Posted on 03/18/2016 12:44:39 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The new Emerson College poll for New York provides some good news for Donald Trump — for now, anyway. With more than five weeks to go before the Empire State’s primary, Trump trounces Ted Cruz for the state’s 95 delegates by more than 50 points, 64/12, with John Kasich only getting 1% despite his big win in Ohio. That puts Trump well over the 50% threshold for winner-take-all allocation, while leaving Cruz and Kasich well below the 20% threshold for any allocation in the event of a plurality. Trump, the home-state candidate, also gets the most favorable marks in the GOP field, +48 against Cruz’ +8 and Kasich’s +20. The small sample of 298 likely Republican primary voters leaves the margin of error at 5.6%, but with gaps like these, the MoE is an afterthought.
However, when it comes to the general election, the news looks worse — much worse, in fact, for the argument that Trump will expand the GOP map:
Looking ahead to the general election, the two Democrats do equally well in a head-to-head matchup with Trump. Clinton (55% to 36%) and Sanders (53% to 36%) lead the reality show star by 19 and 17 points, respectively, while Cruz loses to Clinton by 31 points (61% to 30%).
The MoE on the full survey is a much more reasonable 3.5% on a sample of 768 likely general-election voters, so these numbers are a little more solid. The only bright spot for Trump in the general-election numbers is that Cruz does worse at 61/30, but that’s a cold comfort in a general election, where Electoral College votes are winner-take-all.
Furthermore, these numbers are almost exactly the same as two successive Siena polls got in the past two months, surveys with even larger sample sizes and a traditional live-call model. In February, the race was 57/32 Clinton, and two weeks ago Siena had it at 57/34. That’s close to the margin by which Barack Obama beat Mitt Romney in 2012 (62/36). All three polls show no upside for Republicans by having Trump on the ticket, not even with New York being his home state and the base of his business operations. Clinton may be underperforming Obama, but not by much.
Of course, the general election is still seven-plus months away, but that would only matter if New Yorkers hadn’t gotten to know Donald Trump well (or Hillary Clinton, for that matter) before now. Trump’s ubiquitous in New York, though, and voters there know him better than voters in most other states, with the possible exception of Florida — where Trump actually looks more competitive, but where Republicans have been much more competitive in presidential elections anyway. Romney only lost Florida by a percentage point, getting to 49%, while the RCP average of head-to-head polling there has Trump down 2.2 points … and Trump going no higher than 47% in any of them.
Given this lack of change over Romney’s 2012 performance in New York, where’s the evidence that Trump expands the map? If at this point Trump can’t get to 40% in his home state in head-to-head polling, what makes anyone think that Trump could beat Hillary in California or Massachusetts, or even in Pennsylvania or Michigan? The theory that Trump expands the Republican general-election map and provides a new path to 270 has no evidence supporting it. Right now, it looks like pure fantasy.
What happened to all those unnamed “private polls” per Drudge that showed Trump winning NY.
“It will be interesting. I posit that there will probably be a percentage of the population who will vote for Trump but will never admit it to a pollster. How many is anyone’s guess.”
I remember that same theory in 2008 that helped to provide false hope and comfort to some FReepers before Obama won that year; it was called the “Bradley Effect.”
“At one point several polls in 1980 election had Reagan between a 20 to 30 point underdog.
We all know how that turned out.”
From the time those mid-1980 polls came out, Carter’s candidacy suffered from the twin poison darts of the Iran hostage crisis and a rapidly deteriorating economy. Hillary faces no such challenges.
And please.. let’s quash right now any straw-grasping about Hillary being “indicted” — that is absolutely not going to happen.
Once it is pointed out that Hillary is a carpetbagger and Trump is a true New Yorker he will probably win.
That was tried already in her first Senate run. It failed
This is really nothing new - national polls have been saying this from the moment the race began. But the Trumpeters are positive they are all rigged ... so since they are always right there is nothing to worry about ... except Bernie who consistently beats DJT.
They’re only rigged if they show Trump losing. Any polls that show Trump ahead of his other GOP rivals are real and trustworthy
That’s what frustrates heck out of me with my state. We can have 9/10 of all our towns and things look great, and then in come two or three cities, late of course, and all of a sudden we’re over ruled, we lose every time!!
At one point several polls in 1980 election had Reagan between a 20 to 30 point underdog.
Not comparable to now for a few reasons
From the time those mid-1980 polls came out, Carter’s candidacy suffered from the twin poison darts of the Iran hostage crisis and a rapidly deteriorating economy. Hillary faces no such challenges.
We’re is is=were she is
No Republican is going to beat a Democrat in New York in a general election.
