Clinton leads Trump by 13 points: poll

[applegrove]

Clinton leads Trump by 13 points: poll

By Cyra Master at the Hill

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/286601-poll-clinton-leads-trump-by-13-points


"SNIP..............


Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has a 13 point lead over her likely GOP rival, Donald Trump, in a Tuesday poll from Reuters/Ipsos.

The poll showed 46 percent of likely voters supported Clinton, while 33 percent said they’d vote for Trump.

The survey, conducted July 1-5, comes out the same day the FBI said it would not recommend pursuing charges against Clinton for her use of a private email server during her time as secretary of State. FBI Director James Comey called Clinton “extremely careless" handling of classified information.

Trump's support among likely voters in the Reuters/Ipsos poll was about 10 points below what 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney received at the same time in 2012.


..............SNIP"

[underpants]

1. "No indictment" takes up 13 spaces

Coincidence?

[DesertFlower]

2. it amazes me that his numbers are that

high. more stupid racist people in this country than i thought.

[CobaltBlue]

4. A connection between Teddy and Hillary…

I notice past voting history following two terms of the same president.

The numbers, nationally, move more strongly in such cases (as we’re facing here in 2016) than they do in an incumbent year (re-elections are usually no more than 5 points in either’s party direction—applicable to a 1996 Bill Clinton, a 2004 George W. Bush, and a 2012 Barack Obama (none of whom saw more than 3.40 points in increase or decrease).

In 1988, after two terms of Ronald Reagan, the national shift was nearly 11 points. In 2000, after two terms of Bill Clinton, the national shift was 8 points. In 2008, after two terms of George W. Bush, the national shift was nearly 10 points.

Usually the direction goes in director of the opposition party. Given President Obama won re-election, in 2012, by only nearly +4…the 2016 election should be a Republican pickup for Donald Trump. However, we are in a realigning presidential period for the Democrats. And Trump isn’t standing out as a unique and highly electable candidate from his party as were the cases with Dwight Eisenhower (the only Republican during the Democratic realigning period of 1932–1964) and Bill Clinton (the only two-term Democrat during the Republican realigning period of 1968–2004).

Hillary Clinton, if she wins this 2016 United States presidential election with stronger national support than a 2012 Barack Obama, will be the first to increase—off the second-term victory of a president from the same party—since Teddy Roosevelt did better in 1904 (than William McKinley’s second-term win in 1900).

[John Poet]

6. Republicans tend to run up larger margins in the states solidly

in their column, like most of the south and western states-- than the margins Democrats run up in most of the blue wall states...

... so translated into electoral votes, I think that margin is actually larger than it might appear. By any metric, it would be landslide territory in popular votes.

If the popular vote were dead-even, the Democratic nominee would very likely be the electoral vote winner, simply as a result of where their votes come in-- and not necessarily by any close margin.

Democrats now have a similar demographic electoral vote advantage which the Republicans seemed to have in previous decades.

[eastwestdem]

3. Let's see if we can double that by November! nt

[BlueNoMatterWho]

5. Great to see being that it's double the RCP average of polls!

[Kingofalldems]

7. Trump is losing big no matter how much you try.

[Kingofalldems]

8. Kick this one big time.