NY Times/CBS Poll Hillary 40% Trump 40%

[TeddyR]

"Poll Finds Emails Weighing on Hillary Clinton, Now Tied With Donald Trump"

Hillary Clinton has emerged from the F.B.I. investigation into her email practices as secretary of state a wounded candidate with a large and growing majority of voters saying she cannot be trusted, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

As Mrs. Clinton prepares to accept the Democratic Party’s nomination at the convention in Philadelphia this month, she will confront an electorate in which 67 percent of voters say she is not honest and trustworthy. That number is up five percentage points from a CBS News poll conducted last month, before the F.B.I. released its findings.

Mrs. Clinton’s six-percentage-point lead over the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, in a CBS News poll last month has evaporated. The two candidates are now tied in a general election matchup, the new poll indicates, with each receiving the support of 40 percent of voters.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-poll.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

I still think Hillary has a slight lead nationally but the polls show a tightening race. The debates will be crucial, as will the get out the vote. If Dems turn out Hillary will win.

[Doodley]

1. Worse, Trump opens up 7 point lead with Rasmussen.

[link:http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch|

[TeddyR]

3. And then there's this one

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-07-14/hillary-clinton-leads-donald-trump-in-massive-new-poll-losing-ohio-but-winning-white-house

Which shows Hillary getting 320 electoral votes but Trump leads by a point in Ohio and Hillary by a point or less in Iowa, Pennsylvania, Florida and New Hampshire. These close states should be where Hillary's ground game/get out the vote efforts make a difference.

[spanone]

81. rasmussen is comedy gold

[LynneSin]

87. You mean the right-wing polling site?

Rasmussen is bullshit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Evaluations_of_accuracy_and_performance

n 2010, Nate Silver of The New York Times’ blog FiveThirtyEight wrote the article “Is Rasmussen Reports biased?”, in which he mostly defended Rasmussen from allegations of bias.[73] However, later in the year, Rasmussen's polling results diverged notably from other mainstream pollsters, which Silver labeled a "house effect."[74] He went on to explore other factors which may have explained the effect such as the use of a likely voter model,[75] and claimed that Rasmussen conducted its polls in a way that excluded the majority of the population from answering.[76] Silver also criticized Rasmussen for often only polling races months before the election, which prevented them from having polls just before the election that could be assessed for accuracy. He wrote that he was “looking at appropriate ways to punish pollsters” like Rasmussen in his pollster rating models who don’t poll in the final days before an election.[77] In June 2012, Silver wrote that "Rasmussen Reports, which has had Republican-leaning results in the past, does so again this year. However, the tendency is not very strong – a Republican lean of about 1.3 points." Silver ranked Rasmussen Reports as having the third lowest house effect of the 12 polling firms that Silver analyzed.[78]

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model.[64] He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin[79] – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998."[64] Silver was criticized for his 2010 pollster ratings. Conservative polling analyst Neil Stevens wrote, "after the primaries [Silver] said Rasmussen was in his crosshairs for ducking out on a number of races by not polling primaries. According to Silver’s own chart though, Rasmussen polled twice as often as the second place firm, and is still Silver’s primary target", and "Silver can’t even keep consistent his reasons for hating Rasmussen Reports."[80] Mark Blumenthal, publisher of Pollster.com, wrote that Silver's methodology, in which he awards bonus points to pollsters based on their membership in the National Council on Public Polls and their endorsement of the American Association for Public Opinion Research Transparency Initiative, "appear[s] to significantly and dramatically alter rankings prominently promoted as "pollster ratings," ratings that are already having an impact on the reputations and livelihoods of individual pollsters. That's a problem." Blumenthal noted, "My bottom line: These sort of pollster ratings and rankings are interesting, but they are of very limited utility in sorting out "good" pollsters from "bad."[81]

The website Electoral-Vote.com offers "Rasmussen-free maps", with a note headed "Note about Rasmussen: Rasmussen and Bias", mainly based on Nate Silver's criticisms.[82]

[oswaldactedalone]

2. Say Hello to

President Trump. I hope Hillary emails us her regrets for handling that situation so badly. Take home lesson is: Political witch hunts are good. Dems. should try some.

[tonyt53]

5. Dems just need to show up to vote in November.

[Marr]

8. Hillary needs to inspire them to do so.

If Hillary loses, it will be the fault of the Hillary campaign, not Democratic voters.

