Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll

[Statistikhengst]

If you ran a poll of Rick Perry vs. the Democrats you'd find Perry doing pretty well. You never compare one specific person against a group. That's stupid. Only an idiot like Statistheilhitler would fall for it/
In any case, I am sure all the polls in 2006 showed Hillary was a shoo-in. Actually I recall looking back at this and yes they did. Whether the match up was Hillary v. McCain or Hillary v. Giuliani, who was the front runner.

Well, aren't you a stupid fucker. Each one of those matchups is a one-on-one matchup. Just because a pollster is pitting one candidate on one side against a number of candidates from the other side doesn't mean that the matchups themselves are not individual. Now, rub your two remaining brain cells together and let's see if you can figure that one out, fake Rabbi.

And btw, I have indicated more than once that one individual poll is of not much worth, but the aggregate of many polls does indeed tell us something.

Hey, when Hillary Clinton sweeps on election night 2016 with 57% and well over 400 EV, let's talk again.

Ahhh, yet another Rightie who, when his logic (if he had any at all) fails him, goes for personal attacks instead.

So a matchup of one vs. a party is really one vs one. You make much sense. If you're stoned.
Polls at this stage in 2006 universally showed Hillary as candidate beating either Romney or Giuliani. How did those work out?
Stupid fake-ass fucker you are.

Well, let's take a look at that again, you stupid retarded fuck.

You keep saying it's a matchup between one vs. a party, but dumbfuck, each one of those matchups has two very specific names, one being Hillary Clinton, the other being one of the names of presumed GOP candidates. Put down what you are smoking and learn something for a change, you stupid retarded fuck. Of the 534 (yes, 534) matchups I have recorded, exactly ONE is a generic match up. The other 533 are specific name to name matchups.

And, you stupid fuck, you keep going back to 2006, but you don't have courage to go back to 2010-2011, where Obama was consistently leading Romney by +3 to +4 in Ohio in all that early polling and by +4 nationally, and on election night, you stupid retarded fake Rabbi fuck, Obama won Ohio by +3 and nationally by +4.

So, yeah, stupid retarded fuck, early polling is often quite predictive.

No wonder the GOP keeps losing, with retarded fucks like you speaking for it. You by far one of the most vile pieces of excrement to every creep around USMB and until, I have been halfway nice to you. Not any more, you shitstain.

So, I've addressed the OP and the extra details about polling, and you have attacked people instead, you stupid moronic waste-of-breathable-air fuck.

Oh look at that. A foul-mouthed low life arrogant piece of shit has his ass handed to him. Again.
Poll: GOP candidates top Obama in hypothetical 2012 race - CNN.com
Yeah President Mike Huckabee sure cleaned Obama's clock in 2012.

Oh, look, stupid fuck, you pull one single poll. LOL.

I studied ALL of them:

Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.


All 1,958 of them:

Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.

And if you click on a state, you can see how far back the polling goes, like, for instance, OHIO:

Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.

And those 1,958 are for 2012 only.

Here are the others:

2011 National polling: Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: National Presidential Polling through 11/16/2011

2011 state polling:

AZ through NV:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Statewide polling data through 11/16/2011 - AZ through NV

NH through WY:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Statewide polling data through 11/16/2011 - NH through WI


And, an analysis of all of that data:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Two electoral Landscape Maps as of November 17, 2011

That's 263 more polls, added to the 1,958, making for 2,222 polls, not even including polls before November 2010.

Take a look at Ohio in the 2011 polling:

rosenthalswelt.blogspot.de/2011/11/statewide-polling-data-through-11162011_17.html

12 polls from 12/2010 to 12/2011, 44 match-ups, Obama won 43 of 44 and there was one absolute tie.
Average margin over Romney, through ALL of 2011: Obama +3 to Obama +4.
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +3

Pennyslvania, 2011:

13 polls, 46 match-ups, 43 Obama wins, 1 Romney win, 2 absolute ties.
Average Obama margin over Romney in 2011: +5
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +5.37

Virginia, 2011:

10 polls, 35 matchups, 32 Obama wins, 3 Romney wins.
Obama vs. Romney average for all of 2011: Obama +2.22
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +3.87

You look at early polling and see a sea of bolded blue in the states that were the battlegrounds.
The aggregate of polling from even in 2010 was clearly pointing to an Obama win in 2012 - EARLY POLLING, the polling you like to poo-poo.

So, while you pull out one single poll, I show you 2,222 polls, you stupid fuckwad.

Thank you for playing.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Yeah, as well she did in 2007... how'd that work out?

