CNN poll: Hillary leads five top Republican contenders — by double digits

From: hotair.com, by: Allahpundit, on: March 18, 2015, see the article HERE.

 

Hillary with crownGotta agree with Bill Kristol on this. Not good, especially when you consider that the poll was taken within the last week, with media coverage of her e-mail corruption peaking.

You’ll be hearing this a lot more over the next 20 months (eeyores gonna eeyore), but here’s the inaugural version of the 2016 campaign: Dude, I’m nervous.

But none of the top candidates in this field gets within 10 points of Hillary Clinton in a series of hypothetical general election matchups.

Rand Paul comes closest, with 43% saying they’d be more likely to back him while 54% choose Clinton. The two candidates who currently top the GOP field, Bush and Walker, match up equally against Clinton, with each carrying 40% to her 55%. Huckabee gets 41% to Clinton’s 55% and Carson has 40% to Clinton’s 56%…

On the Republican side, Bush leads the pack with 16%, Walker follows at 13%, Paul nearly matches him at 12% and Huckabee holds 10% support. Huckabee’s backing has dipped significantly since February, from 16% to 10%, while the others near the top have generally held steady. In single digits, Carson holds 9%, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has 7%, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has 7%. The rest of the field lands below 5%, including 2012 candidates Rick Santorum at 1% and Rick Perry at 4%.

“But AP,” you say, “head-to-head polls this early are useless. The Republican contenders are total unknowns to swing voters.” Right, but Hillary isn’t. She’s as close as you get in American politics to 100 percent name recognition. Everyone knows her and everyone has an opinion about her, which means that early polls like this one tend to operate as a measure of her “job approval” (for lack of a better term). Essentially, low-information voters are being asked here whether they prefer Hillary Clinton, baggage and all, or a Republican to be named later as their next president. Upwards of 55 percent prefer Hillary. She’s entering the race as acceptable to a sizable majority of the public, even in the midst of a legit scandal about her attempts to conceal records from the federal government. That’s what the GOP is up against as this campaign begins. Gulp.

Here’s how she polls against the other dynasty case in the race, the only Republican with a fairly strong “brand.” Which number jumps out?

cb

Actually, two numbers jump out at me. One is her lead among non-whites, a group with whom Jeb’s supposed to be a bit more competitive than the average Republican due to his support for amnesty and Latino family ties. At 14/85, he actually does a few points worse than Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul do. But the big number, of course, is the gender split. Hillary leads Jeb by seven points among men but by 21 points(!) among women. And believe it or not, that’s the closest any Republican gets to her among that group. Women prefer her to Rubio by 22 points, to Christie and Mike Huckabee by 24 points, to Scott Walker by 27 points, and to Rand Paul by 28 points. (Although Paul is the Republican who’s most competitive with Hillary overall, his outreach to young adults and minorities hasn’t paid off with numbers appreciably greater within those groups than some of his rivals’.) Male voters trend Republican so they’ll likely end up tilting GOP as the race sharpens, but “tilting” won’t be good enough given Hillary’s huge advantage among women. The Republican nominee will have to win men in a landslide and/or somehow knock 10 points or so off of Hillary’s female base. How do you do that?

