Results here. The Democrats all beat Trump in Pennsylvania and Michigan, so I don't know what's up in Wisconsin.
"Three different states, three different scenarios, one constant - the economy. It's a top issue for voters, and it's giving President Trump a strong tailwind. Wisconsin voters give him a job approval rating above 50 percent, higher than what he receives nationally and in Pennsylvania and Michigan. These Wisconsin numbers are a red warning sign for Democrats that rebuilding the 'blue wall' in 2020 may not be so easy. But it's a long way to November," said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Mary Snow.
Posts
70 comments:
Well now, if Trump don't beat all!.
You know the polls don't mean what they used to mean. They're good for earnest talks about what's going to happen, but no one actually knows what's going to happen. It's for talk. When they used to say, 'talk amongst yourselves', I'm sure they had Presidential polls in mind.
That said, clearly the Badger State is showing superior thinking vs my home state of Meeechigan. Not sure why. Maybe too many U of M grads. But hopefully they'll get clear of the ether in time to vote.
As Wisconsin goes, so goes the nation.
But it's a long way to November
Is it the polling analyst's job to give the DNC hope?
Don't worry about Pennsylvania and Michigan, they are also going to vote for Trump. Except of course, Chuck.
Althouse and Meade helped turn Wisc red.
My bullshit detector is going off, that PA and WIsconsin are that different.
The Wisconsin poll had a 32-26 Republican plurality in the sample. The other two had a Dem plurality. Not going to bother going deeper than that.
Rabel, thanks. That’s what it smelled like to me.
Trump is going to win PA. He is almost unbelievably popular in PA outside of downtown Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. The WBS area looks like it is sticking with him. Turnout is going to be massive for him in the state. More surprises for the pollsters and talking heads.
I'm interested in what states that Trump won't win. NY and CA for sure. Any others?
I'll say it again, as I always do: I've NEVER been polled and neither has anyone I hang around with. And they are all mostly Republicans.
I live in PA. I will happily vote for Trump, but when folks have called me to ask me how I plan to vote (almost always while I'm at work), I hang up on them.
I wonder how much of a boost that gives Democrats... polling during working hours, that is. I'm willing to bet Dems are overrepresented among folks who don't work 9-5.
My bullshit detector is going off, that PA and Wisconsin are that different.
Yah, as mentioned it all depends on the Dem/Rep/Ind mix they choose. Are they replicating the last cycle? Looking at updated registration? Just making it up to get the numbers they want? They never say...
Not all independents are part of a squishy middle, either. Especially true in open primary locales...
What's happening in PA is that Trump hasn't yet run ads pointing out how many PA jobs will be lost when the Democrat ban fracking
AllenS - IL
Althouse and Meade helped turn Wisc red.
Hip hip hurrah!
If the Dem candidate says they will stop fracking, which Bernie and Warren have proposed, they will lose PA. It really is that simple.
Oh, sure. Pennsylvania is aching to hire someone devoted to stopping fracking.
In 2016 the MSM all pronounce Georgia a swing State Hillary would win and refused to call it until the very end. But we all knew Trump was winning big here. That is an example of a State that Soros’ gang had pre rigged its report and count machines. They could not believe Q had unrigged it.
Pennsylvania and Michigan are probably going through the same experience this time. Fear not.
So much winning.
Trump is going to do a lot better in the WOW counties around Milwaukee this time, especially if the D convention is a shit show.
"But it's a long way to November"
It sure is. By November, Pennsylvania and Michigan will be voting for Trump.
Knowing my daughter watched the Dem debates, I asked her who won? Answer: Trump.
I am skeptical that Trump has lost ground in any state he won narrowly. That would imply buyer's remorse. I think Trump's economy is beating what anyone expected, and none of the looming disasters confidently predicted have come to pass. There won’t be many who plumped for Trump who regret it.
It would be so much easier on everyone if the Democrats would just concede this Presidential election. Then we could have more media attention paid to the Congressional races.
Did 2016 not happen? Polls?
I'll say it again, as I always do: I've NEVER been polled and neither has anyone I hang around with. And they are all mostly Republicans.
And that may be why.
Althouse and Meade helped turn Wisc red.
Very few who comment here are from Wisconsin. Did either of them vote for Trump last time? Does anyone think that either will vote for Trump later this year?
Didn’t the polls have Clinton beating Trump in head to head polls in 2016?
People must be really happy with Evers, given their views on the WI economy.
“Althouse and Meade helped turn Wisc red.
Hip hip hurrah!”
Althouse voted for Clinton.
“People must be really happy with Evers, given their views on the WI economy.”
Good point.
Polls at this point are pretty much for amusement purposes only. No way Trump wins Wisconsin by those numbers.
However, more good news for Trump today. He hit his first net positive approval ranking in Gallop. Unless something big changes the dynamic, he will be in a much stronger position going into 2020 than he was in 2016.
I'm interested in what states that Trump won't win. NY and CA for sure. Any others?
Washington and Oregon.
No chance whatsoever.
Inga said...
