Election 2016: the front-runners voters don’t like
I cannot recall a campaign season even remotely like this one, where the majority of voters dislike both front-runners, as confirmed by a recent CBS News/New York Times poll:
Compared to frontrunners in previous presidential primary races, Trump and Clinton’s unfavorable ratings (57 percent and 52 percent respectively) are the highest in CBS News/New York Times Polls going back to 1984, when CBS began asking this question.
Perhaps, not surprisingly, most Democrats have negative views of Trump and a majority of Republicans view Clinton unfavorably. But more than half of independents have unfavorable views of both candidates. Clinton is viewed more positively by members of her own party than Trump is by his. Six in 10 Democrats have a favorable opinion of Clinton; just about half of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Trump.
So the difference between Hillary Clinton’s unfavorable rating and that of Donald Trump is that she has a higher favorable rating among her own party members than Trump does among his. But there isn’t a single previous candidate since 1984 that is even close in unfavorable ratings to either of this year’s front-runners. The previous high was a paltry 41% unfavorable, shared by several candidates.
Hillary Clinton tends to beat Trump in nationwide polls. Of course, in the past, polls that were taken at this point in time in a campaign have not been predictive of very much. However, unlike in many years, the public is very familiar with both of these front-runners, which might mean that attitudes towards them are more entrenched. And it may be that the main reason that Hillary does better in head-to-head polls against Trump is because she draws more Democratic support than he draws Republican support.
Trump does have one great advantage over Clinton; the reality of Islamic aggression. Every attack crumbles her support and strengthens his and though it now seems of minimal impact, it does have a cumulative effect that is headed toward a tipping point. Only time will tell whether that point will arrive before the election. But liberals are aware of Islam’s inherent threat, if still in conscious denial. Bill Maher is not the only liberal who recognizes Islam’s inherent intolerance.
All this spilled ink won’t amount to squat if Trump loses at a contested convention.
Five Thirty Eight, Nate Silver’s blog, did an in-depth analysis and prediction for Trump. They predicted he would finish with 1208 delegates. Since then, Trump has fallen 20 delegates behind the pace and if he loses WI, he’ll fall another 25 behind. That would put him at 1163 if everything else pans out.
74 delegates will be a large undertaking to secure from the uncommitted pool, if it’s possible at all.
The more rounds of voting occur, the worse it will be for Trump.
This is going to be a very long summer.
Ace linked to a Comedy Central bit re-enacting Trump’s recent interview with the Washington Post. The skit covered his response to Rubio’s comments about his “hands”. The script was verbatim, but the actors physical movements were his own. It was an astonishingly bizarre scene. Trump had the ability to discuss his ideas on libel in a formal interview and behaved like he does at one of his rallies. There are not two Trumps, one a public act and the there a private statesman. There is only one and he stands little chance of withstanding the Media’s onslaught. It is proper to not accept the left’s presumptions when you are in public, but not to be able to argue your point is fatal. You look stupid, unprepared and erratic. Trump regularly fails to do even a little homework or preparation on points that are his trademarks.
I think about the 1984 election every time someone speaks positively about a match up between Trump and hrc. This time the odds favor a candidate lacking a fig leaf of integrity with a husband not known for fidelity over a candidate not known for fidelity lacking integrity in spades. Imagine, no not that stupid song, hrc’s mandate when she sweeps the popular vote and reaps a electoral landslide. Meanwhile, down ticket the dems reclaim a senate majority. Oh well, there goes SCOTUS for a generation.
The GOP is going to have to stop permitting cross over voting in New Hampshire, et. al.
With the wholesale adoption of social media, it’s a certainty that the Democrats will game New Hampshire year in, year out.
Befouling the Republican primaries is far more leverage than voting in any Democrat primary.
It really is that simple.
&&&&&&&&
I don’t hold to a low opinion of Trump wearing his managerial hat.
But, it must be obvious to all that by the time the MSM gets through with Trump he’ll be Goldwater’d.
Look at how the MSM is poisoning the well for Ted Cruz.
&&&&&&&
On present trends, the Democrats// Left implodes the economy by destroying the dollar.
At which point, during the reset, the entire Democrat edifice will creak and ‘do the Titanic’ — ripping itself apart while sinking.
&&&&&&&&
STILL no-one comprehends that 0-care is imploding the housing market — and mortgage creation.
Which is the PRIMARY mechanism for the creation of money.
It’s shutting off first time home buyers… and dramatically so.
So family formation is also delayed.
It’s insidious.
Yes blert, it really is that simple. A democrat voting for a democrat in a republican primary is a no brainer. All who have bad mouthed the caucus states need to take a deep breath and note who has won caucus states. Hint, it ain’t DJT.
Dems are utterly, completely, utterly indifferent to any malfeasance involving Hillary and her emails, fees to her foundation, etc. They don’t hear it and don’t care.
The funny thing is, the campaign hasn’t gotten nasty yet. If these two get the nominations, they’re going to go at each other like nothing we’ve ever seen before. They’re both permanently set on Jerk to start with, and for all of Hillary’s supposed policy expertise, she talks about issues as rarely as Trump. The American people are going to hate both of them.
I think I’m smelling a touch of panic in the Trump psyche.
It’s becoming ever more apparent that he will not be able to make it on the first ballot.
And he’s done a cracker jack job of alienating Rubio, Bush, Kasich, Cruz.
Meaning: the sales campaign will ultimately have to shift to the Convention.
By the rules — only Trump or Cruz have the minimum state victories to be the nominee.
The typical delegate is going to flip to not-Trump if given half a chance.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3da1e618-f1c1-11e5-aff5-19b4e253664a.html
The British already figure it’s Hillary as president.
Would like to see Bernie in the mix here as he just won 3 states yesterday. Not so certain Clinton will be the nominee. Rumblings of superdelegates perhaps changing their votes. Now on Drudge I read that Clinton will be questioned by the FBI. So much can happen before June.
Love this presidential cycle. Unpredictable and unusual. Nothing like it ever before. That is why I’m not really paying attention to polls and comparisons.
Bernie polls better than Hillary.
It’s her negatives.
Same with Cruz.
He polls better than Trump.
The key reason I can see delegates abandoning Trump … the polling.
He has rabid support from non-traditional sources — many of whom are wholly opposed to the mainstream GOP.
I suspect that if Trump can’t nail the nomination by the second ballot — he’s toast.
The only fellow left standing would be Cruz.
Which would be tough on Dilbert.
I have a feeling that the Cruz sex scandal will start to have an effect this week in the next round of polling. Whether it is true or not, it will have an effect.
The stuff on Twitter has been brutal. This is the kind of thing that can sink a campaign. Doesn’t help any that several tv pundits, such as Kristen Powers, made it very clear over the weekend that this story was not of Trump’s doing, but connected to Rubio supporters and someone who is both anti-Cruz and anti-Trump.
NE doesn’t usually start with just one single rumor-style story. Look at the timeline of events with John Edwards. Started out in much the same way. More is going to come out. We’ll see if it’s believable.
K-E:
Keep going with that wishful thinking. And keep trying to spread rumors from the Enquirer.
There is no “sex scandal” as far as we know. For every John Edwards story in that rag that has turned out to be true, there have been 50 that have been false or at least completely and totally unproven.
And by the way, the allegations in the Enquirer about Cruz were that there were reports of affairs. Well, yes, there were reports of affairs.
And who gives a flying rat’s ass if the reports were spread by Rubio supporters, or by space aliens?