2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI will not take Bernie Sanders' candidacy seriously until
I see polls about how he matches up against the GOP candidates. Democratic voters need to have this information!
stonecutter357
(12,698 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)I mean, there have to be some out there somewhere.
Could it be that other candidates are pressuring the pollsters to keep them quiet because the results would reflect positively on Sanders' candidacy?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)I don't think the pollsters have been taking him seriously enough, and haven't bothered to do such polling yet.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Media is taking him seriously, just not giving us polls about Sanders v. GOP.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)they absolutely have the head to head data. They are just choosing not to release it.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)He's second under Clinton. People need to know how he stacks up against the Republicans.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Good lord.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)one to make us believe that there is a conspiracy, and the other to make us believe that there isn't one.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Right now there is ZERO information about this hugely important factor. As I said to someone else if you find a poll please post. Democratic voters need to know.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)"Every poll we have done for the last 2 months matches up Bernie Sanders and the other Democrats with Scott Walker, who led our most recent national Republican survey. You can find all of those on our website. In general they have shown that Sanders would not be a viable general election candidate-
Tom"
I think I will email other pollsters about this issue.
______________________________________________________________________
PPP is described as one of the "most accurate" polling companies and also as a "Democratic-leaning" polling company because it polls only for Democratic and progressive campaigns and organizations on a private basis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_Polling
Now, the veracity of two people are at stake, that of the person who mailed me and that of Mr. Jensen. Since the person who mailed me shall remain anonymous I will post the e-mail address and phone number of Tom Jensen so his veracity can be established or impeached, ergo:
tomj@publicpolicypolling.com
919-744-6312.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)being out in the open? What are they afraid of?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the media needs a horse race leading up to the primaries ... if the Bernie/gop polling shows him weak, then for most Democrats the primaries would be over because the most important point for us is electing a Democrat.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)they don't seem to have a problem touting polls that still show Clinton with comfortable leads over Sanders. Such polls would tend to minimize the horse race aspect yet we still see them all the time.
I suspect that Sen Sanders polls surprisingly strong against all or most of the republican contenders.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)If he polls strong I would like to know that. Why aren't we allowed to know?
tularetom
(23,664 posts)If the answer is yes, then despite your avatar, you don't necessarily support Clinton. You just want to back a winner, and I can understand that.
If it's no, then what's the point? You have your own reasons for supporting Clinton and you won't change in any case.
Anyway, I suspect that the Clinton folks fear that a lot of supporters would jump ship if the whole inevitability meme were discredited, because that's really all she has.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Would your opinion of Bernie change if he polls low?
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Look, it's six months until the first primary, polls at this point are meaningless. I wouldn't gloat if the polls showed Sanders in the lead over every republican, nor would I be depressed if they showed him to be trailing all of them by significant margins.
A lot can happen between now and New Hampshire.
Anyway, good on ya for responding as you did. I wouldn't have a very high opinion of anybody who allowed a frickin poll to make their electoral choices for them.
Response to MoonRiver (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)in the eyes of the electorate. Independents and even moderate Republicans factor in also. Why is this confusing to you?
Response to MoonRiver (Reply #9)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)I think you must be very frightened about what Bernie v. GOP match up polls would show. If I were a Sanders supporter, I would want to see the results of such polls, believing he would ace the competition. Assuming that's what Bernie supporters believe.
marble falls
(57,479 posts)how much they support Bernie's positions and how much the GOP has policy that doesn't respond to their real concerns at all like health care, banks, medicare, social security, foreign policy.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)marble falls
(57,479 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)They don't turn into data if all you have is anecdotes.
In order for it to be data, it needs to be a randomized representative sample of the total population and do as much as possible to correct for potential bias such as people talking to a known supporter of a particular candidate or party.
marble falls
(57,479 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)One that nearly all scientists have (and that's good enough for me). Of course, it's more accurate to say, anecdotes are not good evidence (i.e. they are data, worthless data).
karynnj
(59,510 posts)One faction of the right and independents, is libertarians. In reality, neither Bernie or HRC are in agreement with Libertarian ideas, but many see Bernie as more in agreement - even when Bernie disputed the idea that he had a lot in common with Ron Paul. I heard him very eloquently list the many points of disagreement when he was asked if he agreed they had lots in common at a Burlington town hall he had.
