Aug 10, 2015 It isn't just that he has weak support, though. Clinton has very strong support with these folks and has been building relationships for years. Sanders never had to because Vermont is white as f---. He doesn't just need to get better known, he has to convince vast numbers of people who currently support Clinton to change their minds
Aug 12, 2015 I agree with you on your last point. I guess I just disagree on the sheer possibility of that happening. 74,000 people have went to see him speak in the last 3 days and the black lives matter interruption just helped shed light on his civil rights involvement in the 60's, imo. He now leads Hillary by 7 points in New Hampshire. http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/12/politics/poll-bernie-sanders-hilary-clinton-new-hampshire/
Aug 12, 2015 http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-bernie-sanders-surge-appears-to-be-over/ Somewhat what I was talking about before. Sanders has picked up all the easy support for himself and now he has to win over support from people who are more moderate and Clinton supporters, which is a lot harder and a lot slower. That's why his support has leveled out in the teen well, one poll shows him leading there within the margin of error. But either way, he better win New Hampshire. It is a super white state next to Vermont that likes independent type candidates.
Aug 13, 2015 That's a very good read and seems to back up the point you were trying to make. That he has already s----d up the progressive part of the Democratic party and will NOW be entering a plateau. But all you have to do is read articles about his campaign in June and July and they said the same thing. The moment they write that article, the "surge" is stopping. We shall see, but from my point of view, the fact that in most states polled the enthusiasm and favor-ability for Clinton is below 50%, shows me that her supporters are waiting to be swooped up by someone to feel excited about, maybe even the moderate supporters. To me, his solutions are very progressive but the issues he is addressing and talking about are issues a very large number of people (progressives, moderates and conservatives alike) are concerned about. I think that will resonate with some of these people. Despite what you think, I do not believe that even half of the Democrats are aware of his message, the issue i think, is getting that message out there. Is it possible? I don't know. But I guess I feel like the majority of those polled that "think" Hillary will win, are not "excited" about her, but will vote for her if she wins.
Aug 13, 2015 her favorability among Democratic primary voters, though, is sky high. Sanders doesn't really have an opening based on favorability in the primary. and enthusiasm can be important, but it doesn't beat on the ground retail politics, particularly in Iowa and New Hampshire. Getting people fired up doesn't work as well as building a long term relationship with organizers and others in your precinct when it comes to dealing with the hassle that is the Iowa caucuses. I don't think Sanders has much of a shot in Iowa. If Hillary blows him out of the water there, I expect he'll probably win New Hampshire in a close race. After that he's got very little to work with as South Carolina and Nevada look like probable blowouts in Clinton's favor. Then comes a slew of primary after primary and Super Tuesday, where he's not likely to have the money to compete, particularly in some of the largest states. He's doing the best he can, but there isn't much indication that he has a shot at winning at this point. He's going to be remembered as a serious protest candidate unless he completely s----s the bed in the debates and his support collapses (and he's a pretty bad debater, so that isn't outside the realm of possibility)
Aug 13, 2015 Where are you getting the favorability thing? I'm not saying your wrong, it's just that everything I have seen shows a low and decreasing favorability for Clinton and growing favorability for Sanders. Unless you are referring to favorability in terms of the most electable or who the pollsters think will win. Also I do not get your last point at all, is that just coming from a strong dislike for the guy? I have not seen anything that indicates that, and that includes the debates he "lost" on the last page of the topic. But I completely agree on everything else you said. Unless the grassroots/internet movement keeps going very strong, I do not see him having the funds to compete that long into the race, or somehow changing the tide in SC and NV. Unfortunately, money from unions and individuals cannot come close to competing with the Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan bought candidate that is Hillary. That is just the nature of politics now and will take something drastic to change. With Clinton wrapped up in the email scandal (which could play a very large role in things) and Bernie continuing to spread his message and gain Mass Media coverage, I guess i choose to give him a nonzero chance at the nomination. Albeit very low.