[Adrahil]

12. What?

Nonsense. If Democratic voters don;t know what's at stake, that's on THEM.

FFS, Trump is a psychopath. That should "inspire" anyone to vote.

[ehrnst]

15. Yes - blaming "lack of inspiration" as a reason to let Trump get elected

is really reaching for it.

[Marr]

52. Blaming the customer for not buying your product is asinine. /nt

[treestar]

62. It's not a product

It is not buying a product. That is a bad analogy. We have the right to vote and not exercising it is in no way to our advantage.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

33. forget the democratic voters. That is a small segment of the population.

(and growing smaller, just as the GOP is. Non-party affiliation is the only segment that is growing)

The problem is indies (who should and may already fear trump) do not trust her. One least offensive option in their minds would be not to vote, in their minds. That is not their failure, that is the failure of a campaign to attract and convince them.

I have warned folks here before that Hillary has an image problem. It has only gotten worse, thanks to her stupid decisions as SecState and cemented into the national psyche by Comey. Unfortunately for this nation, her campaign continues to be plodding, tone deaf, and uninspiring. That's not me talking. That is what I am hearing from others. What constitutes careful, don't rock the boat campaigning by her is viewed (especially in comparison with the Great Orange Wigmaster) as plodding. When you add a majority of Americans who do not trust her to the mix, it is a fact that her campaign has a problem.

No, it is not on the Democratic voters who may not like or support her. It is HER job as the candidate to sell her campaign. Frankly, she is not doing a very good job of it. And that has me worried. The idea of President Trump should scare everyone.

[Adrahil]

43. I dunno..... Trump is a fascist and all.....

he's a racist and a misogynist, and has no actual policy plans, but.... I dunno.... Hillary doesn't INSPIRE me. I can;t trust her. She might not be as progressive as I want.



Anyone who can breathe should be able to tell that she is a million times better than Trump.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

51. and how does an apolitical critter, with no party affiliation,

no interest in politics, and more concerned with making ends meet, kids' health and education, job insecurity, and a sense that violence is exploding in this country be convinced of that?

That is the majority of voters today, not Ds, not Rs, not libertarians or Tea Baggers, nor socialists or fascists. Her problem is she is NOT connecting with them. I think today's polls should be sending shivers down her campaign staff's collective spines.

[ehrnst]

67. And its the job of actual voters to vote. If you don't vote, no amount of 'inspiration"

will keep the GOP out of office.

[AgingAmerican]

100. And without inspiration they stay home

[Marr]

59. "Nonsense"? All I can say is I really hope that's not the attitude inside the Clinton campaign.

Because it's a recipe for disaster.

You can't just begin with the assumption that everyone is terrified of Donald of Trump, and will vote for your candidate for that reason alone. Yes, Clinton has to inspire voters to actually come out and vote for her. Is this really such a shockingly offensive concept now?

[ehrnst]

68. What's offensive is the idea that she has to be a rock star.

She's a wonk. Experience, competence and the ability to get the respect of her peers and work with them may not be the most compelling bumper sticker, but it will work in the Oval Office.

[Marr]

69. It's offensive that Hillary should be expected to convince voters to vote for her?

I said nothing about being a rock star. But if she wants to win the presidency, she's going to have to convince the voters to vote for her. If she loses, it will be because she did not manage to do so. Blaming the voters accomplishes nothing.

[Andy823]

80. Are you convinced?

If not what would she have to do to convince you?

[ehrnst]

85. I didn't say that.

However, it's been made clear that many of those in the party that did not support her in the primaries took her winning as a personal affront, and they have no intention of listening to her, or will tolerate any mention of her in a positive light.

That said, what would it take to convince you, since you brought it up?

[Marr]

95. Oh brother, is that where all this pushback is coming from?

Are you really all assuming that I'm some evil 'Bernie or Bust BernieBro' or whatever they were called, because I had the temerity to suggest that Clinton needs to actually appeal to voters in this political campaign?

Look, I don't generally do loyalty oaths, but in the interest of heading off paranoia, I'm a Democrat and I'll vote for the nominee. But I'm only one person. There's a whole country full of people that Clinton needs to convince to vote for her. And if she cannot do it, it will be the fault of her campaign, not the voters.

[ehrnst]

98. I think that you are misrepresenting what I wrote. (nt)

[Marr]

101. There's a definite undertone that's run through many of these

responses-- not just yours.

