• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reuters National Poll: Sanders 41.7% Clinton 35.5%

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
83,698
Reaction score
58,399
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
This kinda flies in the face of the media narrative this week who since the Nevada caucuses seemed to have started writing Sanders' epitaph. South Carolina will be a loss for Bernie but all the speculation of Super Tuesday ending Bernies' chances are waaaaayyyyy premature.


Sanders Leads Clinton by Six Percent Nationally in New Poll

The latest Reuters poll is defying the pundits’ predictions that Bernie lost ground after the five-point defeat in Nevada and shows Bernie Sanders taking the lead over Hillary Clinton by six percent nationally.

According to the data, this is not the first time that Bernie Sanders has passed Hillary Clinton this month, but it also signals a downward trend for the once heiress apparent. The Clinton camp would be hoping for a bounce after the Nevada caucus went their way, but this was not forthcoming.​
 
Interesting... but Establishment Democrats probably do not care all that much. The most important thing for the Sanders camp today is keeping a close watch on the pulse of superdelegates (more likely, media speculation and assumptions on where their vote will land.)
 
This kinda flies in the face of the media narrative this week who since the Nevada caucuses seemed to have started writing Sanders' epitaph. South Carolina will be a loss for Bernie but all the speculation of Super Tuesday ending Bernies' chances are waaaaayyyyy premature.


Sanders Leads Clinton by Six Percent Nationally in New Poll

The latest Reuters poll is defying the pundits’ predictions that Bernie lost ground after the five-point defeat in Nevada and shows Bernie Sanders taking the lead over Hillary Clinton by six percent nationally.

According to the data, this is not the first time that Bernie Sanders has passed Hillary Clinton this month, but it also signals a downward trend for the once heiress apparent. The Clinton camp would be hoping for a bounce after the Nevada caucus went their way, but this was not forthcoming.​

Sanders could beat Hillary if he wanted too. I am beginning to think he doesn't want too because if he did he could be doing the GOP's dirty work, and it would crush her. I don't get the Sanders campaign strategy frankly?


Tim-
 
This kinda flies in the face of the media narrative this week who since the Nevada caucuses seemed to have started writing Sanders' epitaph. South Carolina will be a loss for Bernie but all the speculation of Super Tuesday ending Bernies' chances are waaaaayyyyy premature.


Sanders Leads Clinton by Six Percent Nationally in New Poll

The latest Reuters poll is defying the pundits’ predictions that Bernie lost ground after the five-point defeat in Nevada and shows Bernie Sanders taking the lead over Hillary Clinton by six percent nationally.

According to the data, this is not the first time that Bernie Sanders has passed Hillary Clinton this month, but it also signals a downward trend for the once heiress apparent. The Clinton camp would be hoping for a bounce after the Nevada caucus went their way, but this was not forthcoming.​

23% of the people arent even voting, pretty much a joke of a poll since they arent polling likely voters. Who cares how many people sitting on the couch support the Larry David look alike
 
This kinda flies in the face of the media narrative this week who since the Nevada caucuses seemed to have started writing Sanders' epitaph. South Carolina will be a loss for Bernie but all the speculation of Super Tuesday ending Bernies' chances are waaaaayyyyy premature.


Sanders Leads Clinton by Six Percent Nationally in New Poll

The latest Reuters poll is defying the pundits’ predictions that Bernie lost ground after the five-point defeat in Nevada and shows Bernie Sanders taking the lead over Hillary Clinton by six percent nationally.

According to the data, this is not the first time that Bernie Sanders has passed Hillary Clinton this month, but it also signals a downward trend for the once heiress apparent. The Clinton camp would be hoping for a bounce after the Nevada caucus went their way, but this was not forthcoming.​

It doesn't matter. Clinton is the Corporate Candidate and the DNC wants the corporate candidate. America can like Sanders more than Clinton all they want, it doesn't matter. The Party wants Party supporters.
 
