For those who say Hillary Clinton can't win the general election

[CajunBlazer]

Many on this board have made statements that Hillary can't win in November citing polls that they have seen. Okay, I think that we can agree that Donald Trump is presumptive Republican nominee. So let's see why establishment Republicans are going into panic mode at the thought of Trump leading the Republican ticket.

I just looked up the latest polls - Clinton vs. Trump - in the swing states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Virginia. RealClearPolitics.com was my source.

As you know, because reliably blue states have more electoral votes than reliably red states, the Democratic candidate need only win one or two of the swing states to win the election. The Republican candidate can only afford to lose 1 or 2 at the most.

I took only polls which were completed in January or February of this year and here are the results - Clinton is leading Trump in 4 of these states (3 by large margins) and Trump slightly ahead in 2). Now what was that about Hillary Clinton not being able to win the general election?

Colorado - no recent polls

Florida - Trump +2.5%

Ohio - Trump +2%

Iowa - Clinton +5%

Nevada - no recent polls

New Hampshire - Clinton +7.5%

Virginia - Clinton +17%

Wisconsin - No recent polls

Pennsylvania - No recent polls

North Carolina - 3 polls - Clinton +1

Keep in mind that there is a long way to go before November and things can change. But if you believe in head to head polls this early on, you have to admit that Hillary certainly can win the general election.

[jg10003]

1. Did these polls include Bernie? What were his numbers?

[CajunBlazer]

4. No, again these polls were head to head match-ups between Hillary and Trump

The question was not whether Bernie can win the general election. I was only addressing multiple claims on this board that Hillary couldn't win the GE.

I see no reason to spend my time looking up polls on theoretical match ups between Bernie and Trump because it is abundantly clear to me that Bernie is not going to be the Democratic nominee.

[think]

2. She can win. But that's not saying much. The GOP is washed up. If Trump is the best they have

they've really hit bottom....

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. It's just lashing out: happens every contested primary

The loser's side starts a really bitter "Your person can't win" line, along with "What are you going to say when your candidate loses in the November? Huh? Huh?"

It's a typical and somewhat childish response to losing a primary. Ironically, it was the Hillary people who ran this line last time. Now it's being really ramped up by the Bernie people, which is sign and symptom that they see the writing on the wall.

But it's just lashing out. It's not really even worthy of response.

if you've seen more than one or two contested primaries, you can predict the moment when the "But you're going to LOSE in November" charges/posts pop up. Shrug 'em off. They're just frustration and coping tactic.

It's hard to lose.

[CajunBlazer]

6. Heck, it was just a fact check

and I learned something in the process.

[basselope]

7. The only way she wins is if they don't seat a Justice before November.

Otherwise, turnout will be as bad as it was in SC tonight.

[CajunBlazer]

8. Bad turnout?

I thought the enthusiasm Bernie Sanders voters was going to increase voter turn out everywhere. I have been very disappointed with the turnout in all of the primaries and caucuses thus far. Do you think that is why Bernie is not doing as well as expected?

[basselope]

10. He is doing much better than expected.

The turnout in South Carolina was so incredibly low compared to 2008.

529771 in 2008 vs not even 400K this time around.

And while Bernie got more votes than any candidate in New Hampshire history, Hillary will not best Obama's 2008 total.

But, the bigger question you ask about why isn't voter turnout increased everywhere and the answer is kinda simple.

The results of the primaries we have had so far have been known, because polling was very clear and wrong in both cases. Both wins were far greater than the majority of polls said. Bernie was expected to win by high single digits in New Hampshire.. he won by 22. Hillary was supposed to win by 30 in SC, she won by 50.

When the result is KNOWN, those w/o motivation stay home because they have already been told the result.

As we move into contested states like MA, MN, CO, you will see the power of turnout, just as you saw Bernie turn his voters out in New Hampshire.

[CajunBlazer]

23. MA, MN, and CO are all caucus states

Where enthusiasm is supposed to matter. But organization is at least as big a factor which Hillary's team has in abundance.

Obama won all but one of the caucus states in 2008. Bernie has already lost both of the two caucuses thus far.

Latest poll results of those who plan to caucus in those 3 states you mentioned:

Colorado - Clinton +28%

Minnesota - Clinton +38%

Maine - No polls - I guess Maine is to small for anyone to bother polling it.

