Washington Post Poll: Trump Would Still Beat Clinton


There is an interesting finding from a Washington Post poll that is rather buried in the story: “The new survey finds 46 percent saying they voted for Clinton and 43 percent for Trump, similar to her two-point national vote margin. Asked how they would vote if the election were held today, 43 say they would support Trump and 40 percent say Clinton.”  Given Trump’s dismal popularity (perhaps the least popular president in the first 100 days in office since the start of modern polling), it was a surprising result.  It comes at a time when Clinton has been listing a number of reasons for her historic defeat . . . except for herself.  This includes her explanation (and her supporters) that it was not Clinton but self-hating, misogynistic women who could not vote for any woman for President.

The poll still shows only a 42 percent approval rate for Trump with a chilling 53 percent disapproval.

However, the most interesting finding was that, despite that unpopularity, Clinton still remains radioactive with many voters. Before the establishment all but anointed Clinton as their candidate in the primary, polls clearly showed that the voters did not want an establishment figure so the DNC worked to guarantee the nomination to the ultimate establishment figure. However, it clearly goes deeper than that.  Even against one of the most unpopular figures in history (Trump was even worse at 63 percent unfavorability), Clinton could not even maintain a majority of women with favorability ratings.  I believe that voters are willing to elect a woman and I do not believe that the last election was decided by self-hating women. There was ample reason to vote against Clinton who was not just the ultimately establishment figure but was dragging a long chain of controversies stretching back to her time as the First Lady of Arkansas.

Many in the party still cannot break their self-destructive addiction to the Clintons.  Hillary is back giving speeches to rally Democrats and Chelsea Clinton being clearly groomed as the next in line for the Clinton brand to the dismay of some.  Even after the defeat of Hillary Clinton, many remain in denial over the fact that many, if not most, voters remain opposed to the Clintons in polls.  Given the Post results, that strong dislike appears enough to even overcome the persistent unpopularity of the President Trump.

110 thoughts on “Washington Post Poll: Trump Would Still Beat Clinton”

  1. I’m not sure everyone really gets it. People didn’t necessarily vote for Trump, they voted against every other candidate in the Republican primary and then Hillary. If you angled your lens on that everything makes sense. We need better candidates.

  2. @Bob, April 26, 2017 at 10:54 pm
    “Got it. You mean don’t be like the Obama ‘Dear Leader’ idolatry types we saw the past eight years in both the administration AND the press….I’ll give it a try.”

    Yes, like the Obamabots and Barry’s cheerleading presstitutes.

    Sad. Very sad. 🙂

    1. Like I said, Obama would never have survived a media onslaught like Trump is taking. Never. How Sad. Very sad that Obama was propped up like a delicate snowflake for eight long, scandal-filled years by the corrupt media. Obama would not have survived two terms on his own merits without protection and cover by the media. That is a fact.

      1. I was channel surfing and saw Brian Williams talking about Trump Presidency. Why would anyone listen to him? Because the media execs want you to!

        I read independent articles on the internet, listen/watch media I trust. Don’t get your news at 6:00 from ABC, NBC, CBS because they fuzzy the news.

      2. From the first news conference in the East Room you could see the pleasure in their faces. They worked hard to get Obama elected. They were in awe of the first Black President.

  3. @Bob, April 26, 2017 at 9:16 pm
    “Here’s the thing about Trump…he fights back. One way he does it is to label or ‘brand’ people in ways that weaken them. He’s not criticizing them out right. He is ‘branding’ them. Quite accurately. Low Energy Jeb, Little Marco, Lyin’ Ted, Crooked Hillary, Head Clown Schumer. Trump is showing us all how to fight back. Don’t sit back and take the high road of being nice and agreeable and civil anymore. Verbally punch the hell back.

    “And then anytime you get upset with President Trump about anything (b/c he’s not perfect) just say these 3 words:

    “President. Hillary. Clinton.

    “You’ll snap right out of it….. :)”

    Here’s a thought, Bob. Rather than excusing everything Trump does, just because he isn’t Hillary Clinton, how about assessing his actions individually, as you probably do with everyone else in the world.

    That way, you won’t sound like a North Korean talking about “Dear Leader” and you won’t remind people of this blanket defense of someone else who’s idolized:

    1. Got it. You mean don’t be like the Obama “Dear Leader” idolatry types we saw the past eight years in both the administration AND the press….I’ll give it a try.

