2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumPPP: Hillary Won the SC Dem Candidate Forum
Just saw on Rachel Maddow that PPP just released a poll of Dem primary voters taken Nov. 7-8 that found 67% said Hillary won, 16% said Bernie won, 6% said O'Malley won and 11% were not sure.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)What they hear.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)thanks
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)This is about US, not HRH.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)That being said, may the rest of your life be the best of your life.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)Tune in to RM for the full PPP poll but here's what Rachel had to tell us tonight!
Polling on Change of Opinion
More Positive / Less Positive / No Difference
HRC... 61% ----------14% ---------- 25%
BS.... 51% ----------11 % --------- 36%
O'M... 38%-----------18% --------- 43%
Polling on Won the Forum
HRC 67%
BS 16%
O'M 6%
Not Sure 11%
Plan to Vote for in Primary
HRC 72%
BS 18%
O'M 5%
Renew Deal
(81,871 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...caused more viewers to think positively of them than negatively.
BlueMTexpat
(15,373 posts)elleng
(131,103 posts)about people's responses to Governor O'Malley. Wonder who PPP polled. Likely a pretty small group, dontcha think?
Walk away
(9,494 posts)Those poll where they use science don't feed delusions!
msrizzo
(796 posts)It was just people in South Carolina.
taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)with the general Dem primary voters.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Why do you stay here?
MADem
(135,425 posts)There were people who actually thought Kucinich had a prayer. All you had to do was "believe" or something.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)South Carolina has not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976.
http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)in primaries and help select their state's delegates to the nominating convention. SC votes count, too.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)but was merely a series of interviews.
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)Cha
(297,655 posts)But, now.. it's all different because those polled thought Hillary won with the way she conducted herself. the most Presidential if you will..
I shall post your fine work of getting it all down from the tv/dvr rewind thing..
Thank you again, DURHAM!
Polling on Change of Opinion
More Positive / Less Positive / No Difference
HRC... 61% ----------14% ---------- 25%
BS.... 51% ----------11 % --------- 36%
O'M... 38%-----------18% --------- 43%
Polling on Won the Forum
HRC 67%
BS 16%
O'M 6%
Not Sure 11%
Plan to Vote for in Primary
HRC 72%
BS 18%
O'M 5%
elleng
(131,103 posts)SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)As another DUer noted, PPP also asked people whether they liked the candidate more, less or the same after the Forum. Those results similarly had Hillary on top:
Polling on Change of Opinion
More Positive / Less Positive / No Difference
HRC... 61% ----------14% ---------- 25%
BS.... 51% ----------11 % --------- 36%
O'M... 38%-----------18% --------- 43%
Also:
Plan to Vote for in Primary
HRC 72%
BS 18%
O'M 5%
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110726114#post11
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)get it.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)If people really want to "get their democracy back", then they're going to have to realize not every part of an election cycle is a competition.
Forums and town halls are useful for getting to know the candidates and giving them some largely uninterrupted time to make a case for themselves and their policies. Debates are for comparing and contrasting and seeing candidates challenge each other on the issues.
Two very different venues.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)who more people trusted, or the one with the message that impressed more people, the one who more people believed was the most confident and most prepared. By their very nature, polls are subjective and just a snapshot in time of how people were feeling at that very moment.
"Winning" doesn't have to mean that they were engaged in a brawl or that they were verbally challenging each other directly. "Winning" doesn't mean there's a literal scoreboard. The scoreboard is in each person's mind, based on their opinions and what's most important to them.
I understand that you aren't thrilled with the results, but the argument you appear to be making (presumably, that someone can't "win" unless all three candidates are competing simultaneously) seems to be one that's based more on emotion than reason.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)I am not having an "emotional" reaction, nor am I arguing about anything, nor am I basing my basing my question on an objection to the results. I just found it odd that a forum-type interview might be presented by poll-takers as a debate or other contest that could be won or lost. I have no knowledge of the details of the poll so I am not about to argue about its validity.
SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)Cha
(297,655 posts)See how that works?
LOL
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)primary.
South Carolina has not voted for a Democratic candidate for president since 1976.
http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina
The South Carolinians' favorite for our Democratic nomination should be ignored pretty much. South Carolina is an ultra-conservative state. It's not a good sign when a Democrat wins the primary there. The Democrat that wins the primary in South Carolina may not excite voters in the states most likely to vote Democratic.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)I wonder how many of those polled didn't even see it.
jfern
(5,204 posts)PPP really needs to quit trolling in their pols.
SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)I assume it will provide methodology details.
George II
(67,782 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)My goodness. Two memes in one.
William769
(55,147 posts)And that's a good thing.
Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)I'm more confident about her all the time.
Cha
(297,655 posts)Hillary!
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)She will kill the middle class more slowly than the Republicans, but she will.
And, no, I'm not taking it well. I hurt for this country and I'm too fucking old to move - I'd never find a job in another country at my age.
I really don't look forward to working until I die.
oasis
(49,407 posts)Gloria
(17,663 posts)digging at Clinton, probably because of these results, where Clinton cleaned up...
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)the blow back she has received about her stupid hair question to Hillary. Nope.
So, I guess she is expressing her anger over getting called out by insulting Hillary some more.
pnwmom
(108,994 posts)how each of the candidates did and she said Hillary was "very controlled" -- the passive term.
It's very different to say someone IS controlled -- as if Hillary was having to control herself -- than to say someone is IN control -- i.e., in charge.
I think Rachel was pissed that Hillary wouldn't answer her VP question -- that Hillary decided to take control of the interview. So she unconsciously twisted this into Hillary being controlled.
But show me a female candidate who isn't always "controlled" and I'll show you a Michelle Bachman. A candidate without a chance. Hillary would never have risen as far as she has if she behaved like . . . Bernie Sanders, for example. As a woman, she always has to present herself as very calm and controlled. There is no other option.
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)We expect her to be for several reasons but she just isn't. Or, as I said the other day -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251777276#post26
Cha
(297,655 posts)she aced it.
Deal with it, Rachel. When Hillary is in the GE against the moron.. Rachel will have to give acknowledge how good Hillary is.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)I guess that we will still be hearing about all of the on line polls that Sanders won but which no one cares about
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)....who want the next president to represent "the struggling, the striving, AND the successful" (Hillary Clinton's stated goal).
As if the successful don't have enough without a president's help.
George II
(67,782 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...which Hillary Clinton discussed in the most detail at the forum.
She made clear that she intends to seek zero changes to it.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'd like to see it ended, but I'm in my party's minority (not to mention my country's) for thinking that.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)MrWendel
(1,881 posts)are gonna have a hissy fit about this.
Cha
(297,655 posts)that's how they make their money.
Bernblu
(441 posts)or is this another BS poll by PPP? Where is the link?
SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)As Rachel says, watch this space.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)Obviously Rachel is dancing to the tune of the producers and reading their scripts now instead of honest reporting.
I really thought she was better than that.
ram2008
(1,238 posts)SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)Cha
(297,655 posts)Cha
(297,655 posts)people polled showed Hillary won.. then it's all bitter sour grapes.
Mahalo SunSeeker!
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)http://socialnewsdaily.com/59087/reddit-user-claims-he-was-paid-to-troll-bernie-sanders-supporters/
Besides, what does that person's claim have to do with the results of this PPP poll?
Cha
(297,655 posts)http://socialnewsdaily.com/59087/reddit-user-claims-he-was-paid-to-troll-bernie-sanders-supporters/
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)She's already been busted buying followers on Twitter.
Cha
(297,655 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)It's amazing her supporters still cling to this neocon.
Cha
(297,655 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)That kind of digging when she paraded that picture around? That was really classy. She is our Tony Blair...anointed to head the democrats by bankers, hedge funds and weapons manufacturers...doing their bidding...and lying about it. There isn't a big enough shovel or tractor for her BS.
Cha
(297,655 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I've never seen a candidate this repelling within her own party. I guess she'll just have to be more appealing to independents and republicans. Is that possible? It should be but in this upside down world they hate her but truthfully they should love her because she is so much like them. Go figure. Ahhh...keep going....right...great response.
Cha
(297,655 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Thanks for that. Does anyone in their right mind think Hillary wants a better world? I have yet to meet one face to face. Like Republicans she has other designs. Bernie is the first I've seen since Carter and Kennedy. Obama can't claim it either.
Cha
(297,655 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Not like an ostrich with its head in the sand though. With something so rare and precious as TRUTH why does the supply always exceed the demand? Not for long I do believe.