At first I was a bit confused as to why I was getting so much argument on a point as simple as 'Hillary needs to inspire voters', but those last two posts brought it into focus.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

94. She also has to be electable. And that means

SHE has to appeal to voters. The presidency is not handed to you on a platter.

[ehrnst]

13. All it takes to get Republicans to the polls is rage

If those who require "inspiration" to bother to vote would have just sucked it up in 2010 after being "uninspired" by Obama, the republicans wouldn't have taken the House.

I would certainly hope those people have learned a lesson.

[puffy socks]

30. It seems too many didnt learn

a thing which is why they are threatening to vote green or write in Bernie
They continue to tell us that their votes dont matter, or that they need inspired. Petty fools who apparently think a trump presidency won't hurt them in the least and couldn't care less about the most vulnerable people in America, as they profess.
They claim to their consciences won't let them vote Hillary, but if they truly had any conscience they wouldn't need a nano second to decide to vote for Hillary. If they had a conscience they wouldnt be constantly lying about Hillary.

[Exilednight]

49. Here's the real problem:

For the first time in the history of our nation we are being told that the next generation will be financially worse off than the previous generation.

This is regardless of who wins office.

Neither candidate has a plan to fix that, but one has the rhetoric of saying they will.

You said that people feel like they won't be hurt by a Trump presidency: and in reality they feel how much worse can it get?

Grads are coming out of college and finding jobs, but aren't finding jobs they have a future. Just a quick example, my nephew and niece both just graduated with degrees in engineering, but one works at Target and the other works for Grainger pulling orders.

Until there is a president the hat implements a systemic economic shift to change direction, then you can't really blame them.

[ehrnst]

63. Economics is a part of the problem

But tell someone in the Black Lives Matter movement that they just need to wait until we turn Capitalism around, and then their concerns will be at the front of the platform of the Democratic candidate.

Ditto women, immigrants, LGBTQs, Hispanics.

Europe has shown us clearly that even with universal health care and good wages, sexism, racism, xenophobia and homophobia are still endemic.

We need someone who understands that the strength of the Democratic party has always been its diverse coalition of groups, not walking lockstep behind one agenda.

Unless a candidate is capable of carrying out the steady gains of the Obama administration, and doesn't simply tout that economics is the one issue that unites us, you can't fault Democrats for choosing someone who can address the very very real problems of the rest of the party.

[Exilednight]

82. It's funny you bring up BLM

I was sent to Chicago and Houston to meet with BLM representatives to see if they should be brought in for shaping policy in race relations. My verdict was no.

I was expecting to meet with people from lower income to lower middle class, and a few in their 30s or older. Instead I met with well off 20 somethings who think they know something about being poor and growing up in broken homes with shootings and drug dealers on the corners.

Everytime I asked what their possible proposals are to fix any given situation they just looked at me with blank stares and then accused me of being part of the problem.

Prime example:

Me: What's THE most important problem facing your community?

BLM Rep: The number of African-Americans being killed on the daily basis.

Me: What program can be put in place to help begin working on the issue?

BLM: (silence)

Me: Better outreach from the police? Maybe more foot patrols and police that are actually from your area?

BLM: That won't solve anything. Why did they send someone who isn't African-American? You don't understand what it is to be Black.

We can't expect a better outcome when the people complaining don't want to be part of the solution.

[ehrnst]

84. You often get that from well-off 20 somethings

As we have seen so clearly in this campaign.

I assume that you are judging the entire BLM movement based on this encounter you say you had with these individuals?

[Exilednight]

90. I met with two different groups. Five of us were sent to the

10 largest cities.

Every one of us came back with the same story. The only exception was NYC where community leaders were involved.

We each said the same thing, they're too young and too politically toxic to deal with. Look for help from more traditional organizations like the NAACP.

[ehrnst]

99. The founders are really amazing.

I think that BLM will last as a movement, rather than just remain a short protest, like Occupy Wall Street.

[puffy socks]

79. Actually

Ot is gen x who is the first generation to not be better off than their parents
They are also the generation who lost the most during the 08 crash

Having hard economic times doesnt mean you should throw your hands up and give up
So yes I blame those that threw in the towel and whine or decide they have the perfect candidate so its their way or the highway .
And Bernie has no plan to turn the entire economy around...so there's that.

[Exilednight]

91. I'm Gen X and I can't say that I did better than my father, but

That's not a fair comparison.

Every Gen-Xer I know is making more than their parents made by the same point in their life.

