• The Bernie Sanders surge appears to be over; picking up more support will be much harder
    27 replies, posted
[url]http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-bernie-sanders-surge-appears-to-be-over/[/url] [quote]Not long ago, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was surging. In just a few months, the Vermont senator halved Hillary Clinton’s lead in Iowa and moved to within shouting distance of her in New Hampshire. But it’s probably time to change the verb tense. No longer is Sanders surging. He has surged. From now on, picking up additional support will be more of a slog. Take a look at the monthly averages of Clinton’s and Sanders’s support in live-interview polls taken in Iowa and New Hampshire since April (the month that both Clinton and Sanders officially entered the race): [img]http://imgkk.com/i/kclq.png[/img] Support for Sanders rocketed up in Iowa but has leveled off since June. The story is nearly the same in New Hampshire. Sanders rose from June to July in the Granite State, but his ascent slowed. So what’s going on? Sanders is maxing out on gains simply because of increased name recognition. Different pollsters ask about favorability and name recognition in different ways — making comparisons tricky — but the University of New Hampshire (UNH) polled Democrats in the state in April, June and July. Sanders’s favorable rating went from 45 percent in April to 66 percent in June and then to 69 percent in July. The share of respondents with a neutral opinion or no opinion of Sanders fell from 44 percent to 24 percent and then to 20 percent during that period. In other words, between April and June, Sanders was picking up low hanging fruit: The liberal wing of the Democratic Party learned about Sanders and liked him. But now, most voters who are predisposed to like Sanders already know about him.[/quote]
This will be an interesting election
You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48452318]You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries[/QUOTE] Not really. I can see it being a pretty close race. People have called sanders a joke in every election that he has won and in those elections he was registered as independant.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48452318]You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries[/QUOTE] You can say what you want but no one is happy with the established parties. The gridlock that Washington has become has been choking progress in either direction, liberal or conservative. From my anecdotal point of view, everyone I've talked to seems fed up with the petty back and forth politics that has brought the country to a stand still, and people are looking for a way out. On the republican side this mindset has manifested into Trump, and love him or hate him he isn't a run of the mill republican. As controversial as he is he is willing to say things that other candidates wouldn't and to many he seems to be the one who will shake things up and get things moving. Bernie is practically the other side of the same thing. He says things that others won't, and a lot of liberals like him for that. Either way Trump and Bernie are very real threats in their respective primaries and anyone who ignores them is due for a big shock when the votes are finally tallied.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48452318]You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries[/QUOTE] really too early to tell, if after super tuesday he's trailing hillary in every state, then sure, but its ~6 months till the rediculous NH/Iowa primaries, ~8-9 months till the actual primaries that matter. i mean rick santorum was a contender through the first couple primaries until super tuesday, and then he was done. i don't see bernie burning out like santorum did though, hes got a proper strategy
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48452318]You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries[/QUOTE] That's exactly what people were saying in 2008, then came actual campaigns and elections and Hillary was defeated by Obama. In fact, in early August 2007, Hillary was polling at 43 percent and Obama at 21, and that was with a handful other serious contenders on the sides, chiefly John Edwards. Hillary is polling at 53 percent right now and she has complete and total name recognition. The majority of the rest of the polled voters are voting Sanders, undecided or supporting candidates who haven't entered the race (ie Biden). When you consider that she is polling at only 53 percent when there is only one other serious contender (since Biden has not entered the race and it's very possible he won't, while the other candidates collectively hold 5~ percent of the polls together), it's entirely possible that she could lose come the actual campaigns. I wouldn't go trying to crown Hillary the victor this soon. It didn't work out well in 2008.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48452318]You're on crack if you think a pseudo-third party candidate has a chance of beating The most powerful person in the DNC in the primaries[/QUOTE] People see Hillary Clinton as George W. Bush with different chromosomes. Especially with this whole email scandal? When I was at the DMV changing my political party affiliation, I met four people that were going together to register. If there is a candidate in Washington that will get people out of their homes to go and vote, it's Bernie Sanders. Also, his campaign website has made it very easy and accessible to find out how you can vote for him in the 2016 primaries. Either way, vote for who you want to win, not who should win. [url]http://voteforbernie.org/[/url] Hillary will be left on social issues and talk about how it's a woman's choice and how homosexuals are free to do what they want, but when it comes to important issues, she will pander to the same billionaires that we all despise, because she owes them big time. [t]https://i.imgur.com/GCOVi0J.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Velocet;48452827] Hillary will be left on social issues and talk about how it's a woman's choice and how homosexuals are free to do what they want, but when it comes to important issues, she will pander to the same billionaires that we all despise, because she owes them big time.[/QUOTE] Funny you mention that, because she was completely against gay marriage until she decided to run for president. All of her opinions are either for political manipulation or are for sale.