Source: RealClearPolitics.com

[basselope]

24. Incorrect.

MA is a primary and your numbers are VERY old for CO and MN.. they are MUCH more competitive.

Caucuses do not judge enthusiasm.. they judge schedules.

Primaries judge enthusiasm and given the sad turnout in SC for Clinton.. there isn't much there.

If you want to give the election to Trump, be my guest.. but I will be fighting to get an electable candidate like Bernie.

[MineralMan]

25. I'm in Minnesota, and I'll be caucusing for Hillary.

I'm the DFL chair for my precinct, but the caucus will be led by someone else. I think you'll be surprised at the results from my state. That poll isn't all that old, actually. I predict a clear win for Clinton in Minnesota.

We'll know on Wednesday morning.

[basselope]

30. I'm not too concerned about MN.

Last poll was over a month old.

I expect Bernie to Win MN, CO, MA, VT and OK.

If not, I get ready for President Trump, because we all know Hillary can't win in the general.

[MineralMan]

32. Oh, we don't all know that Hillary can't win.

Not by any stretch of the imagination. But I doubt that Bernie will win in Minnesota on Tuesday. We'll see. I'll let everyone know how my precinct's caucus turned out, along with the statewide totals on Wednesday morning.

[basselope]

34. Of course we do.

The only prayer she has is if the GOP is dumb enough to leave the SC seat empty and allow that to become an election issue and even then she will have a hard time getting people to turn out for her.

Anyone who has been around the Bernie campaign knows that the majority of Bernie supporters will not be voting for Hillary. I know I won't be, but since I am in Cali my vote doesn't count anyway.

But, given her very limited appeal, even among democrats and significantly high unfavorability numbers.. there is no doubt she would lead to low turnout, which leads to a GOP victory.

[MineralMan]

35. Well, OK, I suppose. See you in November.

We can discuss this then.

[basselope]

36. Only if Sanders is the nominee.

If Clinton gets the nomination, I won't bother logging into this site again until the democratic party fixes its problems.

There is no place in the democratic party for me if they choose ANOTHER center right candidate.

[CajunBlazer]

40. We'll miss you

[basselope]

45. They just miss my money.

[CajunBlazer]

46. What - $5 a year? Not so much.

[basselope]

47. LOL.

Sorry, but a company I co-founded sold for over 700 Million 2 years ago and I have been an entrepreneur working with VCs and angel investors since the early 2000s. In short, I actually am the 1%.

I met Obama when he opened a Conserv Fuel near our old home. He was very personable and well spoken, but it was painfully obvious that he was a politician first and so I warned all my liberal friends who were so excited about his candidacy... be careful... he isn't what .. I've had numerous opportunities to have intimate sit downs with Hillary if I wanted. I passed. She ain't worth 2K.

IF I were to vote my personal financial interests, I would vote for Trump, but I see the bigger picture, so i support Bernie, who will cost me a lot more than the $5K+ my fiance and I have given to his campaign so far.

So yeah.. I guess I am Bernie perfect demo.. that rich white liberal who is sick to death of corporations owning politicians and serving their interests. If the democratic party chooses ANOTHER candidate like that, I will re-register as an independent and vote only for people who will actually work to change the system.

[elljay]

9. What is the margin of error

in these polls? Other than New Hampshire and Virginia, it seems that the other states are all too close to call.

[CajunBlazer]

17. You can look the polls up yourself if you are interested in margin of error

But I would think that those where Trump seems to be leading by 2% and 2.5% are more likely to be in the margin of error than those where Hillary is leading by 5% and 15%.

Besides, the point I was making is that the statement all over GD-P that "Hillary CAN"T win the general election" are just WRONG - she certainly can and probably will since she needs to take far fewer of the swing states than Trump.

However, polls measuring head to head match ups this early in the process don't mean squat. None of them do. But these polls are better for the sake of discussion than people just speculating with no background evidence to back up their speculation at all.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. .

[CajunBlazer]

19. Every one knows that you can manipulate this particular on-line map....

Last edited Sun Feb 28, 2016, 12:33 PM - Edit history (1)

... to show any results you choose. Why didn't you go all out and show Hillary losing every state if she is the Democratic nominee. Not impressive at all.

[Motown_Johnny]

31. Not my map. And my point was to refute the OP

The same criticism of my map can be made of your assertions.

