Poll: Clinton leads Trump by double digits

[First]

She's going to win big, probably a 350+ electoral vote victory, barring some sort of Brexit-fueled recession or other global contagion taking down the US economy. Even with a recession she'll still win, just not big.

And this is all based on who she's running against. People underestimate the conservative crackup taking place here, this is going to split the party and ideology likely for many cycles. Because even by a politician's standard there's no question Trump is a dangerous fool. Hasn't earned any of his success or wealth. Doesn't have the faintest interest in foreign affairs. And is quite literally the impulse control equivalent of an 8 year old. There are far too many so-called "conservatives" voting Trump that will do so because the alternative is Hillary, but that's based entirely on political left-right considerations when the reality is that ideology is irrelevant in this particular POTUS election because Trump is truly, uniquely unqualified for any office, let alone POTUS.

So whether you vote for Hillary or not (and I totally understand a right-winger or leftist not voting for Hillary), voting for Trump is really a perfect litmus test for whether you're competent, whether you have good judgment. So by that measure, it really helps in political discussions to know who is a Trump voter or not, gives you a generally good bead on a person's mastery of critical thinking.

 

[dullard]

Hillary hasn't polled over 50 since the end of April.

Sanders is still in it.

Wait until those voters give up on their primary candidate.

 

[yllus]

The "Mexican judge" thing is sticking in people's mind, it seems. I wonder if an event that happens this early in the election cycle matters down the line...

 

[buckshot24]

Sanders is still in it.

Wait until those voters give up on their primary candidate.

I will wait but that isn't what you said before. She has struggled lately to get close to 50%.

 

[buckshot24]

The "Mexican judge" thing is sticking in people's mind, it seems. I wonder if an event that happens this early in the election cycle matters down the line...

I think its more than that, he's been on defense about it for the last week +

 

[BUTCH1]

yup, a single poll matter not. what does matter is the overall average of all the polls and what do we see?

one week ago Clinton was up by two and now she is up by five and a half with Trump's numbers going down quickly.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Trump and the Republican party have screwed each other and ensured a Hillary victory.

Well the debates between these two at least ought to be interesting and a LOT of people "on the fence" can be pulled in with a good performance.

 

[dullard]

I will wait but that isn't what you said before. She has struggled lately to get close to 50%.

Um, did you even read this thead? The OP linked the latest poll from this week with her at 49%. Being at 49% in a recent poll isn't struggling to get close to 50%.

I said she regularly has topped 50% and she has. Yes, the last few polls have her less than 50%, but that doesn't matter at this point in an election. What matters is that you can get above a roughly 50% threshold. I say roughly since 3rd parties mean you don't actually need 50% to win (18 elections out of 48 were won with less than 50% of the vote). Clinton has shown that she can. Trump hasn't even gotten close.

That may change, but I see no evidence of it yet.

 

[buckshot24]

Um, did you even read this thead? The OP linked the latest poll from this week with her at 49%. Being at 49% in a recent poll isn't struggling to get close to 50%.

This is the only poll she's close to 50% since the end of April. She's been in the low 40s in most of the other ones.

 

[lopri]

It will be wild if Clinton wins Georgia or (gasp) Utah.

 

[alien42]

several new polls in the past 24 hours. Trump's average is now 38.3, the lowest it's been in 10 months and Hillary is up by 5.8

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

 

[hal2kilo]

several new polls in the past 24 hours. Trump's average is now 38.3, the lowest it's been in 10 months and Hillary is up by 5.8

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Trump should ban them.

 

[alien42]

Trump should ban them.

if that doesn't work, he can kill their families.

 

[fskimospy]

several new polls in the past 24 hours. Trump's average is now 38.3, the lowest it's been in 10 months and Hillary is up by 5.8

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Trump's polling average is one of the lowest polling averages for any major party candidate in history if I'm not mistaken. I know people have been saying this is a crazy election and the normal rules don't apply, but at least so far they sure seem to. Trump is the most widely hated presidential candidate in history and so he's recording some of the lowest poll numbers in history.

I was reading an interesting article about the bind that Republicans are in though, as Trump is still pretty popular with Republican partisans. It seems like their choice is basically stick with someone who is very likely to get crushed at the polls and take down a lot of Republicans with him, or jettison him and risk the wrath of their base voters. They're trapped.

 

[Subyman]

What's funny is that Hillary is such an easy candidate to beat for a "normal" well spoken moderate conservative. Hillary is deeply flawed from a campaign perspective, but compared to Trump, her few stumbles in the past are nothing when contrasted to what is coming out of his mouth every day.

GOP was ripe to win with a decent candidate.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

What's funny is that Hillary is such an easy candidate to beat for a "normal" well spoken moderate conservative. Hillary is deeply flawed from a campaign perspective, but compared to Trump, her few stumbles in the past are nothing when contrasted to what is coming out of his mouth every day.

GOP was ripe to win with a decent candidate.

Honestly I think the only one that stood half a chance was Kasich, and even he was off the rails on the whole PP thing. Other than that, if you look at the initial ~19 candidates vying for the nom, they went from crazy to batshit crazy in a big hurry.

 

[buckshot24]

What's funny is that Hillary is such an easy candidate to beat for a "normal" well spoken moderate conservative. Hillary is deeply flawed from a campaign perspective, but compared to Trump, her few stumbles in the past are nothing when contrasted to what is coming out of his mouth every day.