[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;48453153]Funny you mention that, because she was completely against gay marriage until she decided to run for president. All of her opinions are either for political manipulation or are for sale.[/QUOTE] I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think in some cases we should cut politicians/celebrities some slack. We chastise them for having a bad opinion and then we chastise them for changing it. When it comes to Hilary and her opinion on gay marriage; is she probably pandering to voters, yeah, but she also could have just changed her mind. Now if I saw her supporting some idea, and then coming out against it after getting a check from some invested group, that's be really scummy.
[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;48453153]Funny you mention that, because she was completely against gay marriage until she decided to run for president. All of her opinions are either for political manipulation or are for sale.[/QUOTE] Yeah, not to mention while Bernie Sanders was hosting peaceful sit-ins during the Civil Rights Movement and marching with Martin Luther King, Hillary was working for a candidate that was for segregation. She'll do whatever is necessary to win, even if that means taking a 180 when it's politically convenient to do so. [editline]14th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ltp0wer;48453323]I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think in some cases we should cut politicians/celebrities some slack. We chastise them for having a bad opinion and then we chastise them for changing it. When it comes to Hilary and her opinion on gay marriage; is she probably pandering to voters, yeah, but she also could have just changed her mind. Now if I saw her supporting some idea, and then coming out against it after getting a check from some invested group, that's be really scummy.[/QUOTE] She's a politician by profession so she heard the arguments for homosexual marriage and she heard the ones against it, she decided the ones against it were better than the ones for it. She knew it was a matter of equality, she knew it was a matter of lifetime partners not being able to be in the same room around time of death, she knew it was also a matter of straight couples getting incentives while gay couples got nothing. I don't think you should be so forgiving on that matter.
[QUOTE=Ltp0wer;48453323]I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think in some cases we should cut politicians/celebrities some slack. We chastise them for having a bad opinion and then we chastise them for changing it. When it comes to Hilary and her opinion on gay marriage; is she probably pandering to voters, yeah, but she also could have just changed her mind. Now if I saw her supporting some idea, and then coming out against it after getting a check from some invested group, that's be really scummy.[/QUOTE] Yeah I agree with you there. We do harshly criticize just in general public figures for not "sticking to their guns." It's like how back a while ago when Nintendo were releasing Tomodachi Life and they decided to remove the bug where you can basically get a homosexual marriage. Everyone started bitching so Nintendo decided to change it and then everyone was still bitching because Nintendo changed it to what they thought was right... It's really bad because it discourages those who realize that their views are wrong and changes them from doing that.
[QUOTE=Velocet;48453344]She's a politician by profession so she heard the arguments for homosexual marriage and she heard the ones against it, she decided the ones against it were better than the ones for it. She knew it was a matter of equality, she knew it was a matter of lifetime partners not being able to be in the same room around time of death, she knew it was also a matter of straight couples getting incentives while gay couples got nothing. I don't think you should be so forgiving on that matter.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but assuming that politicians' changes in opinion are because of the changes in the political climate isn't anyways justified. You're probably right with Hilary, though. But even if she was changing to appeal to voters wouldn't that also be a good thing? I guess it would depend on their actions/voting records then?
[QUOTE=Ltp0wer;48453472]Yeah, but assuming that politicians' changes in opinion are because of the changes in the political climate isn't anyways justified. You're probably right with Hilary, though. But even if she was changing to appeal to voters wouldn't that also be a good thing? I guess it would depend on their actions/voting records then?[/QUOTE] I have a lot of respect for Bernie because he's said the things he's wanted to say regardless of the political climate, and he's been quite successful regardless. If I'm basing my opinion on Hillary on her (lack of) integrity or her political record, she's screwed either way. I suppose it's easy for me to condemn Hillary for holding certain opinions in order to meet the demands of the people, but I'm under the opinion that she "flip flopped" too much far too often.