Sanders could beat Hillary if he wanted too. I am beginning to think he doesn't want too because if he did he could be doing the GOP's dirty work, and it would crush her. I don't get the Sanders campaign strategy frankly?


Tim-

He was a unkown nobody up against the most well known candidate by far in both parties. I'd say he's running a pretty damn good campaign strategy to be where he is in this race.
 
It doesn't matter. Clinton is the Corporate Candidate and the DNC wants the corporate candidate. America can like Sanders more than Clinton all they want, it doesn't matter. The Party wants Party supporters.

I think it's gonna rain...

Eeyore.gif
 
I think it's gonna rain...

Eeyore.gif

I just calls them as I sees them.

Listen, of all the Republocrat candidates, Sanders is probably the only one I'd vote for, it's not that I dislike the guy. But the Establishment is the Establishment, the cards are stacked against Sanders. This is Hillary's year, Obama won last time, this time it's her. Why do you think the DNC couldn't field more than 2 candidates? This year is for Clinton.
 
He was a unkown nobody up against the most well known candidate by far in both parties. I'd say he's running a pretty damn good campaign strategy to be where he is in this race.

Clinton is going to spend the next month and change smashing him in public, dude. Sanders isn't even willing to strike back hard at her vulnerable spots.
 
I just calls them as I sees them.

Listen, of all the Republocrat candidates, Sanders is probably the only one I'd vote for, it's not that I dislike the guy. But the Establishment is the Establishment, the cards are stacked against Sanders. This is Hillary's year, Obama won last time, this time it's her. Why do you think the DNC couldn't field more than 2 candidates? This year is for Clinton.

I agree the establishment is against him and it is a really tough slog. But your absolute defeatist tone in almost every post in every Sanders thread is kind of annoying. I mean if you are so absolutely positive of his imminent defeat I don't think you'd even bother posting in any Sanders thread. So I don't think your tone matches your real view. I just think you are trying to prepare yourself for the worst case scenario.
 
Clinton is going to spend the next month and change smashing him in public, dude. Sanders isn't even willing to strike back hard at her vulnerable spots.

Staying positive has him gaining and beating her. The media has been writing him off from the beginning and the GOP has been saying "negative is the way to go" for ever now and meanwhile he's leading her nationally in this poll and a fox poll and is currently tied in delegates voted for at 51-51. Whomoever is advising him seems to be doing a pretty damn good job.
 
I agree the establishment is against him and it is a really tough slog. But your absolute defeatist tone in almost every post in every Sanders thread is kind of annoying. I mean if you are so absolutely positive of his imminent defeat I don't think you'd even bother posting in any Sanders thread. So I don't think your tone matches your real view. I just think you are trying to prepare yourself for the worst case scenario.

I don't think it's "imminent defeat", I think it's a done deal. If he makes it out, I will vote for him. But like the existence of gods, that is highly unlikely.
 
Staying positive has him gaining and beating her. The media has been writing him off from the beginning and the GOP has been saying "negative is the way to go" for ever now and meanwhile he's leading her nationally in this poll and a fox poll and is currently tied in delegates voted for at 51-51. Whomoever is advising him seems to be doing a pretty damn good job.

:lol: he's not tied with her for delegates. Hillary has 503 to his 70.

National polls are nice, but pointless because the nation doesn't award delegates - the states do. At this point in the race in 2012, Santorum was leading by five points in the national polls. The betting markets and 538 both give Bernie less than a 20% chance of winning the primary unless he can convince large swathes black voters that she isn't their best bet.
 
:lol: he's not tied with her for delegates. Hillary has 503 to his 70.

National polls are nice, but pointless because the nation doesn't award delegates - the states do. At this point in the race in 2012, Santorum was leading by five points in the national polls. The betting markets and 538 both give Bernie less than a 20% chance of winning the primary unless he can convince large swathes black voters that she isn't their best bet.

Which is why I specifically said:

"currently tied in delegates voted for."