    2. Here’s the thing….Obama had his critics, but mostly he was supported by his pals in the press (and then that support was amplified by Hollywood pals — some he just vacationed with in the Carribean and then Polynesia). Do you really want to argue over Obama’s assertion that his administration was ‘scandal-free’ for eight years? Because we can do that. It was not scandal free, no matter how many times he says it was. But the media, et al were lock step in line with “Dear Leader” Barry O’s narrative. Who is supporting Trump? Pretty much only his base. Trump ain’t got the cushy sycophantic cushion Mr. Barry O had for eight years…that’s for sure. Obama would never have survived the media onslaught Trump is taking. That’s a given.

  4. Yes! You just stated a big piece of why HRC lost. She doesn’t get it and she never will. She’s part of the problem. Here’s the problem…

    What if instead of having a debate or discussion I repeatedly call you a Racist? A Sexist? A Fascist? Deplorable? Stupid? A Nazi? A White Supremacist? Or I tell you that you have no right to your opinion or your viewpoint because I SAY that I AM OFFENDED by YOUR opinion and then I shut you down and shut you up?

    And what if I tell you that you have no right to listen to an invited speaker of your choice because I SAY I AM OFFENDED by their speech….and so I shut you up, throw rocks, smoke bombs and bottles, block entrances and smash windows, and even assault you to shut the speech down? And the local police force is ordered to stand down and watch while property is being destroyed and people are being beat up by thugs wearing masks? What if I tell you that I voted for Trump and then you shut me down and shut me up because my vote did not agree with your views?

    What if I decide to assert my rights on an airplane? And I refuse to do what I am being asked to do? Instead, I start screaming like a nut case and refuse to stand so I that I have to be physically dragged? What if passengers are now being turned against the crew who are trained to be our first responders on flights? What if police officers are being called racist pigs? What if there is no longer respect for law enforcement? What if our free speech is censored online and outlawed on campuses? What if we, as a society, are descending toward anarchy and mob rule? This is what the Progressive (regressive) left is doing.

    Here’s the thing about Trump…he fights back. One way he does it is to label or ‘brand’ people in ways that weaken them. He’s not criticizing them out right. He is ‘branding’ them. Quite accurately. Low Energy Jeb, Little Marco, Lyin’ Ted, Crooked Hillary, Head Clown Schumer. Trump is showing us all how to fight back. Don’t sit back and take the high road of being nice and agreeable and civil anymore. Verbally punch the hell back.

    And then anytime you get upset with President Trump about anything (b/c he’s not perfect) just say these 3 words:

    President. Hillary. Clinton.

    You’ll snap right out of it….. 😉

    1. Sorry…wrong word choice there….I would rather say we should be ‘civil’ but not ‘acquiesce’ in the face of this tyranny from the left.

  5. Is it not past time to state the obvious? No one enjoys being subject to loathsome, ad hominem, character assassination. No one enjoys being called “deplorable” or “irredeemable.” Like many rational people, I refuse to welcome insults! Has Clinton & our political class not often dismissed us as illiterate? Are you not fatigued by protracted, partisan, progressive, attacks? Clearly, I rebuke all who seek to marginalize others! In short, I abhor all forms of pejoratives directed at others or my way!

  6. I voted for the bitch from Buchenwald. But if the election was today I would vote for the Dboy. Bill and she make too much money on speaking. So does Obama. Trump doesn’t need the money.

  7. This doesn’t surprise me. I was a Sanders voter in the primaries who did not vote for either major party candidate in November, but if the election were held again tomorrow I still would not vote for Hillary. Her final defeat and ultimate rejection by the voters was the only positive to come out that the whole election 2016 fiasco.

  8. It seems to me that it is high time to move beyond the constant Trump-bashing; why did Hillary lose; she won the popular vote etc. etc. The world is falling apart. Look at North Korea, they have nuclear weapons. Much of Europe is turning into a Muslim caliphate, we have many “no-go” zones in America. How close is Iran to developing a nuclear weapons? Like it or not, Trump is the legitimate president. He won the electoral vote and that is how presidents are elected according to our Constitution. What will be the future of America if we cannot come together as a country and survive in a world full of chaos? I think we need to look more at the big picture. Currently too many Americans are in a “cannot see the forest for the trees” mode.

  9. Why I’m pessismistic about and neocon war criminal and dual-citizenship death-cult cheerleader Wolfowitz is optimistic about Trump’s new foreign policy:

    Why Paul Wolfowitz Is Optimistic About Trump

    “In an interview for the Global Politico, the controversial Republican hawk says the president has an ‘opportunity’ in the Middle East.

    “Indeed, Wolfowitz tells me that he did not vote for Trump because he feared he would be ‘Obama on steroids’ given Trump’s campaign-trail reluctance to project American power and leadership in the Middle East and elsewhere—and that he decided not to vote for Hillary Clinton either because he was not sure she would pursue tougher policies and thought she had joined Obama in misjudging Putin with their failed Russia ‘reset’ policy.

    “But he’s now wondering whether the Trump presidency may offer more than he initially thought possible as Trump talks tough on North Korea, proclaims willingness to take further military action in the Middle East and seems to have marginalized anti-free trade, neo-isolationist advisers in favor of his more conventionally Republican national security team, led by CEO-turned-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Generals McMaster and Mattis, whose worldviews are very much shaped by their own participation in the Iraq war.”

    Trump has an “opportunity” to start WW III in the Middle East, if he continues in his 180-degree turn from his campaign pledge to avoid becoming embroiled in military adventurism in the Middle East.

    To quote Ann Coulter again, “Trump campaigned on not getting involved in Mideast. Said it always helps our enemies & creates more refugees. Then he saw a picture on TV.”

  10. @Autumn, April 23, 2017 at 9:57 pm
    “Ken, I have not read the book [Shattered] but I find it annoying that no sources are named. I understand that people don’t wanna be taken down like Seth Rich, but still.”

    I haven’t read it, either, and I agree, of course, that anonymous sources are always more suspect than named ones, but to the extent that the anonymous sources’ statements are consistent with the content of the exposed DNC emails and other evidence of Clintonista collusion and incompetence, I think the book’s information is worth provisionally considering for its entertainment value, if nothing else.

    If Taibbi weren’t such a consistently credible (and entertaining) political analyst, I wouldn’t even have called attention to the book.

    1. Ken, good point – might be worth reading for as you put it “entertainment value” =) I have Matt’s book “The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap” which is an enlightening, but painful read. The three tier “justice” system exposed.

    1. Funny, when you think about it, it was her nonstop talk about Russia that helped get her there. Russia made Madcow number 1.

    2. Bob, in case you missed it – she is equally despised by the Progressives.

      1. Thanks Autumn. Jimmy Dore skewers Maddow’s Russia propaganda garbage that got her show to No 1 in the ratings. For those who don’t bother to watch the video, here are some highlights:

        Journalist Matt Taibbi calls Maddow’s obsession with Russia “an exercise of conspiratorial mass hysteria.”

        “Maddow’s anti-Russia sentiment threatens to turn into rank xenophobia and escalate tensions with a nuclear-armed power.” (the Intercept)

        “This is Reds-baiting bullsh*t at a million miles an hour”

        Two statements NEVER mentioned on Maddow’s show:

        1. “US intelligence has NO EVIDENCE of collusion between Trump and Russia” -James Clapper

        2. “There is smoke, but there is no fire, AT ALL” -Mike Morrell about Trump and Russia

        “What the hell is wrong with her? I mean, really, what’s wrong with her? It’s like she’s losing her mind.”

        “These people don’t give a sh*t. Rachel Maddow doesn’t care if she starts WW3! Her ratings are through the roof, do you think she’s going to stop Red-baiting now?”

        “This is the most irresponsible, unbelievably gut-wrenching garbage-journalism I’ve ever f’ing seen.”
        -Jimmy Dore

        BSNBC = BS + Nothing But Crap.

        1. Bob, I love it: BSNBC = BS + Nothing But Crap – I will share widely. Also isn’t is hilarious the NY TImes actually won a Pulitzer for their Russia reporting? One good thing is that now people who are awake will question authority – or at least I hope they will!!

          1. NYT PP on Russia reporting is hilarious, yes. I’m sure they are all looking forward to celebrating themselves at the White House Correspondents Dinner this Sat — at least those who don’t have to cover Trump’s PA rally on Sat night. 🙂

            And yes, absolutely question authority – but not on airplanes 😉

            1. Autumn and Bob,

              Here is a very interesting article on Zero Hedge about this very topic! “However, when the oligarchs of the One Bank learned that Russia and China had no intentions of serving the West (i.e. the Old World Order), this new friendship quickly deteriorated. The next thing we knew, the Corporate media in the West were back to Cold War rhetoric, simply substituting “Russia” for “Soviet Union”.