BlueMTexpat
(15,373 posts)are actually libertarian.
How many of these are Dems? How many are eligible and registered to vote? How many have ever voted for a Democratic candidate in the GE?
The overwhelming majority of registered and liberal Democratic voters that I know find Hillary to be the best Dem candidate. See, anyone can say what you just said, but those of us who have been lifelong liberal Dems likely have more credibility with other longtime Dems here. The polls to date certainly bear this out.
Does that mean that Hillary will indeed be the Dem nominee? As of now, it is more likely than not. But that won't truly be the case until the primary results are in.
Based on your comment here, you believe that the majority of those polled obviously know anything at all and thus you scorn the majority of Dem voters. That's hardly a winning tactic.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)The old deflection, conflation libertarian distraction. Yes if someone calls our corporate sell out so-called democrats who mirror republicans then they must be like Ron Paul. Face it...people are flat out turned off by Hillary because she is two-faced. Not because of Republican delusions but because of ones democrats see. And yes they all vote. Luckily I live in one of the most liberal states in the country...most of this country is an embarrassment especially since 911 and that includes the democratic establishment in many conservative areas.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)The reasons repubs hate her are a diversion and not real. It's an age old game. Gin up hate on the other side that is unreasonable and inflammatory and by comparison it will negate any real opposition to unjust behavior. So if Repubs hate let's say a certain despot I'm supposed to like that despot. Sorry but I look at every person or thing with my own skepticism and not someone else's. People like you on both sides are so easy to divide and conquer. So simpleminded.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Remember when she paraded around a photo of Obama in a turban? She's a neocon with no shame.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)EOM
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)in general. Very little chance that any Democrat will win there in 2016. If a Democrat wins there, the Democrat will win everywhere.
In 2012, South Carolina voted 54.6% for Romney and 44% for Obama.
http://www.politico.com/2012-election/results/president/south-carolina/
It's an early primary state, but its Democratic primary is irrelevant.
California's primary should count for more. We have 55 electoral college votes and we vote Democratic.
There is no way under current Democratic Party leadership and with Hillary as our candidate that we will win South Carolina.
With Bernie and emphasis on the economic issues, we might increase our vote in Southern states like South Carolina, but with Hillary we will not. And even with Bernie as our candidate, South Carolina is an extremely conservative, Republican state.
These results are nice but should not be considered as relevant to the Democratic race. We need to get our voters out in swing states like Ohio and Florida and then in the states with a lot of electoral college votes.
I'm for the 50-state approach, but South Carolina is probably going to only vote Democratic if the other 49 do it first. Alabama might be even more conservative than California, but Alabama elected a Democratic governor some years back.
Democrats have served as governor of South Carolina for only 12 of the past 40 years.
The last time South Carolina voted for a Democrat for president was Jimmy Carter in 1976.
http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina
South Carolinians like conservative candidates. That's why they are going for Hillary. Hillary is the conservative Democrats dream candidate.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)sure Sanders wants the delegates also. He is going after them.
Polling on Change of Opinion
More Positive / Less Positive / No Difference
HRC... 61% ----------14% ---------- 25%
BS.... 51% ----------11 % --------- 36%
O'M... 38%-----------18% --------- 43%
Polling on Won the Forum
HRC 67%
BS 16%
O'M 6%
Not Sure 11%
Plan to Vote for in Primary
HRC 72%
BS 18%
O'M 5%
SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)AA voters like progressive candidates.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We need to go beyond one demographic and appeal to a broader group of voters in SC and the South. We don't want to lose the AA vote, but clearly we have to appeal to a broader group of voters in the South if we want to win elections.
SunSeeker
(51,696 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)Good grief.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Our large immigrant population and urban centers mean we are liberal.
But we don't vote in the primary until June.
People from red and purple states vote and decide what candidates are still running when we finally get a chance to have a voice.
The order of the primaries should be changed.
Democrats should allow heavily Democratic states to vote first.
As it is now, Iowa is fairly conservative, New Hampshire moderate and South Carolina very conservative. None of the really, really liberal states like California, Oregon, New York, Massachusetts, etc. get a word in until the conservatives have picked the candidate.
That is wrong. It pushes the nation rightward, ever rightward. We see the results in the chaotic, anti-government bunch leading Congress right now.