Trump takes lead in 4-way matchup

Posted by | July 25, 2016 06:27 | Filed under: Politics

Republish
Reprint


Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton 44%-39% in a four-way matchup. Gary Johnson comes in at 9% and Jill Stein has 3%.

[Trump leads]by three points in a two-way head-to-head, 48% to 45%. That latter finding represents a 6-point convention bounce for Trump, which are traditionally measured in two-way matchups.

There hasn’t been a significant post-convention bounce in CNN’s polling since 2000. That year Al Gore and George W. Bush both boosted their numbers by an identical 8 points post-convention before ultimately battling all the way to the Supreme Court.

The new findings mark Trump’s best showing in a CNN/ORC Poll against Clinton since September 2015. Trump’s new edge rests largely on increased support among independents, 43% of whom said that Trump’s convention in Cleveland left them more likely to back him, while 41% were dissuaded. Pre-convention, independents split 34% Clinton to 31% Trump, with sizable numbers behind Johnson (22%) and Stein (10%). Now, 46% say they back Trump, 28% Clinton, 15% Johnson and 4% Stein.
Donald Trump’s plan to win the week

Trump’s newfound lead is also boosted by a sharp increase in support from whites without college degrees. In the new poll they break 62% for Trump to 23% for Clinton, while whites who hold at least a bachelor’s degree have actually tilted more pro-Clinton since the convention (from a 40% to 40% split pre-convention to a 44% Clinton to 39% Trump divide now).

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

86 responses to Trump takes lead in 4-way matchup

  1. Warman1138 July 25th, 2016 at 06:38

    Trumps lead says a lot, a lot about the general level or lack of intelligence nationwide.

  2. DogsRgoodpeople July 25th, 2016 at 06:41

    Hey here’s an idea:
    how about Hillary picks a centrist as her VP pick then hire the lady that resigned as head of the DNC for rigging the primaries so that she would win ? That would pick up so many of the 13 million that voted for Bernie right away.

    • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 07:19

      what makes you think it’s not the predicted post convention bounce?

      • Candide Gunn July 25th, 2016 at 07:29

        and you called us Bernie voters delusional…you are just as delusional over Clinton.

        • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 12:16

          I am a realist.
          I liked Bernie and /or Hillary.
          I have seen the Bernie or bust crowd turn on Hillary, Obama, Pelosi and Elizabeth Warren.
          I have no reason not to expect them to turn on Bernie as well.

      • William July 25th, 2016 at 08:32

        That was a convention?

        • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 12:51

          That’s what the both siderists in the media called it.

      • DogsRgoodpeople July 25th, 2016 at 09:40

        I do think it was post convention bounce. Should that be a soothing factor ?
        She’s losing to Donald trump for christ’s sake.

        • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 13:34

          They ALWAYS get a post convention bounce.
          And the majority of white blue color males LOVE Trump.

          But Romney lead Obama in some polls right up into Nov.

          Meanwhile, averages show Hillary leading and CBS poll shows no bounce for Trump.

          But what would make you think it would be any different with anyone else??

    • Candide Gunn July 25th, 2016 at 07:28

      and the 60 million voters who were not even allowed to vote in the primaries?

      Funny that 47% or almost half of all voters are do not belong to either party but BOTH parties completely forget that they even exist during the primaries, then they are shocked when some poll or other has the temerity to poll these non-two-party voters.

      That whole closed primary thing is a crime, taxpayers PAY billions of dollars every year across the country for thousands of elections, so there should never be a closed primary unless the 2 parties start paying every penny of those closed primary elections.

      if it is just a clique, a club, whatever then they should pick who they want to run and stop pretending that primary votes count.

      The republicans have spent the last 8 years rigging the voting process so that republicans would have an unfair advantage against democrats, it never occurred to them that by rigging the system to disenfranchise voters, they would end up with someone like Trump.

      If we had free and fair elections with no SCOTUS rigging the game for republicans or party chairs rigging the game for such an unpopular candidate, this election would have been a lot different.

      • arc99 July 25th, 2016 at 10:31

        Primary votes do count. That is how the nominee is selected.

        No one is stopping you or anyone else from forming another party, qualifying candidates for the ballot and holding primaries in your state. Members of the party get to select their nominee. Hillary Clinton got more votes than Bernie Sanders. Consequently, she is the nominee.

        Nothing was “rigged” for Hillary Clinton. She got more votes. She was not inside the voting booth with a gun to anyone’s head. I am getting so blasted tired of these phoney accusations about Hillary from the right and the left.

        And put away your misconceptions. My wife and I both voted for Bernie in the California primary..

        • Jimmy Fleck July 25th, 2016 at 11:58

          I think party primaries should be closed. If you want to have a say in who the party nominates then join that party. I don’t think Republicans should be voting in the Democratic primary and vice versa. I speak as an independent that lives in an open primary state and I just skip the primary vote.

        • Candide Gunn July 25th, 2016 at 11:58

          You have seen the CORRUPTION in both parties in the last week… or were you under a rock when the DNC scandal took place?

          There are THOUSANDS of documents PROVING that she didn’t win anything… election fraud and rigging elections is something that GOOD people do not look the other way for…are you seriously looking the other way?

          There should be no parties, it is against the constitution…voting booths have curtains for a reason. Voting is private and forcing taxpayers to declare a party just to exercise their rights to vote is CRIMINAL.

          Just because you are drinking the Kool-Aid does not mean the rest of us have to PAY for your little party with our taxpayer dollars…elections are expensive…so keeping ANY citizen out of the voting process is a crime by its very nature.

          I used to be a republican but after Nixon’s racist southern strategy, I dropped them like a hot potato because I am a good person…I do not excuse bad behavior by anyone.

        • Kick Frenzy July 25th, 2016 at 19:03

          I tend to agree that those in a party should be the ones to elect the representative for that party; however, it’s also true that it’s unfair to use the taxes from half the populace to fund those campaigns/conventions when both parties do everything they can to exclude any other parties from the process.

          But as for Hillary, yes…it was rigged.
          There is black & white evidence in the emails, not to mention outright actions that were meant to discredit Bernie or to make it harder for Bernie supporters to get their vote in.
          There was cheating time and time again, video proof of it, in favor of Hillary (for example, a busload of people let in to caucus for Hillary without ever registering).

          I don’t know the perfect answer to closed/open primaries, but it’s not set up in a fair manner as it stands.

  3. Obewon July 25th, 2016 at 09:28

    Bernie speaks at the DNC on Tuesday. Sanders is voting for Hillary despite the Putin / Trump espionage. Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton! http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/

  4. Suzanne McFly July 25th, 2016 at 09:39

    I hope these old ba$tards who vote for him realize they will be drafted along with the rest of us. If that maniac becomes President, anyone that puts his panties in a knot will be on the reception end of his wrath and we will be having World War 3-7.

    • Snick1946 July 25th, 2016 at 10:03

      Nearly everyone I know or talk to in my neighborhood- I live in a white, suburban area- says they are voting for him. It’s a collective madness. I wonder how they are going to like seeing little Buffy and Muffy drafted to fight in his endless wars?

      You cannot reason with many of them. They have been driven by Fox News, and believe Hillary is a corrupt old hag who will go to jail. Now I know how people felt in Germany around 1932..

      • Suzanne McFly July 25th, 2016 at 10:26

        How do they think rumps TRUMPU case will come out, he may not go to prison but he will hopefully have to pay back billions. Amazing how they can accept blatant corruption from one and not made up corruption from another.

        • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 10:44

          They ignore everything. From fraud to his outsourcing job to other countries all while proclaiming others are giving away jobs that should be here.

  5. anothertoothpick July 25th, 2016 at 10:02

    Gary Johnson at 9%?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHa. That will not happen.

    in 1980 when they nominated Ed Clark and David Koch. In fact, in that election they achieved their best results to date winning 1.06% of the vote .

    In 2012 this same Johnson won .99% of the total vote.

    After forty years the Libertarian Party has only once broken 1% of the national vote and only once earned more than 1 million votes.

    The lunatic fringe will never get to 9%.

