Sanders takes convincing lead in Iowa after late surge

  • Thread starter Deleted member 231381
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
The latest Quinnipiac poll of Iowa has been released. Normally a pollster with methodology that favoured Clinton, the results were:

Sanders 49 (+9)
Clinton 44 (-6)
Martin O'Malley 4 (-2)
Undecided 3 (no change)

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ia/ia01122016_Icg427p.pdf

This is now the second poll in a row to show Sanders establishing a narrow lead in Iowa, the critical first primary for the Democrats and the primary that launched then-Senator Obama's shock upset of Hillary Clinton in 2008. The first was an ARG (AmericanResearchGroup) poll just a few days earlier, showing:

Sanders 47 (+6)
Clinton 44 (-8)

The shift is primarily among female voters, with a big swing away from Clinton towards Sanders.
 
T

Team Alucard

Banned
giphy.gif


probably not
 
SlimySnake

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Hilary cried after Obama beat her in Iowa. Will she cry again?

I am glad Bernie is giving her some trouble. She needs to be tested. The Republicans are going to tear her apart in the general election. She needs to be prepared.
 
A

ApharmdX

Banned
That's great news. I don't think Bernie will win, because there are too many states that he's going to lose badly in, but the Democratic Party needs him to be competitive in order to save them from themselves.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PPP had Clinton up by 6 fwiw

And contrary to your claim in another thread they are actually quite a good pollster and historically better than Quinnipiac.
 
N

noshten

Member
You should also have put the MoveOn.org Endorsement in your OP, it also is a pretty important factor in his unparalleled grassroots campaign. Also there is a good article about his fundraising and how the grassroots have empowered him to actually outspend Hillary in Iowa and NH(probably Nevada as well).


WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on Tuesday received the endorsement of MoveOn.org, a grassroots organization that has been at the forefront of liberal causes.

MoveOn says the Vermont senator was supported by 78.6 percent of its membership in an online vote of more than 340,000 members. Hillary Clinton received 14.6 percent and Martin O'Malley received 0.9 percent with the remaining members urging no endorsement.

"MoveOn members are feeling the Bern," said Ilya Sheyman, executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action. "We will mobilize aggressively to add our collective people power to the growing movement behind the Sanders campaign, starting with a focus on voter turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire

The endorsement was widely expected. MoveOn encouraged Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for president but when she declined last year many of its supporters got behind Sanders' campaign.

The group lists 8 million members and says it will mobilize nearly 75,000 of its members in Iowa and New Hampshire, which hold the campaign's first two contests.

MoveOn endorsed President Barack Obama during the 2008 primaries and helped rally Democrats in opposition to the Iraq War. The group was formed in response to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, with its supporters urging Congress to censure the president and move on to more pressing matters facing the American people.
Click to expand...

http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/...4dbacc028/sanders-campaign-endorsed-moveonorg
 
G

gdt

Member
SlimySnake said:
Hilary cried after Obama beat her in Iowa. Will she cry again?

I am glad Bernie is giving her some trouble. She needs to be tested. The Republicans are going to tear her apart in the general election. She needs to be prepared.
Click to expand...

Lol wut

I'm not sure if there is a politician on this planet more tested than Hillary. She's beyond battle hardened.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Aaron Strife said:
PPP had Clinton up by 6 fwiw

And contrary to your claim in another thread they are actually quite a good pollster and historically better than Quinnipiac.
Click to expand...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-proof-some-pollsters-are-putting-a-thumb-on-the-scale/

A few pollsters are shameless about their herding. One of them is Public Policy Polling (PPP), a polling firm that conducts automated polls for both public consumption and for liberal and Democratic clients.

Take a look at this exchange, for example, between The New York Times’ Nate Cohn13 and PPP’s Tom Jensen. Cohn discovered that in 2012, the racial composition of PPP’s polls was correlated in an unusual way with President Obama’s performance among white voters in their surveys. If Obama was performing especially poorly among whites in one PPP poll, it tended to have a higher share of nonwhite voters, which boosted Obama’s result. And if Obama was doing relatively well among whites, PPP projected less nonwhite turnout, keeping his lead in check. As a result, PPP’s polls tended to show an unusually steady race between Obama and Mitt Romney.

I’m picking on PPP for a reason: They’re the biggest herders in the business.
Click to expand...
 
I

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
"Unelectable tho"

Seriously, that narrative is probably the worst thing i've heard for people voting against their self interests.

He's in the same range Obama was in the 2008 elections when Hillary lead nationally then as well.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Aaron Strife said:
Nate has a very odd vendetta against PPP that he never explains specifically and has no proof of his allegations.

In any case you can't argue with results. Go look at how PPP and Quinnipiac did in Colorado in 2014.
Click to expand...

Both Nates dislike PPP. PPP tends to do well in elections where the average pollster does well, because they basically just fix their result to produce roughly what they expect other pollsters to show. Rather than have a consistent methodology, they adjust their methodology every other poll minutely, which makes them terrible as a piece of data. I think that's why they've been caught with their pants down here; because there's a short shift that you wouldn't catch if you thought "hmm, Sanders seems a bit high, let's make different assumptions about turnout to the last poll".
 
Darkangel

Darkangel

Member
Inuhanyou said:
"Unelectable tho"

Seriously, that narrative is probably the worst thing i've heard for people voting against their self interests.

He's in the same range Obama was in the 2008 elections when Hillary lead nationally then as well.
Click to expand...

I hate people call a candidate "unelectable." It becomes a self fulfilling prophesy.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
Inuhanyou said:
"Unelectable tho"

Seriously, that narrative is probably the worst thing i've heard for people voting against their self interests.

He's in the same range Obama was in the 2008 elections when Hillary lead nationally then as well.
Click to expand...

The difference is Obama built a groundbreaking campaign infrastructure and exploited the nature of the primary process to hammer his way to victory. Nothing I have seen from Bernie suggests his campaign is being conducted nearly as smartly.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Crab said:
Both Nates dislike PPP. PPP tends to do well in elections where the average pollster does well, because they basically just fix their result to produce roughly what they expect other pollsters to show. Rather than have a consistent methodology, they adjust their methodology every other poll minutely, which makes them terrible as a piece of data. I think that's why they've been caught with their pants down here; because there's a short shift that you wouldn't catch if you thought "hmm, Sanders seems a bit high, let's make different assumptions about turnout to the last poll".
Click to expand...
Hm, well that's a pretty bold assumption on your part. I guess we'll see in two weeks!
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
King Tubby said:
I wonder why women voters started moving away from Hillary and towards Sanders?
Click to expand...

My guess is just exposure. If you only have vague knowledge of Sanders and Clinton and think both are generally pretty good, you'll give Clinton the edge because it is important to you your daughter can have a female role model in politics - this doesn't exist for men, or at least usually not to the same degree, so given not much information you'd be closer to neutral. However, if you learn enough to feel strongly about Sanders relatively to Clinton, that overcomes that. About 50% of all the media attention on the Iowa primaries comes in the month before the primaries, so despite Sanders announcing his campaign in IIRC Iowa, he's only just coming up to the two-thirds of the way through the race line.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
The difference is Obama built a groundbreaking campaign infrastructure and exploited the nature of the primary process to hammer his way to victory. Nothing I have seen from Bernie suggests his campaign is being conducted nearly as smartly.
Click to expand...

Yes. I agree with this. I very deeply worry about the Sanders ground game. I don't necessarily have reason to suppose it is bad, but the fact it is unproven doesn't fill one with confidence.
 
B

Brinbe

Member
It's pretty awesome that his candidacy has taken off. More competition for Hilary isn't a bad thing. He wins IA/NH, give himself some legitimacy and who knows where this goes. But as much as I love his policies and his dedication to economic equality, I'm not really convinced he'd be a better president than Hilary.
 
O

Orbis Tabula

Member
I like this thread, because the posts in it almost seem to be coming from different universes. A bunch of posts are thrilled because they love Bernie. Another bunch are complaining because GAF apparently hates Bernie. Then you have another set pointing out that GAF loves Bernie. It's fun.
 
K

KuwabaraTheMan

Banned
National polls have been getting much tighter as well. While national polls for primaries aren't particularly meaningful (due to how spread out the votes are), it still shows a race that is generally getting closer.
 
SlimySnake

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
gdt said:
Lol wut

I'm not sure if there is a politician on this planet more tested than Hillary. She's beyond battle hardened.
Click to expand...

She hasn't run for office since 2008. her record while she was Secretary of State is going to be brought up by the republicans all through out the general election. She will be blamed for ISIS. She will be blamed for Bengazhi. She will be blamed for being soft on terrorism.

And then there are the emails.

She also thought she was going to coast through the primaries but now Bernie is going to give her some headaches. it will be interesting to see how she responds. Last time, she used the race card against Obama and it blew up on her face. It will be a test for her.
 
B

boiled goose

good with gravy
gdt said:
Lol wut

I'm not sure if there is a politician on this planet more tested than Hillary. She's beyond battle hardened.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you Clinton has been unfairly bashed on many issues like emails and Benghazi, she has not been tested on the biggest issues. Money in ppolitics, wealth inequality, etc.

Her answers to the challenge that she's a Washington insider and a corrupt politician are terrible.

Now imagine Trump calling her a corrupt sellout politician. Trump is popular because he is an outsider populist candidate. Now imagine Trump v Hillary. "I bought you. You represent the rich. I represent the people."

Now That's scary.
 
C

CloudyTuba

Member
King Tubby said:
I wonder why women voters started moving away from Hillary and towards Sanders?
Click to expand...

I dont know it from personal observation but people were telling me that Hillary started attacking Bernie in whatever public appearances she's been making, when before she was friendly or apathetic to him. Apparently it's turning people off and also making them curious about Bernie.
Again I'm just repeating what others have said. If she's gone into attack mode I would guess that means she considers him an actual threat now.
 
G

gutter_trash

Banned
comparing '08 Obama to '16 Bernie is disingenuous since Obama was always loyal to the party and and was handpicked to deliver a keynote address in `04. Obama had the blessing from the establishment.

Bernie made a career being critical of the Democratic Party all his life. Now he is using the party's primiariis as a vehicle to propel him

Establishment folks have not chosen him and know that he is not a Democrat.

This is why 2016 is very different from 2008.

Obama was the golden child and rising star +loyal to the party. Bernie isn't
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
NBC/WSJ - GOP&Dem Polls : Trump/Cruz tied Iowa, Sanders/Clinton closing NH/Iowa
2 3 4
155
14K
egruntz replied
  • Locked
Politico: "Sanders consistently beats Donald Trump. It's getting harder to overlook."
44
4K
Christine replied
  • Locked
Poll: Sanders nearly tied with Clinton nationwide
5 6 7 8 9
422
41K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Politico: Sanders Consistently Beats Donald Trump; It's Getting Harder To Overlook
2
71
9K
siddx replied
  • Locked
Two new Iowa polls show Clinton with GIANT leads over Sanders
7 8 9 10 11
517
30K
ModBot replied
Top Bottom