The difference between 2016 and 2020 is pretty simple if you compare this poll to the late June 2016 Q-poll. % of people who feel STRONGLY unfavorable about a candidate in June 2016: Clinton: 50% Trump: 48% and in July 2020... Biden: 31% Trump: 53%
That gave me a good chuckle.One of the president's biographers, Michael D'Antonio, views Trump's struggle to mobilize a national response to the pandemic as something that would have required a greater attention span and ability to think outside his own self-interest than he has.
"P.T. Barnum is not who you want leading you in a pandemic," D'Antonio said.
"None of the talents and inclinations Trump brought to the presidency as showman, developer and reality TV star are sufficient now," he said. "Studying something with dedication or seriousness, learning a new thing — that's never been his strength."
Ocasio-Cortez is no dummy, she's not going to throw away her congressional seat like that. Schumer is an expert organizer who, unlike most of the incumbents who've gotten knocked off in recent years, isn't disconnected from his state (indeed, on his last re-election campaign he dedicated extra time over the years making sure he visited as much of the upstate as he could just to drive up his numbers, which was totally unnecessary from an electoral standpoint).Now we are gonna have to fight this jackass for progress if Dems win control of the Senate. Hope AOC primaries him
Poll Results | Quinnipiac University Poll
Quinnipiac University Poll’s list of recent and past poll results for political races, state and national elections, and issues of public concern.poll.qu.edu
Even remotely seriouslyRegardless of your feelings toward Schumer, it's impossible to take anything David Sirota says seriously.
I'm telling you guys..we truly do not know how bad it can get for Trump. One, the overall situation is going to continue to deteriorate in the next 4-6 months- sports and schools getting cancelled, new lockdowns, and a rising death toll. Two, we literally have no idea what happens with a candidate actively does the opposite of what he needs to do to tighten the race.
Biden +14-15 is possible.
Once Biden's in office (and assume a D Senate), then she doesn't have to leave immediately. She and Breyer absolutely need to both go within the first two years.I hope she retires the second Biden is sworn in. Too much is riding on one person.
Why did Clinton poll better with Hispanics, and what can Biden do to close the gap?
Once Biden's in office (and assume a D Senate), then she doesn't have to leave immediately. She and Breyer absolutely need to both go within the first two years.
I don't see any of the rumored candidates moving that needle.
Clinton invested heavily into the demographic and states with heavy hispanic populations. At this point we're pretty late to the game for it and COIVD isn't going to help the matter. Spanish outreach is hard as hell and Biden didn't have the resources to even attempt it during the primary. One can argue it also has to do with the demographic skewing younger, but honestly I recall listening to I forget what podcast it was that stipulated that the 2016 take away was that Hispanic outreach for as great as it looked on paper, ultimately handed nothing over for Clinton. That perhaps the dem take away was that it wasn't particularly necessary to invest as heavily. Which I dunno, man if that was the ultimate take away then it worries me particularly going into the current general where it feels like we've been under siege for fucking years now under this admin. Shit sucks, I'm hopeful that someone in the campaign makes real efforts for improving those numbers. Might help out in states considering we're pushing for as much of a chance in toss up states but who knows. The most we have is reports from a month or so ago confused as to what Biden's message to hispanic voters even was.
The difference between 2016 and 2020 is pretty simple if you compare this poll to the late June 2016 Q-poll. % of people who feel STRONGLY unfavorable about a candidate in June 2016: Clinton: 50% Trump: 48% and in July 2020... Biden: 31% Trump: 53%
On the Russian bounty issue:
"Seventy-seven percent of voters say they are either "very concerned" or "somewhat concerned" about reports that Russia paid bounties for the killing of American soldiers in Afghanistan. Twenty percent say they are "not so concerned" or "not concerned at all."
Fifty-nine percent say they think President Trump is not telling the truth regarding what he knew about reports of Russian payments to kill American troops. Twenty-nine percent say they think he is telling the truth."
This story will be a major part of the campaign, I think.
