And “Voters are divided 50 – 49 percent on whether the e-mail scandal is important to their vote. While 37 percent of voters say they are less likely to vote for Clinton because of this issue, 58 percent say it will make no difference in their vote.”
I find this result very surprising: I would have expected a huge number not even to have heard of Paul. Considering his strange views I just can see why so many like him–probably they don’t know what these views are yet.
Well, Paul has received quite a bit of attention lately so it’s no surprise he gets a bump.
It’s a Quinnipiac poll and that swings fairly reliably so I’m inclined to both agree and disagree with it. Q is a good firm, but doing horse race polls this far out is essentially pointless.
The info about the emails is the greater takeaway. As before, it looks like most of Clinton’s negatives are already baked in and such things aren’t going to move the needle much. It’ll take one hell of a scandal to damage her seriously.
Well that’s certainly not good news, but the clown car that is the GOP primary season will damage them all to give any Dem a boost
A one-percent lead, a year and a half before the election?
This is just the break the McCain campaign has been waiting for!
Of much bigger advantage to the Draft Romney movement, which gains momentum every day!
Hillary has been beaten before. It’s not the first time she’s been behind in the polls. However, the general election is a looooong way off.
Considering how representative of the country Iowa is and how soon the election is this is disastrous news for the Democrats!
The writer of that article needs to be banged over the head with the concept of margin of error.
Paul leads in Colorado too. Actually, three Republicans currently lead Clinton in Colorado.
Some posters asked what states the GOP could win that they didn’t win in 2012. You have your answer: Colorado, which is going increasingly red in the past few years, and Iowa.
That gets the GOP up to 221. Add in Florida and you get 250. Now what? Virginia gets you close, but it’s been trending the other direction. OH gets you even closer, but you’d still need either NM or NV.
Certainly possible, but still a tough row to hoe.
That said, I do think the fact that all of the GOP candidates tend to run much closer to Hillary in states where they have been campaigning and fundraising does point out how much of her perceived strength is simply higher name recognition.
Clinton’s campaign team is probably drooling at the thought of whacking Rand Paul over the head with his bizarro positions.
As for Iowa, it’ll be interesting to see how Paul can reconcile his libertarian views with promising massive subsidies to Iowa agriculture.
Just to fight ignorance:
Quinnipiac is not a firm; it’s a university.
They’ll likely try to present them in such a way that they appear to be *Republican *positions, since going after Paul only helps Jeb and Jeb is going to be the nominee.
Iowa, the state that keeps electing Steve King, is going increasingly batshit, yes. But Colorado’s Hispanic vote is increasing, making it an increasingly Democratic state (wherever the fuck you get your info is, as always, a pointless point).
But even so, you’d still be a couple hundred or so EV’s short. What do you plan to do about that?
In 2013, Colorado Democrats forced thru a gun control bill, that’s not a surprise, but it did result in three Democrats losing their seat. Two were recalled and one quit. The conservative, Republican, Tea Party, and 2nd Amendment voters have shown that they are willing to go to the polls, and vote for the candidate that best represents them. Hispanic voters can be conservative, and 2nd Amendment supporters.
The immediate effect of the recalls — the first of their kind in Colorado — was to remove two state senators, Angela Giron of Pueblo and John Morse of Colorado Springs, and replace them with Republicans.
The topic here is Presidential elections, not the power of the NRA to stir up their base in off years.
Any poll with hypothetical candidates is pretty much meaningless.
If state representatives mattered profoundly in presidential elections, we’d have elected Romney in 2012 due to all the GOP wins in Congress. Fact is, Obama beat him handedly.
(Bold and underline added)
Is Steve King running for President?
Is it OK with you if Hispanic voters vote conservative, or pro-gun, or anti-Hillary? Why would you take Hispanic votes for granted?
The King comment was inserted to demonstrate Iowa’s batshittedness, which extends to its presidential votes. And Hispanic voters do tend to vote against the party that hates them. Do please try a little harder.