The other 30% are Tea Party members who would never vote for Clinton even if she was running against Pol Pot.

It isn't as definitive or black and white as you think it is

"Whether the issue in fact hurts Clinton in November is an open question. Republicans, the vast majority of whom already oppose Clinton, are the most apt to say it makes them less likely to support her."

"Still, many independents and even a >few< Democrats say the same. (Results are similar among registered voters.)

I want to note that many many independents lean right. They are former Republicans.

I also want to note that per recent Pew poll, 85% of Bernie primary supporters are planning to vote HRC in the GE. That number includes left-leaning independents.

..."accurate"?

Throughout their 108 year history (founded in 1908), how many people were charged by the FBI?

A wild guess - ZERO!!!!!!

she wasn't charged. You should be happy the Republican witch hunt didn't work.

does.

They charged into rooms where the bad guys are. I've even seen where they use a taser on a suspect. That person definitely got a charge out of it.

Or did you mean criminally charged? Semantics you know.

Does not mean it represents a majority of all Americans. That may well be the case, but I never accept a single poll as proof of anything!

Including said tea partiers.

You can't get "less likely" than zero, after all.

There is no way some right winger will miss a change to say something bad about Clinton.

Whether their eyeballs can stand being pried away from Faux News for that long, remains to be seen.

If Hillary maintains her strong leads over Trump, all is well.

But if her lead narrows to what it was in May, and if voter ID/suppression laws in key swing states end up having more of an effect than expected, a net GOP tunout boost of just two million (nationwide) will probably be enough to put Trumpolini in the White House.

Never underestimate the effects of blowback. We're just lucky this didn't happen in October.

...of chances for the GOP and the media to do all kinds of things to undermine Hilary. And yes, we were very lucky that the vote wasn't in October.

That said, I'm doubtful that the *email* situation is going to undermine her lead. Something else might. Something else could. But it would take a lot for the email "scandal" to do more than cause most voters to yawn. I'm not sure most voters even understand why this is a scandal. Because they've not been given an example of what classified info got out to whom or what it did to put the U.S. in danger. Smoke and mirrors can do a lot of damage, but if you go on too long with such a trick, as any magician will tell you, the audience might begin to see that it's just smoke and mirrors.

And so far voter suppression is being knocked down by the courts and may not be, well, as healthy as hoped by election day (again, not that this means we can sit on our laurels--we have to make sure all voters who want to vote for Hilary can and do vote for her, whatever lengths it takes). However, I think the next leg of this race will depend a lot on the running mates both she and Trump pick. The conventions are the next step, what happens there will let us know how much harder this fight for the White House is going to be.

As you may know, Hillary wasn't my first choice.

But as Bernie himself has said on many occasion: on her worst day, she's a million times better than anyone running in today's GOP.

And I said no, not if Dems turn out to vote. But if they don't because they aren't motivated then we could be in trouble.

If loyalists aren't at the polls, things will go badly.

I retired from the Army in '95. My last duty was as Security Manager (controlling classified material) for 580 people. Prior to that, I had been Assistant Manager and Manager of units ranging in strength from 60 to 200 people. I personally testified in courts-martial for 2 cases, and supplied written and verbal statements in numerous non-judicial punishments for people who violated security rules. My testimony was key in getting 2 men sent to Ft. Leavenworth Disciplinary Barracks (Jail), one for 8 years and another for 18 years. A key point: what both did was less serious that what the FBI determined to be factual in the case of Secretary Clinton. Granted that she is not under UCMJ, but rather the Code of Federal Regulations; by my review of things, she should get anywhere from 10 to 35 years. She simply proves that rules do not apply to all equally. One rule for thee, another for me. My name and pedigree will protect me.

So how the hell am I supposed to vote for the Democratic nominee for President? I do not, will not, nor can I in any way, shape, or form condone what she has done. She is a brilliant lawyer, do not try to tell me she is not sophisticated enough to deduce the meaning of classified markings in a document when it is the first thing in the paragraph, and separated by parenthesis. I have worked with men and women who would fail to notice the significance of such markings. None of them would ever stand a chance to pass a State Bar Exam, let alone practice law without themselves ending up in jail.

Someone, please help. I'll never vote for The Hair that Ate St. Louis, nor will I weasel my vote going for Jill of the Greens. What the hell do I do in November? I haven't missed an election in over 30 years, and only two others since turning 18, and I was deployed then and didn't get the Absentee Voter stuff in on time. Voting is important to me, but I just don't know what to do here.

Dem leaning left independents will as well.

...by the media.

Let's see how enthusiastic the voters are in September, October, and November.

...our last two monthly Democratic meetings, and probably will in August, too.

Real campaigning starts in September. Unfortunately in our state there winds up to not be much campaigning - Clinton and our Senator are pretty much shoo-ins, as are three of our five congressional candidates.

Those who canvass will have many compelling positive things to tell undecided voters

At any rate I do not see African American and Latino voters sitting home after the horrible and dangerous racist things Trump has said.

Nor do I see left leaning LGBT sitting home, as Mike Pence is at the top of of his VP shortlist. Even if Trump does not ultimately pick him, this totally undercuts his claim that he's a friend of LGBT.

Additionally I'm sure you've seen the Pew poll that indicates 85% of Sanders primary supporters say they will vote for HRC in the general election. I don't know the breakdown, but I think I can ass-ume many of those are left-leaning independents.

As to sane Republicans, although this is anecdotal, my Republican neighbors voted for Obama to keep Sarah Palin out of the White House. They felt she was far too dangerous to be a heart-beat away from the presidency. As Trump is basically Sarah Palin in a Chinese manufactured suit, they are thinking the same thing.

