General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBloomberg Politics/Saint Anselm New Hampshire poll-HRC 62% - Sanders -18% Biden 5% O'Malley 3%
http://images.businessweek.com/cms/2015-05-08/150510_methodology_final_31343.pdfUnvanguard
(4,588 posts)Interesting question is, where will he peak? I bet he has better name recognition in NH than he does elsewhere, so, we'll see.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Isn't his home state? I live in VA and follow politics, but the average person here can't tell you who their Senator is, much less a neighboring state.
His ground game in NH is probably better than Iowa, but both are a long way off.
Unvanguard
(4,588 posts)And not just because NH neighbors VT, but also because it's the first primary state and primary candidates probably get more media attention there. Also, he's a reasonably prominent Senator, and the "average person" doesn't vote in primaries.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)JI7
(89,251 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)great.
HRC better not condescend to him as a response. She better treat all the opponents as equal for the task or she will shoot herself in the face metaphorically. I have seen it before in other races.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)That's still a huge mountain to climb, but may the best candidate win.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)That speaks volumes about the disrepute the Bush brand is in...
It's more toxic than Tylenol circa 1982.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)apparently to his detriment.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)not just in a poll months before.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)he won't even win Vermont.
I think he will drop out after South Carolina, maybe Nevada, and endorse Clinton.
He may stick in until Super Tuesday just to give Vermonters a chance to vote on him. He will lose that as well.
Bookmark this post.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I am here to report the polls* and not bury any candidate.
*That doesn't mean seeing HRC doing well doesn't please me but I am trying to ignore these internecine pissing matches...I never disrupt threads that are laudatory of Bernie. The only threads I intervene in regarding this matter are those that are hostile to Hillary.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Good dude.
He just won't win a single state, is all.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)There are people here heavily emotionally invested in him. I prefer to keep some of my opinions, observations, prognostications, et cetera close to my chest.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Getting emotional about politics, especially interparty politics, is never a good idea as it thins the skin.
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)When will people finally say yes. We have a candidate who stands for everything democrats supposedly support. Too smart to say yes. Mind boggling.
cali
(114,904 posts)he's enormously popular here.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)However, the Vermont primary is on Super Tuesday, March 1, if I'm not mistaken. I know he's popular there, but by then Vermonters may well decide to go with Clinton if it looks impossible for Sanders to win. They'll still have him in the Senate, after all.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)If he manages to knock out O'Malley between IA, NH, and NV, we're in the odd position of Clinton winning the South on Super Tuesday and Sanders probably winning Vermont and being the only other candidate in Colorado.
Bigger upsets have happened...
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)I don't think he's a serious candidate anyway.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,234 posts)I agree, however, about VT. He won't win VT. I remember in 2007, in a hypothetical matchup he trailed Obama by 30+ points. At least the voters of VT may love him as their firebrand in the Senate, they didn't want him in the WH.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)failed to break 10% in South Carolina. Then the next primary day is Super Tuesday, with Vermont on the table. People won't want to back somebody who's clearly losing. If he doesn't drop out after South Carolina, I'd be very surprised. Once he loses NH, the whole thing will unravel quickly.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,234 posts)last time. Hopefully, her new team has learned from the mistakes of the past. She's been very smart so far. She hasn't held any big "inevitable" rallies. She's been speaking in very close knit venues, and doing pretty much what she did to win her Senate seat by a landslide. I'm confident she'll be the eventual nominee, but I still can't say with confidence that Sanders won't pick up a caucus state or two.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)You poked the hornets nest.
Now you've done it!
Recursion
(56,582 posts)He's also very likely to win DC a month later.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)He simply doesn't have voter appeal.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)I would assume most know Bernie Sanders by now in NH and already have an opinion about him.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I think it will be less than 20%.
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)Last edited Sun May 10, 2015, 03:35 PM - Edit history (1)
I just think that Hillary has more, for whatever reasons. Bernie waited too long. The only time he gets national attention is as a wonk on a talk show. And yet he can't run as an out of the blue outsider, creating his own message, a la Jimmy Carter. It's a different political era--media, money and campaign wise. Hillary has been expanding her presence and impact for years--on a national and now a world level. And she's taken on uncounted attacks and is about to face a $100s million opposition research/propaganda army along with its willing surrogates in the MSM. I am sure she thought long and hard about running again. You've got to want the job and work toward it. But you also have to stay in the moment of your present endeavor. I think Hillary always did this. Student/Lawyer/First lady Arkansas/U.S., Senator, Secretary of State...
