I expect to see those numbers change somewhat as we get into early 2016. When there are more clear cut people to compare against, I think that is when those numbers will firm up.I agree, Hillary is already defined. She is a well-known commodity. But she is not tracking all that well with independents as I have stated in another post 41% to 47% in the negative as far as favorable/unfavorable goes. But neither are any of the mentioned Republicans to date either. But most of them are in the 20’s and 30’s and can either increase their favorable by a lot as too can their negatives be increased a lot. It is a two edged sword.
2016 is an uphill battle for republicans. Demographics works against them. They have to define who they are going forward. They have to find a way, or at least a candidate, who can appeal to those groups republican typically lose. They do not have to win those groups, but they need more of them. And they need to do those things in the states you mention. It is certainly doable, but I would not bet money them being successful.But I think at times we tend to place too much emphasis on the popular vote, it is the electoral college that counts. For a Republican to win in 2016 it is a must to win all the states Romney carried plus Florida, Virginia and Ohio and that still doesn’t put the Republican over the top. Whomever runs will also have to wine one of the remaining swing states, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Nevada. Iowa has only went once in the last 7 presidential election to a Republican candidate, New Hampshire only once in the last six leaving Nevada which went to the GOP in 2 of the last 6 Presidential races. Not good odds to say the least.
Always a pleasure to chat with you. You do good post.