Aug 13, 2015 favorability among Democratic primary voters remains high for Clinton, it is among the general public that her favorability has taken a hit (which is to be expected facing united Republican opposition) As for debates, Sanders has a tough time when he is questioned by someone who may not disagree with him. He does great in speeches, he does great on liberal talk radio, he gets frustrated and angry when dealing with someone else. He came across very poorly against Michele Bachmann, and debates are won and lost as much if not more on style as substance. Al Gore lost debates by rolling his eyes and sighing when Bush was saying stupid s---. Bill Clinton won by "feeling your pain." Hillary and Obama are both pretty great debaters, though Hillary was better in 2008 over most of the campaign. Bernie has a huge deficit among female voters and if he's seen as not taking her seriously, trying to talk over her, etc. he's going to take a worse hit. Clinton and Sanders are both funded by individuals. She's also supported financially by labor unions much more than Sanders. The fact that some of her contributors work for Wall Street firms is not surprising- she was a Senator from New York. Wealthy liberals in New York often work on Wall Street. These financial instituions are not donating to her campaign (they can't, in fact) and they're not funding any of the associated Super PACs. The whole meme about Hillary being funded by Wall Street is kind of misleading. The same with Bernie's support- he was a Senator of a state with a low population, inexpensive media markets, and relatively noncompetitive elections ever since he was elected to the House. He looks like he has huge support from labor because most of his money came directly from Union PACs, not individuals. He never really did much fundraising from individuals, which is why all of the numbers on that meme are nice, round numbers. when it is appropriately broken down, you can see that Clinton gets some pretty hefty PAC donations, but they pale in comparison to Sander's reliance on PACs as opposed to individual donors. Beyond that, if you dig down, Clinton has received more support from these labor unions than Sanders ever did, but they're limited to being lower on the list because of PAC donation limits and the relatively small number of actual employees a union has. These numbers aren't all that surprising- Sanders doesn't like fundraising, and he didn't much need to do it to win in Vermont. Clinton was a Senator from New York and a Presidential candidate, so she has raised a lot more money overall, but most of it comes from individuals who work for these companies, not the political action committees of the companies themselves. If Sanders' advocacy for a minimum wage of $15/hr got him the support of millions of Wal Mart workers around the country who each donated a few bucks, one of Sanders' biggest "donors" would appear to be Wal Mart on these charts. The email scandal is also totally manufactured. It certainly won't matter in a year when we're getting towards the general election, and Democrats don't seem to care much about it either way. That's really the main thing that Sanders has to contend with- unlike 2008, Clinton is very popular among Democrats. He doesn't just have to get people to know and like him, he has to get them to like him more than Clinton enough to vote for him over her. That's the work he's got to do now that he's picked the low hanging fruit, and it is a lot harder and a lot less glamorous than big west coast rallies
Aug 13, 2015 The email scandal won't matter if it ends today, but you know how media can beat a story to death... and if there is anything that could potentially hurt Hillary, it will be repeated for quite a while. Actually, it will be repeated concurrently with the Democratic debate schedule (6 debates ,what a joke, wonder who that favors), so that could be a huge time for Sanders. We shall see how those debates go but a video showing him get frustrated at some woman who literally won't shut up and let him speak is hardly evidence. He will not treat Hillary that way, he never has and will not say a thing negative about her, and that won't end at the debates. Although, he talks with hands too much, it is quite annoying. But beyond that, you are looking at donations accumulated throughout their entire respective political careers. Numbers for this campaign cycle are a little different than that. vs I view Bernie's "small individual donations" as perfectly reflective of the success of his grassroots campaign method. 68% have been "small" and he has received $0 from PACS. As a matter of fact he says he refuses to take money from PACS for this election (which, admittedly, is probably more of a bad thing than a good thing) Then you got Hillary who has over a quarter of a million dollars from PAC's and is 83% funded by "large individual donations".. who do you think these "large individual donations" come from? Normal, working class individuals? I don't... I also completely disagree about the Walmart analogy, it honestly depends on how you make that donation.. and most of his donations are coming from social media links and emails that do not ask for your place of employment. I'm not even sure why we're going back and forth. Unless you just don't flat out don't like the fact that for NOW, I am supporting Bernie. It's not like I'm going off on a tangent about how Donald Trump "tells it like it is", so I support him lol. We can agree to disagree.. but I won't get behind Hillary until Bernie legitimately begins to flame out. I mean, it's not like Hillary could ever lose a nomination that she has wrapped up to another candidate with a grassroots platform, right?
Aug 13, 2015 not particularly. there's nothing statistically significant about a self-selected sample like that. It is similar (and so is Bernie's overall candidacy to this point) to Ron Paul in 2007/2008. He has a small but dedicated following who engage in stuff like flooding online polls but it doesn't really translate into the real world.
Aug 13, 2015 no, I get it. I think that is based on 700k+ responses. It's just that we know how these things work. Polling in the aggregate is very accurate at capturing a snapshot in time. Bernie's national support is less than 30% of Democrats. He has dismal numbers with African Americans (less than 15%). He is winning Congressional districts on that map that he will lose 80-20 in an actual election. There is a self selection bias among people who take that test, it isn't representative of the electorate whatsoever. Beyond that, you have Republicans who want to face Bernie because they'd demolish him in the general election who also vote here. This kind of thing is completely meaningless. It isn't even a good measure of enthusiasm for candidates because clicking an online poll is about the LEAST you can do.
Aug 13, 2015 I understand. But when you combine that with the enthusiasm that Bernie has, large splashes could be made. It is reinvigorating a huge portion of disenfranchised voters in this country. Like you alluded to, Ron Paul did the same thing in 08 and 2012, in 2012 he had a wave of supporters literally take over the RNC and cause havoc among the GOP. THAT'S what happens when you mix enthusiasm with large numbers of new millennials and disenfranchised voters. These are individuals that believe in a message so strongly that they learn HOW to be an electorate and take the party over from the inside out. I think we can at least agree on that, and I suppose that is where our points of view differ. While you are seeing it as it really is, broken system and all. I see it as a broken system that needs huge change and could even see something similar happen at the DNC this year if Bernie doesn't go away. Then imagine if Biden enters the race, I guarantee he will be eating away large numbers from Hillary's support and Bernies will not waver, and possible even continue to grow.
Aug 13, 2015 if Biden jumps in, it is over for Bernie. Bernie needs every undecided voter out there and to completely consolidate the anti-Hillary vote. There was just a poll in Iowa yesterday that shows the problem for Bernie. With Biden in the race, Hillary leads Sanders by 19 points- 50-31 and 12 for Biden. If Biden is out of the race, Hillary leads by 26, 58-32. So, yes, Biden takes a lot of Hillary's support. But there's barely any undecided voters in either scenario. With Biden out of the race, Sanders has a chance to eat into Hillary's soft support (that 8% who went for Biden instead of her) and would need to clean up among undecided voters. The problem for Bernie is that every point Biden takes from Hillary rather than Bernie himself hurts Bernie on the margin. Take that 58-32. Ignoring the other, unimportant candidates, that leaves 10% undecided. Give them all to Bernie (which is obviously very generous), so call it 58-42. Every percent Bernie takes from Clinton gives him two points on the margin. To get that 16 point lead cut down, Bernie needs to take just 8% of Clinton's support to tie it up. If you take the numbers with Biden in the race, you get 50-31-12, you have 8% undecided. Even if we give it all to Bernie once again (even more generous, given a third candidate), the race is 50-38-12 Every percent Biden gains on Clinton helps Bernie by 1% on the margin. Every percent Sanders gains on Clinton helps him by 2%. So if you have Biden take another 5% of Clinton's support on top of the 8 he already took, we make the race 45-38-17. While Clinton's seven point lead there looks easier, Sanders would have to win another 4% of Clinton's support to pull ahead 42-41-17. That means that between Biden and Sanders, they would need to take nearly one in three Clinton supporters over, and that is assuming the best possible scenario for Bernie with undecided and Biden's draw. But the reality is that Bernie's not going to get that rosy of a scenario. The candidates will split the undecided vote. Biden will take Hillary's soft support almost immediately, as the poll shows, but those left will be harder for Biden to win and nearly impossible for Bernie. Bernie's appeal is somewhat rooted in being the anti-Hillary. If Biden is in the race, he splits the anti-Hillary vote, and could very well eat into Sanders' softer support among working-class white men. There are Bernie supporters in these polls who feel Clinton is too liberal. They very well could jump ship for Biden once Bernie's background and positions are better known. The math is very tough for Sanders either way, but Biden complicates things enormously, and that's in an overwhelmingly white state like Iowa. Biden could probably hand New Hampshire to Sanders, but Sanders' current reliance on strength among white voters would be seriously damaged in places that are less than 90% white.