[CajunBlazer]

37. Your map means absolutely nothing!

Why? Go to this website: http://www.270towin.com/ You will find this identical map where you can click on any state to change it from Blue (Democratic win) to Red (Republican win) to gray (swing state) and back again so you can set up any scenario you wish including one where Bernie Sanders wins every state in the country and Hillary wins none.

So your maps mean absolutely nothing without some evidence that Bernie will win more states than Hillary, which of course you did not provide.

So as I pointed out previously, your maps prove absolutely nothing.

[Motown_Johnny]

48. State-by-state poll information and estimates taken from RealClearPolitics and Huffington Post

Pollster Averages.


The bottom line in that black box in the center of the image.

[PonyUp]

33. That map is true for North Carolina. No way will Hillary win here. n/t

[CajunBlazer]

38. And again, aside from your assuences, what evidence...

... do you have that Hillary will in "no way win" NC?

I have three very recent polls that say she has a good chance of doing so:

Elon University 2/15-2/17 Clinton 47 Trump 41 Clinton +6

SurveyUSA 2/14-2/16 Clinton 43 Trump 45 Trump +2

PPP 2/14-2/16 Clinton 43 Trump 44 Trump +1

[frustrated_lefty]

12. Not really.

She invites visceral disgust from republicans, independents think she's a liar, and a bare majority of democrats vote for her. Millenials won't bother to turn out at all.

The younger Bernie voters will stay home, the older Bernie voters like myself will write his name in, and the Hillary-shills will be beside themselves explaining why we handed the election to Trump.

Congrats on your establishment candidate who will just bring more of the same shit we've had for 16 years.

[CajunBlazer]

18. That's already figured into these polls

So is the fact that some Bernie Sanders voters may well have polled and told the pollsters that they would vote for Trump instead of Hillary to make their candidate look better in comparison. That's why early head to head polls this early in the process don't mean anything.

I was just answering the statements that "Hillary can't win the general election". That's obviously not true.

[azurnoir]

13. maybe you didn't know but in the GE we go by the electoral collage and by your list

Trump has 47 electoral collage votes and Hillary has 38

[CajunBlazer]

21. Really? Wow!!! I didn't know that!!!!

We actually use electoral votes to elect our President. Who'd thunk it.

You do realize that the Republican candidate would have to win almost all of the swing states and the Democratic candidate would have to only win one or two (depending on which states she wins) to win electoral college. Right?

[reformist2]

14. Maybe she can win. But all the evidence points to Bernie being a much stronger candidate.

[Gothmog]

16. No because Sanders has not been vetted yet

Polls do lie when such poling is based on bad data and premise. Nate Silver and other are clear that these polls are worthless in part because Sanders had not been vetted. Clinton has been vetted for two decades but the GOP and the press have not paid any attention to Sanders and so these polls are meaningless. Dana Milbank has some good comments on general election match up polls https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Sanders and his supporters boast of polls showing him, on average, matching up slightly better against Trump than Clinton does. But those matchups are misleading: Opponents have been attacking and defining Clinton for a quarter- century, but nobody has really gone to work yet on demonizing Sanders.

Watching Sanders at Monday night’s Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump — or another Republican nominee — would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.

The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the “socialist” label and requested that Sanders define it “so that it doesn’t concern the rest of us citizens.”

Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who don’t want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: “Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top — that’s my definition of democratic socialism.”

But that’s not how Republicans will define socialism — and they’ll have the dictionary on their side. They’ll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. They’ll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldn’t be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists don’t win national elections in the United States .

Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases — “one of the biggest tax hikes in history,” as moderator Chris Cuomo put it — to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that “hypothetically, you’re going to pay $5,000 more in taxes,” and declared, “W e will raise taxes, yes we will.” He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that “it’s demagogic to say, oh, you’re paying more in taxes.”

Well, yes — and Trump is a demagogue.

Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government “bigger than ever,” Sanders didn’t quarrel, saying, “P eople want to criticize me, okay,” and “F ine, if that’s the criticism, I accept it.”

Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.

Match up polls are worthless because the candidates have not been fully vetted. Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads.

