On May 2, a Rasmussen Reports poll was released. It shows Donald Trump 41%, Hillary Clinton 39%, “someone else” 15%, undecided 5%. See here. Thanks to Douglas Joy for the link.
On May 2, a Rasmussen Reports poll was released. It shows Donald Trump 41%, Hillary Clinton 39%, “someone else” 15%, undecided 5%. See here. Thanks to Douglas Joy for the link.
This poll is worthless.
By itself, perhaps. But that’s the second recent poll that has shown a sizable chunk of support for a candidate other than Trump or Hillary. And in poll that included Gary Johnson, he polled 11%. I imagine a poll which included Jill Stein might have her at 5-10% given the amount of support she seems to have coming from Bernie Sanders supporters.
The questions asked:
The first time (April 25-26):
————–
If the presidential election this fall comes down to Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump, you would:
[choices given]
Vote for Hillary Clinton
Vote for Donald Trump
Vote for some other candidate
Stay home
Not sure
The second time (April 27-28):
1* If the 2016 election for president were held today, would you vote for Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hillary Clinton?
[no choices shown on the question page as given, but the article says 15% preferred some other candidate, and 5% were undecided]
The article focused on the latter survey having removed the “stay at home” option . . . but to me it’s also significant that — if the latter survey’s question really was asked with no other options given, and 15% *volunteered* that they wanted someone else — that’s only 1% drop-off from when another candidate was a listed choice. That’s arguably a stronger result for the alternative parties.
A recent poll by the Star Tribune in Minnesota was 43%-38% for Clinton v. Trump when they only gave those two options, with no “other” option. So even when the question is worded so that you only have those two choices, 19% of people still refused to choose one of them. http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-poll-results-presidential-race/366232021/
I only wish that we could take all these 15%+ results to the Commission on Presidential Debates and rub their noses in it: “Since the polls aren’t naming names other than one Democrat and one Republican, the evident support for another choice can’t be limited to one alternative or another — so the only objective rule left is for you to include anyone whose ticket is on enough ballots to win the Electoral College.”
Actually, my previous comment was an understatement. There could be a rule including any Presidential candidate who’s on a ballot *anywhere*, and thus has a *visible* chance to be in the top three considered by the House of Representatives in case the Electoral College deadlocks. Just how crowded would the stage get then, Richard? How many Presidential candidates were on any ballots in 2012?
I think these results need to be compared with polls taken in April of previous presidential election years. I think 15% is somewhat higher than normal, but not that much higer. The percentage always goes down dramatically between the conventions and election day.