“People must be really happy with Evers, given their views on the WI economy.”
Good point.
--
Oh my. That Evers is a veritable dynamo.
Inga: "Didn’t the polls have Clinton beating Trump in head to head polls in 2016?"
Yes.
The polls are always stacked in the dems favor.
Which makes any poll showing a republican in the lead a cause for a double take!
If a republican is shown as slightly ahead in the poll, its likely they are more than slightly ahead.
walter: "Oh my. That Evers is a veritable dynamo."
Evers is the WI beneficiary of the Trump raging economy that obama is trying to take credit for while all the dem candidates claim doesn't even exist.
Why anybody would give credence to THAT polling organization in particular is beyond me. I don’t recall them ever being correct when it’s between a democrat and a republican.
I also don’t get how they stay in business. My theory is the are in the business of delivering a paid for result. Certainly not unique in that respect in the polling and MSM world.
>>I'm interested in what states that Trump won't win. NY and CA for sure. Any others?
Hawaii. All of New England. Illinois.
I'm thinking along the lines that Trump will win Maine. Maybe New Hampshire.
There is no way that an 11 point gap exists in Trump support between WI and MI. His support is probably a little lower in WI than stated in the poll and higher in MI.
Unless Sanders wins the nomination and Bloomberg runs a third party campaign Trump will not win CA, NY, VT, MA, CT,RI, MD or IL. I think the other 42 are possible in a head to head Trump versus Sanders.
Realistically, Trump's path to victory is getting the exact same states he did in 2016, with a chance of picking up one or two more like Minnesota and Oregon.
Evers is a non-entity who has had negligible impact on Wisconsin so far, thank heavens.
Trump is right in principle. And with the hunters and judges under investigation, and with judiciary reform to mitigate progress, and Democrats looking to end quid pro Bos and Joes in order to resolve CAIR and progress prices, there is an opportunity for positive development.
Sorry, I forgot about HI. Trump probably has no shot at that one, either. NJ and DE are probably off the table unless there is a 3-way race. Still, that leaves 40 states Trump contest.
“Oh my. That Evers is a veritable dynamo.”
No, he’s actually very boring. But, that he was able to beat Walker should tell you something.
When you view the polls thru the correct lens it makes them easier to understand
The purpose of polls, especially at this stage of the game, are not to reflect what we believe but instead are meant to influence what we believe.
Therefore, why show Trump winning in Wisconsin but losing in the other two states?
Suppose the pollster is a good friend of Democrats and wants Democrats to win.
So, knowing all that, why show him winning in Wisconsin but losing in the other two?
DarkHelmet said...
Sorry, I forgot about HI. Trump probably has no shot at that one, either. NJ and DE are probably off the table unless there is a 3-way race. Still, that leaves 40 states Trump contest.
2/20/20, 4:31 PM
Trump has one shot at Hawaii.
Dwayne Johnson.
He's been making noise about running as a Republican.
If Trump took him on as his Vice President for 2020-2024, he would win Hawaii.
And The Rock might win the White House in 2024.
"People must be really happy with Evers, given their views on the WI economy."
I've been at a couple functions with Evers ... seems like a nice guy. But REALLY glad Republicans still control both houses of the Wisconsin legislature, which keeps Tony from mucking up most of Walker's contributions.
"that he was able to beat Walker should tell you something."
It tells you that Wisconsinites don't like it when their otherwise popular governor abdicates his post to run for President. That was the rationale of every single person I know who backed Walker in his early elections and didn't in 2018.
Calypso Facto said...
It tells you that Wisconsinites don't like it when their otherwise popular governor abdicates his post to run for President. That was the rationale of every single person I know who backed Walker in his early elections and didn't in 2018.
Exactly.
Still, that leaves 40 states Trump contest.
Washington state has gone the longest of any state in the nation without a Republican governor. Spellman - in 1984 - was the last. And the state has drifted more and more leftward since 2000.
Hell, in the area I live in there were more Jill Stein voters than for Trump.
No way does Washington go red.
Washington state has gone the longest of any state in the nation without a Republican governor. Spellman - in 1984 - was the last. And the state has drifted more and more leftward since 2000.
Gee, I wonder if the influx of Californians over the past several decades has anything to do with it. ;-)
I lived in Seattle most of my life and remember when the Seattle Times was conservative.
I'm interested in what states that Trump won't win. NY and CA for sure. Any others?
1. All of New England - except NH.
2. NY/NJ/Delaware/MD
3. Minnesota/Illinois
4. Calf/Oregon/Wash/Hawaii/NM
Funny thing. Even if Trump loses Pennsylvania and Michigan in November, while still holding Wisconsin and all the other states he won in 2016, he's only down to 268 electors--two short of victory. But two "faithless electors" in Texas deserted Trump in 2016 to vote for Ron Paul and for John Kasich. That means that if the Texas Republican party does a better job of screening its electors in 2020, Trump will win two extra electors in Texas, taking him back up to 270--the exact number needed to win the presidency. In other words, Trump may have slightly more leeway in 2020 than many imagine.