Not to mention there are many disaffected people who might vote if Bernie is the candidate and not otherwise.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)brooklynite
(94,950 posts)http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_61615.pdf
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)That's how I read it, but obviously could have missed something.
brooklynite
(94,950 posts)...one thing to consider is the willingness of respondents to answer extended questions. Clinton is considered to have a strong probability of winning the nomination (and no, that's not just media bias), so she's given head to heads against the large Republican field. Ask the same of Sanders and you double the set of questions (triple if you add O'Malley); there a strong likelihood that you'll lose the participation of the respondent if the survey gets too long.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)before primaries begin.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Too much is at stake to put up anyone other than a candidate that is most likely to retain the WH for 8 more years against the fascist assault.
Too much is at stake for dreaming, just yet.
Even the French Revolution took 70 years to shake out...I counsel progression and patience.
calimary
(81,594 posts)I like Bernie too. But I like Hillary AND her chances in the general.
Besides, it's time for a woman. Especially since we finally have one who's capable and viable.
Stevepol
(4,234 posts)considering the poll took place June 16. A lot has happened since then. Bernie's main problem is name recognition. I would wait for polls about how Bernie would stack up against Repubs until Bernie's name is better known and people have a chance to digest and assimilate that info. Hillary is very well known already, about as well known as she is ever apt to be.
marble falls
(57,479 posts)thesquanderer
(12,000 posts)It doesn't address the topic of the OP at all. It talks about how Sanders has more support among Dems than various Repub candidates have among Repubs, and doesn't say anything about how Sanders would match up against any Repub candidate.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)What I got from that link is that Sanders is 42 points behind Hillary among Democrats, but ahead of all GOP competitors. By how much, especially as compared to Hillary, is a guess. I would like some serious polling with media attention. It's all murky right now.
mythology
(9,527 posts)There are substantially more Republicans running for their nomination. By default, you would expect that would lower the level of support any individual candidate will likely get because you are dividing the same potential support (100%) over 15 or 20 candidates rather than over 4 candidates in the Democratic primary.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)So tell me exactly why those same polls can't be run for Bernie. Is he "special?"
madokie
(51,076 posts)Hillary will never be the President of this country and that you can bank on.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)FAIL.
madokie
(51,076 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)This is why we have primaries, to see if Democrats prefer one or the other. Sanders can beat any Republican, in spite of comparisons to George McGovern.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Seriously, the primary voters need and DESERVE to see how he stacks up against the GOP.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)she votes "no" on the Iraq war resolution.
Oops.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)lack of suport of one, I gave my reason for lack of support for the other.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)I like Bernie. All I'm asking for is polls about how he matches up against the GOP candidates.
Response to MoonRiver (Original post)
moobu2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)I still think he and his supporters believe he has a shot at the primary and general. Polls, if they are ever produced, will tell the tale.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)I understand we're in a primary and everyone wants their candidate to get the nomination, but its getting kind of ridiculous. Either you haven't been paying attention to his candidacy(which makes you uninformed), or you think hes lying. Bernie hasn't given any indications that he is untrustworthy, quite the contrary.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)just before the primary voting starts. I believe by then the polling will reflect more accurately a public that has had time to check out all the candidate's records and policies. I guess you might say these things are still "evolving".
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Polling exists between Hillary and the Dem candidates; Hillary and all the Repub candidates. Why not Bernie, and the other Dem candidates, against the GOP? I'm getting the feeling that this prospect is very threatening to Bernie supporters.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)I thought Hillary supporters were smarter than that.
Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #34)
moobu2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)Funny, this board hates polls when they don't go our way, but we love them when they support our narrative.
Maybe you shouldn't care what corporate biased polls have to say and support the candidate you think has the best platform?
Then again Hillary is the corporate candidate, makes sense. I'll listen to labor, you listen to Gallop and CNN.
brooklynite
(94,950 posts)ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)I support Bernie, and the the numbers after the caucus are all that matter to me. I don't look at politics as a football game.
Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #43)
moobu2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)The continuation of selling our country to Wall Street? More war? Lol. She'll get things done alright.
CrispyQ
(36,557 posts)You're the second person to insinuate this, this morning. Why are you folks parroting this lie?
http://inthesetimes.com/article/17572/bernie_sanders_president
To the dismay some idealists, Sanders rejected the idea of running for president as an independent. No matter what I do, I will not be a spoiler, Sanders said. I will not play that role in helping to elect some right-wing Republican as President of the United States.
Before he decided to run, Bernie stated that if he did run, it would have to be as a dem because only the dem & repub parties have the infrastructure/funding for a presidential election.
Bernie will not throw the election to the repubs if he loses the primary.
Response to CrispyQ (Reply #57)
moobu2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)You're own gut instinct? If anything it will be Hillary supporters that take their ball and go home.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)If a candidate can win.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)it doesn't really matter a whole bunch. We'll be left with a choice between two Wall Street candidates, and the corporate forces will have cemented their victory for decades to come. To me the fight for Bernie eclipses any partisan agenda, it is about reclaiming representative Democracy for our citizens. The train is moving fast, and folks can get on board or get out of the way. We have one shot at this, and I for one am not going to waste it coddling to those that are comfortable with the status quo.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)against the GOP candidates.
I don't want to get into a philosophical discussion about why you support Bernie. I disagree with your assessment of Hillary, but that's not the point of this thread.
calimary
(81,594 posts)Glad you're here. May I gently suggest that we start reframing that a little?
Perhaps make it "It's Bernie or ANOTHER DEMOCRAT."
Because if it isn't Bernie, and everybody who preferred him stays home and pouts on Election Day, then it will be WAY WORSE than any "Third Way DINO." And THAT you can take to the bank.
The worst Democrat is a lot better than the "best" CON. For one thing, you don't see ANY of them sidling up to paul wolfowitz on foreign policy, do you? OR planning to consult george w. dry-drunk on anything, do you? Or to ron paul and his fairy-tale/Utopia/up-on-some-vaporous-make-believe-cloud-somewhere libertarian world. You already KNOW what they'll do. Even the worst of those on our team can at least be worked with. None of them will summarily ignore anything that comes from our side - like I guarantee you ANY of the GOPers will. You want THEIR idea of a dream Supreme Court????
And I'd venture to say that if Bernie does not go all the way, he will still have pushed the whole party machinery farther toward the left. And anybody who does beat him to the nomination - and I'm betting it'll be Hillary - WILL take note of that because they're going to want Bernie's followers to come over to them, and I suspect they'll know what they have to do to woo them. They're gonna want all those Bernie supporters kept in the fold. I know I certainly do! And I think, with her brains and shrewdness, that's exactly what Hillary would do, too.
I happen to put a lot of stock into those "listening tours" of hers. Look how she conquered New York state. When she emerged from First Lady status and decided she wanted to be a public servant in her own right, they moved to New York and she decided to aim for the Senate from there. The opposition and the skeptics and the scoffers pelted her with criticism. Threw all kinds of "carpetbagger" shit at her and "oh how arrogant she is" shit at her and "who the hell does she think she is?" shit at her. Meanwhile, she was touring the state in little bitty venues and availabilities - listening to people. Not the Wall Streeters. Not the banksters. Not the high-rollers. The PEOPLE. People in the small towns. People in the redder parts of the state and the countryside and the rural areas. She spent months doing that. She collected opinions and preferences and complaints and stories of individual kitchen-table need from stem to stern. She went out, reached out, and found out what THEY wanted. And then she formulated her campaign on that. And she won. TWICE.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton
So I believe in her. And I fully realize she's not perfect. But she's as good as they come in my book. And who have the other guys got? carly fiorina forcryingoutloud??????? Who have they EVER had as far as women candidates go? sarah palin? michele bachmann? FUCK! Hell, not a single one of their men measures up - even an inch off the ground. They're all busy pushing in the opposite direction all the time!
I've already said if Bernie beats Hillary to the nomination, then I will happily be all in for him. Without hesitation and no moping or pouting, either. I wish I could say I hear the same pledge coming back this way from Bernie supporters but I don't. I hope they come around because I believe SHE'S gonna be it. And she's gonna need them onboard, however reluctant and pissed off and pouting they might be. WE ALL are gonna need them onboard - if that's how it shakes out, and if we are really serious about keeping the White House in Democratic hands.
