All errors should be reported to

Thursday, January 05, 2017

Politico poll shows President Trump would beat Obama

This should be blockbuster news. A poll by a major political publication in Washington found more voters prefer President Trump over President Obama -- just days after Obama claimed he would beat President Trump if he ran against him.

President Trump would beat Obama by one point if the two squared off.

By contrast, Clinton beat Trump by two points in the non-binding popular vote.

That's big news.

But Politico buried this finding because it does not fit the Politically Correct Narrative that the American people revere Obama and disdain President Trump.

The headline read: "Voters want Trump to concentrate on jobs."

Which they do, and which he is doing.

But it was not until Paragraph 13 that Politico mentioned the big news in the poll:
The poll also shows voters evenly divided on a recent point of contention: whether they would rather have President Barack Obama continue for a third term – which is prevented by the 22nd Amendment limiting presidents to two terms — or whether they want Trump to take office this year. Forty-five percent of voters say they want Trump to serve as president for the next four years, while 44 percent want Obama to continue as commander-in-chief.
Conducted by Morning Consult, the Politico poll asked:
If it were up to you, who would you rather see as President for the next four years?
45% said Trump.

44% said Obama.

I am willing to believe that if Obama led that question, that would be the lead in Politico. Indeed it reported, "Voters narrowly dispute Trump’s assertion that the first-time candidate would have defeated the incumbent if Obama could seek another term: 47 percent say they think Obama would win an election against Trump, while 42 percent think Trump would win."

But the numbers clearly show Trump would beat him.


Please read "Trump the Press," in which I skewer media experts who wrongly predicted Trump would lose the Republican nomination. "Trump the Press" is available as a paperback, and on Kindle.

It covers the nomination process only. The general election will be covered in a sequel.

For an autographed copy, email me at

Be deplorable. Follow me on Twitter.


  1. This is not news because ... "Most people no longer trust the media on news stories about presidential campaigns." Duh.

    1. That this is not news is why most people no longer trust the media on news stories about presidential campaigns.

    2. You could have stopped after "news stories".

    3. The quote above is Surber's. Write him about your re-write Old. But you miss the point: one post after waxing about how the media is collectively a cesspool of inaccurate information about the presidential race, Surber touts a media outlet about its "Trump would beat Obama" declaration. Does no one see the irony in all this? Why this blog is so entertaining.

    4. I'd rather write YOU, Autonomous. And watch you fall for the very thing you're pushing, Captain Obvious.

      In fact, I'll do it again.

      "Not only are we watching the Left lose their credibility, but we are watching them lose their sanity." David Prentice

    5. So it's obvious to you too that Surber loves the media when it is pro-Trump but discredits the media when it is anti-Trump? Excellent. You must find this blog quite amusing too. Double excellent.

    6. The media discredits itself, Anon.

  2. Give it four years. the results will be a hair thin 95% 1% with 4% too stupid to decide.

    1. Give it two weeks and Barack Urkel will be whining, "Did I do that?"

  3. Anything the news organizations say are lies or lagging indicators buried under prevarications.
    --Feel free to use it if you like.

  4. Not sure you can really draw that conclusion from the poll numbers. 45/44 is within the margin of error, so all one can really say is that the two are statistically tied.

    Even if we take that 45/44 as gospel, we just spent a month pointing out that winning the popular vote does not equal winning the presidency. If Trump could beat Clinton with a 2 point deficit in the popular vote because of how the vote was distributed, it's possible that Obama could beat Trump with a 1 point deficit. It depends on how the votes are distributed across the states.

    Luckily this is a theory we'll never have to put to the test.

    1. I doubt that the respondents were selected and tabulated by ratio of respondents proportional to state voter registratation.