Have a great Monday!

How can a fair answered be provided without knowledge of the facts surrounding the investigation or the skills to understand when to bring charges and when not to? Big difference.

That does not seem to stop people from speculating and discussing when police are not charged in shootings. It also does not stop them from commenting when police or others are found not guilty in various shootings.

That is what this poll is telling us.

It just like the polls for the ACA a few years back .... entire GOP hated it, the fringe left hated it, and the polls said most people were "against it".

And in both cases, its meaningless noise that the media can use to get clicks and eye-balls.

Even so, the worrying number is the 60% of independents.

They here a noise ... and off they go.

I'm saying that 30% of Dems were disappointed she wasn't indicted (according to this poll), and was just asking if that number represented the "fringe left."

that asked if Hillary is a liar during the campaign. damn.

concerned with perception rather than facts and reality.

....and if that chart indicates what they were asked, they have no clue about the FBI, either (nor does ABC)

For the umpteenth and hopefully final time - THE FBI DOES NOT "CHARGE" ANYONE!!!!!! That's the job of the prosecutors.

But, of course we're talking about a Clinton, so hatred "trumps" reality.

and they are going to keep flooding it all the way to Election Day.

Clinton hasn't even started to attack Trump yet.

overloaded with Republicans.

http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1144a58Clintonemails.pdf

highly suspect. Under their methodology page it is stated that they always use 1000 random samples. On this poll the methodology says it used 519 random samples.

Their web page states they always include this in their polls:

All clients receive full demographic information for all completed interviews including:
•Gender
•Age
•Education
•Race
•Geographic information
•Socio-economic information (income and home-ownership)
•Household composition
•Party identification
•Political ideology
•Religion, and more…


Where is that info on the poll that was published?

.

People do not understand the key issue involved because of the constant misinformation. Hillary Clinton has not mishandled classified information by sharing with someone not entitled to receive the information. Both sender and receiver have proper security clearance in all cases. What he have are government computers that are far outdated making their use cumbersome at best and sequestration has only made matters worse. When people attempted to create their own more user friendly systems the IT department did not have the protocol's in place to assure that the transmission of data was secure from hacker attacks. That is an IT issue, pure and simple, with under funding at the heart of the problem. You get what you pay for and since we didn't pay for much we did not get much. It is not that Hillary choose to use a private server as a way around the cumbersome State Department IT systems - so did Secretary's Powell and Rice. It is that the State Department IT area did not have the tools available, such as encryption software for the server, to secure such an arrangement and still allowed it to go happen. This is still another government IT failure, making it really a funding issue much like Benghazi was a funding issue with security at an embassy. So this has next to nothing to do with what Hillary Clinton did and a whole lot to do with Republican budget cuts.

The poll should ask how many classified emails were there. How many people know that the number is NONE?

it is complete bullshit.

OBVIOUSLY so.

But, this country so desperately needs to want to believe "they all are the same" crap.

This ridiculous email thing spinning out of the coordinated Republican Benghazi rightwing attack which was formulated to bring down Hillary as a presidential candidate - "Mission Accomplished" banners all over it! - has impacted the majority of voters who only pay attention to headlines and 30-second advertisements.

Still - to this day! - try as they may! - all they have ever actually proved is she may just have a little Tammy Wynette in her!

Since the FBI announcement,

This says to me that 56% wanted charges brought and 57% are concerned about her being President. 58% say it doesn't change their minds. Well if someone feels both of the above and It didn't change their mind, it would seem that they aren't planning on voting for her anyway. This should concern people more than it seems to.

Oh wait, he already did that, and then he developed instant amnesia when the whole matter was reduced to only three emails not properly marked as classified.

You know he is a great attorney when he can spin the matter to such a degree that he lied to Congress without exposing himself to the charge of lying to Congress.

People don't get his motives in doing what he did.

This man was part of the whitewater bullshit, he cut his teeth on doing wet work for the GOP.

registered republican. The timing and details were not discussed.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimony/2016/07/what-party-is-james-comey-registered-as-225223

Pretending to be adversarial did not alter the facts, Comey basically lied to Congress by not acknowledging there were ZERO classified emails, and when confronted by the facts and asked if he questioned State about it, developed instant amnesia instead of admitting his lie. Comey should be resigning.

classification authority, you have determined there was nothing classified?

If that were the case, POTUS would have each and every one in the public domain to you could read them. But as the administration has said, some of them are Top Secret and include Special Access Program material.

But you make a good joke and really have me chuckling with my cup of coffee.

1. It's random adults, not likely voters.
2. The wording in Question 1 is barely short of making it a push poll.

But the media must continue to prop up Trump to get their ad-friendly horse race.

at least I thought it was odd. According to their methodology page, they split their 1,000 telephone interviews per week into 600 cell phone and 400 landlines.

Then they note that:

households" per thousand.

What is that about? If you want to get a latino sampling, you need a lot bigger sampling than .035.

There was always going to be a hit from this being concluded, but now it's in the rear view mirror.

....circulation of less than 500k?

a great job planting in the minds of Americans that she did something willfully nefarious.

Those who disapprove and even most who do approve do not have all the facts that the FBI had access to and have made judgment based on fiction, propaganda designed to sway their opinion or for political reasons.

It's a good thing the majority didn't have the ability to charge her without the evidence to prove it.

Are they saying they would have been more likely to support her if she was recommended for indictment?

Too many who engage in these polls are DUMB and don't understand the issues in the first place.

Did we?