Stardust
(3,894 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,169 posts)So there.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Here is a PPP summary for Washington:
PPP's newest Washington poll finds that Hillary Clinton leads the entire Republican field in the state- by margins smaller than what Barack Obama won by in 2008 and 2012, but larger than what Al Gore and John Kerry won by in 2000 and 2004.
Clinton leads the GOP hopefuls by anywhere from 10 to 15 points. Ben Carson and Marco Rubio come the closest, each trailing by 10 at 49/39. Jeb Bush and Scott Walker are each down by 11 at 48/37 and 49/38 respectively. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul face 12 point deficits at 50/38. Mike Huckabee and Rick Perry lag by 13 points at 50/37. And Chris Christie does the worst of the Republican field with a 15 point deficit at 49/34. Clinton doesn't quite match the 15-17 point margins Obama won the state by, but exceeds the 5-7 point ones Gore and Kerry had.
We also tested the other Democratic hopefuls against Scott Walker but even in this dark blue state, none of them lead him. Bernie Sanders achieves a tie at 35, and the rest of the Democrats trail him- Jim Webb by 1 point at 33/32, Martin O'Malley by 3 points at 34/31, and Lincoln Chafee by 6 points at 35/29. The weak performances of the alternate Democrats are a byproduct of their being so little known that they get only 54-61% of their own party's vote but nevertheless they show how much more formidable Clinton is than anyone else on her side.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/05/clinton-up-big-in-washington.html#more
This is over a month old and is also limited to a particular state and one potential Republican nominee.
Response to mythology (Reply #47)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)It's a very limited poll.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)There are more than 2 Dems in the race right now. Are they held to this same standard?
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Ideally we should see match-ups with all the candidates on both sides.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)She beats them all. I'd like to know how the other Dem candidates would do. Something wrong with that?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)calimary
(81,594 posts)Just a few posts upthread from here.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)would mean nothing?
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)if polls showed him being clobbered by the GOP. That's logic 101.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)if Hillary beats Bernie, then she the stronger candidate to run against the republicans.
But if Bernie beats Hillary, it's the other way around. That is what's logical.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I can see a case either way.
The case for Clinton: She's clearly more conservative than Sanders. Some centrist voters, to Clinton's right but to the Republican's left, might consider themselves ideologically closer to Clinton than to the Republican, but closer to the Republican than to Sanders. She's also more familiar to the voters who don't pay much attention to politics and who skip the primaries and caucuses.
The case for Sanders: The election isn't primarily about where the candidates are on the left-right scale; it's primarily about turnout. Sanders could trail Clinton among the more committed voters who show up for primaries and caucuses, but, as a much less conventional candidate, do a better job of motivating people to vote in the general even if they've become apathetic about politics.
Which case is stronger? Way too early to tell.
It's even harder to handicap O'Malley's chances, because he combines some of the strengths and some of the weaknesses of each of the others.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Yes we need that information.
onecaliberal
(32,991 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Deflection some?
onecaliberal
(32,991 posts)Who best represents the interests of my family and this country. I won't argue with you about this any further. My morals don't need poll testing.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)It was a simple request for polls that show how Bernie does against the GOP. Nothing more. Nothing less.
onecaliberal
(32,991 posts)Some of us don't need to poll test policy to be for it.
Enjoy the dust bin.
SunSeeker
(51,796 posts)A Little Weird
(1,754 posts)Polls can be valuable tools for campaigns but voters shouldn't rely on pollsters to tell them how to vote. Critically considering a candidate's record and policy positions is the way to choose who to vote for.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)But, more importantly, why poll one Democratic against the GOP candidates, but not the other Dem candidates? Seems quite biased and unfair to me.
A Little Weird
(1,754 posts)Sancho
(9,071 posts)any kind of horse race is fun to talk about. Why ruin it with.."Bernie had a big crowd, but the polls show he would lose badly in any race against Bush/Walker/etc." would not be a good headline.