It's now assumed that millennials will make the same or less than their parents, but not more. The economy is pretty stagnant when it comes to wages.

My kid at 40 will be making less or the same as what I did at 40.

[Marr]

55. You just made my point, thanks.

When those moderates failed to show up in 2010, it had huge consequences. People need to be inspired to actually come out and vote. You can't just assume they'll show up.

[ehrnst]

64. It wasn't moderates who failed to show up.

It was the my way, or not at all far left who supported Obama.

If you don't think that voting is a civic responsibility, then why bother, no what the message?

[Marr]

70. Sorry, the data shows that it was moderates.

I realize that doesn't condemn your preferred whipping boy, but it's true. Moderates voted for Republicans or just didn't show up at all in 2010. Young voters also had much lower turnout.

The left of the party did show up. And more importantly (unlike their moderate brethren), they voted for Democrats.

[ehrnst]

86. I'd be interested to see that data.

Would you mind sharing?

[Marr]

89. Here.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/07/weekinreview/07marsh.html?_r=0

Democratic support from self-described 'Moderates' took a nosedive in 2010, and shot up for Republicans.

[ehrnst]

102. Thank you. I guess I had been looking at the extreme fall off of the youth vote

who are usually most left wing.

https://www.thenation.com/article/young-voter-turnout-fell-60-2008-2010-dems-wont-win-2012-if-trend-continues/

[NCTraveler]

23. I actually agree.

If Clinton wins or loses its on her.

I have a feeling that most of the people claiming the loss will be completely hers will then try to take all of the credit after she beats Trumps ass.

It's the way it works. Sanders loss is on he and his campaign. Clintons win was hers, though we do get to celebrate and rejoice with her. Trumps beating will be on Trump.

[Democat]

45. Stop bashing Clinton, the primary is over

Do you people ever stop?

[Marr]

50. Really? *That's* "bashing"?

The same is true of any politician. I would've thought my statement was so obvious that it was almost a tautology. If Hillary Clinton loses, she will have run a losing campaign.

Blaming the voters for political losses is a recipe for long term losing. You have to be prepared to recognize weaknesses in your own campaigning/platform/etc. Blaming the voters is just a means of walling off politicians from any criticism.

[krawhitham]

48. +1

One of the many season she needs to pick Warren

[ehrnst]

65. It's voters who will be at fault. Hillary gets to cast one vote.

It's not on her or Bernie or the DNC.

It's on us. It's called an election.

[Marr]

75. If you lose an election, you ran a losing campaign. Period.

Sanders ran a losing campaign, by definition. Whatever the particulars of your particular race were, whether it was a cakewalk or an uphill climb, if you lose the election, you ran a losing campaign.

Hillary has every conceivable advantage going into this thing. I'm convinced she'll win. But if she doesn't, it will be because she ran a losing campaign.

[ehrnst]

78. Bernie lost because voters did not vote for him in the numbers needed to win. (nt)

[uponit7771]

92. she is

[Doodley]

9. That is not very reassuring.

[ehrnst]

16. Yes they do. Yes they do. (nt)

[hollowdweller]

18. I think the dems WILL show up for Hillary

However a lot the independents, are almost all going to go to Trump.

Then among the Bernie supporters I know, and I'm one voting for Hillary, about 20% are not voting for her. Not voting for Trump either either third party or setting it out no matter how hard we argue with the abt the supreme court and stuff. These are the younger folks who don't remember Bush VS Gore.

[ehrnst]

66. Democrats who understand that it is a civic responsibility to vote

And not a concert where you want to be moved to get up and dance.

[Marr]

96. I hope the Clinton campaign is smarter than this.

You can't mock and harangue people into voting for a candidate.

[Democat]

44. You sound like a Republican

Not a Democrat.

[Cali_Democrat]

73. HAHAHA

[tonyt53]

4. Damn people, lay off all polls until Labor Day. Right now they mean nothing.

Trump will even have a convention bump, but it means jack shit. Hillary will have an even better convention bump, and that will be after the Trump bump has faded. Lay off the polls for a bit.

[Squinch]

24. Some people seem to live to show every crack in her armor. You are correct. The polls will

get worse through the R convention, and then they will get better for Hillary. And the Hillary haters on DU will ignore the upswing in Hillary support when it happens, as they will gleefully report on the downswing for the next couple of weeks.

