Tuesday, October 30, 2024
By Steven L. Taylor

To follow up on the previous post:

Via here, we note that 49% is pretty good in terms of recent history, so again, the fact that Hillary is consistently polling in the4 46%-49% shouldn’t be construed as an obvious negative, especially at this stage of the game:

Popular Vote Winners, by Percentage, 1960-2004

2004: 53.16%
2000: (pop vote): 48.48%
1996: 49.95%
1992: 43.28%
1988: 53.89%
1984: 59.17%
1980: 51.59%
1976: 55.20%
1972: 60.91%
1968: 43.31%
1964: 61.20%
1960: 50.05%

Now, granted, all of the bolded dates had a significant (to varying degrees) third party candidates to siphon votes from one (or both) candidates. Still, at a minimum the notion that Hillary, sans an actual general election campaign, cannot possibly find a few percentage points, is wishful thinking. Certainly is it rather early to be pronouncing sureties about the numbers.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (5)|
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.

5 Responses to “Putting the 46%-49% Range into Historical Context”

  • el
  • pt
    1. Max Lybbert Says:

      What’s interesting isn’t that 49% of those polled support her; but that so many registered and likely voters absolutely can’t stand her. It’s not a case of 51% of the country being undecided and potentially willing to vote for her.

    2. Dr. Steven Taylor Says:

      True: the argument is that high negatives are hard to overcome. All well and good, but the notion that it would be impossible to budge some of those folks is not well founded. Further, even if that it is the case, there is no guarantee that the 51% will all vote Republican. Additionally, as I noted in the previous post, the issue of whether these voters are concentrated in Red states anyway is also of issue.

    3. Max Lybbert Says:

      True as well. The other issue is whether the 49% will vote. But it does seem odd for a political party to nominate somebody knowing that she will only ever be able to get 49% of the vote.

      Talk about Rovian politics, …

    4. Dr. Steven Taylor Says:

      Part of my point is that I am unconvinced that she has an impenetrable 49% ceiling.

    5. R. Alex Says:

      I agree that it’s absurd that Clinton can’t bust the 50% ceiling. I also agree that the issue is not her positives but her negatives.

      We also don’t know who the Republican nominee will be. Whomever it is, they are likely to be viewed more unfavorably by some of the same people that view Hillary unfavorably. Enough to push her over, likely.

      She is the most likely next president of the United States, but nonetheless it might make for a closer race than some hope/fear.

    blog advertising is good for you

    Visitors Since 2/15/03

    Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics



    Powered by WordPress