The dems have so bungled everything from the ME to the economy, couple that with her age, health and integrity issues... I just don't see it. Now we know the moonbat brigade will vote for her no matter what; but that's just a collection of crazies and hacks. And it's a small group.. I hope.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

Clinton/Warren?

Wow... where to start with the integrity issues.

No fucking way.

 

[mudwhistle]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

I'm rather baffled by your claim, PT. I was watching CNN a few nights ago and they were doing a segment on Hilary Clinton's shrinking poll numbers against a number of different GOP candidates.

Watching the ol' Faux again I see. CNN has had many stories and polls with Hillary leading at this point, fyi.

What a surprise.

 

[Mad Scientist]

"I'm voting for Hillary because she's ahead in a Poll so I wanna' go along with the crowd. Gurrrl Powah!
What? Question how the poll was made? Question Hillary's record? No way! That would be so like, rude and stuff!"

- Typical Brain Dead American Voter.

 

[Darkwind]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

It's not just your dog that's snoring Gramps, it's your Whole Party that's why the American people continue to suffer due to their inaction just like your dog that well represents your party.

That makes total sense considering the gop is poised to take the Senate.

Or maybe not. Don't count your chickens before they've hatched. Remember "DEWEY WON"?? Besides, if anyone other than the rich votes Republican they'd be seriously shooting themselves in the foot and would live to regret it. Let's hope they have the good sense to know and realize that before they vote.

You want to reconsider that?

Here you are, boasting about an alleged 20 point lead (in one state only btw) for an election that is over two years away. Yet you just claimed that for an election that is less than 100 days away, we should not count our chickens before they hatch.

Do you want to take some time and consider that before revising? Or no?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Maybe CNN will make her a political Commentator so she'll have at least some small roll in watching the Dems pick their candidate in 2016

 

[Redfish]

HRC will never be POTUS. You dems and libs can continue your fantasy if you want, but thats all it is, a fantasy.

 

[Misty]

I would not be happy about having Hillary Clinton for a president.

She is a proven giant piece of human scum.

 

[g5000]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

Please outline Hillary's platform.

1) What would she do to get the economy going?

2) How would she balance the budget?

3) How would she reduce the federal debt?

4) What would she do about Iran's nuclear weapons program?

5) What would she do about North Korea's nuclear weapons program?

6) What changes or improvements would she make to ObamaCare?

7) What changes or improvements would she make to Medicare?

9) What changes or improvements would she make to Social Security?

9) What reforms would she make to our immigration policy?

10) What changes would she make to the financial services industry?


As you are her number one fanboi, these and other questions should be a snap for you to answer.

 

[candycorn]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

It's not only a ticket that would energize the base, the women's vote, and highlight the GOP war on women moving the issue front and center...the move actually is one of the better fits. The skill sets compliment one another very well. The old geographic "balance" argument means zip in this day and age of 35-38 entrenched states (unless you can find a rock star from one of the 12-15 you pick the person who is best for the job).

 

[Mad Scientist]

There is no "War on Women". Stop watching TV.

 

[Oldstyle]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

It's not only a ticket that would energize the base, the women's vote, and highlight the GOP war on women moving the issue front and center...the move actually is one of the better fits. The skill sets compliment one another very well. The old geographic "balance" argument means zip in this day and age of 35-38 entrenched states (unless you can find a rock star from one of the 12-15 you pick the person who is best for the job).

The "war on women"? Really, Candy? LOL Look, that was a stroke of genius by the Obama folks last time (what do you run on when you've fucked everything up? You run on something that doesn't exist of course!) but at some point don't you think it would be to the betterment of the country if you liberals ran someone who had concrete plans to fix what's wrong with the economy...and with foreign affairs? Hillary was part of the problem with the Obama Administration.

 

[jknowgood]

You say that you have Hilary's "back, PT but you should probably be asking yourself who's back Hilary Clinton has! She's the ultimate political animal...willing to do or say anything to get elected. If that's what you're looking for in a leader then by all means get behind Hilary!

Yeah ole Bill ran his entire presidency on polls.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

She should have been the Dim nominee in '08, but the Dims instead chose a not-ready-for-primetime divider.

Anyway, Hillary I'm certain will be the next president, but she sure isn't going to win by 20 points.

 

[candycorn]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

It's not only a ticket that would energize the base, the women's vote, and highlight the GOP war on women moving the issue front and center...the move actually is one of the better fits. The skill sets compliment one another very well. The old geographic "balance" argument means zip in this day and age of 35-38 entrenched states (unless you can find a rock star from one of the 12-15 you pick the person who is best for the job).

