National—CNN/ORC–Trump 47, Cruz 31, Kasich 17
National—CNN/ORC–Clinton 51, Sanders 44
National—CBS News/NY Times–Trump 46, Cruz 26, Kasich 20
National—CBS News/NY Times–Clinton 50, Sanders 45
National—NBC News/Survey Monkey–Trump 45, Cruz 24, Kasich 16
National—NBC News/Survey Monkey–Clinton 53, Sanders 41
Utah—Deseret News/KSL–Cruz 42, Trump 21, Kasich 13
Utah—Deseret News/KSL–Sanders 52, Clinton 44
Arizona—FOX 10/Opinion Savvy–Trump 46, Cruz 33, Kasich 17
National—CNN/ORC–Clinton 53, Trump 41 | Sanders 58, Trump 38
National—CBS News/NY Times–Clinton 50, Trump 40 | Sanders 53, Trump 38
That new New York Times/CBS News poll finds that broad majorities of Republican primary voters view their party as divided and a source of embarrassment and think that the campaign is more negative than in the past.
“The dismay has not set back their leading candidate, however. While about four in 10 Republican voters disapprove of how Donald Trump has handled the violence at some of his rallies, Mr. Trump has also picked up the most support recently as several rivals have left the race. Forty-six percent of primary voters said they would like to see Mr. Trump as the party’s nominee, more than at any point since he declared his candidacy in June.”
Meanwhile, Susan Page and Jenny Ung provide results from a USA Today/Rock the Vote poll of voters under 35 years of age which demonstrates that nothing will inspire the youth vote quite like having Donald Trump as the Republican nominee.
In a hypothetical Clinton v. Trump contest in November, voters under 35 would choose Clinton by a crushing 52%-19%, a preference that crosses demographic lines. Among whites, she’d be backed by nearly 2-1, 45%-26%. Among Hispanics, by more than 4-1, 61%-14%. Among Asian Americans, by 5-1, 60%-11%. Among African Americans, by 13-1, 67%-5%.
And the yawning gender gap she has against Sanders would vanish: Clinton would carry young men and women by almost identical margins of more than 2-1.
Nearly one in four Republicans would defect to the Democrats if the GOP nominated Trump against Clinton. Just 7% of Democrats would defect to the GOP.
Majority of Americans support restoring U.S.-Cuba ties, new @CBSNews/@nytimes poll shows https://t.co/pFm9AL8rk5 pic.twitter.com/lyWEdWsBlq
— CBS News (@CBSNews) March 21, 2016
Greg Sargent says Donald Trump almost certainly will never be elected President.
With Donald Trump steamrolling towards the GOP nomination, the political chatter is increasingly focused on whether Trump could win a general election by making surprise inroads into states in the industrial Midwest. Many Democrats and nonpartisan observers see this as probably the only plausible (if that’s even the right word for it) path for Trump, who might do this mainly by running up huge numbers among white voters — particularly blue collar whites.
But a new examination of the demographics and projected voting patterns in some of the key Rust Belt states underscores just how unlikely this really is. To succeed, this analysis finds, Trump would likely have to improve on Mitt Romney’s advantage over Barack Obama among blue collar whites by double digit margins, which is an astronomically high bar — in almost all of these states.
Demographer Ruy Teixeira conducted this analysis at my request. Teixeira was the lead analyst on a comprehensive report on the projected makeup of the 2016 electorate that was released by the Center for American Progress late last year. He built on that report in this new analysis. […]
— In Michigan, where Romney beat Obama by 53-45 among working class whites, Trump would have to win among them by 62-36, an improvement of 18 points.
— In Wisconsin, where Romney beat Obama by 50-48 among working class whites, Trump would have to win among them by 56-42, an improvement of 12 points.
— In Pennsylvania, where Romney beat Obama by 56-42 among working class whites, Trump would have to win among them by 63-36, an improvement of 13 points.
— In Ohio, where Romney beat Obama by 57-41 among working class whites, Trump would have to win among them by 60-38, an improvement of six points. (This is lower than the others because Ohio was much closer overall; but even six points is a pretty sizable improvement.)[…]
“It seems very unlikely that Trump can do so much better than Romney among whites and particularly working class whites in these states,” Teixeira tells me. “The swings are just too big.”
Now, Trump backers might argue that he will also drive up turnout among white voters relative to nonwhites, meaning he would not have to win among them by these margins to prevail. But here is where a demographic trap intrudes: All of things that Trump might say and do to drive up white turnout — particularly working class white turnout — would also likely drive up nonwhite turnout. So there’s no reason to expect a major boost in turnout from one group and not the other, Teixeira says.
“I don’t think he can produce a tsunami of white turnout in these states without provoking an answering surge in minority turnout,” says Teixeira, who has a lot more comprehensive demographic analysis at his Election Oracle page. “The fact of the matter is that his path in the Midwest/Rustbelt is very, very difficult no matter how you look at it.”
Click here for pictures from Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Adviser to the President, of the President’s historic trip to Cuba.
