Discussion for article #240176
The poll was conducted from August 26 to Sept. 2 among 966 registered voters (+/- 3.2%), 413 potential GOP primary voters (+/- 4.8) and 356 potential Democratic primary voters (+/- 5.2).
413+356=769 What happened to the other 197 polled? I must be missing something.
Including Biden in the poll when heâs not running pretty much makes this poll useless. For those who support Biden, who would they support if he doesnât run? Would they all support Sanders 58% vs. 32% for Clinton? Would they all support Clinton for 48% vs. 41%?
In any event, as the partyâs anointed one Clinton should be doing a lot better.
1 Like
Including Biden in the poll when heâs not running pretty much makes this poll useless. For those who support Biden, who would they support if he doesnât run? Would they all support Sanders 58% vs. 32% for Clinton? Would they all support Clinton for 48% vs. 41%?
They actually did ask the question both ways, it just wasnât reported in this article here at TPM. This is from MSNBC:
âWithout Biden in the race, Sandersâ lead over Clinton in the current survey increases to 11 points, 49% to 38%.â
4 Likes
Hereâs a more detailed report of the Marist Pollâs findings, and at the bottom of the article are links to the complete tables for both Iowa and New Hampshire.
In Iowa, with Joe Biden in the race, the numbers are Hillary 38, Bernie 27, Joe 20, an 11 point lead for Hillary over Bernie.
Without Biden in the race, itâs Hillary 48, Bernie 37, same 11 point lead.
In this Iowa poll, Joeâs 20 points appears to split equally between Bernie and Hillary in his absence. None of the low-single-digits candidatesâ numbers change with Joe in or out, and neither do the undecideds, which remain at 8%.
So if Hillaryâs supporters are hoping that without Joe Biden in the race, sheâd be ahead (or at least be less far behind) in New Hampshire, or that she would have a larger lead in Iowa, this poll would appear to throw cold water on these hopes. On the (relatively) bright side for Hillary supporters, it doesnât appear that Joe Biden entering the race would hurt her more than Bernie, which some had speculated would be the case given that they are both mainstream, establishment candidates with very similar policy views.
3 Likes
You guys need to read the article at the following link, it offers a whole lot of insight as to why Bernie Sanders polling well in NH does not really mean all that much right now. It offers some unique insight.
Last two paragraphs pasted from the article:
There are other indications that Sanders is unlikely to win the nomination. He hasnât won a single endorsement from a governor, senator or member of the U.S. House of Representatives (unlike Obama at this point in the 2008 campaign). Sanders is also well behind in the money race (again, unlike Obama). These indicators havenât changed over the past month.
But even if you put aside those metrics, Sanders is running into the problem that other insurgent Democrats have in past election cycles. You can win Iowa relying mostly on white liberals. You can win New Hampshire. But as Gary Hart and Bill Bradley learned, you canât win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.
Absolutely true that Bernie canât win the nomination without substantial support from African-Americans, and also Latinos by the way. But way too early to say whether her lead among these groups will continue to be as strong as itâs been up to this point. At one point she also had staggering leads among women and self-described moderates, but her lead among both has been falling fast. In this newest New Hampshire poll sheâs down to a 6 point lead among women, and dead-even among self-described moderates. If there was something about Bernieâs campaign or platform that was inherently less favorable to minorities, that would be one thing. But there really isnât.
The conventional wisdom still says (and this is parroted in most news reports) that she is more âelectableâ than Bernie, but several recent polls show him doing as well or better against Republican contenders, so this selling point may be on the verge of evaporating entirely.
She still enjoys higher name recognition and âknows enough to offer an opinion on the candidateâ numbers among minorities, but that will almost certainly change as the debates get underway, and as more people in states other than Iowa and New Hampshire begin to pay closer attention to the race and the candidates. Only then will we really have a good indication of whether Hillaryâs lead among minorities is attributable to much more than the head-start she had. We shall see.
2 Likes
Really? Youâre still calling her the anointed one even though she has credible competition for the nomination and the media ignores her policy statements and instead focuses on the email nontroversy?
And who has anointed her?
1 Like
Bloody hell! Can Bernie really beat Trump or whomever if he actually gets nominated?
Most recent Quinnipiac poll (August 27th) had Sanders up by 3 points over Trump. RCP polling average has Sanders over Trump by 4 points, but includes a poll from back in July where Sanders was ahead of Trump by 20. It seems pretty clear that Trump has closed the gap substantially since then. More recent polls have showed a closer contest, with Trump leading in some. But all are basically within or close to the margin or error.
And this is all still with Trump having higher name recognition and âknows-enough-about-the-candidate-to-offer-an-opinionâ numbers. Which leaves Sanders a lot more room to grow as awareness of and knowledge about the candidate and his campaign continue to increase.
Sandersâ favorable/unfavorable numbers continue to top all the other candidate, and are way, way better than Trumpâs.
Oh yeah, and in the same Quinnipiac poll, Sanders beats Bush by 4 points, better than Clinton, who beats Bush by 2. Clinton does 2 points better than Sanders against Rubio, beating him by one point whereas Sanders loses to him by one point. But, again, all within the margin of error.