    • Jimmy Fleck July 25th, 2016 at 11:55

      At this point I am leaning towards voting Johnson or not voting in the presidential election. Hillary and Trump are not acceptable. I think a lot of people feel the same as me.

      • anothertoothpick July 25th, 2016 at 12:16

        Before you vote for Johnson contact the libertarian party and ask them one question
        https://www.lp.org/contact-us

        Why are there no libertarian countries? If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?

        • Jimmy Fleck July 25th, 2016 at 12:25

          a vote for Johnson does not mean the whole country would go libertarian. The president doesn’t have that much say in how the country is run. Luckily the congress will likely stay Republican and there is a decent chance the Senate goes back to the Democrats so we will likely have 4 to 8 years of more gridlock limiting the extremist parts of both parties regardless of who wins the presidency.

      • Mensa Member July 25th, 2016 at 12:32

        >> Hillary and Trump are not acceptable.

        Trump is obvious unqualified to be president but why is Hillary not acceptable?

        Do you understand that we Democrats are far closer to true libertarian philosophy than are the Republicans?

      • BigD July 25th, 2016 at 13:31

        Wow. Please do some issues research. If you are young your life will be a living hell for the next 30 years with a Trump Supreme Court. If you are not young, you will be dead and folks will wonder why did voters let this happen.

        • mea_mark July 25th, 2016 at 13:46

          Do some more fearmongering please, issues aren’t important just fear.

          • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 13:51

            you don’t think that’s the truth. this is a real fear, not the fear tactics the RWNJ’s do on a daily basis as with tRump and his ignorance.

            • mea_mark July 25th, 2016 at 14:05

              Voting based on fear has gotten us where we are today, it is the problem. Doing the same failed thing over and over and expecting success is not very smart to me. The cycle has to be stopped. And no I don’t fear things like others do. America is going through a cultural shift to the left and the government will follow it. The people, in the end will have their way.

              • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 14:08

                there is rational fear and irrational fear. fearing someone like tRump possibly being the president is very rational.

                • mea_mark July 25th, 2016 at 14:15

                  He has no record, just bumbling bloviating talk. He doesn’t even want to run the country, that will be his vice president’s job. It’s a massive clusterfuck in the works. He will be the most ineffectual president ever elected, if elected. His own party doesn’t like him, he won’t get anything he wants unless there is bipartisan support for it. If anything, I fear him less than some of the other options. He simply won’t have the power or support to do whatever it is he will want to do. Plus I doubt he would be president very long if elected, I think he would get bored and quit. The real question should be what about Pence and who his vp might be.

                  • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 14:36

                    You see what’s going on with this but case running and all this violence, it will get much worse.

        • Jimmy Fleck July 25th, 2016 at 13:48

          I am not voting for Trump.

    • Mensa Member July 25th, 2016 at 12:37

      >> Gary Johnson at 9%?
      >> HAHAHAHAHAHAHa. That will not happen.

      I’m too worried about America to laugh — but that 9% did strike me as way off.

      But, this is obviously not a normal election year. When was the last time so many in the GOP core boycotted their own convention? Obviously, a whole lot of Republicans are fishing around for someone besides Trump to vote for.

  6. eyelashviper July 25th, 2016 at 10:09

    Fear and Rage always sell, even more so to the poorly educated.
    Look for a big bounce for the Dems after this week. And still, Trump does not have the $$$$ to really compete in the General, and his days of “phoning in” to tv shows are limited, and all the tweetstorms are not gonna move his numbers.

  7. Um Cara July 25th, 2016 at 10:53

    Electoral % is more interesting than absolute % – it will be interesting to see how that breaks down post D convention.

    • Snick1946 July 25th, 2016 at 11:08

      One electoral vote tracking site shows Clinton with something like 247 EVs. Tossups in OH, IA, FL and a few others. She is not in bad shape, really. This will only improve after this week, unless the uproar over DWS manages to blow up the whole thing.

      • BigD July 25th, 2016 at 13:26

        Exactly. We need to all take a deep breath and work like hell to defeat Trump. Then starting in Feb 2017 work like hell to make the progressive changes in the Dem Party. Without a Dem win in November, we get squat.

