Polls look bad for Trump, good for Hil­lary (but re­mem­ber last time)

The Washington Times Weekly - - Kamala Harris’ Nosedive - BY JOSEPH CURL

Elec­tion Day 2020 is of­fi­cially less than a year away (by just a cou­ple days, but still). Things are chang­ing fast (or not, the elec­tion’s nearly a year away). But usu­ally by this time, there’s at least a real front-run­ner from the party that’s not in the White House. To­day, not so much.

For­mer Vice Pres­i­dent Joseph R. Bi­den, once the in­evitable nom­i­nee, is run­ning one of the worst cam­paigns in the his­tory of cam­paign­ing. He’s been over­taken by Sen. El­iz­a­beth “Poc­a­hon­tas” War­ren in a slew of prom­i­nent polls, in­clud­ing those in Iowa and New Hamp­shire, the first two states to cast bal­lots in the pri­mary sea­son. Sen. Bernard San­ders, de­spite a heart at­tack and the fact he’ll be 103 when he moves into the White House if elected, is not far be­hind.

Then there’s the ele­phant in the room, the one in the muumuu.

A new poll re­leased last week by the con­ser­va­tive ca­ble chan­nel Fox News shows 2016 Demo­cratic pres­i­den­tial nom­i­nee Hil­lary Clin­ton run­ning ahead of Pres­i­dent Trump. Re­ally.

Con­ducted Oct. 27-30, the sur­vey found Mrs. Clin­ton up 43% to 41% in a hy­po­thet­i­cal race against Mr. Trump, who also runs be­hind Mr. Bi­den by 51-39, Ms. War­ren 46-41 and Mr. San­ders 49-41.

The two-time loser has most def­i­nitely been keep­ing the door open for a 2020 race. With Mr. Bi­den plung­ing and Ms. War­ren and Mr. San­ders hav­ing hit a ceil­ing, a late Clin­ton en­trance is all the more con­ceiv­able. Were she to jump into the race — even at this late date — Mrs. Clin­ton would likely pull in $100 mil­lion within weeks and quickly be com­pet­i­tive. Plus, hav­ing run in 2016, she could likely build a na­tional cam­paign in short or­der (she doesn’t have the same namere­cog­ni­tion prob­lem as that mayor from South Bend, In­di­ana … what’s his name).

But there was more bad news for Mr. Trump in all the polls.

A sur­vey con­ducted by The New

York Times and Siena Col­lege, also re­leased last week, showed Mr. Bi­den beat­ing Mr. Trump in four of the six bat­tle­ground states that the pres­i­dent won in 2016. Mr. Bi­den has a 5-point lead on Mr. Trump in Ari­zona, is up 3 points in Penn­syl­va­nia, and leads by two in Wis­con­sin and Florida. The pair are dead even in Michi­gan, while Mr. Trump leads in North Carolina by 2 points.

Mr. Trump ver­sus the other two top-tier can­di­dates show the pres­i­dent in bet­ter shape. While Mr. San­ders leads Mr. Trump by 3 points in Michi­gan, the Ver­mont so­cial­ist trails by 1 to 4 points in Penn­syl­va­nia, Florida, Ari­zona, and North Carolina. The two were even in Wis­con­sin. Mean­while, Ms. War­ren trailed Mr. Trump by 2 to 4 points in Michi­gan, Penn­syl­va­nia, Wis­con­sin, Florida, and North Carolina and the pair are even in Ari­zona.

In another poll, this one by Har­vardHar­ris, Mrs. Clin­ton and Mr. Bi­den are vir­tu­ally tied for the Demo­cratic pres­i­den­tial nom­i­na­tion — if, that is, the for­mer sec­re­tary of state runs. In the poll, Mrs. Clin­ton would get 18% of the vote if she en­ters and Mr. Bi­den would get 19%. Without her in the race, Mr. Bi­den draws 33% of sup­port from reg­is­tered Democrats.

Mrs. Clin­ton never re­ally went away and has been drop­ping hints. “It truly is re­mark­able how ob­sessed he re­mains with me,” the ob­sess­ing Mrs. Clin­ton said of Mr. Trump last month on PBS’ “NewsHour.”

Then she said, “Maybe there does need to be a re­match.”

“Ob­vi­ously, I can beat him again. But, just se­ri­ously, I don’t un­der­stand, I don’t think any­body un­der­stands what mo­ti­vates him other than per­sonal griev­ance, other than seek­ing adu­la­tion,” she said, still seek­ing adu­la­tion.

Mean­while, for­mer White House aide Steve Ban­non, who knows a thing or two about pol­i­tics, has pre­dicted she will make a third at­tempt for the pres­i­dency. “Hil­lary Clin­ton is do­ing a whole thing,” he said on Fox Busi­ness. “She is run­ning. She’s just throw­ing to de­cide how to fit her way in.”

Dick Mor­ris, a for­mer long­time ad­viser to Pres­i­dent Bill Clin­ton, also now says Hil­lary is likely run­ning.

“There’s a test you can do at home,” he said last month on “The Cats Round­table” on New York AM 970 ra­dio. “Just put your fin­gers on her wrist, and if you feel a pulse, you know she’s go­ing to run.”

But it’s worth re­mem­ber­ing the last time around. “Poll­ster” be­came a dirty word af­ter the 2016 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion. Nearly all of the data-based prog­nos­ti­ca­tors got it wrong — way wrong.

“A sur­vey from the Prince­ton Elec­tion Con­sor­tium has found that Hil­lary Clin­ton has a 99% chance of win­ning the elec­tion over Don­ald Trump,” the In­de­pen­dent wrote days be­fore the elec­tion, adding that she was pro­jected to win 312 elec­toral votes (she didn’t). Plenty of oth­ers wrote much the same thing.

It’s a long, looooong time un­til Elec­tion Day. The only poll that mat­ters is the one Amer­ica will take on Nov. 3, 2020.

Just like last time.

Joseph Curl cov­ered the White House and pol­i­tics for a decade for The Washington Times. He can be reached at [email protected] gmail.com and on Twit­ter @josephcurl.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.