[Gothmog]

15. These polls are before opposition research is used on Trump

Match up pollings are misleading unless both candidates are fully vetted. Trump has not been vetted yet. There is a ton of good stuff ready for use. According to one researcher, 80% has not been used yet http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-research_us_56cf2c6de4b03260bf75b395

Whether the fruits of this late opposition-research push or the investigative work of the reporters themselves, some critical, deeply investigated articles on Trump have begun popping up. On Wednesday, Bloomberg News had a comprehensive look at Trump's troubled international business dealings. And on Thursday, The New York Times reported that Trump had been relying heavily on foreign labor at his Florida resort, in contrast with a campaign promise to create jobs for American workers.

But it is treated as a truism among Republicans that a vast reservoir of damaging opposition research remains untouched. It's a suspicion that Democrats aren't challenging. Indeed, one Democratic opposition research said that they’ve spent the past eight months compiling material on Trump as he’s risen up the ranks. That's actually not a lot of time. Democrats had started focusing on Mitt Romney in 2009 -- a full two years before he ran again for the presidency. But those eight months have produced some good.

That researcher estimated that of all the material they’ve compiled -- court and property records, newspaper clips and videos -- approximately 80 percent of it has yet to surface in this election cycle.

The general election will be fun

[RiverLover]

20. Clinton +3 in NC!

Just like Ohio, Trump will turn the state blazing RED.

He's the one talking about bringing back American manufacturing.

Which has gone away because of Clinton1.

WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!

[CajunBlazer]

22. And you base your statement on what evidence?

Answer: None.

In addition, I listed NC as a swing state because some web sites are showing that the state is in play in 2016. Normally NC is not included in the list of 8 swing states, but is instead listed as a red state and usually NC's electoral votes are counted as part of the safe 191 electoral votes total normally conceded to the Republicans. The fact that NC is considered a swing state this year is a very bad sign for Trump.

[yourpaljoey]

26. Trump will tweak his platform and draw the Independent vote

The left wing of the Dem party will stay home in droves.
If Hill cheats her way thru the Primary, the General will be a nationally televised bloodbath from the opening bell to the
inevitable Hill loss.

[ochazuke]

28. Right

Once Trump is over the top, he will moderate and go on the attack against Hillary. She will likely not be able to survive it as she has been lying, covering up, smearing, and stonewalling since Gennifer Flowers days.

The general election polls have little meaning at this stage. An analysis of all the factors that will go into the final result is more useful. No matter how bad Trump is, he will hold his voters (the usual Republican reptilian/tribal response) and get even more independents and Hillary-haters. However, the campaign will be a big turn-off to Sanders supporters and others who are looking for change.

[Kalidurga]

27. There is about a 60% chance that who ever gets the Democratic Nomination will win the GE

But, that is because of demographic wars. The wars that Republicans wage on every demographic except for lily white male Christian heterosexuals that remain virgins til they marry and have bank just in case they die and leave behind a young widow with 1.5 children with just a few years of college, because of course women don't actually need a degree once they are married.

[EndElectoral]

29. I don't believe in head to head polls in the GE from Feb.

I simply beleive that the youth of this country is disenfranchised and will not vote for her in large numbers. I also do not think Trump is a guaranteed nominee yet as the RNC really wants Rubio at this point. I also beleive that the GOP in general really dislikes HRC and turnout will be large on the GOP to keep her from being elected or choosing the next Supreme Court nominee.

Many of those polls are within margins of error anyway and some are downright silly. The Virginia result for example. This is a state that more often than not trends conservative. Also if Trump chooses Kasich or Rubio for VP it will impact Ohio and the hispanic vote.

She will lose the GE. If you think Bernie's ads are negative get ready for negativity like you haven't seen since Kerry ran.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. Too far out for polls to have much predictive value./nt

[CajunBlazer]

42. Absolutely agree! Much to early!

But I got tired of people claiming that Hillary had no chance of winning the general election and referring to polls (without citing any in particular) to back up their arguement. I was just pointing out what the current polls actually show.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Point the "Hillary can't win" crowd here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1364720

[andym]

41. Hillary could win against Trump

If she's the nominee, I hope she chooses Elizabeth Warren or Bernie as her VP to help her create a more compelling vision for the future of this country.

Trump is a very dangerous candidate, btw, because he is really basing his campaign on charisma and nationalism, which apparently is playing well as far as the polling does.

[CajunBlazer]

44. He simply is not dangerous enough to win the nomination

There is no way that Hillary will pick a 74 year old socialist to be her running mate. Elizabeth Warren maybe, but Julián Castro would fire up the Hispanic wing of the party against either Trump, Rubio or Cruz.