After all, Bernie is interesting to talk to!!
I think the polls don't show Bernie as competitive yet, so there's nothing to report.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)There can't only be polls about one Democratic candidate.
frylock
(34,825 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)underestimating him? Really strange statement.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Log into Facebook and take a looksee at Sen Sanders presence on social media.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)I would encourage you to continue to not take Sen Sanders' campaign seriously.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)And they don't look good. Hurrr durr!!!!
frylock
(34,825 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)In the meantime, you are welcome to pester the pollsters.
I'll be much more interested in what the polls say six months from now.
karynnj
(59,510 posts)At this point, he is simply too unkown. Many groups - including the elderly and veterans - who really really like him in Vermont have yet to really hear or see him.
If he does become viable, I suspect it will be because he wins Iowa and gets heard in the media. Even two months ago, I would have thought that impossible, but he may be the best fit for where the country is in 2016.
In 1976, Jimmy Carter was far from a mainstream Democrat and it was via retail politics in Iowa that he gained visibility. His strength then after Watergate was his integrity. Could the incorruptibility that Sanders represents be appealing to many not ideologically driven people?
As to electibility, I would not push this if I supported Clinton. To you this should matter only if you think he is actually a threat to HRC. To be that, he has to pull off an upset that is bigger than Obama 2008. If he is that strong, why would he lose to a very weak Republican field?
NOTE: The Republicans don't face a challenge of defeating a very strong candidate. We do - either HRC wins as an almost incumbent president type candidate or we have someone who beats her - thus a tested campaigner .
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)The reason I conclude that Sanders and OMalley are viable is that this is so early. DUers are fixated on politics but the general electorate is not. There are plenty of people out there who, asked about a Bush versus Clinton race, would think Dubya was running against Bill, they not even being conversant with that term limits thing.
In general election matchups, Clinton is doing somewhat better right now but theres more than a year of campaigning yet to come. Theres plenty of time for the leading Republicans to close the gap against her. Theres even more opportunity for the trailing Democrats to close the gap against Walker (or some other Republican), given how many voters dont know that much about them. None of these three Democrats wins or loses by such a huge margin that we can take the poll as a sure indication of what will happen sixteen months from now.
The poll also has some information about Chafee and Webb, for those interested.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)You seem to differ with the pollster on how to interpret his own polling.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Polls necessarily sample how people would vote if the election were held tomorrow. The one thing that's clear is that the election isn't being held tomorrow.
As one example among a host that could be cited, I refer you to this poll: "Gallup Daily: McCain Maintains 5-Point Lead". As of September 9, McCain was leading Obama, 49% to 44%. And, by the way, that was September 9, 2008, not September (let alone June) of 2007.
So, if you picture Hillary Clinton's inauguration in 2017, with outgoing President McCain on the podium with her as is customary, you might want to rethink.
In two months, Obama turned a 5-point poll deficit into a 7-point popular-vote win, a swing of 12 points. O'Malley and Sanders have sixteen months to attack Walker's current lead of 8 points. Also note that the "No opinion" tally in the 2008 poll was 4% but is (unsurprisingly) much higher in the current polling on the 2016 election, so O'Malley and Sanders have much more polling room as well as much more time to overcome the current gap.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)I wonder how many people said that in 2006 about President Obama ?
pugetres
(507 posts)What is so different now that you feel that I need that sort of information to decide who best represents my values and principles?
Response to pugetres (Reply #103)
moobu2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
pugetres
(507 posts)But, there still is no need for a poll to help me decide who to cast my primary vote for.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Time. She has been shown up in polls with Republican and possible DNC candidates. It will be interesting.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a question worth asking. Why is it that we're more willing to support someone, even if they're not the best candidate, just because everyone else is?
I take Bernie seriously because he is the best choice for me. Not because he looks good in the polls. The status quo will never change if we keep doing as we're told.
OnlyBernieBurnsBush
(63 posts)In 2000, Bernie won by 51 points over his GOP opponent.
Gore only beat Bush by 10.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It's pretty clear we are looking at Kucinich 2.0 here. Great at small ball, lost and confused when playing with the big boys. Really, a life of government with little accomplished except for lofty rhetoric.