OHIO
OHIO, on the presidential level, is the quintessential battleground state, one that both sides want to win, one that the GOP absolutely has to have in order to win, the most reliable bellwether state in US electoral politics at the current time, and ground zero of every presidential campaign for the last 30+ years.
At the current time Hillary Clinton is so far ahead of the GOP in polling in the Buckeye state that, if these statistics hold, then Ohio would not even be a battleground in 2016. But it is still quite early and much can change. And yes, we are talking about a small number of polls right now, but from reputable pollsters known for accuracy.
First, some background on OHIO (my home state), over a number of helpful links.
All presidential election results for Ohio since 1856:
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=39&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state
An intensive analysis of OHIO from the 2008 presidential election, in three parts, starting with part I:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SR2w2havgdaqWvdzYDVgF4-hpaTsUNdcGDsRDQ0m3Ok/edit?usp=sharing
A electoral "bio" of OHIO, from the end of 2011:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Rank 26 / 26: Ohio
2008 polling from OHIO:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: FINAL POLL CONVERGENCE, No. 12
2012 polling from OHIO:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=70
The four polls of Ohio from 2013 till now are here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao6IyAPQ8DmmdHhSRUJqa3MyUm5VUTg0dlRzaHZtaEE&usp=sharing
The latest Quinnipiac poll just came in a couple of days ago:
( ) = values from the Quinnipiac poll prior to this one for that particular match-up:
Clinton 49 (49)
Ryan 40 (41)
Margin:
Clinton +9 (+8)
Clinton 51 (51)
Paul 38 (40)
Margin:
Clinton +13 (+11)
Clinton 49 (42)
Christie 36 (41)
Margin:
Clinton +13 (+1)
Clinton 50 (48)
Rubio 36 (39)
Margin:
Clinton +14 (+9)
Clinton 51 (50)
Bush, Jeb 36 (37)
Margin:
Clinton +15 (+13)
Clinton 51 (49)
Kasich 36 (38)
Margin:
Clinton +15 (+13)
Clinton 51 (50)
Cruz 34 (35)
Margin:
Clinton +17 (+15)
Now, the margins, in ascending order:
Hillary vs. Ryan:
+9
Hillary vs. Paul:
+13
Hillary vs. Christie:
+13
Hillary vs. Rubio:
+14
Hillary vs. Bush, Jeb:
+15
Hillary vs. Kasich:
+15
Hillary vs. Cruz:
+17
When you analyse the CHANGE in the margin from this Quinnipiac poll over the last time each pair was matched up, then the change looks like this:
Hillary vs. Ryan: from
+8 to
+9 =
Clinton +1
Hillary vs. Paul: from
+11 to
+13 =
Clinton +2
Hillary vs. Bush, Jeb: from
+13 to
+15 =
Clinton +2
Hillary vs. Kasich: from
+13 to
+15 =
Clinton +2
Hillary vs. Cruz: from
+15 to
+17 =
Clinton +2
Hillary vs. Rubio: from
+9 to
+14 =
Clinton +5
Hillary vs. Christie: from
+1 to
+13 =
Clinton +12
---------------------------------------------------
So, what to make of this data?
First, Hillary leads in 6 of 7 matchups by double-digit landslide margins in a state that has been won in single-digits, most of them quite low, for the last 6 election cycles. And the one matchup that is in single-digits, against Paul Ryan, is a +9, which is almost a landslide margin in and of itself.
Second, the changes in margins show a continuing pattern: in 5 of the seven matchups, Clinton increased her margin by between +1 and +2. Against Rubio, she increased her margin by +5. But against Chris Christie, post-Bridgegate, she went from a +1 (statistical tie) to a +13 margin, a jump of a whalloping +12 in margin between these polls. We have seen this kind of large "pulling away" from Christie in a number of polls in February.
Third, just as in the last national poll (Marist/MaClatchy), which I reported
HERE, at current time, Paul Ryan does the best against Clinton and Ted Cruz does the worst.
Fourth, also related to the Marist national poll, once again, as is Ohio's electoral history, a Democratic candidate wins OHIO with a leaner margin than the national margin, and this also currently the case when you compare the two Ohio Quinnipiacs with the two national Marists - Clinton does better nationally than in Ohio. This has long historical precedent, all the way back to 1932. Since then, the only Democrat to have done better in Ohio than he did nationally was: LBJ, in 1964.
