Discussion for article #244493
This is a fairer headline than the one used on Maggie Haberman’s NYTimes article which portrayed only one side as making a strong showing.
What is happening is that the race is becoming tighter in both states.
In Iowa Hillary remains ahead 48 to 45 with Bernie closing. Given margin of error, dead heat.
But in New Hampshire – while Bernie remains ahead, Hillary may have made really substantial gains.
But in New Hampshire, the survey also found Mr. Sanders at 50 percent, to 46 percent for Mrs. Clinton.
That margin is smaller than a recent Fox News survey, in which Mr. Sanders led Mrs. Clinton by 13 points. An NBC survey last month showed Mr. Sanders ahead by nine points in New Hampshire
3 Likes
“Calling Dr. Freud. Dr. Freud. Code Blue! You’re wanted on the Hysteria Ward”
Are you feelin’ the Bern ladies, are you feelin’ the Bern!! LOL!
1 Like
One poll does not a caucus make.
Hillary is up 10.6 points in the RCP average for Iowa.
I am not so convinced that these polls would bear out nationally. It seems counter-intuitive that Sanders who is polling far behind Clinton nationally, especially with black and latin voters would be polling higher than her against prospective GOP candidates. I’d say a sanders v. Rubio match up is beyond unlikely.
3 Likes
Bernie filed for a conscientious objector exemption during the Vietnam war. Sure, so did Muhammad Ali, but Ali isn’t running for president. I feel in a general election, Bernie will be destroyed on that issue by the Republicans. After having Obama take away the Republican claim Democrats are soft on defense, I’d hate for that to become an issue again. If Bernie is serious about his run for the presidency, he had better get ahead of that issue early and often. Knowing how screwed up Americans are on toughness, I seriously doubt he can really win. The Republican scare ads will be brutal if he is the nominee.
That’s my read, too – tightening in both those states. Not that long ago there were some polls showing Hillary 30 or more points ahead in Iowa, and Bernie farther ahead in New Hampshire than he is right now. Obviously the more recent, tighter polls are good news for Bernie in Iowa, and good news for Hillary in New Hampshire.
But it looks like the national numbers may be tightening a bit too:
I like to look at the change over time within each pollster’s results. In other words, pollster X shows Hillary ahead by Y% in December, and by Z% in January (this helps remove the problem of pollsters using different “likely voter” model – assuming the pollster doesn’t change their likely voter model in between polls, at least you’re comparing apples to apples). And if you look at the most recent national polls and compare them with results from the last poll by the same pollster, most of them show movement in Bernie’s direction.
Even if you disregard, (as an suspected outlier), the most recent poll listed on Real Clear Politics this morning (the IBD/TIPP poll that shows a gap of only 4 percentage points between the candidates, a 14 point shift in Bernie’s direction since their last poll), the most recent three polls before that all show Hillary with a lead in the mid-teens, whereas in the last polls by all three of those pollsters her lead was in the 20’s. On the other hand, Quinnipiac shows Hillary holding steady with a lead of 31 points, up a hair since their last poll, where she was 30 point ahead.
Of course even if most of the recent polls are accurate (at least as to the direction, if not the actual numbers), Hillary still has a very strong lead nationally. And as no doubt someone will (correctly) point out, we don’t nominate presidential candidates with a national popular vote, it’s state-by-state, with delegates. And I don’t see much movement in South Carolina, for example…though there’s surprisingly little polling to go on. I do see that Bernie has hit his highest level in South Carolina so far – 31% – in the CBS/YouGov poll, closing the gap by 11 points since their last poll. But (a) that still leaves Hillary with a 36 point lead, and (b) the recent CBS/YouGov poll had a whopping 9.7 point margin of error!
How many deferments did Trump get? And which of the other GOP candidates served in 'Nam?
3 Likes
Perhaps not as far ahead nationally as she was a month or so ago (see my post above). And remember, that’s just with Democrats. Throw independent voters into the mix and it’s not at all hard to see how Bernie could be polling ahead in general election matchups, which include independents and a general election (and Republicans, not that I think either Bernie or Hillary will get a lot of those votes) while polling behind among (mostly*) Democratic voters in the primaries.
*some states do allow independents to vote in the primary of their choosing. New Hampshire, for example – and, sure enough, polling in New Hampshire has shown Bernie doing better with independents than Hillary.
1 Like
…and with who would that be important?
my guess, the same folks who voted for W over J. Kerry
2 Likes
Exactly – folks who will rule out Bernie for being a conscientious objector during Vietnam wouldn’t be likely to vote for either Bernie or Hillary anyway.
2 Likes
I’d also add that polling in states really far down the primary calendar (thus, less attention to primary and little to no campaigning locally) are adding to Hillary’s cushion as polling in these areas are measuring name recognition only.
As a former 1st lady, NY Senator, 2008 primary candidate (primary went throughout with all states contested) SoS, and candidate again she is universally known. This helps her as it helped her in 2008 under the same metrics.
this universal name recognition starts to hurt when including independents and republicans.
There are no doubt republicans/ independents that would never vote for Trump or Cruz and might otherwise stay home,but will make it a point to get our and vote against Hillary.
To me, after considering the above, it seems less counter-intuitive.
3 Likes
Rubio is an egregious piece of shit. I hate that fuck.
And Hillary is clearly an unlikable candidate. At least at this point. She has to be in order to be polling behind that lying fuck Rubio.
2 Likes
If you mean did I once like Bernie and consider that he would be a good President, yes I did. But after seeing the campaign staff he selected, I’m not interested.
My bet is that Bernie is currently appealing to the older white less-educated blue collar demo that likes Trump. I’d also be they don’t have a clue that Bernie was a conscientious objector during Vietnam. They will care.
For me, it’s the threats from Sanders supporters to sit out the presidential election if HRC is the nominee. So I’m thinking of attempting a PUMA type effort if he is the nominee and call it The Sauce For the Goose Is The Sauce For The Sanders movement . Hell, I could even up on Fox News.
1 Like
PUMAs are great shoes…but shitty people
I was about to ask why will they care about Bernie’s C.O. status, but not Trump’s multiple deferments…but then I realized that the subset of voters you’re talking about – folks who would tell you that they like both Bernie and Trump – are, pretty much by definition, not likely to be troubled by such inconsistencies. 
Jeff Weaver is a shitty person.
A lot of them probably used to be known as Reagan Democrats. They were pro-war.