[realmirage]

37. Sounds about right

[oswaldactedalone]

6. Hillary is allowing

Trump to define her as Crooked Hillary. When will she define Trump as Don the Con, or something similar. Difference is that Hillary won't say outrageous stuff on the stump but Trump will say anything. We've already seen the ineffectiveness of TV ads but her campaign will have to use them to define Trump and give him a label as devastatingly bad as Crooked Hillary has been to her. They better start soon.

[puffy socks]

32. The public is allowing Trump to

define her.
All it takes is some real research.
But people would rather be led around by the nose while they feel informed.

Hee supporters need to start being more involved in social media and start posting her bio and achievements, the facts about her emails all over.

[radical noodle]

42. She will have people like Elizabeth Warren to define him

The PACs are also working to define him in their ads. She needs to be presidential, and she has attacked him in numerous speeches in a more refined way.

[Mass]

7. There is plenty of time for polls to change again and again. Anyway, polls show anything from

Clinton up by 13 to Trump up by 7. This shows how meaningless they are... (Sure, one of them may be correct, but who knows which one).

May be it is time to take a deep breath.....

[MohRokTah]

10. Same poll, same time in July in 2012. Romney 45, Obama 43. eom

[Johonny]

28. The media loves a horse race

[realmirage]

38. Exactly. Every 4 years people forget how polling works

[MohRokTah]

56. The media MUST HAVE ITS HORSE RACE

And remember, the media sponsors these polls and the media creates the questions.

It's easy to get the results you want to make it look like a horse race.

[geek tragedy]

11. It was inevitable she was going to take a *polling* hit from the FBI thing.

That's just how the news cycle affects polling. Enough people call her a liar on the news, some weak supporters will lean back to undecided, and some undecided will lean to Trump.

Did it change the fundamentals of the race?

Doubtful.

Trump had his most advantageous news cycle all year, and he's still only at 40%.

20% undecided is unusually high.

[Yavin4]

14. Crap polls by the media designed to get the campaigns to spend money on ads.

You can configure any sample to show whatever results you want. For Hillary to be tied with Trump that would mean that Obama voters are crossing over to Trump, and I just don't see that happening.

[TeddyR]

19. Well, I'm not sure I agree that they have to be crossing over

They both are only at 40%, so that tells me that a lot of people are either staying home or voting third party.

[Yavin4]

21. So you load the sample with partisan voters and balance it so that it's even.

That's how you get 40% to 40%.

[KingCharlemagne]

77. Add to that an amazing stat: Trump has a 77% unfavorable rating with women! Jesus, I can't

believe it's even remotely close at this juncture.

[Yavin4]

83. Obama beat Romney by 4 points in 2012

For them to be tied that means that 4% of Obama's supporters have moved to Trump. I just don't trust this poll at all.

[demmiblue]

20. A sad state of affairs, indeed. n/t

[Squinch]

26. Do you disagree?

[realmirage]

39. She's who the people wanted, so yes, she's the strongest candidate

[Democat]

46. All of the anti-Clinton people are posting away in this thread

Hope to see some bannings soon.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

54. It is not being anti-Clinton to raise questions

and take note when the general public is not happy/does not trust/dislikes with the D nominee.

That is a fact, not some attack on her. The problem I see is two fold:

A. Some here believe raising unpleasant facts is treasonous and that we should shoot the messenger. That will leave you with no honest messengers.

B. Her campaign is misguided and misdirected. Taking out millions in TV ads has been shown to be incredibly ineffective, especially at this early stage. Sure she has millions more than Donald, sure she is spending it, and yes, she has active efforts in each state, whereas the Donald has no structure at all. She and her campaign staff have not yet addressed the elephant in the room, even one as horrible and orange hued as Trump. If she loses, it is on her and her campaign. Not voters who are not convinced by her.

[CrowCityDem]

22. Notice, Trump's support never goes up.

[realmirage]

40. Finally someone mentioned the real issue

Trump never gets over 40, or very rarely and only barely if ever. Hillary has hit 50. You don't win if you never get above 40

[uponit7771]

93. +1, he was already below the 40% floor in that one poll... he needs to be around 47% for this NOT to

... be a landslide election in the swing states.

[Squinch]

25. Hillary is smart right now to be laying low. We want Trump to be the opponent, and we don't want

to do anything now to convince the Republicans to replace him with some coup at the convention. These polls are fine. And the numbers on these polls will get worse for the next couple of weeks. Then, when Trump is confirmed as the candidate, and the DNC takes place, she and everyone who supports her are free to unload everything we have on him, and she will get her convention bump, and he will never recover.