  8. labman57 July 25th, 2016 at 12:28

    Any Bernie-backers who are planning to support Trump out of vengeance against the DNC should think carefully about the consequences of that decision.

    During the next 4 years, at least 1 and as many as 3 justices on the SCOTUS will be appointed by whomever is elected POTUS. Do we really want all of the progressive decisions of the past two generations to be overturned?

    • robert July 25th, 2016 at 12:35

      18 minutes of frightening comments from trump

      https://youtu.be/oLWaoMCUg0g

      • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 12:55

        I couldn’t stomach more than a minute.

    • Suzanne McFly July 25th, 2016 at 14:28

      Any Bernie supporter who will now support rump was never really a Bernie supporter. Hillary has more in common with rump than Bernie ever has.

      • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 14:41

        Thank you!
        I felt the same way with Hillary/ Obama and I felt the same way towards people who said they will never vote for Bernie.

  9. BigD July 25th, 2016 at 13:24

    I’m horrified at the thought of a President Trump. A Trump Supreme Court will destroy any hope of the progressive changes we all want.

    • Um Cara July 25th, 2016 at 13:28

      Yep, it’s weird how Hillary and many of her supporters are so openly antagonizing liberal dems and independents. One would think she would recognize how critical this election might be and try to gain their support.

      • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 14:04

        Obviously she feels confident enough to reject the progressives by going with Kaine…
        Warren or Brown would add the most votes and get the real lefty’s to maybe hop on board…
        Making a spot for DWS to campaign with her is just a slap in the face
        Maybe she knows something we don’t

        • mea_mark July 25th, 2016 at 14:08

          I think she might be playing to shifting demographics and voting blocks. She is trying to build a party around a voting block that consistently votes her way.

        • Suzanne McFly July 25th, 2016 at 14:26

          By putting Kaine on her ticket, I think she is trying to attract more righties than lefties. I would hate to think that, she needs to unite the left and let the right continue to eat their own, but that is the only thing that makes sense to me.

          • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 14:36

            She ALSO needs the middle, who will get scared off by two women or a woman and a minority.

            • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 15:57

              I think that’s where we disagree…JMO but this cycle the electorate seems pretty much settled as a whole….
              Anyone who supported Hill but would be scared off by 2 women or a minority isn’t going to vote for Trump. Same goes for Trump voters …the middle is solid as a rock…I believe this is gonna be close, a lot closer than anyone expects and in that kind of a race it pays to cast a wide net…
              We’re gonna find out soon enough…

              • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 16:24

                JMO???

                “Anyone who supported Hill but would be scared off by 2 women or a minority isn’t going to vote for Trump.”
                _____

                I think you are just looking at the two extremes.
                There are lots of people in the middle who even paying attention at this point.

                I believe that someone like Kaine IS the wide net.

          • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 15:01

            If true, she’s making a yuuuge mistake (couldn’t resist)
            I think there are more fish in the Bernie/Indy pond than any right wingers who could be snagged by Kaine… JMO.
            DWS needed to be completely exiled from the party not given some sort of spot in the campaign…she’s a proven traitor.
            This thing will be about turnout…forget the numbers…R’s can always be counted on to turnout big… we need a turnout like 2008 if we want to be competitive…
            I’m not feeling the energy…yet.

        • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 14:35

          Should she reject the middle of the country?
          It is why it is so hard to do anything in government; Without THIS amendment, a group necessary to pass a bill will vote NO.
          WITH this amendment, another group necessary to pass a bill will vote NO.

          When compromise is reached, they are ALL sellouts.

          • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 14:52

            The old discursive dilemma paradox…? No, not yet…
            If you want to include more people under your tent you need a big tent. Jamming more people into the small one you have won’t work.
            Hillary already has her backers, the goal should be to include those who were for Bernie by adopting not just some of his platforms (which she did) but including a guarantee of sorts that she’s not just paying lip service to garner votes….we’re not like the republicans, yet…we can still have rational conversations and reach a compromise…
            Discovering in the most embarrassing way possible that the DNC chair has been secretly working against a candidate who won 22 states and then elevating that person to a spot in your campaign is not the way to win hearts and minds…just sayin…

            • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 15:03

              Jamming more people into the small one you have won’t work.
              ______

              That’s why people say she should NOT have chosen another woman or a minority.
              The Bernie people who are not going to vote for her over Trump ( 85% say they plan to vote for Clinton in the general election) were unlikely to vote for her anyway.