There were more votes for Republicans in Minnesota in 2016 (Trump plus Egg McCuffin) than there were for Hillary
Minnesota could easily go for Trump in 2020
Bush took NM in 2004, and only "lost" it in 2000 with "500 Gore votes were discovered" after the counting was done.
Trump got Maine 2 in 2016, and 1 EC vote. They could flip in a Trump wave.
Inga,
My comment re Evers was regarding the notion that Evers has helped Wisconsin's economy.
Fortunately, his idiotic proposals are largely quashed by the Rs.
I’m not surprised with all those farmers.
Trump only needs 269 EC votes to win. GOP has more than 25 States where they control at least 1/2 the House delegation, and the only way Trump gets to 269 also gets him a majority of the States.
It's only 20 miles to Minnesota from where I live. I read the St Paul and Minneapolis newspapers, and I do believe that Trump will win Minnesota.
Any Minnesotans out there that would like to comment?
Greg the class traitor said...
Trump only needs 269 EC votes to win. GOP has more than 25 States where they control at least 1/2 the House delegation, and the only way Trump gets to 269 also gets him a majority of the States.
Except that the House that will vote in case of an Electoral College tie is not the current one, but will be the one elected in November 2020. That House will convene in January 2021 to count the Electoral College votes and proceed to vote for president (from the top three candidates), if there is an Electoral College tie. Given that the Republicans currently only have control of 26 state delegations, there's at least a reasonable chance that they might not have such a majority of state delegations in January 2021.
I think NH is probably gone blue...
Blogger mockturtle said...
Washington state has gone the longest of any state in the nation without a Republican governor. Spellman - in 1984 - was the last. And the state has drifted more and more leftward since 2000.
Gee, I wonder if the influx of Californians over the past several decades has anything to do with it. ;-)
I lived in Seattle most of my life and remember when the Seattle Times was conservative.
2/20/20, 5:38 PM
It's really tough to win here because King County controls the elections and in King County EVERY ballot is a mail in ballot.
Not only is every ballot a mail in ballot, but when the Democrats don't win, they keep finding more and more ballots that somehow got lost.
I don't foresee Republicans winning too many state wide elections for as long as this lasts.
I don't know what's up in Wisconsin.
It's populated (not heavily, thankfully) by gullible morons?
Eric observes: Not only is every ballot a mail in ballot, but when the Democrats don't win, they keep finding more and more ballots that somehow got lost.
This happened in AZ in 2018 making the Senatorial election outcome dubious. Amazing how many ballots can be 'found' at the last minute in a very tight race.
"What's happening in PA is that Trump hasn't yet run ads pointing out how many PA jobs will be lost when the Democrat ban fracking”
Then he is going to run lessons for grandmothers on how to suck eggs. Maybe that saying doesn’t work anymore, but I think that PA is pretty clear that the Democrats want to shut down the energy extraction industry. If I were interested in debating with pee pee tapes, I could probably get him to tell you openly that shutting down the energy extraction industry is one of the main reasons he is for the Democrats. But I am not interested in debating somebody who falls for hoax after hoax.
Any Minnesotans out there that would like to comment?
Minnesota is different. I live in the northern suburbs, inside the 494/694 loop, and it’s cobalt blue. Not sure there are enough people outstate to make up the gap. The DFL has lost the Iron Range, which complicates things, but there are too many people in the metro area. I grew up in Wisconsin and the population is more spread out, which allows places like the Fox River Valley to have more political power.
khematite said...
Greg the class traitor said...
Trump only needs 269 EC votes to win. GOP has more than 25 States where they control at least 1/2 the House delegation, and the only way Trump gets to 269 also gets him a majority of the States.
Except that the House that will vote in case of an Electoral College tie is not the current one, but will be the one elected in November 2020..... Given that the Republicans currently only have control of 26 state delegations, there's at least a reasonable chance that they might not have such a majority of state delegations in January 2021.
Given that a whole bunch of Democrats were elected to the House in 2018 on the promise that they'd be reasonable, and "work for the People, not Pelosi", the reasonable expectation is that the GOP will be controlling the House, and fare more than 26 States, come Jan 2021
"There's a new Quinnipiac poll, and in Wisconsin, Trump beats everybody."
Duh.
mockturtle said...
Gee, I wonder if the influx of Californians over the past several decades has anything to do with it. ;-)
Washingtonians have always liked to blame California for how they fucked up their own state.
Washington state has gone the longest of any state in the nation without a Republican governor. Spellman - in 1984 - was the last. And the state has drifted more and more leftward since 2000.
Gee, I wonder if the influx of Californians over the past several decades has anything to do with it.
Unlikely. For the most part people leaving CA are significantly more conservative than the CA average. For example, Ted Cruz would not be a senator today but for voters who were not born in Texas. Washington has been getting nuttier and nuttier as time goes on - it might have something to do with the exit of so many blue collar jobs. How many people are employed in extraction industries now as compared to, say, 1980?
Post a Comment