The "war on women"? Really, Candy? LOL Look, that was a stroke of genius by the Obama folks last time (what do you run on when you've fucked everything up? You run on something that doesn't exist of course!) but at some point don't you think it would be to the betterment of the country if you liberals ran someone who had concrete plans to fix what's wrong with the economy...and with foreign affairs? Hillary was part of the problem with the Obama Administration.

The GOP war on women is real.

It wouldn't receive the rampant denials every time it is brought up. Despite the denials, it's real. The restrictions on women's health care get more vindictive every month. The GOP nominee for President wanted to overturn Roe and completely do away with Title X. Senatorial candidates from the GOP wonder about whether rape is legitimate (in the first case) and (in the second case) talks about a woman being able to simply will herself not to be pregnant. If such will power didn't exist, she would have to carry the child to term in a GOP world; a constant reminder of the sexual assault.

Despite your denial of what is obvious to everyone--Obama won the women's vote handly as will any Democratic nominee in 2016; you know that don't you???--you are correct about one thing.

If Hillary does run, she will have to run, in part, on Obama's record. Americans are used to rewarding folks who make a difference, not slow and steady improvement. As Obama's Secretary of State, she has some of his "baggage" if you want to call it that.

Foreign affairs are not going to be a problem. Hillary is well respected around the globe and for good reason.

 

[Statistikhengst]

She should have been the Dim nominee in '08, but the Dims instead chose a not-ready-for-primetime divider.

Anyway, Hillary I'm certain will be the next president, but she sure isn't going to win by 20 points.

I have stated it openly more than 10 times in USMB. I will say it again, and you can gladly bookmark it:

Hillary will win in 2016 with 57% of the NPV and more than 400 EV, perhaps considerably more.

Demographics, demographics, demographics.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's 2008 all over again!

Hillary so far ahead in the polls whats the point of even having an election

 

[Statistikhengst]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

It's not only a ticket that would energize the base, the women's vote, and highlight the GOP war on women moving the issue front and center...the move actually is one of the better fits. The skill sets compliment one another very well. The old geographic "balance" argument means zip in this day and age of 35-38 entrenched states (unless you can find a rock star from one of the 12-15 you pick the person who is best for the job).

The "war on women"? Really, Candy? LOL Look, that was a stroke of genius by the Obama folks last time (what do you run on when you've fucked everything up? You run on something that doesn't exist of course!) but at some point don't you think it would be to the betterment of the country if you liberals ran someone who had concrete plans to fix what's wrong with the economy...and with foreign affairs? Hillary was part of the problem with the Obama Administration.

The GOP war on women is real.

It wouldn't receive the rampant denials every time it is brought up. Despite the denials, it's real. The restrictions on women's health care get more vindictive every month. The GOP nominee for President wanted to overturn Roe and completely do away with Title X. Senatorial candidates from the GOP wonder about whether rape is legitimate (in the first case) and (in the second case) talks about a woman being able to simply will herself not to be pregnant. If such will power didn't exist, she would have to carry the child to term in a GOP world; a constant reminder of the sexual assault.

Despite your denial of what is obvious to everyone--Obama won the women's vote handly as will any Democratic nominee in 2016; you know that don't you???--you are correct about one thing.

If Hillary does run, she will have to run, in part, on Obama's record. Americans are used to rewarding folks who make a difference, not slow and steady improvement. As Obama's Secretary of State, she has some of his "baggage" if you want to call it that.

Foreign affairs are not going to be a problem. Hillary is well respected around the globe and for good reason.

In 2012, Obama won the female vote by +11

Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com


In state poll after state poll after state poll, Hillary Clinton is winning in the female vote by by between +15 and +20, including in red states where we expect her to lose that particular state. In national poll after national poll after national poll, she is also winning the female vote by between +15 and +20. I am referring to pollsters who release their internals. Not all do.

Example. two days ago, PPP, North Carolina:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2014/PPP_Release_NC_8201205.pdf

Overall:

Clinton 45 / Christie 38, Margin: Clinton +7
Clinton 47 / Cruz 41, Margin: Clinton +6
Clinton 47 / Paul 42, Margin: Clinton +5
Clinton 46 / Bush, J 42, Margin: Clinton +5
Clinton 45 / Huckabee 44, Margin: Clinton +1

Historical comparison:

Obama won NC in 2008 by a squeaker +0.33%
Romney picked-up NC in 2014 by +2.04%

Former President George W. Bush landslided in NC in 2004, with +12.43, also with +12.83% in 2000.

So, the Tarheel State has gone from being a rock-solid GOP bastion to a true battleground state within the last 8 years.