              The DNC was doing nothing that parties don’t always do.
              Of course they were going to support the one who was a Democrat for decades over someone who only jumped on board to run in a national campaign.
              A lot of “little” people who worked hard at the county and state level resented that and felt the Bernie’s supporters looked down their noses at them and wanted to take over the party that they were too good to join before.

              Picking someone who does not represent the majority of voters and looks down on them also is not the way to win hearts and minds.

      • OldLefty July 25th, 2016 at 14:32

        Isn’t that more the other way around?
        I was pummeled for not despising Hillary and agonizing over my choice.
        Ask a Bernie supporter what their response is to, ‘What would you say if Bernie had won and there were Hillary supporters who showed such hostility to Bernie and said they would never vote for him.’

        I think many of them were never going to vote for a Democrat and the few who would turn against Bernie the moment he had to compromise.

        That is how we got 8 years of Reagan and 8 years of Bush and the Congress we have now.

        I consider myself a “liberal den’ and I can not imagine standing back and allowing the GOP to win just to punish the most vulnerable.
        Not now,
        Not in 1980.
        Not in 2000.
        Not in 2008.
        Not in 2010.
        Not in 2014.

        • Um Cara July 25th, 2016 at 21:46

          Isn’t that more the other way around?

          No, candidate Clinton needs to gain the support of enough folks for her to win the presidency. Liberals would be a pretty good target for her, seems like she should be courting us instead of telling us she doesn’t need us. BUT – as said before, it’s cool – she’s obviously a good politician, if she doesn’t think she needs us, she probably doesn’t. I don’t think she’s trying to lose to Trump.

          I was pummeled for not despising Hillary…

          It’s the interets, lots of folks w/ no social skills interacting and whatnot. Bernie supporters have also been pummeled for their choices. I think it sucks that people have attacked you.

          I consider myself a “liberal den’ and I can not imagine standing back and allowing the GOP to win just to punish the most vulnerable.

          Of course some liberal dems will support Hillary. Heck some Republicans are supporting her. All kinds of folks do all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons, I suppose. Not many things in real life are 100 percent. I’m sure there are even one or two folks out there who want to ‘stand back and allow the GOP to win just to punish the most vulnerable’ – but I doubt there are many.

          Folks are taking principled stands based on their conscious and information at hand. Some folks take a stand different from other folks they generally agree with. You sound like a more polite version of those rude Bernie folks you were talking about when you ascribe a desire to punish the most vulnerable as a primary motivation.

      • dewired4u July 25th, 2016 at 17:42

        Donald’s trolls are out today hot and heavy.

  10. Soothsayer123 July 25th, 2016 at 13:41

    We’re now dealing with a cult, not a political party. How do you fight back against the new-look GOP?

    Nate Silver now gives Trump nearly a 58% chance of winning, and Trump has yet to spend a DIME on campaign ads.

    Hillary cannot afford a SINGLE misstep this week. Having the BLM moms speak at the convention is a terrible idea. What does Trump have to do with them? All they will do is anger those independents who are pro-police.

    Instead, bring on all the people who’ve been ripped off by Trump and let them tell their stories. THAT will resonate with working stiffs and small-business owners

    • whatthe46 July 25th, 2016 at 13:46

      BLM is NOT anti-police. they are anti-police violence.

      • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 16:02

        Agreed…he’s talking perception…you could repeat that sentence all day long and not a single RWinger would listen past BLM…

    • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 13:59

      Not that it matters…
      As of 8am this morning Nate has it at 53,5% Clinton and 46.5% Trump ….
      http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

      I’ve never seen Trump on top of any general matchup 538 poll
      Agreed…BLM moms are a terrible idea…so was making a spot for DWS in the campaign.

      • Ned Nutley July 25th, 2016 at 14:55

        That’s the poll I follow.

