Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
35. It's backed up by some polls.
Wed May 25, 2016, 01:42 AM
May 2016

Just as some polls show Clinton beating Trump and others show her losing to Trump. And I don't give a rip about any of them, no matter who they have in the lead--all are worthless.

All cherry picking aside, the overarching point stands. Hypothetical general election match-up polls are historically misleading...to put it mildly.

McCain beats Clinton by 1 and Obama by 5:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106981/gallup-daily-obama-49-clinton-45.aspx

Dukakis vs. Bush:

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/26/us/dukakis-lead-widens-according-to-new-poll.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/17/us/poll-shows-dukakis-leads-bush-many-reagan-backers-shift-sides.html?pagewanted=all

Kerry led Dubya in a majority of polls up until September:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2004/president/us/general_election_bush_vs_kerry-939.html#polls

Dubya led Gore in polls right up until election day.

George H.W. Bush had big leads over Clinton in early polling of '92. It wasn't until July that Clinton first took a lead in polls.

Even Bob Dole led Bill Clinton in polls...though, in that case, I'm referring to polls taken more than a year before the election. Throughout '96, there wasn't ever much doubt that Clinton would win re-election.

Early polling had Carter defeating Reagan. Actually, late polling did, as well. But times were different. There was only 1 debate between the 2, and that was a week before the election (Reagan got a big bump following that debate).

THANK YOU!!!! oldandhappy May 2016 #1
You're entitled to your opinion. Thanks for letting us know how uncomfortable Bernie's polls make JudyM May 2016 #2
I wouldn't say they make us nervous as much as it bugs us that you people use them as a way anotherproletariat May 2016 #10
I stopped reading at "never vetted." You just lost all credibility. She found nothing to hit him JudyM May 2016 #11
People do not know him. The Repubs will keep on saying "Socialist" or "former Socialist" then kerry-is-my-prez May 2016 #16
The people supporting him are not the ones this would bother. We know better. JudyM May 2016 #28
Just how would electing Sanders take power from the corporations? The President can only veto and kerry-is-my-prez May 2016 #31
Please. Give me a lesson in the branches of government. JudyM May 2016 #32
Most Indies will vote as the party loyalists that they are. Garrett78 May 2016 #36
This isn't about how I feel. This is about reality. Garrett78 May 2016 #23
Pssst. THere are some interesting facts there in the OP too. nt BootinUp May 2016 #24
Check out the RCP averages for 2008 and 2012 icecreamfan May 2016 #3
Polls showed... Garrett78 May 2016 #19
Each of those campaigns were horribly flawed SheenaR May 2016 #21
And your assumption is that Trump will be the exception to the rule? Garrett78 May 2016 #25
No no SheenaR May 2016 #26
False, I linked the RCP polling average for McCain and Romney. Obama was beating them at this point. icecreamfan May 2016 #30
It isn't false. There were individual polls that had Obama trailing. Garrett78 May 2016 #33
Seriously? Averaging polls doesn't give a better picture than individual polls? icecreamfan May 2016 #34
It's backed up by some polls. Garrett78 May 2016 #35
Where was your tut tutting of the Clinton polls being rolled out four years ago? TheKentuckian May 2016 #4
Huh? Garrett78 May 2016 #18
Are you trying to convince us pmorlan1 May 2016 #5
I'm trying to get people to stop posting meaningless garbage as if it's meaningful. Garrett78 May 2016 #17
Translation: Hillary was just surpassed by Trump in national polls AgingAmerican May 2016 #6
No, it's simply a statement of fact. Garrett78 May 2016 #15
I answered upthread SheenaR May 2016 #22
First of all, elections aren't held then, which is sort of the point. Garrett78 May 2016 #27
And what's funny.... seekthetruth May 2016 #7
And she doesn't need the white millennials, male voters, nor the women with whom she has an insta8er May 2016 #8
Well it's not "meaningless" it's just historically not a great predictor of November Recursion May 2016 #9
I think it's fair to say they're meaningless at this juncture. Garrett78 May 2016 #14
Yup...and BERNIE is no different UMTerp01 May 2016 #12
There's kids who weren't around for McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis. Also people who can afford kerry-is-my-prez May 2016 #20
It's kind of sad, but I'm sure there are still a lot of folks who don't know who Sanders is. Garrett78 May 2016 #29
Sanders has not been vetted at all yet Gothmog May 2016 #13
You don't think David Brock has vetted Sanders? Peace Patriot May 2016 #37
The Sanders-Peace narrative doesn't jibe with reality. Garrett78 May 2016 #38
Ah! So, now he's a warmonger. And what about Hillary? Peace Patriot May 2016 #39
+1000! nt nc4bo May 2016 #40
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hypothetical GE match-up ...»Reply #35