(06-15-2016, 10:30 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Interesting chart: Hillary Clinton has gained nothing, but Donald Trump has sunk catastrophically in favorability in three weeks.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps-un...d=39856303
Donald Trump just went underwater among "conservatives", a group with which he must be firmly ahead if he is to have a chance at being elected. Hillary Clinton breaks even with moderates, and has tepid support with liberals. Hillary Clinton has room with which to get improvement by recognizing the concerns of the supporters of Bernie Sanders. Donald Trump faces a more shattered Republican coalition. Republicans of course despise Hillary Clinton, so I can't see much of a "Republicans for Clinton" tendency. But I can see huge numbers of Republicans voting Libertarian if they do come out to vote.
For someone who has said little derogatory about blacks, Donald Trump does incredibly badly among them. Maybe they recognize that someone who says horrible stuff about Hispanics can swiftly turn against black people.
I'm beginning to think that many conservatives have begun to recognize that Donald Trump is a reckless demagogue, and that his antics are not "Presidential". His campaign was in trouble on May 20... and instead of making needed gains in support he lost much credibility in three weeks.
There's also the recent Bloomberg poll that in addition showing a 12% spread to Clinton also showed that 55% of registered voters could not see themselves voting for Trump. Then there's the polling on the three speeches in response to Orlando - Obama got a 44/34 favorable/unfavorable and the much-less seen Clinton speech was a 36/34. Clinton's was okay but Trump's speech got a near unbelievable 25/51 split - so much for any bounce from Orlando
These numbers suggest Clinton can make in-roads into Right-leaning independents and perhaps even some significant numbers of GOP members particularly women.
Clinton being able to reach out to her Right could give her some upper hand in dealing with Bernie and his supporters. I want the Dems to swing further Left but to do it in a way that will allow them to actually win elections and make things actually happen once elected. It would not be good for the Dems to catch the magic unicorn bug that took over the Sanders campaign.
Most importantly, I do hope she pushes back on Bernie's hypocritical request on changing the nomination process. It's just weird that he denigrates the super delegates which about 1/2-way through the primaries provided the ONLY way for him to be nominated - and since April, the only valid reason for him to stay in the race. I don't mind jettisoning the super delegates but it should be done within an agreement to get rid of the most voter-suppression process in the election process - the caucus.
The excuse for caucus voting is that it is too expensive to hold primaries; some states won't pay for them and the Party has to come up with the money that they believe can be spent better otherwise. I think this gets solved by proportionally reducing super delegates with state caucuses moving to primaries- the simplest being the super delegates stay but only in states deciding to still use the caucus, perhaps keeping some proportional level of national super-delegates - call it an an ongoing incentive for getting rid of all caucuses and moving to true elections. Also any state wanting to hold a caucus rather than a primary should be moved to the back of the state voting calendar including Iowa - I'm certain Iowa would jettison the caucus and come up with the money to fund an actual primary in a matter of seconds.