But the bottom line is, yes, from all indications it looks like Bernie could beat Trump and Bush. No guarantee, but at least as good a shot as Hillary has, according to a number of polls.
2 Likes
[quote=âJoeCool2, post:6, topic:25889â]
There are other indications that Sanders is unlikely to win the nomination. He hasnât won a single endorsement from a governor, senator or member of the U.S. House of Representatives (unlike Obama at this point in the 2008 campaign). Sanders is also well behind in the money race (again, unlike Obama). [/quote]
And he probably wonât because Democrats are whimps. They are too afraid to associate themselves with the demonized word âsocialist.â However, I donât see that harming Bernie because he has built a grassroot support. Furthermore, he and Trump have proven that voters do not want status quo.
[quote=âJoeCool2, post:6, topic:25889â]
you canât win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.[/quote]
African-Americans are really stupid on this. I can say that, I am African-American. They donât realize Bernieâs history of supporting civil rights. They probably wonât figure it out, either and will blindly support Hillary due to their unreasonable enthusiasm for Bill. But, Iâm not so sure that would make a difference. Millennials will make the difference, not so much African-Americans, who historically have low turnout anyway. Millennials have strong support for Bernie.
2 Likes
I donât think itâs stupidity. I think a big part of it is simply name recognition and Bill Clintonâs popularity with African-Americans.
But I suspect another big factor is perceived electability. Minorities, especially African-Americans, Latinos and immigrants, have the most to fear from a Republican victory, and are understandably wary of nominating a candidate who might have a lesser chance to beat the Republican nominee, whoever that turns out to be. Thatâs not âstupid,â itâs just self-preservation. And the media and the pundits have been loudly, repeatedly declaring for months now that Hillary is far more âelectableâ than Bernie (despite recent polling evidence that calls this assumption into question).
The affection for Bill Clinton isnât likely to change, and no doubt this will continue to help Hillary, but the name recognition gap between Hillary and Bernie is certainly going to narrow (if not disappear entirely) and the âelectabilityâ argument may be falling apart too. As the first happens, and if the second does too, and meanwhile Bernie wins New Hampshire (and perhaps Iowa), then we may begin to see a substantial number of minority voters being more open to supporting Bernie over Hillary.
3 Likes
Its funny, Biden hasnât even declared yetâŚyet there is this âhopeâ. Personally that Biden number might evenly split or the majority of that # could go to Bernie. Iâm interested in her strategy going forward thoughâŚâreasonsâ.
Nobody has to declare any real support, until January. Now if you had said that NYâs senators had endorsed Hillary. But right now its Sept 6th, 2015.
Joaquin Castro is reportedly, on behalf of candidate Clinton, disparaging candidate Sandersâ outreach to Hispanics â among Hispanic audiences.
1 Like
Indeed. But some of his constituents are taking exception to his remarks, and itâs already forced him to qualify his remarks and modify his tone:
But as I noted above, Bernie does need to improve his standing with minority voters, including Hispanics. He has already done quite a bit of outreach to Hispanic organizations and leaders, and no doubt would have continued to with or without Castroâs comments â but if Castroâs criticism (even if self-serving and inaccurate) prompts the Sanders campaign to up its game in that area, so much the better.
[quote=âProfessorPoopypants, post:12, topic:25889â]
I donât think itâs stupidity. I think a big part of it is simply name recognition and Bill Clintonâs popularity with African-Americans. [/quote]
You donât think that in itself is stupid? You think voting for someone simply because youâve heard his/her name more than the rest, or because his/her spouse was charming to your community is reasonable?
This is the stupidity I am precisely referring to. I happen to have followed Bernie Sandersâ career for a long time. I know what he has done. But, if I had not, choosing not to find that out and settling on a vote for someone simply because I have heard of them before, would be stupid, IMO.
Unfortunately, this may have become the standard by which Americans vote, which is a shame and why Iâve said American voters, in general, are just dumb. Of course, the GOP obviously realizes this and exploits it to all its glory with demagoguery.
1 Like
I get what youâre saying, and I would agree that if people end up voting for Hillary because of her husband or because they heard of her first, those would be very poor reasons to vote for her. But thereâs a difference between telling a pollster who youâre favoring months away from the first primaries and caucuses, before even the debates, and before you are familiar with all the candidates, and what may happen once you learn more and see more. My hope, and cautiously optimistic belief, is that there are plenty of minority voters out there who have not completely âsettledâ on a candidate, and when they learn more about Bernie, his message, his record, and his campaign, many will come Bernieâs way.
And again, I will just reiterate that I think âperceived electabilityâ is a key issue here too. Like I said, while we all stand to lose in the event of a GOP victory it is minorities (and women) who stand to lose the most. So it is not necessarily âstupidâ to want to go with someone you think has a better chance of winning, even if you might not like their platform quite as much. And it has been hammered home in the media, over and over again, that Bernie would be less âelectable.â Iâm not at all sure thatâs true, but I can certainly understand why folks who are unfamiliar with Bernie, and keep hearing that he wouldnât be as strong a candidate, would be hesitant to back him. Hopefully this too will change, as the campaign unfolds. If the polling continues to show Bernie performing comparably to Clinton (or better) in match-ups against Republicans, at some point that âbut everyone knows he canât really winâ narrative may finally fade,
1 Like