Hillary Clinton severe underperformance in US Midwest is a ‘major liability’
Barack Obama was much further ahead than the current Democrat candidate
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Hillary Clinton is severely lagging behind where she would hope to be in very important states, according to polling experts.
The Democrat candidate is as much as 7 percentage points behind Obama in early polling, according to Nate Silver, who predicted the 2008 election perfectly. Far more voters are undecided about whether to back her, and that is likely to prove central if Donald Trump does win the US election.
On the face of it, Ms Clinton’s lead is fairly similar to the one held by Barack Obama at the same time four years ago. But despite that face, pollsters and bookmakers are putting the probability of winning much lower.
That is largely because Ms Clinton’s polling is far weaker in the important swing states. While the two may have had similar shares of the expected popular vote, Ms Clinton is not getting as many of those votes in the kind of states that she needs to in order to win the White House.
Her performance is particularly weak in the Midwest, where many of the states that can decide the election are. Mr Silver has described that fact as a “major liability”.
Ms Clinton is down by around four points on Mr Obama’s forecasts in 2012. In states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Iowa, Ms Clinton is down significantly on the same forecasts that let Mr Obama win in 2012.
In some states, Ms Clinton’s performance is even weaker. In Iowa, she is down by 6.7 points compared to Obama’s 2012 forecast; in Ohio she is down by 5.9 points.
And the popular vote numbers may be weaker than they appear, according to Mr Silver. Mr Obama had 49 per cent of the vote where Ms Clinton has 45 per cent, because of the huge number of undecided voters that aren’t sure whether they’ll support Ms Clinton.
Forecasts including those by Mr Silver’s 538 are still putting a win by Ms Clinton as very likely. But those numbers might be a complicating factor that could lead her to lose, he has noted.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments