Trump leads Clinton in new Rasmussen Poll

[4chs]

Trump leads Clinton by two points in Rasmussen poll

[theguru]

From the link:

 

Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton by 2 points in a head-to-head matchup, according to a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey.

 

Trump gets 41 percent to Clinton's 39 percent in the new poll.

 

This poll differs from recent polling, which all show Clinton holding a lead over the Republican front-runner. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, Clinton has a 7.3 point lead over Trump, 47.4 to 40.1 percent.

 

Just last week, Clinton and Trump tied in another Rasmussen poll in which each won 38 percent. In that survey, voters were also allowed to answer that they would stay home and not vote for either candidate.

[Pioneer.Pride]

Hillary is in for a rude awakening. And yes, that does have multiple meanings.

[Jesse James]

I want to hear all the no way Trump wins supporters comments on this. You know who you are. If not when this election is over I have screenshots. :sssh:

 

The reality is this. There are alot of people going to pull the lever for Trump in the privacy of the voting booth who would never admit it.

 

There will need to be counselors on hand here at BGP if Trump wins for the meltdowns.

[2 Humped Camel]

The fact that so many people on this board and KY in general think that Trump has a shot at winning, is the best case study of cultural isolationism I have ever seen.

[Jesse James]

The fact that so many people on this board and KY in general think that Trump has a shot at winning, is the best case study of cultural isolationism I have ever seen.

 

Is this poll a Kentucky poll only?

[Twotoplace]

The most accurate presidential poll in 2012 was IBD/TIPP. It was only off 0.9 percent. Rasmussen, by comparison, was off 4.5 percent in 2012 and ranked near the bottom in accuracy. Most current (4/29) IBD/TIPP poll has Clinton beating Trump nationwide 47-40.

[Jesse James]

The most accurate presidential poll in 2012 was IBD/TIPP. It was only off 0.9 percent. Rasmussen, by comparison, was off 4.5 percent in 2012 and ranked near the bottom in accuracy. Most current (4/29) IBD/TIPP poll has Clinton beating Trump nationwide 47-40.

 

So this poll is bogus?

[Twotoplace]

So this poll is bogus?

Rasmussen either has an unintentional Republican bias or has not improved its polling methods from '12. (I believe it was the only major poll in '12 that utilized the Internet.) Before you start hollering, IBD/TIPP also had a slight R bias in '12 as well.

 

If you want to hang your hat on something solid, consult the RealClearPolitics average of polls. Probably a little premature to start thumping your chest over what appears to be an outlier poll.

[rjs4470]

So this poll is bogus?

 

Not bogus. Just traditionally, not the most accurate. That being said, I'm no longer convinced that HRC wins convincingly come November. Her baggage isn't going to help, but the problem I see is she, for whatever reason, just seems really disingenuous. The more I see her, the more it seems to me like she's going through the motions, and her shrill tone when speaking really makes her hard to watch. Couple that with the obvious charisma (maybe charisma isn't the right word, but people seem to want to watch and listen to him) that Trump has, and I see the possibility of a close election.

 

Obviously, there is still time for things to change. If you assume that Trump is not real threat, I'd say at this point, you're likely mistaken.

[Jesse James]

Not thumping my chest, I am not a huge Trump supporter( just kinda been forced there as my others have long since dropped out). I was just asking if you thought this poll was bogus.

 

But I will vote for whoever is the Republican candidate over anyone the Dems run.

[NKY Bandit]

Polls mean very little right now. Most of us are still deciding which of the two evils to choose.

[Jesse James]

Not bogus. Just traditionally, not the most accurate. That being said, I'm no longer convinced that HRC wins convincingly come November. Her baggage isn't going to help, but the problem I see is she, for whatever reason, just seems really disingenuous. The more I see her, the more it seems to me like she's going through the motions, and her shrill tone when speaking really makes her hard to watch. Couple that with the obvious charisma (maybe charisma isn't the right word, but people seem to want to watch and listen to him) that Trump has, and I see the possibility of a close election.

 

Obviously, there is still time for things to change. If you assume that Trump is a real threat, I'd say at this point, you're likely mistaken.

 

I say he is a big threat. How much popular vote and delegates does Trump have? What does the polls say? A year ago he was 0 threat. Much has changed. Hillary vote totals are less than 2008. Trumps are record breaking. To say Trump is no threat is to ignore the signs.

 

Are you hanging your hat on a contested convention?

[4chs]

Rasmussen either has an unintentional Republican bias or has not improved its polling methods from '12. (I believe it was the only major poll in '12 that utilized the Internet.) Before you start hollering, IBD/TIPP also had a slight R bias in '12 as well.

 

If you want to hang your hat on something solid, consult the RealClearPolitics average of polls. Probably a little premature to start thumping your chest over what appears to be an outlier poll.

 

The IPD Poll was actually graded as having a left leaning bias in 2012.

 

Two left-leaning Democratic pollsters top the list: Public Policy Polling, which nailed the election prediction if Florida goes for Obama, and the Daily Kos/SEIU/PPP poll, a weekly tracking poll.

[rjs4470]

I say he is a big threat. How much popular vote and delegates does Trump have? What does the polls say? A year ago he was 0 threat. Much has changed. Hillary vote totals are less than 2008. Trumps are record breaking. To say Trump is no threat is to ignore the signs.

 

Are you hanging your hat on a contested convention?

 

Sorry...meant to say "if you think he's not a threat, you'd be mistaken. I've edited the post to reflect what I meant to say. I do think the rest of my post is pretty clear....I've got concerns about HRC's electability.