Presidential Race Snapshot

From Real Clear Politics:


Assuming the above is reasonably accurate, the country has definitely moved Left in its preference for presidents. It’s interesting that Kasich does best as the Republican nominee and Sanders does best as the Democrat nominee. That may be the indoctrination effects of the MSM and the schools showing itself, especially as more young people indoctrinated their entire lives mature to voting age. It’s also possible it may reflect the poor state of the economy and more people looking to government for assistance.


12 thoughts on “Presidential Race Snapshot”

  1. I think these polls represent a couple of things.

    One is $100 million in negative ads against Trump.

    Two is his style which has been directed at the primary electorate.

    At this point Reagan was 30 points behind Carter.

    Another is a real (I think) “Bradley Effect” in which voters are reluctant to reveal a preference for Trump. This has been described in a number of settings, including West Los Angeles, a very far left (and gay) community.

  2. The electorate has definitely moved to the Left. Importing 60 million people from the 3rd world, most of whom are dependent on wealth transfers, is going to have an effect. People vote on their self-interests.

    Nevertheless, the snapshots taken today are immaterial. Clinton hasn’t been taking much fire at all so the public is not reminded of her negatives like they are of the Republican candidates.

  3. See what happened during the UK electons last year. All the polls and the prediction markets were very wrong. People wouldn’t admit in public they were going to vote Conservative, and they didn’t want to admit it to pollsters either.

    I’ll never forget watching PredictIt for weeks predicting Labour would win with the bids barely budging, then seeing a 10 sigma move in the opposite direction just as the results were announced. I knew then we had entered a whole new ballgame.

  4. See what happened during the UK electons last year.

    I wouldn’t count on this being a significant factor. Demographic change is doom for conservatives. Fear of being called racists and not stopping the demographic tsunami is now slowing leading us to the cliff where our values and politics are going to be pushed over the cliff. Look at the demographics of the conservative movement, it’ principally white people who value the old historical America traditions. Minorities want wealth and opportunity transfer and the Big Government which can deliver these goods.

  5. We are in the middle of an American Jacksonian populist uprising in America.

    We are also at the dawn of the Great Pan-European Muslim Urban Insurgency.

    Those polls mean jack.

  6. “Demographic change is doom for conservatives”

    I’m not sure about this. We will run out of money but before that, we may see some serious trouble that will bring back “law and order,” even for immigrants.

  7. A very interesting development in California that may not be recognized outside the state.

    I am certainly under no illusions that my candidacy is anything but a tremendous long-shot. Over the two decades that have passed since Gov. Pete Wilson’s Prop. 187 campaign, California has been transformed into what amounts to a one-party Democratic state, with Republicans holding not a single statewide office and barely one-third of the State Legislature; GOP presidential campaigns rarely invest any time or money in hopeless pursuit of California’s 55 electoral votes. With the sole exception of Arnold Schwarzenegger—who was obviously a special case—not a single Republican has won a top-ticket statewide race since 1994, with candidates often losing by 20-25 points despite spending many millions or even tens of millions on their campaigns; and virtually all down-ticket Republican candidates have generally lost by comparable margins.

    The Democrats are trying to undo his highly successful initiative this fall.

    He entered the governor race years ago and almost won.

    The primary factor behind this sudden decision on my part was the current effort by the California Democrats and their (totally worthless) Republican allies to repeal my 1998 Prop. 227 “English for the Children” initiative. Although the English immersion system established in the late 1990s was judged an enormous educational triumph by nearly all observers, and the issue has long since been forgotten, a legislative ballot measure up for a vote this November aims to undo all that progress and reestablish the disastrously unsuccessful system of Spanish-almost-only “bilingual education” in California public schools:

    The half-black Attorney General is the D candidate. She is a female Obama with no accomplishments.

  8. I am also not sure that polls have any meaning at all – I am not at all certain that if – a) with their best efforts front and center that the professional pollsters can get a representative cross-section of respondents and b) that if they did, those respondents would give a an honest answer.

    I know that I wouldn’t – trusting not the smallest particle in confidentiality with regard to my answers. The hotter the contest and the more contentious the issue – I’d be a fool to answer honestly.

  9. In some elections the polls have no meaning and in others they are near dead-on. The problem is trying to discern which is which. I agree Reagan was way behind this time of the season.

    I still don’t know who I will vote for. Not really happy with Trump or Cruz, and was leaning towards Kasich but he is a bit too left on social issues for me. But he would be most likely to win.

    Politics is all about compromise – both as a politician and who you vote for – very few reflect anyone’s exact views. To me is is “who has the best chance of winning with the most of the ideals you espouse? If one likes a person 100% but they have no chance of winning “votinkg to make a statement” isn’t for me. Who cares?

  10. Politics is all about compromise except when it is all about change. FDR did not compromise. Neither did Lincoln. This may not be the election where change occurs. In fact, the two leading candidates really propose no change, only more of the same done better. This may be 1856 or 1928, not the year of change, but the year of no change that leads to the collapse that is a necessary condition of change. But change is coming and it won’t be the result of a compromise.

  11. In the case of Kasich v Clinton, I will suggest that most people do not like or trust Clinton, and know nothing about Kasich; advantage Kasich. As they learn more about Kasich and actually face making a choice between only those two, his lead will shrink, probably vanish.

Comments are closed.