Trump Leads for the 2nd Straight Day in New Poll (Rasmussen- 43/41; Certain Voters 48/46)

Rasmussen ^ | Oct 14, 2016 | Justin Holcomb

[xzins]

Justin Holcomb |Posted: 9:30 AM Share (25) Tweet Big League: Trump Leads for the Second Straight Day in New Poll, Nearly 50% Donald Trump has maintained a national lead over Hillary Clinton for the second straight day in a new Rasmussen poll that showed him trailing by seven on Monday. He now leads her 43 percent to 41 percent.

And one of the more important statistics from this poll is that 87 percent now say they are certain how they will vote in this year’s presidential election, and among those voters, Trump leads 48 percent to Clinton's 46 percent.

Trump also earns 77 percent of the GOP's support, while Clinton carries 76 percent of her own party.

View image on Twitter View image on Twitter Follow Rasmussen Reports ✔ @Rasmussen_Poll #WhiteHouseWatch: No Sign of Allegations Fallout Yet... http://tinyurl.com/whw2016 #BreakingPoll #Election2016 #DonaldTrump #HillaryClinton 8:35 AM - 14 Oct 2016 43 43 Retweets 53 53 likes But most Republican voters still think the Republican establishment is hurting the party with their continuing criticism of Trump and are only slightly more convinced that those leaders want Trump to be president.

Republicans are becoming more and more likely to side with Donald Trump in November rather than the Washington establishment.

[MountainWalker]

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the media’s psyops propaganda campaign ended lulling low propensity Hillary voters to stay home and cost her the election?

[Impala64ssa]

FTA: "Trump Leads for the Second Straight Day in New Poll, Nearly 50%"
To paraphrase Her Heinous, WHY THE HELL ISN'T HE AT LEAST 50%?? /s It could hapoen yet. Good news nevertheless.

[CatOwner]

My only concern about comparing Trump to Reagan is Reagan had been in politics before the 1980 election, having run in 1976 and been governor of California. What I don’t know is if Trump has the type of behind-the-scenes political ground game to get out the vote on the national level. I guess we’re going to have to wait and find out.

[Ted Grant]

Hilly does have trouble breaking through the low 40s, much like Bill did in 1992.

Of course he had the benefit of an inept incumbent for an opposing party and a more credible third party running.

Hillary has neither.

[Impala64ssa]

. Of course the thought of her going down makes us happy in one sense, but in another sense it makes me want to puke
Hey! I saw what you did there!! :)

[xzins]

They changed the number of dems and reps from one poll to the next. My memory says they changed them by 3 or 4.

[Parley Baer]

Good news. GO TRUMP GO

[yoe]

[M1903A1]

I still think the bigger “tell” is the “signals intelligence”...what are you seeing and hearing from those around you.

I live and work in deep blue country, and while I’ve seen a handful of Clinton bumper stickers, I’ve seen more residual Bernie ones, and in terms of Clinton lawn signs I’ve seen exactly three. For a region and people big on “virtue signalling” (Starbucks, NPR, Whole Foods, etc.), I think that says something.

[conservativepoet]

I think the democrats are trying to start a fire in a scorched over area. It doesn’t work.
____________________

Exactly right. Voters know who controls the MSM airwaves: Hillary

[luvbach1]

Fox still showing 7% deficit. average that with Ras = -4.5%

[longtermmemmory]

only fox news is BARELY covering the wikileaks.

megan Kelly is so in the Hillary tank that even the DUmmies find solace in the fact she is one of them.

[luvbach1]

How can this be? Fox has him down by 7 and sinking!

Not only that, they show him behind the beest on terrorism, economy, and honesty/trustworthiness!

[DarthVader]

Here is another shocker. This was on C-SPAN last night:

http://www.usapoliticstoday.com/breaking-jill-stein-just-endorsed-donald-trump-watch-her-obliterate-hillary/

[xzins]

I heard Stein say that Clinton is more likely to start a nuclear war.

I was impressed with the honest.

Clinton WILL start a war.

[CommerceComet]

My only concern about comparing Trump to Reagan is Reagan had been in politics before the 1980 election, having run in 1976 and been governor of California.

Despite his experience, there was still a lot of uncertainty about and distrust of Reagan (of course, fueled by the MSM) in 1980.

I'm really comparing the election dynamics of this year to 1980. Personally, I'm not convinced at all that Trump is the second coming of Reagan in terms of politics or leadership. I hope Trump is elected and I'm pleasantly surprised. In terms of political leadership, the gap between Reagan and everyone that followed him is huge, so Trump has a big landing area to be an improvement over what we've had in the last 28 years.

[longtermmemmory]

remember the weekend before the election FOX had KERRY winning by five percentage points.

[crz]

As more and more of the christian hating stuff comes out Trump will continue to gain ground.

Romeny never had that vote like he should have.

Then, more and more of the corruption proof comes out from the Obastard administration and the Witch herself.

[Snowybear]

Chances this will be covered on any Fox News show:

0%

[jjsheridan5]

No legitimate poll will want to ruin its credibility over one election. Watch for the rogue, rigged polls to show Trump “strengthening” as election day nears to cover themselves after they feel they have accomplished their goal to help Hillary as much as possible.

Maybe.

The media has never ruined their credibility over a single election before (they have always maintained a kind of plausible deniability in terms of bias -- plausible to relatively low information voters, and to those ideologically on the left). But they have done so, this time. They are no longer pretending. The Republican establishment has never sacrificed their (false) claim to be the opposition to the Democrats. Until recently, when they have become overtly anti-Republican voter. They, too, are no longer pretending. The Republican donor base has always maintained a fiction of "conservatism". Until this election. Now, they are no longer pretending.

This election is different. I have no doubt that wavering journalists are being told there will be severe career consequences if they don't actively oppose Trump. I have no doubt that establishment Republicans have been told that the gravy train ends if they don't do everything they can to stop Trump. And ... I have no doubt that pollsters have been told that if they ever want contracts in the future, they have to manufacture poll results that fit into the coordinated media narrative. Reputation be damned.

Bottom line: These polls are going to probably remain ludicrously biased up until election day.