That less obvious story lurks in the demographic breakdowns, as well as the question of preference among those who expressed a preference for Bernie Sanders. The Sanders crowd give Stein 18% support. Among respondents who count themselves "liberal," as opposed to "moderate" or "conservative," 13% would vote Stein if the election were held today.
Left for us to figure out are
- why the ideological choices don't include such labels as "progressive," "socialist," "libertarian," or hell even "anarchist;" and
- why CNN's article on the poll does not mention Johnson or Stein by name.
CNN's version of the big story is the two-way horse race between Trump and Clinton, with Clinton's lead and Trump's negatives growing weekly. It downplays or ignores the huge story: that an increasing percentage of voters doesn't want either of these two in the White House.
For sheer amusement value, nothing beats the 1% in certain demographic groups who answered, regardless of their own allegiances, that Jill Stein will win the election. I reckon that represents three Gen-X smartasses in the 35-49 group. However, if anyone is legitimately giving odds on Stein pulling out a victory, I'll put a fiver on it. I missed the chance to put a fiver on Leicester City, last August, and I could have turned that fiver into 25,000 bucks, pounds, or euros.
Oh look, here are the latest betting lines from the UK! Where Stein is actually listed, she is running anywhere from 100:1 (William Hill) to 500:1 (Ladbrokes). Others have her at 250:1. Maybe I'll punt twenty quid instead.