              Russia was first in the cross-hairs because it had never really benefitted from the new (supposed) era of cooperation between East and West. Put another way, the oligarchs had invested nothing in their faux friendship with Russia. Meanwhile, their puppets in the Corrupt West had already begun targeting nations allied to Russia.

              One of the ways these puppet governments have been covering up their own campaign of naked aggression is through fabricating a massive blanket of propaganda. Every act of naked aggression by the West was supposedly a “reaction” by these fascist governments to supposed aggression from Russia’s allies or even Russia itself — or else “the terrorists” (the West’s mercenary henchmen).”


    1. But of course we hear no such commentary from the media when Obama interferes in the French election.

  11. The reasons behind the Clinton loss will be analysed and debated for years. I voted for her solely because the Supreme Court was the most important issue in the election, and I would prefer that we not entrust the appointment process to the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation.

    1. Exactly the reason I voted for Trump! If you listen to the women on the Court you’ll understand. Ginsburg is so abortion-friendly she probably had no problem with Dr. that killed viable babies after birth. The other two don’t talk much, but very little, if any, study of the Constitution. I thing Ginsburg and Kennedy will retire soon, which should solidify a reasonable Court. The last few years have brought strange rulings we are stuck with.

  12. Matt Taibbi reviews “Shattered, a campaign tell-all fueled by anonymous sources, [which] outlines a generational political disaster”:

    “The real protagonist of this book is a Washington political establishment that has lost the ability to explain itself or its motives to people outside the Beltway.

    “In fact, it shines through in the book that the voters’ need to understand why this or that person is running for office is viewed in Washington as little more than an annoying problem.

    “In the Clinton run, that problem became such a millstone around the neck of the campaign that staffers began to flirt with the idea of sharing the uninspiring truth with voters. Stumped for months by how to explain why their candidate wanted to be president, Clinton staffers began toying with the idea of seeing how ‘Because it’s her turn’ might fly as a public rallying cry.

    “This passage describes the mood inside the campaign early in the Iowa race (emphasis mine):

    “There wasn’t a real clear sense of why she was in it. ‘Minus that, people want to assign their own motivations – at the very best, a politician who thinks it’s her turn,’ one campaign staffer said. ‘It was true and earnest, but also received well. We were talking to Democrats, who largely didn’t think she was evil.’

    “Our own voters ‘largely’ don’t think your real reason for running for president is evil qualified as good news in this book. The book is filled with similar scenes of brutal unintentional comedy.”

      1. Good thing Bernie ‘the lifelong commie’ is popular. DNC chair Tom Perez couldn’t do the DNC ‘Unity Tour’ without him. Perez has so far gotten boo’d in Maine, Florida and now Utah.

        1. Perez is bizarre! He is probably better for the Repulican party than the Democrats. His demeanor is scary.

    1. Ken, I have not read the book but I find it annoying that no sources are named. I understand that people don’t wanna be taken down like Seth Rich, but still.

  13. I wouldn’t think twice before voting for a woman..but not that woman. I would not vote for any man or woman who misappropriated clean water and medical supplies from the poorest people in the Western Hemisphere to the tune of many billions to be divided between her gluttonous family and their gluttonous Friends of Bill.

    1. Autumn, She was his college professor. I’m guessing he did well in her class!! BTW, I was in your former town of Vegas, last week. I’m not paranoid, but prudent. Whenever I was walking on the Strip I kept my eye out on vehicles. The latest ISIS savagery of mowing people down w/ vehicles is perfect for the Strip.

      1. Nick, exactly that – Vegas is perfect for such an attack with all the tourons on Las Vegas Blvd.. SO glad I don’t live there anymore – but both my siblings are residents.

        So, I just watched a video by a bright Millenial:

      2. No, she was a secondary school theatre teacher. His parents sent him out of town for his final year of high school to keep them apart. In this country, that sort of thing gets you fired and, depending on some unspecified ifs, prosecuted. The man has step-children who are contemporaries. The whole business is creepazoid.

Comments are closed.