Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumWhy Sanders supporters are reading 2008 primary polls incorrectly.
I note how they love to point out how Sanders polls very close to the level that Obama polled in 2007/2008.
Ironically, this is classic projection and a complete failure to recognize that in 2007/2008 there was a CLEAR three way race. They are comparing apples to bicycles.
The most important factor to note is that over dozens upon dozens of polls throughout 2007 and into the primaries of 2008, only a single ARG poll placed Hillary above 50%. There was not any single other poll that had her breaking 50% during the entire race:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_primaries
Here we are in 2015 going into 2016 and you'll be hard pressed to find a single poll where Hillary comes out BELOW 50%
This clearly points to an easy victory for Hillary Clinton in the primary race.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Time had some decent numbers, it was a mostly even three way split. Also, the delegate coin was still close until June, I do not see the long delegate in this primary because of Hillary's high poll numbers nationwide. It is a different race.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)O'Malley doesn't even poll close to what John Edwards polled at.
And every time I read a post by someone who's trying to compare Barack Obama's candidacy to Sanders', I always laugh.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)enid602
(8,642 posts)It's intentional. They repeat the same flawed logic every couple of days, knowing that some will believe it. No wonder Bernie feels he can steal Trump supporters.
Cha
(297,497 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Clinton didn't lose Black voters because Black voters just decided to change their minds about her. Obama's early win in Iowa broke a barrier that showed that he had a broad base of support, and could win white voters.
That helped turn the tide in SC.
"Sanders advisers note their candidate is still not well known, and take heart in the fact that Obama was well behind Clinton in South Carolina at this point 2007. But Obama had a unique demographic advantage that Sanders does not. Once the African-American senator demonstrated his ability to win white voters in 95% white Iowa, black voters in South Carolina flocked to the future president, giving him a big win over Clinton."
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bernie-sanders-refuses-give-south-carolina
Cha
(297,497 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)"Turnout on Saturday was estimated at a record 530,000 people, nearly 100,000 more than in the Republican primary a week ago. More than half of the Democratic voters were African-American, and surveys of voters leaving the polls suggested that their heavy turnout helped propel Mr. Obama to victory.
Mr. Obama, who built an extensive grass-roots network across the state over the last year, received the support of about 80 percent of black voters, the exit polls showed. He also received about one-quarter of the white vote, with Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards splitting the remainder.
In particular, Mr. Obama was helped by strong support from black women, who made up 35 percent of the voters. Mrs. Clinton, with the help of her husband, had competed vigorously for black women voters, but Mr. Obama received about 80 percent of their support, according to the exit polls, conducted by Edison/Mitofsky for the National Election Pool of television networks and The Associated Press."
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/us/politics/27carolina.html
I believe the state itself is 30% AA. It was pretty much a blowout. It's hard to see what Bernie's plan is to duplicate this or even get close.
Edit to add, before someone says that I'm saying people only voted for Obama because he was Black, my original statement was that his win in Iowa inspired greater voter confidence that he had broad appeal that showed up in contests after Iowa that had been seen as a shoo-in for Clinton.
Cha
(297,497 posts)AA voters who don't think much of him for that move. The Obama Coalition was not impressed.
Thank you, Starry!
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Coolest Ranger
(2,034 posts)until he said that, then he lost me forever. I will not throw my support behind him on anything except maybe remaining in the Senate as majority leader or whip
Cha
(297,497 posts)Cha
(297,497 posts)trusted flawed logic.
Coolest Ranger
(2,034 posts)they get all in your face, start taking over your page or your comments, accusing you of being "better than that" had someone tell me that over Facebook this morning. Nothing burns my blood then when someone tells me of being a Third Way Dem what ever that means. I had to warn people to not come at me telling me I will support their candidate when he has nothing to offer me.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... but they continue to hang on to the "myth" and fallacious comparisons because: a) it's about the only thing they have to pin their hopes on, and 2) it almost always gets a rise out of Hillary supporters who prefer facts over fantasy.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)It's only a matter of a few months now. Then they can start lying to themselves about why Bernie lost the nomination.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,237 posts)That being said, BS is no Barack Obama, and he has stalled out for good reason. It's because the "Obama" coalition that they have routinely disparaged for seven years, aren't "feelin' the bern", and this one never will.
They can't admit they're stuck, because if they do that, people will stop opening their wallets.