No republican was ever going to win NY in the general. That’s why states like Ohio and Florida are considered battleground states. New York is behind enemy lines.
For a little context, keep in mind that in 2012, Obama beat Romney by 28.2% in New York, and in 2008, Obama beat McCain by 27.9%In essence, this poll is saying that Trump actually betters Romney and McCain's efforts by ~10%.
If that is true, and if it generally carried nationwide, We'd be looking at Trump taking all of Romney's states from 2012, plus Iowa, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida, and Nevada in November. It would be a blowout for Trump.
Yep, you guys are exactly right, we have to be optimistic, but we have to be honest here. NYS is not in play as of today ( however, current events can change things on a dime ). Regardless, Trump should still campaign here ( and LA, SF, Chicago ) because it will drive the enemy crazy, put a huge dent in their bankroll and run up the popular vote as high as possible.
Now keep in mind that the most valuable voter anywhere is a direct (D)ummycrat crossover ( i.e., one who voted for Dumbo last time and switches to our guy this time ).
This is because getting newly first time votes results in the expected (R)+1. But crossover voters result in a (D)-1 and (R)+1 for a net 2. They are twice as valuable because literally each one of them is worth two new voters. They are the magic that flips purple states between a (D) or (R) victory. It is how 52-48 or 54-46 battleground states get nailed down.
Now here in my state of New York there is a stable spread of +2 Million for the (D)ummycrat socialists. To cover the approximately net 30% spread requires a huge 15% crossover because there are few new or old (R)'s and (C)'s to pull from. They're gone. Florida. Carolinas. Out west. We actually lose electoral votes after each census. We're down to 29 from about 43 when I started voting.
Now this state is NOT impossible. I would say none are truly impossible depending on current events ( e.g., a terrorist attack or stock market crash or another rapid fiscal crisis ). Nixon's landslide in 1972 was partially due to continuing street unrest since 1968 and the obvious perception that McGovern and Eagleton and Shriver were not going to keep things orderly.
The simultaneous effects of Trump being a homeboy headquartered in midtown, depressed (D)ummycrat turnout from a damaged candidate perhaps facing indictment ( or suffering from strategic Trump attacks ) combined with an energized (R)+(C) base and with a large amount of direct (D) crossovers could close that 30 points quickly. This poll placing Trump at -17% or -20% means that he literally is already along the required trajectory to get real close.
A half million, or 500,000 (D) crossovers up here would mean a net 1 Million and a close contest ( for NYS ) of around 4 Million - 3 Million. With some possible new voters plus a depressed (D) turnout this thing will wind up with a difference of far less than a million votes. My guess is we wind up in 56-44 or 54-46 territory at the end of the day which is how we used to go before and immediately after Reagan and Nixon.
This kind of thing though is exactly how the purple states will fall, probably 7 of the 12 by my count. And that is a win right there ( and if you look back to last summer, I started calculating this possibility about a month after Trump started showing populist synergy with the voters ).
And most interestingly, when you really press for (D) crossovers, there are some slightly less "Blue" states like NH ( 52-46 ) or OR ( 54-42 ) or WA ( 56-42 ) or even IL ( 58-42 ) which suddenly become excruciatingly painful ulcers for the (D)ummcrats. If you see any of them flip on election night, look out below.
NOTE: when talking about (D) and (R) in the above New York math it is only about actual ballot box results for the candidates, NOT party registration or the party line they voted on. The above numbers for (R) includes people who voted on the (C) line. We actually have a large (C) party here but that only has to do with registration, you can vote any line obviously. Naturally they cannot vote in the (R) primary though. Likewise the (G)reen and other Labor and Communist front parties appear in the (D)umbo vote totals.
“1) Tie her to an Obama third term
2) This one may have the most impact is to tie her to the Washington DC corruption. And there is very few people in the country that don’t find her corrupt”
1. Six months ago, tying her to an Ibama third term would’ve been effective, but I doubt that’d have much impact, considering Obama’s job approval ratings are trending upward.
2. Problem with the Clintons is, people already know they’re thoroughly corrupt, but that’s not a barrier these days. The corruption factor has already been factored in.
You're WRONG because you look no further than the old establishment conjecture.
Hitlery is fast becoming "damaged goods".
Whether she's indicted or not, when the results of the investigation are leaked she'll become "UNELECTABLE."
I'm NOT talking email and servers.. she has 150 agents investigating her case which directly includes special State Dept treatment for favors by Mrs. Clinton while heading up the State Dept.
Those favors coincide with huge MONEY deposits to the Clinton foundation.
One such example was the Uranium deal.
Hitlery is over, one way or another... whether you think so or not.
Name the state’s Obama won in 2012 that Cruz will flip.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.