June 1, 2016

Clinton's 4-point lead over Trump shrinks to a 2-point lead when Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are included in the poll.

The just-released Quinnipiac poll — PDF.

43 comments:

madAsHell said...

I'm just not seeing it. I can't believe any poll in which Hillary leads. My totally unscientifical method of counting bumper stickers puts Bernie in the lead by a considerable margin.

Brando said...

I can see that--Johnson's libertarianism does not fit well with Trump's nativist/statist appeal, and Stein (who I assume probably is closer to Sanders than anyone else) appeals to lefties.

But overall I think in swing states most "NeverTrump" and "NeverClinton" voters are going to do the "lesser of two evils" thing, as their vitriol towards their more hated candidate outweighs their disgust over two awful choices. Johnson and Stein don't really change the race, because their voters simply would have stayed home otherwise--it's not like they don't know what they're doing by voting third party. They simply cannot stomach what the Dems and GOP offered them. But their appeal will be strongest in "safe" states.

Mike Sylwester said...

Brando at 8:34 AM

Johnson and Stein don't really change the race, because their voters simply would have stayed home otherwise--it's not like they don't know what they're doing by voting third party. ... their appeal will be strongest in "safe" states.

This is true. In any state where it's clear that either Clinton or Trump will win, a lot of people will vote for the libertarian alternative.

In any state where the race between Clinton and Trump is close, people will feel compelled to vote for one of those two.

EDH said...

Quinnipiac poll?

Raahh!!! Nick, Nick, Nick...fuut, fuut, fuut....tjaahhh... Indians.

MadisonMan said...

What Brando said -- a National Poll is meaningless. How do these matchups work in the States that matter? Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, etc.

Also, note the cringeworthy lead sentence in that poll: A titanic clash of the sexes leaves Democrat Hillary Clinton with a small 45 – 41 percent lead over Republican Donald Trump in the race for president, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today

Ugh. As if distaste for Hillary the Candidate has anything to do with her Vagina.

Mike said...

Ha ha ha ha ha ha

AprilApple said...

Clinton leading in any poll ever is based on the media and hollywood pimping her - protecting her and hiding the truth about her from the masses. If they dumped her, she would be toast.

AprilApple said...

I desperately want to see George Clooney LOSE.

vicari valdez said...

Brando said...
But overall I think in swing states most "NeverTrump" and "NeverClinton" voters are going to do the "lesser of two evils" thing, as their vitriol towards their more hated candidate outweighs their disgust over two awful choices.


i don't know. it's hard for me to imagine sanders supporters voting for trump.

holdfast said...

@vicari valdez

First, a lot of them are pretty dumb and/or naive.

A lot of them are millennials who probably think that life is a TV show.

Some will be attracted to Trump's "outsider" status.

Sure, Trump won't get any of the hard-core lefties, greenies, feminists, etc. But he'll get a few "Bernie Bros" who are just with the Bernster because he's trendy (or trending) in certain circles.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Makes sense to me. In my adopted home state of Virginia, the LP candidate took more votes from McAullife than from Cuccinelli in the Governors race. Some Libertarians lean farther left than right, however one would define those terms these days.

Big Mike said...

The only poll that counts will be taken on November 8th.

tim in vermont said...

In Vermont, the libertarian candidate for governor drew enough votes that I am pretty sure would never have gone to a Republican, to chasten the Democrat Shumlin to the point that he ended up killing single-payer. That plus the fact that the main proponent of single-payer in the legislature lost his "safe seat" over it to a Republican. So while third parties carry risks, they at least make it clear that the winner may not have the mandate that he/she would like to claim. Being under 50% does that kind of thing.

tim in vermont said...

Neither of these two main candidates should get 50%.

tim in vermont said...

Ugh. As if distaste for Hillary the Candidate has anything to do with her Vagina.

Can you not mention the word "taste" and Hillary's vagina in the same sentence again please?

AprilApple said...

Trump must lead her decisively in order to overcome the leftwing cheat machine.

CJinPA said...

Once Clinton gets the nom, won't 90% of Democrats support her? (I read where 90% of either party support the nominee.)

Charlie Cook of National Journal writes that the polls are only close because the GOP is unifying but Dems have yet to get there. That Clinton's lead is actually larger.

vicari valdez said...

holdfast said...
@vicari valdez

First, a lot of them are pretty dumb and/or naive.

A lot of them are millennials who probably think that life is a TV show.

Some will be attracted to Trump's "outsider" status.

Sure, Trump won't get any of the hard-core lefties, greenies, feminists, etc. But he'll get a few "Bernie Bros" who are just with the Bernster because he's trendy (or trending) in certain circles.

6/1/16, 9:32 AM


sorry, but i'm still not convinced by this argument.

Brando said...

"Trump must lead her decisively in order to overcome the leftwing cheat machine."

It's more than just the cheating--if she has a ground turnout operation and he effectively doesn't, that's worth a point or two in a swing state. So consider that when he laughs off "data collection" operations--that's largely what helped Obama in two elections.