Bernie wants to influence the direction of the Democratic Party. He doesn't want to be President. Hillary's calling is deeper. There are more people from every demographic that wanted her to run. If Bernie makes it to the Illinois primary, I will still vote for Hillary. Not because her message/position/motivation is pure, but because her work is genuine and committed. How does one move an agenda forward in Washington?
The reason classically Democratic issues aren't promoted with more vigor is because a huge portion of typically Democratic voters don't think every election matters. As a party we know this, and yet the roots building message sucks. Howard Dean understands this. He was beginning to rebuild the foundation. Barrack Obama understands this, but he used it and then cut it loose and lost all momentum in 2010. Perhaps Rahm had a lot to do with that.
If Hillary wins the primary and then the Presidency, it will be because she has worked hard and will have earned it. I am rooting for her to crash through, for she will have changed the odds against it at the beginning of her career.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)He's already toast? Good God, please make it stop!
DCBob
(24,689 posts)I would imagine most everyone knows Bernie by now in NH and have probably already formed an opinion. If he's going to have any chance at all I would have thought it would show up in places that know him well already. I could be wrong but that's my opinion.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)What nerve!
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Bernie has been in the race for what, two weeks?
Clinton has been in the race for 6 years.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Hillary is a well known and beloved public figure. THAT is why she is so far ahead.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)tritsofme
(17,379 posts)tick tick tick
Logical
(22,457 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I feel his % is correct.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... is where "the numbers" are in a year and a half from, post implosion.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Because apparently the rest of DU doesn't. "He's toast!" "He won't break 20%" though he's gone up 5% since just last week and is now at 18%. For fuck's sake! And we make fun of low information Republican voters? Make it stop, please!!
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)Destroy Hillary's self-fulfilling "inevitability" delusion, and the climb will continue beyond core progressives.
Destroy the perception of her electability, which she assumes to be her greatest strength, because she is in truth a weak campaigner, and Sanders can take the ticket.
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)Really?
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)And then deploy grief counselors to the Hillary camp with jugs of Prozac and copies of Oprah books.
WTF?
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)--her electability, which she assumes to be her greatest strength--
That sounds like projection to me. Are you privy to her thoughts about her chances?
It sounds like you resent her popularity, like a Courtney Barnett fan pissed off at Taylor Swift.
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)She doesn't appear to have learned a single thing in the interim. Same arrogance, same entitled presumptuousness, same attempt to cruise to a nomination she would probably squander.
Are you privy to her thoughts about her chances?
I'm privy to her words and actions, both of which scream as much.
It sounds like you resent her popularity
What "popularity"? The poll reflects nothing but presumption that she would be the nominee. Her message is that the ticket belongs to her and we all just better get used to it - same it was in 2008. And the reasons for telling her to shove it are the same as they were the first time. It's very fortunate that we did. I hope we have the same common sense this time around.
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)No it doesn't. It specifically asks:
"If the 2016 New Hampshire Democratic presidential
primary were held today and the candidates were:
Hillary Clinton, Joseph Biden, Bernie Sanders, Martin
OMalley, Lincoln Chafee, and Jim Webb
for whom would you vote? Who would be your second choice?"
It doesn't ask, "Who do you think the nominee will be?"
You are only calling into question your perception, and this approach does nothing to help you destroy what you perceive to be Hillary's delusions and presumptions.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)for Sen. Sanders verses the prospective Republican field?
We see Hillary beating all comers.
Too early?
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)We have to see if/when O'Malley, Webb, and Biden announce, possibly by the end of the month.
The GOP money is going to have to decide who they are going to back soon. They are not going to go all scattershot. Only ideologues and long-shots have announced so far. It's going to be between Scott Walker and Jeb Bush. I don't think Christie makes it out of NJ and onto a debate stage, where I think his closest challenge would be Rand Paul or maybe Cruz (but I think Cruz' voice would ultimately annoy the shit out of America, and he would sink fast).
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)I think a Bernie Sanders polling at 62% would mean that the country, as a whole, would have already moved left. It would mean that the country got over the the stigma of the "socialist" label. That we would be governing more German-like than Texas-like.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)But still worth working toward, talking about. I am supporting Hillary to that end, as I supported Barrack Obama to that end. TPP and Fast Track only passes if congress abdicates its oversight charge. And that is on us.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)People are going to be surprised.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)And Iowa and New Hampshire are two very good states for him (only DC and VT are probably intrinsically stronger).
Interesting times.