There may be only one hope, my friends. To stop this freight train, we need a hero to derail it before it gets going. And luckily, for us and for America, that hero is out there.

~~~~~~~~~~

AP is right, polls this early of “adults” aren’t much of a crystal ball, BUT for this skank to be polling so well against the entire field of Republicans is cause for alarm. And, as AP mentioned, this poll was taken after the story about her secret personal stash of State Department email became public. It was also troubling to see (or rather NOT see) Ted Cruz mentioned – I assume that he was included in the “below 5%” group.

My friends, I trust that this poll is not representative of what the actual results are when the polls close on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. If Hillary does win, we are well and truly SCREWED since we will have been outvoted by morons.

Garnet92

 

 

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to CNN poll: Hillary leads five top Republican contenders — by double digits

  1. carolinmd says:

    Unfortunately, the last two elections have proven that we can easily be outvoted by morons when they have been supplied with money and fraudulent voting maneuvers from the likes of Soros and others of this ilk. Not to mention the GOP, who has her own supply of less than scrupulous members who are more interested in fulfilling their own personal agendas rather than the needs of America and those who want the best for their country.

    • Garnet92 says:

      True carol, but thinking people voted in the 2014 mid-terms and look what that got us. The biggest problem we have is the large group of “NO information voters.” That group doesn’t know nor care about national problems, only their racist vote. If black’s votes were distributed according to almost any other issue, he wouldn’t have won. Barack won both elections because he was (half) black, NOT because Obama was the best individual to manage the country’s affairs. The majority of his voters couldn’t have provided any reasonable, logical reason for their vote. Now we’re faced with the “gender” vote – those who will be voting for Hillary, not for her stance on substantive issues, but because she is (reportedly) a woman.

  2. Uriel says:

    It is disheartening in a way but I do think time will tell. Especially with the immigration issue up in the air. This is really a deciding factor. There are movrments afoot that May affect such as social security cull of fake or long dead people. It will be interezting if that gets done to see how many people are uskng old birth info like some have accused O of doing.

    • Garnet92 says:

      It’s the same old story Uriel, our reasoned, logical reasons for voting for a candidate are offset by someone voting for another candidate who is [black] or a [female] and who don’t care about that person’s qualifications or history of actions, in other words, like I said earlier, a NO-information-voter.

  3. captbogus2 says:

    But there are several serious GOP candidates and only one Dem. If Rand Paul is really at 43% just think what he would be coming out of the primaries and without the conservative vote being divided between the several other contenders.

    • Garnet92 says:

      That is true capt., and a valid point, but I still can’t help myself when I see the poll numbers stacked against us, it is disturbing. I know, it’s early and our side is fractured, but I’d rather see our side with big numbers and Hillary with zilch.

  4. Kathy says:

    Another number stands out and that is the 64% of young people between the ages of 18-34 that support her. That’s a big number but it may not represent actual voters.

    We need to pray big time for Trey Gowdy – he may be our only hope in keeping her off the ballot.

    • Garnet92 says:

      I hope that he’s not our only hope. I’ve seen a poll today that showed some softness in her numbers – it may be that we’re beginning to see a “death by a thousand cuts” beginning – I certainly hope so. I still haven’t given up on Gowdy, but the absence of any of her correspondence relating to Benghazi doesn’t help. I hope he has a lot more witness testimony, etc. to help crucify her.

  5. BrianR says:

    I’m with Buck. This poll is meaningless.

    Clinton’s so far unchallenged in her party; the GOP’s split among many. That’s a default serious skew in the polling results.

    Further, assuming she ends up being the actual candidate, that’s when the rubber meets the road, and she WON’T be able to dodge all the hard questions anymore.

    The polls leading up to last year’s election also didn’t indicate a GOP stampede, and yet here we are.

  6. BrianR says:

    PS.

    Look whose poll it is: CNN.

    The Communist News Network.

    Consider the source…

    • Garnet92 says:

      Your points are all valid Brian, but if doesn’t stop me from preferring to see one of our candidates on top rather than showing poorly against her. I hope that the polling progressing through the campaigns continue to show her support weakening and one of the conservative candidates beginning to rise to the top. My brain tells me “don’t worry, it’s early,” but I still don’t like the image.

      As far as the hard questions, she’s been dodging hard questions all of her public life and she’s slipperier than a greased eel. She’s gonna be hard to land a body blow on – not impossible, but difficult. I’d like to think that we’ve got the goods on her this time.

  7. vonMesser says:

    With any poll, it depends on two things
    1. Where the poll is taken
    2. How the questions are worded

    Example 1
    A poll taken on UC Berkley campus is gonna be far more apt to support Hillary than a poll taken on Hillsdale College Campus.
    Example 2
    Over 80% of Americans support a woman’s right to control her own body
    Over 90% of Americans oppose murdering unborn infants

    • Garnet92 says:

      You’re right vonM. I’ve written on that very subject before. Most people only see a chart or graph of the results of a poll, but you can’t really assess the validity of those results unless you know what the exact questions were. Often changing a single word can elicit a completely different response. My brain tells me “don’t worry yet,” it’s early, but as I’ve said before – I don’t like seeing that image of Hillary leading.

  8. upaces88 says:

    I do NOT believe that for one second!!

  9. tannngl says:

    Polls are very often misleading if not outrightly lying. Media group polls have done that for the Progs.
    ABC is a schill.