Discussion for article #244787
So when do we vote nationally again?
Isn’t there some other thing we need to do before that election?
jw1
12 Likes
That’s funny and you’re right., Honestly I hate all these polls
4 Likes
Well, either the last two national polls, which showed Bernie within double digits, were way off, or this poll is way off, or her attacks are working and have swung a bunch of voters back her way. All three possibilities seem about equally plausible to me. (And of course it may be some of each).
4 Likes
Usta’ be that polls-- were just that-- polls.
Now? I tend to think of them as advertising.
Commission a poll with wording that will bring the desired response, massage the results, and disseminate it through the MSM-- amplifying the message.
Et voilá-- same effect as a politial ad-- and cheaper too!
jw1
10 Likes
You don’t want the poor cash-strapped mega-corps to fund actual news gathering do you? It’s so 'spensive…
7 Likes
A year’s worth of polls like this is significantly more expensive than a reporter. Or two.
2 Likes
Then the corps have no excuse but a desire to hinder public understanding…
If the well-written political dramas I’ve watched are any indicator of the worth of polls, I’ve seen that polls are commissioned when there is a blip in public response to the latest utterance or if the campaign is undecided if should go up or down or left or right, or should the candidate wait to file divorce papers until after the primary, you get the idea. It’s an industry that’s sprung up to replace analysis of issues and dialogue between candidates and the voting public and we’re conned into believe they have meaning.
4 Likes
No wonder the unemployment rate has gone down…
1 Like
The thing which the “analysts” will not stress is Bernie/Hillary overlap among voters, policies, etc.
4 Likes
I hear ya, but I doubt that is the case with this NBC/WSJ poll showing Hillary 25 points ahead. It may be somewhat off, or even way off, but I doubt that’s due to purposeful manipulation. In Oct the NBC/WSJ showed Hillary around 10 points further ahead than most of the other polls did, in Dec they showed Bernie about 10 points closer than most of the other polls did. So this pollster doesn’t seem to have a strong. built-in “house effect” in favor of Hillary.
There are some pollsters, like Gravis, who I am always pretty skeptical of, as they have a poor reputation (not necessarily for bias, more like for accuracy in general) but NBC/WSJ isn’t one of them. Of course I’m skeptical of any one or two polls, but that also goes for the two recent polls that showed Bernie within single digits nationally.
At this point most of the polls are using a “likely voter” model, and such models can vary quite a bit, so while one might expect polls to appear to converge as the first contests approach, it’s not unusual for the opposite, which can lead to the appearance of increased volatility as subsequent polls from different pollsters are treated by the media as if they represented clear movement compared to polls from other pollsters, whereas in reality the difference may be largely about different likely voter models (in other words, the media sometimes compare apples to oranges, and on that basis declare that fruit is getting more orange or red).
It’s also possible that the underlying race may indeed be becoming a bit more volatile. The recent Des Moines Register poll of the Iowa Caucuses seems to suggest that may be the case, as it showed more people moving into the undecided category there, kind of the opposite of what one might intuitively expect as we draw closer to caucus day, but again not really unusual.
4 Likes
National polls, much like IA and NH on the Democratic side, very poorly reflect the state of the race. I’m beginning to think it’s very likely that Sanders takes IA and then NH, loses SC and NV and then proceeds to get decimated on Super Tuesday as minorities get a say in the process. I do, however, worry that it will lead to some Sanders supporters concluding there’s some sort of conspiracy to hand HRC the nod.
17 Likes
If the comments over at DK are any indication, most Sanders supporters believe this already.
And this article is quite depressing, and more than a little puzzling in some of the details:
5 Likes
I worry about that too–and I say that as a Sanders supporter.
5 Likes
Good article thanks. But I disagree with the notion that the GOP can correct to the center. They’ve invested way too much in the ANGER machine to correct anymore. This isn’t 2012. The Dems maybe in for a rough ride, but the GOP as a presidential party is screwed for a long while, I think.
If the national Republican Party were then to remain mired on the populist or hard right, Greenberg’s prophecy of a new American majority could turn out to be correct — not as a result of demographics, but because the Republicans would have become identified with only one part of their coalition. But it’s more likely that Republicans would take their defeat to heart, and nominate more acceptable candidates in 2018 and 2020, as they did in 2014 after suffering defeats in 2012.