[realmirage]

41. Nice post. She doesn't want to peak too soon

[mia]

27. Polls reflect views July 8th to 12th, so don't reflect the effect of Sanders' endorsement

Last edited Thu Jul 14, 2016, 12:06 PM - Edit history (1)

The next set of polls should show a better lead for Hillary.

[Democrats Ascendant]

36. Doubt it.

There will be no "Bernie Bump." Never was gonna be.

[Go Vols]

97. Yep

[andym]

29. FBI statement caused damage

that's why the House wants to keep the email server in the news. But if it fades out of the news, the Hillary's poll numbers will recover.

[flamingdem]

31. Hillary needs a veep attack dog

Warren would fit the bill

[davidn3600]

34. Pretty obvious Americans hate their choice

67% finds Hillary dishonest
62% finds Trump dishonest
20% undecided who to vote for

Ugly numbers....even if it is only July.

Whoever wins isn't going to have a honeymoon period.

[Democrats Ascendant]

35. Lol!

I'm paying attention to M$M right now when they need me most during summer doldrums when voters are on the beach and enjoying their bbqs

[Marr]

53. My god, catch your breath.

There's nothing in this thread that amounts to 'hate'. You seem incredibly anxious to see people banned.

As you yourself said, the primaries are over-- it's time to let go of the grudges.

[Democat]

57. My only DU grudge in the primaries was Democrat bashing

I got temporarily banned for fighting with both Clinton and Sanders haters who insisted on posting in the general forums. I come here to support Democrats not undermine them.

[Marr]

61. I come here for honest discussion.

I realize there are boundaries, considering the nature of the site and the fact that it's primary season, but I assume those boundaries are broad enough to allow for worthwhile exchanges.

Frank discussion isn't 'bashing'. One honest critique is worth a hundred pieces of fawning praise.

[kurt_cagle]

58. Factor in Polling Times, and Slow News Cycle

Hillary had a bad stretch between 1 July and about 10 July, then the house of cards began to collapse. The Q poll covered to the 11th, as were the news polls, but most of the change in fortune for her came in the last few days. Sanders endorsement is not factored in yet, the farce as Comey essentially backtracked from his somewhat dubious report rant is not factored in, and its the middle of July before either candidate has chosen a VP or held their respective conventions. This is the grand reset after the primaries, and everyone's recalibrating to the assumption that both candidates are "equivalent".

Prediction - the GOP convention will be a nightmare for them. They can't get speakers. They can't get testimonials. They've lost most of their sponsors. Best case scenario for them is a challenge on the floor, and they show Trump the door, but I don't think they dare. Worse case is that Trump speaks and comes off as the buffoon that he is, Newt Gingrich is dragged out of retirement as his Veep, and they get Clint Eastwood talking to an empty chair.

A final note - the recalibration is more than just a metaphor. While there have been a fair number of Clinton vs. Trump polls, they were largely hypothetical. This means that a lot of polls don't have much in the way of firm baseline data. Trendlines are important here, and the polls will be all over the place for a little while until they settle down after Labor Day.

[CrowCityDem]

60. It's also one poll, while others still show healthy leads, and Trump can't get it up (his numbers).

[iloveObama12]

71. This is some bullcrap!

[Atman]

72. Here we go again. Ratings aren't good unless it's a horse race.

Every election since Bush v. Gore has been a razor-thin margin you MUST WATCH every day! OMG! OMG! OMG!

You can't build any excitement around a candidate with a commanding lead.

[deaniac21]

74. There is no way

that Hillary will lose.

[chillfactor]

76. I am sick of ALL of the polls..

they conflict one another and no one has any idea what in the hell the spread really is!

[LynneSin]

88. This will be expected for the next 2 weeks until the DNC convention

Trump will get more news time and will show a bit of a peak in the polls at this time. With the RNC convention upon us this is the time of heaping praise and glory unto the nominee.

But since the Democrats have the White House then they have the 'Home Field Advantage' which means IF we have a great convention (meaning Bernie gives the endorsement of a lifetime speech), then Hillary will pretty much wipe out any of the love seen at the polls during the RNC convention time.

[mfcorey1]

103. I simply don't believe it! It's just another attempt for the pollsters and tv anchors to

justify keeping their jobs with the hype. Moving on. Nothing to believe here.