Discussion: Clinton Leads Sanders By 2 Points In Heated California Race

TPM Article Topics
21

Bernie Sanders backers’ bid for an emergency injunction in California’s Presidential Primary Election is rejected. Soundly.

A federal judge in San Francisco delivered a withering rejection to a motion by supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign for an emergency court order that would have imposed significant eleventh hour requirements on elections officials in California’s June 7 Presidential Primary.

At a hearing June 1 in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Judge William Alsup described allegations by plaintiffs’ counsel as “hot air” shortly before ruling verbally from the bench. Alsup noted that “there’s not a single decision in the history of the universe” equating plaintiffs’ alleged facts with a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, and added that they had made “absolutely no showing of a violation of federal law.”

15 Likes
22

Ohsnapbitches!
From the bench no less.

jw1

5 Likes
23

Statistically speaking, one poll does not indicate a lead or a tie, particularly when there are multiple polls conducted at approximately the same time utilizing better methodology and larger sample sizes.

4 Likes
24

so does five thirty eight

1 Like
25

Thought you might like this additional snippet from Judge Alsup:

" I’m giving my order now so you can get your writ to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then the United States Supreme Court, then the International Court of the Hague. But you’re done in federal court."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/06/01/judge-rejects-sanders-supporters-voting-suit.htm

12 Likes
26

You are not wrong in your assessment, just too kind. It is actually much shittier journalism than just ignoring other data points. It is utterly ignoring the reality of the situation. Sanders may well be within in 2 points of Clinton as two polls are now showing, but that isn’t the point at all. If the other primaries left (USVI, PR, NJ,MT,SD,ND,NM,DC) play out as predicted then Sanders margin in California needs to be 81 to 19 in order to secure a majority of pledged delegates. Reporting this poll of Clinton only winning by 2 (key word “winning”) while not reporting the fact that Sanders needs to win by massive margins is shit journalism.

10 Likes
27

Oh, man, thanks for the link. It’s pretty hilarious. Found this little nugget:

Simpich said the case is not about partisan politics, and that he isn’t affiliated with the Sanders campaign.
“I threw a party for him last year, but that’s it,” he said.“This is an entirely independent lawsuit,” Jaffe said. “We deliberately sought to balance this lawsuit to make it non-partisan.”

5 Likes
28

So does Fivethirtyeight.

(Edit: @patwally beat me to it.)

1 Like
29

jus one more:

adding that their claims are state-law claims and “this is a federal court.”

If there’s a better example of how the system is rigged for Hillary I haven’t seen it. :hamster:

3 Likes
30

Announcing the results of mail-in ballots before election day? I very much doubt it. My recollection of the way it works in California (and I assume in other states) is that those absentee ballots are indeed counted ahead of time (except ones that are delivered by mail on election day, or are brought to the polls or to an election office on election day), and those results are reported in the first set of numbers released on elections night, usually shortly after the polls close.

Assuming the cited numbers are real, my guess would be that these are numbers that come from pollsters, in the course of their normal polling, asking people if they’ve already voted by mail, and if so for whom.

5 Likes
31

But that’s just because that Judge is a corporatist shill for the 1%, with a thumb on the scales, because small donors, we the people, process is rigged, argle, bargle, something, something, Wall Street!

8 Likes
32

True. Still, one can report on the results of a specific poll on its own terms, irrespective of how accurate it is relative to other polls. And when doing so, to call a point spread that falls within the margin of error a “lead” in any respect is sloppy reporting.

1 Like
33

Oh FFS! STOP already with the Hillary/Bernie “horserace” coverage! It’s all over but the shouting and everyone knows it.

4 Likes
34

But that said. Given the results and 95% confidence intervals, I, as a “rational” gambler would still place a bet that Clinton is “actually” in the lead and not Sanders.

2 Likes
35

Of course 538 gave Hillary a 99% chance of winning Michigan. Which is not to slam 538, their track record is quite good overall. Just noting that these forecasts may imply a higher level of certainty than really exists.

1 Like
37

Alan Abromowitz twitter re last weeks’s PPIC poll.

Alan Abramowitz
May 30
Alan Abramowitz ‏@AlanIAbramowitz
PPIC poll has Clinton up by 6 among whites and 9 among Hispanics by only by 2 overall. So is she losing badly among African-Americans?

3 Likes
38

Yeah something there doesn’t seem to add up. Asian-Americans are a pretty big group in California and Abromowitz doesn’t mention them, but it seems like even if Bernie was winning handily among Asian-Americans (which other polls aren’t showing anyway), and other smaller groups (Native Americans, multi-racial follks), it would be hard to see how that would be enough to make up the difference.

ETA: As far as today’s NBC/WSJ/Marist poll, it also shows Hillary leading Bernie by a larger margin among whites (51-46) than she leads overall (49-47). And it shows Bernie with a modest (within the MOE) lead among Hispanics. The rest of the demographics seem pretty familiar:

In the Democratic horserace, Clinton leads Sanders among likely voters ages 45 and older (63 percent to 33 percent), self-identified Democrats (57 percent to 40 percent), women (54 percent to 41 percent), past Democratic primary voters (53 percent to 42 percent) and whites (51 percent to 46 percent).

Clinton also is ahead among those who have already voted, 58 percent to 41 percent.

Meanwhile, Sanders leads among first-time participants (72 percent to 28 percent), independents (68 percent to 26 percent), those younger than 45 (66 percent to 30 percent), men (54 percent to 43 percent) and Latinos (49 percent to 46 percent).

So, of course it’s possible that the poll is just way off, and Hillary is actually leading among Hispanics. Though there is also a fairly plausible explanation for why Bernie may be leading Hillary among Hispanics in California – they tend to be on the young side, and Bernie has done well among younger Hispanics (as he has among younger voters in general).

Will be interesting to see what the Field Poll says, as it’s often described as the “Gold Standard” of California polls. I believe the latest Field Poll (and I assume the last one of this primary season) comes out tomorrow.

My guess is California will be close, but if I had to bet I would still bet on at least a narrow win by Hillary, given the “semi-closed” type of primary, and the large number of folks who vote early, by mail.

2 Likes
39

so what? A Michigan type win for Sanders in California won’t mean shit. What part of “he needs to win by 81 to 19” is difficult to understand?

2 Likes
40

You’re right, but if we’re quibbling over headlines then the bigger issue should be the declarative nature of the headline. One poll does not mean Clinton leads or even ties. One poll means nothing more than the results of the one poll.

2 Likes
41

Yes, I agree. If CA were a truly closed primary, I doubt it woukd be close at all. I’m thing Hillary by 3-4% when it’s all sorted out.

1 Like