"Charlie Cook of National Journal writes that the polls are only close because the GOP is unifying but Dems have yet to get there. That Clinton's lead is actually larger."

That's the thinking, though let's not underestimate Clinton's ability to keep her own coalition divided. She would better serve her own cause by getting lost in the mountains for the next six months.

AllenS said...

The Libertarian candidate agrees with Sanders 73% of the time. Good luck drawing away Trump voters with this guy.

link text


eric said...

The last Quinnipiac poll had Clinton at +6.

tim in vermont said...

It's an open question as to whether a candidate as roundly despised as Clinton is will get her party back.

Michael K said...

"Once Clinton gets the nom, won't 90% of Democrats support her? (I read where 90% of either party support the nominee.)"

Two questions that need to be considered.

One, will she be the nominee ?

Two, turnout is probably more important this year than most.

Both will decide the election,.

Gusty Winds said...

The experts said Trump was never supposed to get this close. Charlie Sykes and Bill Kristol promised us a blow out!

Meanwhile....Scott Adams says the predictions of a Trump landslide will be in abundance by late August.

Bobby said...

AllenS,

"The Libertarian candidate agrees with Sanders 73% of the time. Good luck drawing away Trump voters with this guy."

Hahaha... Gateway Pundit conveniently left out the context: Johnson was referring specifically to a 60-question quiz he took on ISideWith.com, which showed that- after a 100% match to his own views- the quiz showed that his next closest match was indeed with Sanders at 73%. If you look at the issues surveyed- Johnson listed abortion, gay marriage, opposition to military interventions, crony capitalism, unfairness of the government on level playing fields, and marijuana legalization- Libertarians indeed have widspread agreement with Sanders on these issues.

And this is not the least bit inconsistent with Libertarian poitical philosophy: because libertarians believe in limited government individual freedom on economic and social matters (as opposed to conservatives who are against government intrusion in economics, but passionately embrace government intrusion into all sorts of social matters).

You should fact check your own sources instead of just blindly believing what they tell you- Gateway Pundit intentionally misled you this time (and if the intent is to thereby persuade libertarians into backing Trump over Johnson, that kind of deception won't help very much).

eric said...

Bobby,

Isn't the point to mislead? I mean, the libertarian is sharing that to try and pick up sanders voters. He doesn't get to have his cake and eat it too.

eric said...

Blogger Gusty Winds said...
The experts said Trump was never supposed to get this close. Charlie Sykes and Bill Kristol promised us a blow out!

Meanwhile....Scott Adams says the predictions of a Trump landslide will be in abundance by late August.


I'm starting to think Adams got lucky. I've been looking at the polling and comparing it to 2012 and 2008. Seems pretty similar for Dems and Reps.

If Hillary is leading in the polls throughout the summer, I don't see how Trump wins.

Brando said...

"The Libertarian candidate agrees with Sanders 73% of the time."

That number means nothing until you look at what questions they agree on and disagree on. For example, you could probably ask 100 questions of Martin Luther King and George Wallace and find they agree on 73 of them, if those 73 questions are things like "should the government provide schools" or "should rich people on Wall Street control our government", while the other 27 questions are things like "should the federal government guarantee people the right to vote regardless of their race".

Sanders favors redistribution, greater economic regulation, much higher taxation and expansion of the welfare state. How does any of that mix with libertarianism?

I suspect any Sanders voters who would consider voting for Johnson are simply supporting Sanders out of protest against Hillary, or are focused singly on easing our drug laws. I doubt that's a large crossover.

Brando said...

"I'm starting to think Adams got lucky. I've been looking at the polling and comparing it to 2012 and 2008. Seems pretty similar for Dems and Reps."

How could that be? Althouse thinks Adams is a super politics genius.

"If Hillary is leading in the polls throughout the summer, I don't see how Trump wins."

Generally around Labor Day, the polls tend to solidify with only modest shifts. There's still a chance for major events to affect things, and I don't discount Hillary's incredibly poor campaign skills or Trump's utter ability to turn off voters, but most likely we're going to see people gravitate back towards their parties with a similar split we've seen in the past few cycles. That gives Hillary the edge by default.

Bobby said...

eric,

"Isn't the point to mislead? I mean, the libertarian is sharing that to try and pick up sanders voters. He doesn't get to have his cake and eat it too."

No. Johnson pointed out to the Sanders supporter many of the issues on which they likely agree, and then explained his belief on why they fundamentally disagree on economic matters. That's not misleading- that's actually being quite transparent.

Misleading is Gateway Pundit intentionally leaving out relevant contextual information because his conservative readers are a choir that want to be preached to (and yes, I just ended a sentence with a preposition).

n.n said...

The Left can literally get away with mass abortion, progressive wars, mass exodus, class diversity, selective exclusion, and redistributive change.

jr565 said...

That makes little sense. I'd think Trumps polls would go up if Never Trumpers didn't vote third party and instead voted Trump.That's assuming that Never Trumpers are voting for the libertarian as opposed to some other candidate. Like say, David French. to which I'd ask - WHO THE HELL IS DAVID FRENCH?

Roughcoat said...

The pundits at National Review are having apoplectic fits.

jr565 said...

"The Libertarian candidate agrees with Sanders 73% of the time."
So, I took that poll and according to the poll I side with the libertarian 88% of the Time and Trump 77% of the time. And with Sanders 21% of the time. Yet, Johnson says he sides with Sanders 73% of the time.
So, shouldn't I be siding with Sanders more than 21% of with Johnson less than 88%? Something is wrong here.
Also, I'm a bit shocked that I'd side with Trump 77% of the time. Maybe he's not so bad after all..

jr565 said...

"The pundits at National Review are having apoplectic fits."

that would be true if they were pushing the libertarian. Instead, they, like bill bristol will be pushing someone named David French. Yeah, I never heard of him either.
Actually thats not exactly true. His writing has appeared in National Review. Some of his writing includes well reasoned anti Trump articles. And i think I actually agree with much of his writing. However, that doesn't mean he'd make a good president. Especially when no one even knows who he is or have ever heard of him.

Bobby said...

jr565,

"So, I took that poll and according to the poll I side with the libertarian 88% of the Time and Trump 77% of the time. And with Sanders 21% of the time. Yet, Johnson says he sides with Sanders 73% of the time.
So, shouldn't I be siding with Sanders more than 21% of with Johnson less than 88%? Something is wrong here.
"

No, not necessarily- it is calculus, not arithmetic. The quiz allows you to weight your answer based on how much that particular issue matters to you, which in turn will cause some degree of differentiation. Additionally, there's (obviously) overlap between your 88% Johnson match and your 77% Trump match, which is a different overlap between your 88% Johnson match and your 21% Sanders match, which is also a different overlap between your 77% Trump match and your 21% Sanders match. All of which is to say that you can't compare your match to person A with person B's match to person A and conclude that they are arithmetically related- they're not.

Brando said...

"that would be true if they were pushing the libertarian. Instead, they, like bill bristol will be pushing someone named David French. Yeah, I never heard of him either."

I've heard of him only from reading his National Review articles, but figure he's not well known outside of that. If that's what Kristol et al can come up with, that's pretty sad. Nothing against French--simply by not being Trump or Clinton, he is probably well qualified to be president. But if they can't find a higher profile person than that, they've got nothing.

The anti-Trumpers on the right clearly don't think the man is bad enough to not vote for--even Chuck admits he'll probably vote for him--so clearly they don't think he's that bad. When National Review actually endorses Hillary, I'll take notice. In the meantime, it's everyone hold your nose and get back in line like good little soldiers.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

French is an odd choice for the above stated reasons, but also for the allegation that French's wife -Nancy, is Sarah Palin's ghostwriter.

shiloh said...

Quinnipiac not being very accurate this year or 2012 aside, Althouse just like 2012 is trying to give her con bloggers and herself reason to believe ***(((5 mos.)))*** from the general.

As always voters, especially independent moderates who decide elections, don't start paying attention until after the conventions.

btw, Quinnipiac had Trump winning the Iowa caucus by 7. Oops! Also Dukakis was 17 pts. ahead of Bush41 after the '88 Dem convention. He lost by 7 pts.

Keep hope alive!!!

Bay Area Guy said...

Hillary has been in full "prevent defense" or "run out the clock" mode for a long time now. But Bernie is picking away at her, bit by bit. And Trump has picked away at her. And the IG Report has picked away at her.

Drip, drip, drip.

God I hope Bernie wins California.

tim in vermont said...

Keep hope alive!!

Dukakis was a Democrat, a lot like Hillary, except honest and lest deluded about his abilities.

KEEP HOPE ALIVE!!!

Does Shilo ever post anything but Democrat talking points? It's almost as if she operates within the "Received Knowlegde" mode of Women's Ways of Knowing.

Received knowledge describes the epistemological position in which women in the study perceived knowledge as a set of absolute truths received from infallible authorities. The process of learning, as understood by received knowers, involves receiving and repeating the knowledge and words of authorities. In this sense words are no longer viewed as weapons, and are seen as critical to the learning process, but the origin and meaning of words and knowledge remain external (Love and Guthrie 1999).

That's why you are so lousy at defending your positions, Shilo, because they are not your positions, you didn't arrive at them through reason, and you don't understand the considerations that went into building them. But don't worry - You weren't meant to! So you're doing great!

Saint Croix said...

My results from the survey

Gary Johnson 89%
Donald Trump 74%
Bernie Sanders 33%
Hillary Clinton 24%
Jill Stein 21%

tim in vermont said...

And among a wider electorate of all potential Democratic voters in California, Sanders is actually ahead by one point, 48 percent to 47 percent.

KEEP HOPE ALIVE Hillary!