Quinnipiac recently took a poll on the 2016 presidential race that ended up dragging some important realities into the spotlight. As reported by Breitbart News on Saturday, the poll revealed that most major GOP presidential candidates would beat Hillary Clinton if the election were held today.
According to the poll, when matched up against Ben Carson, Hillary would lose by a stunning ten points. She would end up with only forty percent of the vote, compared to Carson’s fifty percent. Against Marco Rubio, she would lose by five points. She would get forty-one percent, compared to his forty-six percent. Against Ted Cruz, she would lose by three points. She would only get forty-three percent, compared to his forty-six percent.
Even elitist left-wing RINO Chris Christie would still prevail over Clinton by five points. The only major Republican candidate who would lose to Clinton is Donald Trump, coming in at forty-three percent, compared to her forty-six percent.
The margin of error for the poll was 2.9 percent. So even accounting for the possibility of that entire 2.9 percent going against Clinton, Carson would still win by about seven points, Rubio and Christie would still win by two points, and Ted Cruz would be approximately tied. Trump would lose by nearly six points in that scenario, and could only roughly tie Clinton if the poll’s entire margin of error were against him.
The poll also shows that Donald Trump and Jeb Bush face the highest percentages of Republican voters who emphatically refuse to vote for them under any circumstances. Trump’s committed opposition in the GOP stands at twenty-five percent, and Jeb Bush’s remains at twenty-three percent.
Clinton, who has been plagued by seemingly endless corruption scandals for decades, naturally faces the most sweeping public rejection of her honesty and trustworthiness. A full sixty percent agree that she cannot be trusted with the presidency.
This all flies in the face of recent wishful thinking by liberals comically predicting a “landslide victory” for Democrats in 2016. Such absurd predictions come from clearly flawed election models like that of Moody’s Analytics, which are based admittedly on a great deal of guesswork and ignore key points like the fact that successor candidates from the incumbent party are automatically three times less likely to win…more so when the incumbent’s approval ratings are low, like Obama’s. They also ignore the fact that, contrary to the spin of tyrant-worshiping leftist propaganda, Mitt Romney barely lost the 2012 election (with rampant Democrat cheating).
The bottom line: Even with Hillary being female (the only actual ‘qualification’ Democrats can identify) the same people who were so willing to look past our first black president having sat in the pews of a racist lunatic for twenty years, befriended open terrorists, and mentored under treasonous Marxist radicals can’t manage to muster up any better numbers for Hillary Clinton than to lose to almost every major Republican candidate.