- The Washington Times - Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s unpopularity has hit a new high, as she’s erased some of the good will built up in the wake of last month’s Democratic National Convention, according to an ABC News-Washington Post poll released Wednesday.

Thirty-eight percent of registered voters now have a favorable view of Mrs. Clinton, compared to 59 percent who reported an unfavorable view. That’s down from her 46 percent/52 percent favorable/unfavorable split in early August, shortly after the Democrats’ convention in Philadelphia.

Among registered voters, she’s now on par with Republican nominee Donald Trump, who had a 37 percent/60 percent favorable/unfavorable split in the new poll — essentially unchanged from a 36 percent/61 percent split in early August.

Among all adults, 56 percent said they have an unfavorable view of Mrs. Clinton, compared to 63 percent for Mr. Trump.

The highest unfavorable rating for any previous major-party presidential nominee in ABC/Post polling was former President George H.W. Bush’s 53 percent rating in July 1992, ahead of his loss to former President Clinton in that fall’s election.

For the first time in a year, most women now see Mrs. Clinton unfavorably, and she’s lost ground among moderates, liberals, independents and nonwhites — including a 16-point drop, to 55 percent, among Hispanics.

Mr. Trump lost ground among men compared to early August but made up for it by improving among women by about the same amount.

“Favorability is the most basic measure of a public figure’s popularity. Clinton and Trump’s unprecedentedly low ratings raise substantial uncertainties about voter turnout in the November election,” reads a polling memo from Langer Research.

“The open question is whether they can motivate their potential supporters to show up to vote — either for them, or, as may be more likely, against their unpopular opponent,” it says.

• David Sherfinski can be reached at dsherfinski@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide