintain a safe water source. It doesn't take much to destroy it forever.

[NeoConsSuck]

15. That's the problem with the electoral college

If it was popular vote, no one would feel that their vote could be thrown away.

[RBInMaine]

14. More nonsense that doesn't mean shit right now.

[Dem2]

17. Poll posted days ago

why the heck would someone post it today?

[LAS14]

18. Why do the bad ones get all the press? See...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN0ZV2OA

And check RCP. My understanding is that Reuters doesn't appear in RCP because it's a tracking poll with rolling averages.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Can we stop cherry picking polls and focus on the aggregate?

POLITICO's Battleground States Polling Average
11-state weighted average: Clinton: 44.1%; Trump: 38.8%

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/swing-states