First Read: “Accept Trump — who is trailing Hillary Clinton by double digits in hypothetical general-election matchups, who could possibly put the House in play for Democrats, and who could fundamentally transform the Republican Party as we know it. Or reject Trump — whose delegate lead is likely to increase after this week’s contests, whose alternative is Ted Cruz, and whose supporters will likely abandon the GOP in the fall if Trump is not the nominee.”
FiveThirtyEight on whether Trump will clinch before the convention: “The Republican race for the presidential nomination is down to just one man and one number: Donald Trump and 1,237 — the number of delegates required to clinch the nomination. Can Trump win 1,237 delegates by the end of the primary season on June 7? Will he be forced to plunder among the more than 100 unbound or currently uncommitted delegates who will make the trip to Cleveland in order to win on a first ballot at the Republican National Convention? Or are we all but assured of a multi-ballot convention?”
“Any pundit giving confident answers to these questions is full of it, so FiveThirtyEight surveyed some of the best delegate obsessives and political experts we know on how many delegates they expect Trump to win in the remaining contests. Trump has 695 delegates now, and, on average, our respondents estimate he will still be just a little bit short of 1,237 on June 7, when California wraps up the primary calendar. He might be close enough, though, that he could clinch the nomination in the six weeks between California and Cleveland.”
Rick Klein says Republicans are in disarray: “The thing about the plan is, there is no plan. More than halfway through the voting, with Donald Trump far and away the delegate leaders – and therefore the GOP frontrunner, and it’s not even close – the anyone-but-Trump forces are as scattered and uncertain as ever. There’s no consensus alternative, not with Ted Cruz and John Kasich both still running (and both touting support they got from the party’s most recent nominee, inside the last week). There’s no consensus on the third-party route – neither on whether to do it nor whom to do it with. There’s no firm sense that any of the tens of millions in anti-Trump spending has had its desired effect, or that future spending can hope to be successful, either.”
“So it is that as Trump comes to Washington Monday to court the establishment, the establishment (such as it is) can agree on only one, longshot-in-itself, goal for stopping Trump: denying him a majority of convention delegates. Even that is undercut by the growing list of elected officials and party regulars boarding the Trump train. Trump’s been advising the GOP to embrace, rather than fight, the energy he’s brought to the party. That advice will sound more tempting the closer Trump gets to his magic number.”
Today we have a caucuses on both sides in Utah, a Democratic caucus in Idaho and a primary on both sides in Arizona. The last poll out of Utah showed Sanders leading Clinton 52-44, and the last poll out of Arizona showed Hillary leading Sanders 50-24. There has been no polling out of Idaho, but we should expect it to go to Sanders.
In terms of Delegates, we can probably expect a night where Clinton ends up padding her delegate lead yet again even though Sanders will win more contests, simply because Arizona has 85 pledged delegates at stake, while Idaho only has 27 and Utah has 37. So if Hillary gets 40% or so in both Idaho and Utah and then wins Arizona by 70-30, she will earn more delegates proportionally.
Here is the upcoming schedule (all are primaries unless otherwise noted):
MARCH 26–Alaska Democratic Caucus, Hawaii Democratic Caucus, Washington State Democratic Caucus
APRIL 5–Wisconsin
APRIL 9–Wyoming Democratic Caucus
APRIL 19–New York
APRIL 26–Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island
MAY 3–Indiana
MAY 7–Guam Democratic Caucus
MAY 10–Nebraska Republican Primary, West Virginia
MAY 17–Kentucky Democratic Primary, Oregon
MAY 24–Washington State Republican Primary
JUNE 4–Virgin Islands Democratic Caucus
JUNE 5–Puerto Rico Democratic Caucus
JUNE 7–California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota Democratic Caucus, South Dakota
JUNE 14–District of Columbia Democratic Primary
My expectations:
Clinton wins: Hawaii, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryalnd, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Indiana, Guam, Kentucky, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, California, New Jersey, New Mexico, DC
Sanders: Alaska, Washington State, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota
Jonathan Chait’s The Possibilities of Obama’s Last Lap is worth a read. Here is an interesting point Chait made in it:
Obama hasn’t so much moved from the center to the left as he has moved the center to the left, redefining it in the process.
Donald Trump met with the Washington Post editorial board yesterday and towards the end of the discussion was asked “would you use a battlefield nuclear weapon to take out ISIS?”
TRUMP: I don’t want to use, I don’t want to start the process of nuclear. Remember the one thing that everybody has said, I’m a counterpuncher. Rubio hit me. Bush hit me. When I said low energy, he’s a low-energy individual, he hit me first. I spent, by the way he spent 18 million dollars’ worth of negative ads on me. That’s putting [MUFFLED]…
RYAN: This is about ISIS. You would not use a tactical nuclear weapon against ISIS?
[CROSSTALK]
TRUMP: I’ll tell you one thing, this is a very good looking group of people here. Could I just go around so I know who the hell I’m talking to?
This is disqualifying.