8 Responses

1. 1. The polls need to ask about the Libertarian and Green candidates. Based on current polling, the Libertarians (running to former Republican governors) will be one of the strongest third party candidates ever, and since it appears that the Libertarians are taking votes from both parties, they could end up carrying a state and forcing the election into the House of Representatives (which due to widespread dislike of both Clinton and Trump, could choose Johnson as the least objectionable second choice).

   2. While many neocons will probably prefer Clinton-Kaine, most economically conservative Republicans will consider Johnson-Weld, and many pro-Sanders Democrats might vote Green, or decide they prefer the disruption of the Libertarians (who are social liberals).

2. Nothing to get excited about. Everyone gets a bump right after their convention. That’s one of the benefits of incumbency. The party that holds the White House gets to have their convention second, so their bump gets to offset the other party’s bump.

3. “they could end up carrying a state”

   Which state(s) do you think Johnson/Weld can carry?

   While I disagree with Johnson and Weld on most issues, they are both decent people and they would not be a catastrophe for America the way Trump will be.

4. These polls are part of the “vast right wing conspiracy” hillary rotten clinton warned us about in 1998.

5. At this point Johnson/Weld appears to have a reasonable chance in at least Utah, and perhaps New Mexico. over the next few weeks a key question is how many conservative Republicans will give up on Trump and switch to Johnson (but subtract from that for neocons switching to Clinton), and how many Sanders supporters will decide they want to teach Hilary a lesson and rather than a protest vote for Stein will vote for Johnson/Weld (who is somewhat radically “liberal” on social issues – an unknown is whether the Sanders supporters are really socialists, or just dissident Democrats who want to overthrow the system).

   The personal unpopularity of Clinton and Trump means that all models on which polling is based need to be treated with great skepticism, and we may be in an election similar to the traumatic ones of 1824 and 1860, rather than the less traumatic third party campaigns of the 20th century (1912, 1948 and 1992).

6. akuperma-again with your tremendous wisdom!”personal unpopularity” has translated into 14 million votes in the primaries!unprecedented in history and against 16 opponents no less!your dear friends of the media depicted the RNC as a
   “disaster” with opening day protests,melanias’ plagiarized speech,cruz debacle,and Trumps’gloom and doom speech.Guess what?he’s pulling away in all the polls!you keep pontificating about johnson weld while Trump slamdunks this election!!

7. Mondale led Reagan after the Democratic Convention in 1984.

8. As I said, the models upon which polls are based are not applicable. The models predicted a Bush-Clinton race, and a dull primary season with no serious competition. The platforms of both parties are radically different from the traditional “orthodoxy” of each, which is why there are serious third party candidates and possibly massive crossovers between parties. Trump and Clinton have both alienated large parts of their own parties, which is unheard of in the past (except perhaps for 1860).