In the same PPP (D) poll, here are the internals vis-a-vis the female vote:

Women only:

Clinton 51 / Christie 35, Margin: Clinton +16
Clinton 40 / Cruz 38, Margin: Clinton +12
Clinton 52 / Paul 35, Margin: Clinton +17
Clinton 52 / Bush, J 37, Margin: Clinton +15
Clinton 50 / Huckabee 38, Margin: Clinton +12

So, overall, her margin by this poll is between +1 and +7, but among women, between +12 and +17 - and that in a heavy battleground state.

Let's look at New York, from yesterday:


New York State (NY) Poll - August 21, 2014 - Clinton Or Cuomo Thump GOP In | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Overall:

Clinton 61 / Paul 30, Margin: Clinton +31
Clinton 60 / Bush, J 29, Margin: Clinton +31
Clinton 54 / Christie 34, Margin: Clinton +20


New York, female vote:


Clinton 66 / Paul 25, Margin: Clinton +41
Clinton 65 / Bush, J 26, Margin: Clinton +39
Clinton 60 / Christie 27, Margin: Clinton +33



And, Ohio, from 07/31/2014:

Ohio (OH) Poll - July 31, 2014 - Obama Approval In Ohio Nears A | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 48 / Bush, J 37, Margin: Clinton +11
Clinton 46 / Christie 37, Margin: Clinton +9
Clinton 47 / Kasich 40, Margin: Clinton +7
Clinton 46 / Paul 42, Margin: Clinton +4


And in the female vote, Ohio, this poll:

Clinton 55 / Bush, J 31, Margin: Clinton +24
Clinton 54 / Christie 31, Margin: Clinton +23
Clinton 53 / Kasich 33, Margin: Clinton +20
Clinton 55 / Paul 33, Margin: Clinton +22

So, in this poll, Clinton is leading in THE quintessential battleground state by between +4 (close to Obama's 2008 margin) and +11 (no Democrat has done that well since LBJ in 1964), but by between +20 and +24 in the female vote.

That's the data.

A party that is losing the female vote by 20 points cannot, I repeat, cannot compete nationally.

@candycorn

 

[Oldstyle]

Hillary Clinton has at least 20 point lead over GOP in new poll | Early & Often

--------------------------------------------------
Way To Go!! We have your back, Hillary!!

How many points does Hillary have vs. Elizabeth Warren?

Since they are both obviously very popular the current consensus among many is that Elizabeth should run as Hillary's Vice-President. Now with that Winning Team it would be extremely hard for any Republican to beat let's face it. I hope she does choose Elizabeth! They would make a Great team for the country, unequivocally!

It's not only a ticket that would energize the base, the women's vote, and highlight the GOP war on women moving the issue front and center...the move actually is one of the better fits. The skill sets compliment one another very well. The old geographic "balance" argument means zip in this day and age of 35-38 entrenched states (unless you can find a rock star from one of the 12-15 you pick the person who is best for the job).

The "war on women"? Really, Candy? LOL Look, that was a stroke of genius by the Obama folks last time (what do you run on when you've fucked everything up? You run on something that doesn't exist of course!) but at some point don't you think it would be to the betterment of the country if you liberals ran someone who had concrete plans to fix what's wrong with the economy...and with foreign affairs? Hillary was part of the problem with the Obama Administration.

The GOP war on women is real.

It wouldn't receive the rampant denials every time it is brought up. Despite the denials, it's real. The restrictions on women's health care get more vindictive every month. The GOP nominee for President wanted to overturn Roe and completely do away with Title X. Senatorial candidates from the GOP wonder about whether rape is legitimate (in the first case) and (in the second case) talks about a woman being able to simply will herself not to be pregnant. If such will power didn't exist, she would have to carry the child to term in a GOP world; a constant reminder of the sexual assault.

Despite your denial of what is obvious to everyone--Obama won the women's vote handly as will any Democratic nominee in 2016; you know that don't you???--you are correct about one thing.

If Hillary does run, she will have to run, in part, on Obama's record. Americans are used to rewarding folks who make a difference, not slow and steady improvement. As Obama's Secretary of State, she has some of his "baggage" if you want to call it that.

Foreign affairs are not going to be a problem. Hillary is well respected around the globe and for good reason.

So let me see if I understand how this works in "CandyLand"...

The GOP's denials of an alleged "war on women" is the proof that it exists? Because if it didn't exist they wouldn't deny it? Is that your logic, Candy? Wow...I mean WOW!!!

So if I accuse you of being a murderer and you respond with "rampant denials" that you ARE a murderer that only means that you're obviously guilty of murder?