    • dewired4u July 25th, 2016 at 17:40

      I was just there and he has Clinton winning 53% to 46% stop the BS.

    • BigD July 26th, 2016 at 09:45

      Yea, stop the BS.

  11. Mike July 25th, 2016 at 14:33

    Anyone who thought this wasn’t gonna be close has been kidding themselves.
    Trump will be strong in FL…maybe lose OH, but he’ll pick up NC and Nevada…
    The country is pretty polarized geographically speaking…this thing will be about electoral votes not popular votes…
    FL and OH will matter….

    • crc3 July 25th, 2016 at 18:39

      The electoral college needs to be removed from the voting process all together. Popular votes are what elections should be about!

  12. Ned Nutley July 25th, 2016 at 14:54

    Tell that to the 86% of Latino voters that aren’t voting
    republican this time and the more than 300,000 new
    Muslim Americans who have just registered to vote,
    the Don’s crusade to alienate evey single demographic
    except uneducated white fox watching males seems
    right on track.

    • Mike July 25th, 2016 at 15:29

      I agree with your numbers but have a bit of nuance to add…
      Those 300k Muslim’s are a block in 2 (blue) states and Latinos are concentrated (as a block) in just 5 states (3 blue) So I’m not sure you’re gonna see any real change in the electoral map.
      Hispanics should be the dominant voting block in Texas but the R’s have done a great job at suppressing the vote … If dems concentrated on registering and educating (Spanish language media) Hispanics, Texas could be blue by the next cycle.

      • BigD July 26th, 2016 at 09:43

        They could be the tipping point for a Hillary win in those states. Michigan is not being listed as deep blue. We have never gone for a repub since Pappy Bush. We have a lot of Muslims in the state. Many were for Bernie, but they are backing Hillary now. The thought of a fascist being president is very scary to me.

  13. arc99 July 25th, 2016 at 16:43

    Several articles analyzing these latest polls point out that Mitt Romney enjoyed a similar bounce and lead at this point in campaign 2012.

    At this point, I will take any good news I can get.

    This graphic is not a meme or a photo-shop job. it comes from the Twitter feed of journalist Ben White. As near as I can tell, it is authentic. Still, to think that Trump can be as competitive as Mitt Romney is more than a little distressing

  14. StoneyCurtisll July 25th, 2016 at 18:23

    Cruz talks Trump…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLkbx5U7EVU

  15. crc3 July 25th, 2016 at 18:36

    It also looks very likely that Russia is bidding for a Trump election. Putin and Trump have a real love affair…

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/25/fbi-suspects-russia-hacked-dnc-u-s-officials-say-it-was-to-elect-donald-trump.html

  16. Obewon July 25th, 2016 at 20:22

    Bernie Supporters aren’t taking the Putin / Trump bait.
    Right leaning Pew: 90% of Bernie Sanders supporters are voting for Hillary in General Election! https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/the-democratic-convention-is-chaotic-the-democratic-base-isnt/

  17. arc99 July 25th, 2016 at 22:20

    Time for a reality check. I am the last person looking to engage in false optimism.

    But the states that have gone Democratic in every election since 1992 provide a total of 242 electoral college votes. A candidate needs 270 EC votes to win the Presidency.

    Looking at the list of those states below, the question is whether Trump will be able to win any of them. If he cannot, then all Hillary has to do is to add Florida with its 29 EC votes.

    Or she could lose Florida, but win Ohio with 18 and Virginia with 13 (hello Tim Kaine) and she takes the election.

    Regardless of the polls, the objective is crystal clear. Hold the so-called “blue wall” as listed here, win Florida and uncork the champagne.

    To be sure, Trump has been full of surprises as far as his success. But honestly, do you see him winning any of these states?

    California
    Connecticut
    DC
    Delaware
    Hawaii
    Illinois
    Maine
    Maryland
    Massachusetts
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    New Jersey
    New York
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Rhode Island
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin

    • BigD July 26th, 2016 at 09:39

      But the media wants a horse race so they use national polls to make it so.

  18. BigD July 26th, 2016 at 09:37

    We don’t vote nationally. We vote state by state.

Leave a Reply