Last month was slow, sure, but it's picking back up this month. The [url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html]source of those numbers[/url] shows an upwards trend this month which is quickly closing the gap and [url=http://www.businessinsider.com/poll-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-new-hampshire-2015-8#ixzz3ie7McXGL]another poll[/url] shows him in the lead over Hillary.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48452338]Not really. I can see it being a pretty close race. People have called sanders a joke in every election that he has won and in those elections he was registered as independant.[/QUOTE] On top of that Hillary has run into some controversy over that server of hers, plus I don't expect that her overgeneralization of the Republican party as a bunch of women-hating bastards based on the remarks of one candidate helps her
What I'm starting to wonder is, how many Republicans are willing to put aside their beliefs about abortion and gay marriage to support a man who is the antithesis of your typical politician.
[QUOTE=Velocet;48453763]What I'm starting to wonder is, how many Republicans are willing to put aside their beliefs about abortion and gay marriage to support [B][U]a man who is the antithesis of your typical politician.[/U][/B][/QUOTE] Donald Trump? :v:
Is no one going to mention Sanders dethroning Hillary in New Hampshire 44-37? Same thing that happened with Obama in 2007, Clinton isn't an exciting candidate. Once the American people see the first Democratic debate, his numbers are just going to continue to rise.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;48453833]Donald Trump? :v:[/QUOTE] I dream of the day where you have a presidential showdown between Trump and Bernie. It would be legendary.
Sanders holds a chance of winning for one reason if nothing else, Republicans can scream all day along about his views but in the end, they are HIS views, they aren't for sale. Clinton is going to be massively fucked in the long run because anyone who has two eyes, regardless of if they work, can see that she's for sale and honestly, the last thing most people want is another politician's topic stances: just add dollar.
[QUOTE=draugur;48454575]Sanders holds a chance of winning for one reason if nothing else, Republicans can scream all day along about his views but in the end, they are HIS views, they aren't for sale. Clinton is going to be massively fucked in the long run because anyone who has two eyes, regardless of if they work, can see that she's for sale and honestly, the last thing most people want is another politician's topic stances: just add dollar.[/QUOTE] And yet she somehow still polling at around 50%. Why would anyone even think about voting for her? No seriously I want to know what the logic behind this is, because people should know better by now, regardless of political affiliation.
I agree I have no fucking clue how. It's sad.
[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;48454800]And yet she somehow still polling at around 50%. Why would anyone even think about voting for her? No seriously I want to know what the logic behind this is, because people should know better by now, regardless of political affiliation.[/QUOTE] People often don't listen to the news or research candidate history, and just vote straight down the party that their parents or peers do. That, and the whole "first woman president" thing.
[QUOTE=_Kent_;48454919]People often don't listen to the news or research candidate history, and just vote straight down the party that their parents or peers do. That, and the whole "first woman president" thing.[/QUOTE] Yeah, the same thing goes for Obama. Today I look back at the mindset I had bac when I was rooting for Obama and I realize that the only reason I really supported him was because he would be the first black president (and also apparently had a lot of 'change' in his pockets). When I watched TV all it would be was how revolutionary this was to have an African American as a potential President, blah blah blah. Really there's absolutely no way a boring guy like McCain could have won against that kind of social atmosphere.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;48454972](and also apparently had a lot of 'change' in his pockets)[/QUOTE] I kinda feel like that's why a good number of people are voting for Sanders. They hear the huge promises of '$15 minimum wage' and 'cheap college' and don't bother to ask any questions. Not to say there aren't well-informed people voting for him, but I'd say that, similar to Obama, a lot of them are young-ish college students. Like, some people are forgetting that he's still just a politician, even if he [I]is[/I] better than Hillary...
[QUOTE=Monkah;48454992]They hear the huge promises of '$15 minimum wage' and 'cheap college' and don't bother to ask any questions.[/QUOTE] Yeah, my AP Government teacher always said: "You can't compete with a Santa Claus."
[QUOTE=Monkah;48454992]I kinda feel like that's why a good number of people are voting for Sanders. They hear the huge promises of '$15 minimum wage' and 'cheap college' and don't bother to ask any questions. Not to say there aren't well-informed people voting for him, but I'd say that, similar to Obama, a lot of them are young-ish college students. Like, some people are forgetting that he's still just a politician, even if he [I]is[/I] better than Hillary...[/QUOTE] Actually Sanders was pretty upfront and open on both minimum wage increases and free college tuition and how he is actually going to make that claim tangible. Hilary however has to walk on thinner ice because of those who support her. She can't make detailed populous claims like Bernie because they aren't in line with the Democratic Party's current platform.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.