Poll: Sanders Has Slight Edge Over Clinton In Matchups With GOP Opponents
Source: USA Today
Susan Page and Jenny Ung, USA TODAY 1:01 p.m. EST February 17, 2016
WASHINGTON Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders fares a bit better than rival Hillary Clinton in head-to-head matchups against Republican presidential contenders, a USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll finds, and he has pulled within 10 percentage points of her for the Democratic nomination.
The nationwide survey, taken Thursday through Monday, underscores how formidable an opponent the 74-year-old democratic socialist has become against one of the Democratic Party's most established figures.
Clinton a former first lady, two-term New York senator and secretary of State is backed by 50% of likely Democratic primary and caucus voters, down 6 points from December. Over that time, Sanders' standing has surged 11 points, to 40%.
While Clinton argues that she would be more electable in November, Sanders shows somewhat more strength against four possible Republican opponents, although almost all of the matchups fall within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/02/17/usa-today-suffolk-poll-whos-more-electable/80452560/
secondwind
(16,903 posts)ananda
(28,876 posts)I hope and pray that the White House is safe from any Reep.
Nice to dampen that argument about a reason to throw one's support in a 'safe' direction.
katmondoo
(6,457 posts)I don't think so. They wouldn't pick Mitt Romney and he was not even half as bad as this years candidates
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)cannabis_flower
(3,765 posts)Something horrible. He might have won if he hadn't said this:
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what...who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. ...These are people who pay no income tax. ...and so my job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
MisterP
(23,730 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Reter
(2,188 posts)He picked the wrong year to run. Thank your lucky stars he won't be the nominee this year.
rocktivity
(44,577 posts)In the beginning, Romney actually had an edge over Obama with independents. But by refusing to show his returns (a tradition started by his own father!) he effectively folded his own trump card...if you'll pardon the expression...
rocktivity
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Wait until a billion dollars worth of !!!!!SOCIALISTCOMMUNIST!!!!! attack ads come out. So much for the lead.
frylock
(34,825 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)and Social Security, and they fold like cheap fans.
youceyec
(394 posts)What part of this don't pollsters and some of you understand? GOP has NOT been attacking BS other than a few blurbs about socialism here and there. Once they start attacking him his numbers will SINK.
Think about it.
frylock
(34,825 posts)[font color="white"]Sanders is no Obama[/font>]
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)Dean couldn't win. Kerry was most electable.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Beacool
(30,253 posts)Hillary is a well known commodity, Sanders is not. Either one of them is going to get viciously attacked by Republicans. After 8 years of Democrats holding the WH, they are salivating to take it back. That's why party leaders are in despair that they haven't been able to stop Trump.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)her biggest problem.
dchill
(38,537 posts)Incredible how they can't see the YUUUGE swath of the electorate that she has alienated and disgusted.
Her nomination would cost us Democrats the election.
Blasphemer
(3,261 posts)Is that Sanders's numbers used to look significantly better (outside the margin of error of a given poll) but now that he's better known, the numbers are virtually identical. They're both running neck and and neck (and losing) to Trump. This makes perfect sense to me. In an election year like this, no Democrat is going to really have an edge over any other Democrat. The same applies to the inflated numbers Biden was getting. His numbers if he had decided to run would look just like Sanders's and Clinton's.
On the flip side, the numbers for the Republicans are also likely inflated. Trump is well-known but we have yet to see how his schtick would stand up to a GE fight. Cruz, Rubio and Kasich have yet to be fully exposed to the public. Overall, this poll is not bad news for the Democrats at all. It's normal for the party that is out of power to poll much better (a la Bush's early polls in 2000) initially and then the numbers become closer as we get closer to the election. The GOP is only managing a tie right now. That doesn't bode well for them come November.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)It's way too early in the electoral season to know who people will really favor in November. I kept saying that the two challengers of both parties wouldn't be the nominees. I still feel that Hillary will prevail, but I'm not so sure about Trump. It seems that the Republicans are on their way to nominate the one candidate running who is unfit for office.
It's one crazy election year......
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Trump has his own money and Bernie is getting his in $27 checks. Let's see, what do All of The Others have in common? Right, they bow down and kiss the rings of Big Donors. That would be The Establishment. Not exactly breaking news.
We're getting sick and tired of being sick and tired about that shit running our country.
cannabis_flower
(3,765 posts)Likely voters and aIso does a 65-35 landlines/cellphone ratio. However, even by 2013 that ratio was 59/41 and is likely closer to even now. I'm hoping that means it is a closer race than it appears.
http://time.com/2966515/landline-phones-cell-phones/
rocktivity
(44,577 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 24, 2016, 01:04 PM - Edit history (1)
if only because I can't see the Republicians who can't bring themselves to vote for Trump bringing themselves to vote for Hillary.
rocktivity
POE-PurityOfEssence
(4 posts)This is pretty much moot - is there a tabulation of who would fare better state by state? Then we can calculate electors and see who really fares better, and if Trump or Rubio can beat either of them.
Regardless - with so much at stake I'm voting for whoever gets the nomination- Hillern Cliders or Bernary Sandton
Gothmog
(145,563 posts)Dana Milbank has some good comments on general election match up polls https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Watching Sanders at Monday nights Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump or another Republican nominee would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.
The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the socialist label and requested that Sanders define it so that it doesnt concern the rest of us citizens.
Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who dont want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top thats my definition of democratic socialism.
But thats not how Republicans will define socialism and theyll have the dictionary on their side. Theyll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. Theyll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldnt be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists dont win national elections in the United States .
Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases one of the biggest tax hikes in history, as moderator Chris Cuomo put it to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that hypothetically, youre going to pay $5,000 more in taxes, and declared, W e will raise taxes, yes we will. He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that its demagogic to say, oh, youre paying more in taxes.
Well, yes and Trump is a demagogue.
Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government bigger than ever, Sanders didnt quarrel, saying, P eople want to criticize me, okay, and F ine, if thats the criticism, I accept it.
Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.
Match up polls are worthless because the candidates have not been fully vetted. Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads.
still_one
(92,403 posts)decided by states, not by national polls
Right now at this point in time the state polls favor Hillary for the Democratic nominee. That may change. The republican state polls have Trump for the state polls for the Repugs nomination, that could change
Any hypothetical match ups of presumed candidate dates are just that, hypothetical
Once the respective nominees are chosen it becomes real
That is why including Biden when he didnt announce was artificially skewing the results