Superdelegates aren't voted for and are fluid... subject to change. I seriously doubt superdelegates would stand firm for Hillary if Sanders won the voted for delegate count. Because the revolt would probably cost Hillary the general election due to the appearance of corruption from within.
 
Which is why I specifically said:

"currently tied in delegates voted for."

Good catch.

That's interesting. So delegates that aren't voted for don't have their votes count? :)


Superdelegates aren't voted for and are fluid... subject to change. I seriously doubt superdelegates would stand firm for Hillary if Sanders won the voted for delegate count.

He would have to win by more than they can sway the nomination (in general) for them to switch as a group. They will be able to take any close election and make it a Hillary victory.

Hillary tied in Iowa, lost in New Hampshire, won in Nevada, and is about to win in South Carolina before winning almost all of Super Tuesday. Bernie is the candidate of educated white liberals... who make up a minority of their party.

Because the revolt would probably cost Hillary the general election due to the appearance of corruption from within.

That depends on if Trump is the nominee on our side.
 
Good catch.

That's interesting. So delegates that aren't voted for don't have their votes count? :)




He would have to win by more than they can sway the nomination (in general) for them to switch as a group. They will be able to take any close election and make it a Hillary victory.

Hillary tied in Iowa, lost in New Hampshire, won in Nevada, and is about to win in South Carolina before winning almost all of Super Tuesday. Bernie is the candidate of educated white liberals... who make up a minority of their party.



That depends on if Trump is the nominee on our side.

Actually, Hillary wins the college educated vote and Bernie tends to win the non college educated vote.

The non–college educated electorate that seemed to be trending towards Sanders in New Hampshire was dead even here (Nevada).

link...
 
Nationwide Sanders is the most popular. In a general election the polls have Bernie easily outperforming Hillary. The problem is that when it comes to getting the actual Democratic nomination, the odds are stacked against him.
 
Sanders could beat Hillary if he wanted too. I am beginning to think he doesn't want too because if he did he could be doing the GOP's dirty work, and it would crush her. I don't get the Sanders campaign strategy frankly?Tim-

Sander claims that he wants to run a clean campaign without personal attacks. Could be, but I think the reason really is the result of the 45 minute back rub he got from Obama.
 
Sander claims that he wants to run a clean campaign without personal attacks. Could be, but I think the reason really is the result of the 45 minute back rub he got from Obama.

staying positive seems to have worked well for him so far.
 
Staying positive has him gaining and beating her. The media has been writing him off from the beginning and the GOP has been saying "negative is the way to go" for ever now and meanwhile he's leading her nationally in this poll and a fox poll and is currently tied in delegates voted for at 51-51. Whomoever is advising him seems to be doing a pretty damn good job.

I agree with this, rob. I don't think Sanders should change his strategy and lower himself to her level. He's done just fine doing what he's been doing.
 
Sanders is done, the fix is in, establishment democrats have the deck stacked against people like sanders.
 
I agree with this, rob. I don't think Sanders should change his strategy and lower himself to her level. He's done just fine doing what he's been doing.

She's banking it all on Super Tuesday. Odds are now is that she will have a good day.

These are probably going her way:
GA, VA, TN, AL, TX, AR

These are probably going for Bernie:
OK, VT, CO

Toss ups:
Definitely Massachusetts and possibly Minnesota

If she doesn't win convincingly in those states she's predicted to win in or better... I don't think she'll win the nomination. The South is her "firewall" as she puts it... and if Bernie is within reach after her firewall Super Tuesday... its on like Donkey Kong. IMO, it appears as if she is running out of money and much of her campaign supporters are maxed out in donations. I think this because she's tapping into Superpac $'s more now against Bernie when she intended to use superpacs more for the general.
 