3 Likes
Well said. And concisely putting into perspective what’s important.
2 Likes
Will be interesting to see how the two candidates handle the gun and health care issues tonight. With Bernie reversing position on the manufacturer liability thing (while his campaign implausibly denies it’s a change), Hillary is out today accusing him of flip-flopping on the issue. Which, to be sure, is much more of a fair criticism than some of her health care attacks over the last few ways.
Unfortunately for her, raising the “flip-flop” narrative is inherently problematic for her, given that she has flipped and flopped on way more issues than he has over the years, including the Iraq war, TPP, same-sex marriage, etc.
But, you play the cards you are dealt, and I expect she will play them well. At the same time, if there is one thing Bernie has proved, over and over, is that he’s not at all the pushover many assumed he would be, and that underestimating his potential is a perilous proposition.
Despite their many differences, one thing Hillary and Bernie have had in common in this race is a reluctance to go hard negative against their opponent (Hillary for strategic reasons – not wanting to unnecessarily alienate Bernie supporters, and Bernie because of his distaste for incivility, and perhaps strategically as well, since civility is a big part of his brand), but both have also shown that they will strike back hard when they feel sufficiently provoked.
And at this point, both seem to be feeling sufficiently provoked. So I tend to concur with the pundits who are predicting a hard-hitting debate. And no, I don’t expect either to engage in nasty personal attacks like the Republicans, but I do expect some pretty aggressive back and forths over the issues and their respective records. Which is all for the best, I think – whoever wins the nomination (I still see Hillary as a heavy favorite overall…though as Bernie put it “not so inevitable any more”) will need to be as toughened-up and ready as possible.
1 Like
Agree. Polls are supposed to measure public opinion, but sometimes they are used to shape it.
4 Likes
I agree, and share the concern. However, I’m also a bit concerned that there is a mirror-image version developing in some sectors of the Clinton camp too. In their version, Hillary would have long since buried Bernie if only the media weren’t giving him more positive coverage than he (in their minds) deserves. Which to Bernie supporters seems like a pretty crazy proposition, given how little coverage he received early on, the fact that nearly all coverage until recently, and still a strong majority of coverage, basically dismisses his chances.
But I do agree that there is more risk of a significant number of Bernie supporters “boycotting” the election if Hillary is the nominee than the reverse. And this is not just based on commenters on Daily Kos and HuffPo and the like, but there has actually been some polling on this which I saw a few weeks ago. I’m having trouble coming up with it in a quick Google search today, but as I recall about 85% Bernie supporters said they would vote for Hillary in the general if she was the nominee, whereas over 90% of Hillary supporters said they would support Bernie if he were the nominee. It wasn’t a huge difference, but it was a significant one.
I see two likely explanations for that. The first is the most obvious – Bernie has more support among young voters, first-time voters, and irregular voters. By definition the first-time voters have never been in this position before, so may not really have considered the question much yet. And of course young and new voters are more likely to be a bit more naive / idealistic.
The second factor is that, at least up to now and to a large degree even now, Hillary has been seen as by far the most likely winner of the nomination. So it may just be a lot easier for Hillary’s supporters to say “sure, I’d vote for Bernie, if he won,” because they saw / see little chance of actually facing that choice.
Not sure how much of a factor that second one is (if at all) but there is a certain logic to it as at least a partial explanation. Still I think the larger factor is that Hillary’s voters are, on average, older and have been to this movie before.
At any rate, I’m cautiously optimistic that once the nomination is secure, and these voters are faced with the contrast between Hillary and whatever Republican, or Bernie and whatever Republican, most will decide that a President Trump or Cruz (or whatever) is a more-than-sufficient reason to get off their high horse and vote for the Democratic nominee. Both candidates have pledged to support the nominee, even if it is not them, and in particular Bernie has been very clear that even if he loses the nomination, he will do everything he can to help the nominee win in the general election.
To any fellow Bernie supporters out there who are considering “sitting out the race” – or voting write-in or for a third-party or independent candidate or whatever – I would just ask you to bear in mind what Bernie himself has said: "Let me be very clear, Hillary Clinton is infinitely better than any of the Republican candidates."
5 Likes