I wonder what a Biden +12 or more type win would do for the Senate races.
lol if it's 15 we'll probably be wondering whether Dems have any hope of 60 with
AZ/CO/IA/ME/NC/MT/TX/KS/GA/AL/SC/KY/GAs
Flashback to @QuinnipiacPoll in late June 2016
Clinton 42% (+2%) Trump 40%
Election results: Clinton 48.2% (+2.1) Trump 46.1%
The absolute farthest I could see him going would be shutting down bars and indoor dining, but I doubt he'll even do that much. A mask mandate is more likely, but even that is kind of pointless when none of the cops around here are willing to enforce the mandate. DeWine was crushing it in the beginning of all of this (and so was Dr. Acton, who is brilliant, looks like my mom, and will live forever in my heart), but I can't tell if the fuck-ups lately have just been him "coming home" and showing his true colors, caving to pressure from protesters, or if his ability to respond to this adequately has been completely knee-caped by lack of federal support. Either way, as an Ohioan, the COVID-180 from his admin has been infuriating.So, DeWine has a press conference scheduled in Ohio for 5. What are the odds on it being some sort of shutdown of the state? I'm thinking it's just a mask mandate and maybe closing high risk areas.
It's astounding. Just like how Trump has continually polled well on the economy despite doing everything in his power to fuck it up.Thanks for the explantion. Dems really need to step up their game here if they want to take advantage of the rapidly changing demographics. I'm still surprised Biden is polling so close to Trump when Trump has shown repeatedly how racist he is and how much he hates immigrants - and Trump has somehow increased his popularity by 7 points. It boggles.
Biden +15...
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...2016/heres-what-happened-with-the-latino-vote
Mr. Trump was supposed to be the bucket of cold water that aroused the sleeping giant, producing not only a stronger preference for the Democratic candidate but also, more important, a spike in turnout. In 2012, with immigration reform on the line, more than 12 million Latino voters stayed home, producing a turnout rate of 48 percent compared with 64 percent for whites and 67 percent for blacks.
The much ballyhooed and chronicled "Trump Effect" was supposed to have produced a surge in naturalizations and voter registration over the past year, and news organizations were churning out stories about the "surge" in Latino voting even after the polls closed Tuesday.
While more time and data is needed to get a full picture of Latino turnout this year, at first glance it appears Latino numbers were up, and perhaps significantly in some places, but that in fact the giant was barely stirred.
Oh for sure. Every time I run into someone in real life who dejectedly says they just know Trump is going to win again and how I can't trust the polls, and blah blah blah, I just ask them:I'm telling you guys..we truly do not know how bad it can get for Trump. One, the overall situation is going to continue to deteriorate in the next 4-6 months- sports and schools getting cancelled, new lockdowns, and a rising death toll. Two, we literally have no idea what happens with a candidate actively does the opposite of what he needs to do to tighten the race.
Biden +14-15 is possible.
The main issue is also that the expectation is you seemingly triage the waning support with stop gap solution last second when previous elections show even concerted efforts are tough. 2016 Clinton campaign found that the negative ads don't necessarily always work against Trump for Hispanic voters. It isn't just a monolith of immigration, though frankly the GOP force the nation's hand to assume that's it. 2016 showed that like most other people we just want stability... jobs and a working economy that's equitable, with immigration tailing behind in second because we became the focus of the issue in the first place. At the same time, 2016 identifies the problem that outreach to Hispanics is tough, a lot of pollsters don't hit us and a lot of eligible Hispanics simply don't vote.
There's no single shot solution, I can tell you from experience canvassing locally that registering older Spanish voters is incredibly harder than the younger demos. I don't really have a solution other than to just keep plugging away. Again from my own experience just getting one member of a Spanish speaking family going and jazzed for voting has a much bigger cascading effect when you deal with multi-family home situations. Knocking down the kids first then they knock down the parent as a voter was the strategy we were given and idk, I think that works, but it's still hard. With COVID, that kind of outreach just doesn't seem possible though, I don't know how you overcome that problem.
The only reason people thought she had it in the bag was because of the Access Hollywood tape. It's still crazy that the tape didn't completely end that campaign.Clinton was only beating Trump by +2 in June of 2016? Holy moly.
Everyone was soooo damn sure she was going to win... but the signs were all there...Clinton was only beating Trump by +2 in June of 2016? Holy moly.
The only reason people thought she had it in the bag was because of the Access Hollywood tape. It's still crazy that the tape didn't completely end that campaign.