Fifth, this poll is the first EVER showing a Democratic candidate breaking at or over 50% in 5 matchups in an Ohio poll - ever. Bill Clinton never got to or above 50 in any Ohio poll, ever. Carter topped out at 49. John Kerry topped out at 49. Obama got to 50 in some polls in 2008, but not many. And yet, with an average of 49, Obama won Ohio in 2008 with
+4.56%. 2012 was the first year ever that Rasmussen even had the president at the 50 mark, but only once. And here, when you look at these four polls of Ohio over 2013, she is hitting over coming over 50 an awful lot.
Back to the actual winning margins in Ohio, here the last six cycles:
1992:
Clinton (Bill) +1.83%
1996:
Clinton (Bill) +6.36%
2000:
Bush 43 +3.51%
2004:
Bush 43 +2.11%
2008:
Obama +4.56%
2012:
Obama +2.97%
In the last 20 years, there has not been even one single poll of Ohio showing any candidate with double digits leads. And you have to go back to 1988, with Bush 41, to see a double-digit landslide winning margin (
Bush 41 +10.85%).
Back to those margins again, this time with the national margin in parenthesis:
1992:
Clinton (Bill) +1.83% (+5.56%)
1996:
Clinton (Bill) +6.36% (+8.52%)
2000:
Bush 43 +3.51% (GORE +0.52%)
2004:
Bush 43 +2.11% (+2.46%)
2008:
Obama +4.56% (+7.26%)
2012:
Obama +2.97% (+3.86%)
You can clearly see that in all four cases of a Democratic national winner, that the Democrat's margin in Ohio was always less than the national margin. This was also the case for Bush 43 in 2004, but that is a rarity for Republican candidates.
I just want to drive home the point that Ohio is supposed to be an extremely competitive, middle to low single-digit state in national electoral politics and that large margins for a Democratic candidate are indeed rare. In fact, I have never seen such margins for a Democrat in my lifetime.
To compare: Hillary is currently doing
better in Ohio than John McCain performed in Georgia, both Dakotas, South Carolina and his home state of Arizona and is on par with McCain's performance in Kansas and Nebraska. Hillary is also doing better than Mitt Romney performed in Georgia, Indiana and Mississippi and is on par with his performance in Montana and Alaska. Those are all states that were never in doubt in 2008 and 2012, respectively.
This means that Ohio joins the list of Florida and Virginia as a state where Hillary is already in double digit margins over most all comers from the GOP. If there ever was a warning sign that the GOP is in deep, deep trouble for 2016, should these numbers hold, then this is it.
It is looking more and more that the old "trifecta" of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida in Electoral politics is becoming a Quintifecta, when you add Virginia and North Carolina (also a state where Clinton is ahead right now).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here was PPP's (D) and Quinnnipiacs's track record in 2012:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: The moment of truth: how did the pollsters do?
PPP (D) was -hands down - the best pollster of 2012 when you compare it's end-polling to the final results.
Quinnipiac also did quite well, but polled less battleground states than PPP in 2012, at least at the end.
That being said, in spite of the fact that both pollsters actually has a slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias in 2012, both were off to the left by +2 in their polling of Ohio. But even if Qpiac is off to the Left by 2 now, a +13 projection that would mean a +11 win is still a landslide.
Both pollsters are showing that Hillary is currently more than comfortably ahead in Ohio.
If you check out the 2014 primary calendar:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/election-forums/338137-2014-primary-calendar.html
You will see that Ohio's primary is 5/04/2014, in about 2 and 1/2 months, and since there is a competitive gubernatorial race brewing in the Buckeye State, expect a number of 2016 presidential polls to come out as well.
Before anyone on the Right gets upset about my choice of wording, they might want to check out my threads on Colorado and Alaska first:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/election-forums/339685-current-presidential-polling-in-colorado.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/election-forums/338878-current-presidential-polling-in-alaska.html
Coming up next: current presidential polling in Louisiana.
Here's a question for you. What are the reasons behind those numbers. Anything more than name recognition?