Aug 13, 2015 That was literally the smallest point of my post, it was the last sentence typed as an afterthought, but we can talk about it. You keep repeating that minority mantra and although it is completely true right now, it will change in time. After that Black Lives Matter interruption the spotlight on his civil rights stances is widening. Polls have not reflected this yet. He also hired a Black Lives Matter supporter for his press secretary and subsequently provided a plan to address institutional racism. Those numbers will adjust accordingly. But my feelings on Biden entering the race go beyond one recent poll out of Iowa (not that you do not provide great points, you do) and I believe you are underestimating the amount of Clinton supporters Bernie is flipping and will continue to flip. The numbers have been showing it for months, and it isn't surprising after seeing her favorability numbers plummet. Summed up here, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ike-crazy-for-joe-biden-to-run-for-president/ To summarize, Biden entering closes the gap between Clinton and Sanders, we agree. It also still leaves Sanders behind Clinton in the most recent poll, we agree (your numbers prove this).. But I see the swing continue and that gap you reference effectively get smaller and smaller (thanks to continued momentum AND Biden's presence). The difference is you continue to base your arguments on his "surge" being over. But I do not see proof of this yet. We are not going to find a middle ground on this. We are conceding facts to each other as they stand but the difference is that I see the trend continuing while you do not. I admire an honest, respectful debate and give props for having one with me. But I think we will go on about this forever lol. Agree to disagree.
Aug 14, 2015 Go Bernie! He's picking up support and once his message gets out will crush Hillary in the polls. @ImmortalTechnique You have no idea what you're talking about with the union funding. In the pictures you posted Hillary's top 5 are all major banks/corporations. Bernie top are unions then you go on to say that Hillary has more funding from unions? What? "She's also supported financially by labor unions much more than Sanders." lol. Also no one trusts Hillary. She is the establishment candidate thats why the right leaning democrats would vote for her. Everyone else will hear Bernie's message and hop on board. ( Young people, african americans, blue collar people) h--- even some republicans are switching sides and loving Bernie's message.
Aug 14, 2015 Bernie is getting crushed with African American voters. And Hillary has recieved VASTLY more support from labor unions. That's not a knock on Bernie, she just has run for office in much more expensive states and gotten their support. All of Bernie's biggest donors are union PACs, which have a donation limit. Clinton has received as much or more from every single one of those unions, but their donation limits keep them from the top of the list. Clinton has raised 90% of her money from individual donors, including this Presidential cycle https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019 The top groups donating to her are: Law Firms (trial lawyers have always been key to Democratic politics) Retired People Securities and Investments (where 98% came from individuals who work in that field, not unusual for a Senator from New York. Wealthy liberals work on Wall Street, too and just 2% came from PACs) it's one thing to have a different opinion, but different facts are generally the sign of someone who is more emotional than rational about what they're talking about. Sanders COULD win the nomination. But he isn't in a strong position to do so. His name recognition has increased dramatically from when he started the campaign, but his support has leveled off between 20-30 percent for the last month or so.
Aug 14, 2015 also, I like Bernie Sanders a lot. I think he's a great person, and a wonderful Senator. He's not a particularly good candidate, and I am glad we most likely won't have him trying to win the general election. But when he's in the Senate with Elizabeth Warren, Russ Feingold, Sherrod Brown, and other great progressive Senators when Clinton is inaugurated in 2017 he's going to continue to be an important voice and shape policy in a major way
Aug 14, 2015 This will never end, I'm sorry but I feel compelled to respond lol. Like I said man, his message will continue to spread and the support will follow. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. Her largest donations come from individuals that work on Wall Street and in banks. Period. End of story. No more spin.
Aug 14, 2015 the problem is that that isn't happening. another recent poll from Missouri highlights the problem. Hillary Clinton's favorables with African Americans are 85-6-10 favorable/unfavorable/no opinion. Sanders are 30-25-44. His UNFAVORABLES are more than four times hers, despite being less well known. People are getting to know him, and they aren't liking what they say. The message is spreading, and the support has mostly leveled off. If he's serious about winning he needs to figure out what about his message is turning significant numbers of important Democratic constituencies off. And I understand that fact about her donors. The point is that it doesn't actually matter, except in that if Sanders becomes a real threat for the nomination she will be able to swamp him out on Super Tuesday and beyond. Trying to spin individual donations from people who happen to work on Wall Street for a Senator from New York as being bought and paid for is a pretty weak argument, and it is clear from the numbers that Sanders is going to have to do better than that.