Last edited:
Yet another national poll showing Bernie and Hillary tied:

Despite her win in the Nevada caucuses Saturday, Hillary Clinton’s lead among Democrats over Bernie Sanders has evaporated nationally, 45% to 43%, according to the latest IBD/TIPP poll. Last month, Clinton topped Sanders 50% to 38%.

link...

This puts the Real Clear Politics poll average with Hillary +5 right now.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Democratic Presidential Nomination
 
Last edited:
Bernie does't WANT to win....his sole purpose is to be the "also ran" for the Democrat ticket.

Even if Hillary dropped dead today, Bernie would not be the nominee.

HINT: Wall Street and big money will never allow your desire for Socialism in the USA to happen. Forgedabouditt

But you're welcomed to dream on if you like.
 
I don't know the name of the blogger who wrote this, and I freely admit that I lifted it from Capitol Hill Blue, my favorite political forum, and I thank Mister "Logtroll" for posting it, because I think it answers a lot of the Bernie Sanders detractors who think he can't be an effective leader:

Quote:

"As for Bernie Sanders vs. Hillary Clinton: You knock Sanders because he is, in your description, an ineffective legislator and unlikely to pass an agenda if he wins the presidency. On the other hand, it is implied, Clinton will be effective.

I remember 2007, when Barack Obama was first coming into view. At public events around the country and in Silver City, Obama was making an appeal that politics had become corrosive and poisonous, and the people of the country needed a new way of talking to one another. Obama promised he could break through the logjam. My attitude towards Obama and towards those who supported him and pushed that line was that they were deluded. "With whom," I thought, "do you think you are dealing? Have you been paying attention to the Republicans?"

To those who think that President Bernie Sanders will be ineffective but President Hillary Clinton will "get things done," I say: "With whom do you think you are dealing? Have you been paying attention to the Republicans?" The reality is that neither President Sanders nor President Clinton will get much -- if anything -- done, at least initially, and maybe for the entire course of their presidencies. That does not mean that it does not matter which one becomes president.

To take just one issue: Neither President Clinton nor President Sanders, faced with a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, is going to get anything through. But President Clinton will call, repeatedly, for an increase in the minimum wage from $7.25/hour to $10.10/hour (which is what Obama is currently calling for -- to no avail). What is persuasive about that call? That it will raise income for a full-time worker from the poverty line for a family of 2 to the poverty line for a family of 3? Clearly, that still leaves children in poverty -- a fact that Clinton will never mention.
On the other hand, President Sanders will call -- over and over again -- for a minimum wage of $15.00/hour. He will say, truthfully, that at $15.00, a family of five that now lives at about 50% of the poverty line will be lifted above the poverty line.
Which message, repeated over and over again from the bully pulpit of the White House, is likely to catch on and resonate and perhaps -- just perhaps -- get people to change whom they elect to Congress? The one that calls for us to keep children of working parents in poverty? Or the one that calls for us to lift children out of poverty?

I take it as a given that neither Sanders nor Clinton will get much if anything done in a first term, and maybe not in a second, either. We don't know what changes the atmosphere created by President Sanders might instigate. We do know what changes President Clinton, trying to "get things done," will bring. We have had that experience. We will get welfare reform that cuts the ground out from the unemployed and underemployed in an economy that creates ever more people in those two categories. We will get further proof that "the era of big government is over." (Who said that? Hmm. I wonder.) We will get more trade deals like NAFTA (Clinton's current expedient and soon-to-be-abandoned opposition to the TPP notwithstanding).

Pundits say that there is not much difference between the policy pronouncements of Sanders and Clinton. I'm not sure I agree, but even if I did, is there anyone foolish enough to believe that President Clinton will be saying from the White House lawn what candidate Clinton is saying now while Bernie Sanders has a megaphone? On the other hand, is there anyone who thinks President Sanders will be saying anything other than what he is saying now, no matter who the opposition is?
It is a possibility that we won't ever get what President Sanders will call for. It is a certainty we will never get what President Clinton will not even talk about."

AW
 
Back
Top Bottom