GOP was ripe to win with a decent candidate.

Did I miss the election or something?

 

[sunzt]

It appears that the best campaign strategy to defeat Trump is to let him keep talking.

 

[Jhhnn]

Trump's polling average is one of the lowest polling averages for any major party candidate in history if I'm not mistaken. I know people have been saying this is a crazy election and the normal rules don't apply, but at least so far they sure seem to. Trump is the most widely hated presidential candidate in history and so he's recording some of the lowest poll numbers in history.

I was reading an interesting article about the bind that Republicans are in though, as Trump is still pretty popular with Republican partisans. It seems like their choice is basically stick with someone who is very likely to get crushed at the polls and take down a lot of Republicans with him, or jettison him and risk the wrath of their base voters. They're trapped.

Well, at least they're not going on about how "We built this!"

They did build it, of course, with massive propaganda campaigns over decades that have shaped America's thinking in no small way. That's particularly evident among a base that's thoroughly irrationalized.

 

[Jhhnn]

What's funny is that Hillary is such an easy candidate to beat for a "normal" well spoken moderate conservative. Hillary is deeply flawed from a campaign perspective, but compared to Trump, her few stumbles in the past are nothing when contrasted to what is coming out of his mouth every day.

GOP was ripe to win with a decent candidate.

I don't think so, for a lot of reasons.

First off, Repubs can't field that candidate. At this point, such candidates have been weeded out early in their political career because they have to pander to an irrational base to become a candidate for any office they can win.

Second, Repubs have not made a necessary ideological pivot in the wake of their last disastrous term at the head of the Executive branch. They all adhere to the same failed ideology that delivered the invasion of Iraq & the Ownership Society looting spree in order to gain funding for their campaigns & funding for so-called independent groups supporting them.

Other than Trump, it's all well funded astroturf all the time.

 

[brycejones]

Did I miss the election or something?

Just lots of somethings....

 

[Mxylplyx]

I don't think so, for a lot of reasons.

First off, Repubs can't field that candidate. At this point, such candidates have been weeded out early in their political career because they have to pander to an irrational base to become a candidate for any office they can win.

Second, Repubs have not made a necessary ideological pivot in the wake of their last disastrous term at the head of the Executive branch. They all adhere to the same failed ideology that delivered the invasion of Iraq & the Ownership Society looting spree in order to gain funding for their campaigns & funding for so-called independent groups supporting them.

Other than Trump, it's all well funded astroturf all the time.

I would agree. Casual observers of politics tend to think every national contest starts off with even odds of victory, without considering the demographic disadvantages that have been building in the republican coalition for some time. Until Republicans find a way to broaden their coalition, which is a tall task given the xenophobic and racist leanings of much of their base , Democrats will have a significant advantage from the outset of every contest. For republicans to have a good chance, they would need an ideal candidate going up against a highly flawed dem candidate, and even then I think it will be an uphill battle. Bush had to win 40% of the Hispanic vote to barely win. Who would care to venture a guess on when the next time that will happen after what Trump has done? I suspect he did generational damage to the republican hopes of appealing to Hispanics.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Did I miss the election or something?

You'll probably wish you did.

 

[Vic]

This is the only poll she's close to 50% since the end of April. She's been in the low 40s in most of the other ones.

Bill won 2 general elections without getting 50% of the popular vote. He only got 43% of the vote in 1992 but won with 370 electoral votes.

 

[dullard]

Until Republicans find a way to broaden their coalition, which is a tall task given the xenophobic and racist leanings of much of their base , Democrats will have a significant advantage from the outset of every contest.

I mostly agree with your post. For the last couple decades, the GOP has relied on a consistent group of reliable voters (older whites). They have done so with ideas, policies, and speeches that have for the most part turned off the younger generation (unreliable voters). This worked quite well. For a while.

Their problem is that with each passing day, their base ages and parts of it die. While with each passing day democrats get more young voters. Sure, they are unreliable new voters, but as they age they do get more and more reliable. A base that is shrinking vs. a base that is growing is a recipe for long-term failure for the GOP. And the GOP has generally not responded with policy changes that will help switch new or existing voters to their party.

But where I disagree with you is that the one thing the GOP can do to grow their base without changing policies is xenophobia. Xenophobia is a very powerful unifier. Just look at what happened in the first half of the 1900s in Europe (Hitler, Mussolini, etc, were very popular for a time). And now look at Europe today with England possibly leaving the Euro over xenophobia and much of Europe violating its own policies of free travel between Schengen countries. Once you get a critical mass of xenophobia, people change political parties in an instant and are quite willing to vote for vile creatures that reinforce xeonphobia.

 

[Vic]

Did I miss the election or something?

Pretty much. Trump's has imploded in the past few weeks. He's demonstrated that he won't run to the middle (but instead amplified his rhetoric), won't follow the GOP leadership, and (worst of all) failed his first public leadership test in spectacular fashion.
My speculation is that the GOP is going to to cut Trump off from the party machine and force him to run independent. They'll split the ticket and nominate Cruz at the convention, accept that they won't win the White House, and try to save their seats down ballot (Trump voters will still likely vote R). Their only alternative is that they run Trump and lose everything in a catastrophic landslide.
After the election, the GOP will clean house. The base will be forgiven and brought back into the fold, but those prominent members of the GOP who backed Trump (ie Christie) will find their careers over.