2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNational Gallup polls show Clinton far head by 29 points...
Gallups national presidential polling strongly points to Clinton winning the Democratic nomination. Barring something unusual or otherwise unexpected, she is well positioned for the Democratic primaries. Her closest rival has not been insignificant: he came within single digits of tying Clinton for the lead at two points this spring. But he has recently lost ground and is now in the weakest position relative to Clinton that he has been in all year.
No other announced or potential Democratic candidate has come close to threatening Clintons front-runner status since the campaign began!
When this is history and one looks retrospectively at where the race stands today, the key factors forecasting Clintons success will likely be the following:
Clinton Has Had a Consistent Run at the Top
Clinton has led the Democratic pack in every Gallup Poll conducted between November and October . For most of this time, Clinton has led by a double-digit margin.
Clintons lead has expanded to nearly 30 points in Gallups latest poll!
Gallup polling on Democratic nominations going back to the 1972 election shows that, by historical standards, a lead of even 20 points is large for Democratic candidates. The two candidates who held this distinction in the fall months before the election year (Gore in 1999 and Walter Mondale in 1983) eventually won the Democratic nomination.
Importantly, two-thirds of Democrats who prefer Clinton for their partys nomination say they are certain to vote for her in the primaries, a higher percentage than is found for supporters of the other Democratic candidates.
Clinton s Support Runs Deep
Clinton holds a commanding lead among nearly every major subgroup of potential Democratic primary voters. Some of her strongest showings are among women, nonwhites, those in lower-income households, those with less formal education, and Southerners.
Clinton Is Broadly Popular Among Democrats
Clinton enjoys high favorable ratings in the Democratic Party that extend well beyond the 40% to 50% of Democrats typically naming her as their top choice for the nomination. Eighty-two percent of Democrats and Democratic leaners have a favorable view of the former first lady, while only 16% have an unfavorable view of her. her rivals lag behind Clinton on this measure, in part because fewer Democrats are familiar with them.
Democrats also rate Clinton as the candidate most likely to defeat the Republican in the general election -- a key perceptual advantage given that primary voters are trying to distinguish among candidates with largely similar issue positions.
Additionally, 64% of Democrats say they would vote for Clinton enthusiastically in November 2008 should she be the partys nominee.
Clintons Image Strong on Top Policy Issues
According to the Sept. Gallup Panel survey, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents choose Clinton as the candidate best able to handle a wide variety of national issues.
In fact, even when given the choice of the top three Democratic candidates an outright majority of Democrats say Clinton would do the best job on 6 out of 17 issues measured in the poll. This includes some of the major nuts-and-bolts policy issues Americans generally rate as most important to their vote for federal offices: healthcare, the economy, and education. It also includes two of the leading values issues in todays culture: abortion and gay marriage.
Clinton is preferred by a solid plurality of Democrats on an additional seven issues. Among these are terrorism and the situation in Iraq -- two of the most hotly debated issues of the election, as well as potentially crucial to voters. She also holds sizable leads on taxes and energy, and somewhat smaller leads on crime, immigration, and being commander in chief of the military.
Clintons nomination seems almost inevitable, but Ted Kennedy (1980) and Gary Hart (1988) provide some caution that under extreme circumstances, a strong Democratic candidate can blow a big lead. Kennedys and Harts big leads came much earlier in the campaign, however. Of note as well: Mondale saw his large lead from the fall of 1983 disappear after Harts win in the 1984 New Hampshire primary, before Mondale recovered and went on to secure the nomination.
Some have speculated that Americans might be uncomfortable with Bill Clinton returning to the White House after scandal marred his presidency, but polling data suggests that is not the case -- at least not now.
..........................
This has been a retrospective from this day in history - Gallup poll results are from October 2007. Clinton's rivals are Barack Obama and John Edwards. and she is completely, totally undefeatable. Every prognosis points towards Hillary Rodham Clinton being sworn into office in January 2009. democrats believe she is the best-able to defeat the might of the republicans - Specificlly Rudy Guiliani, who was set to be the shoo-in republican nominee. Barack Obama is favored over here in exactly one category - race relations.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102277/gallup-election-review-october-2007.aspx
Food for thought.
BernieFan57
(80 posts)That was an interesting year or two....
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)There seems to be a persistent belief that polls from September 2015 will be the absolute deciding factor in February-June 2016.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)She polls well that's for sure, but even they know it's not over yet.
Don't believe everything you read on the Internet.
Response to Scootaloo (Original post)
RandySF This message was self-deleted by its author.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)We Want Bernie
(45 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Bernie is no Obama.
That is true.
But Hillary ain't no Barack, either!
Who is inspiring the masses....same answer both elections---NOT Hillary.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Hillary has huge support across demographics that actually reflect the diversity of the Democratic base...just like Obama.
artislife
(9,497 posts)And how about social media.
Well this is an interesting article
http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/ap-poll-no-digital-divide-among-black-white-millennials/
People of color are very wired and just as adept in using technology, said Tom Rosenstiel, executive director of the American Press Institute, which funded the study. If you want a subject that hasnt been covered in the mainstream, millennials have found ways to get at that information through community sharing more than traditional ways. The way they get news is heavily influenced by topic.
In general, 64 percent of millennials say they read and watch news online regularly, including 66 percent of African-Americans, according to the poll, which was conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the American Press Institute. Sixty-five percent of white millennials say they keep up with the news online, while Hispanics were slightly less likely to say so, at 53 percent
Online news ---there is more out there than cnn, msnbc and fox out there.
This in case you are wondering
12-17: 25 million (7.8%)
18-24: 31.5 million (9.9%)
25-34: 43.5 million (13.6%)
35-44: 40.5 million (12.7%)
45-54: 43.5 million (13.6%)
55-64: 40.1 million (12.6%)
65-74: 26.4 million (8.3%)
75+: 19.8 million (6.2%)
Some other popular age groups, including the ever-present 18-34 bracket:
18-29: 53.5 million (16.8%)
18-34: 75 million (23.5%)
18-49: 136.4 million (42.8%)
35-49: 61.4 million (19.3%)
50-64: 62.6 million (19.6%)
55+: 86.3 million (27.1%)
65+: 46.2 million (14.5%)
http://www.marketingcharts.com/traditional/so-how-many-millennials-are-there-in-the-us-anyway-30401/
Voting
17.8 million
The number of blacks who voted in the 2012 presidential election. In comparison to the 2008 election, about 1.7 million additional black voters reported going to the polls in 2012.
We got a shot at winning the whole thing!
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Number 2: Hillary has 5 million twitter followers, Bernie has 600k. And number 3:
artislife
(9,497 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Boov
(30 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)Not enough to win, unless
A. Every person in their teens and 20s votes your way
B. The other 78 percent do not vote.
Don't get loopy off your own scent. Stop talking only to people who agree with you.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Priceless...or uncouth.
I don't talk to just people who agree with me...I listen to h supporters all day long. like you.
I have use social media for my business and pleasure. I have a lot of conservative, like you, people in my feed because small business owners tend to be republicans. I belong to a lot of different type of groups, with people ranging in all ages.
No one is talking about Hillary.
No one.
They did when the first "I'm ready for Hillary" stuff came out. But then came the draft Warren stuff...and that has been it.
I have a loopy Trump supporter, couple of scary Christians, and some gun loving republicans on my feed...they aren't voting for her. The rest...Bernie. People who surprise me. White 67 year old regular Democratic women, White deer hunting middle age guys in Colorado, 40ish woman Environmental engineer in New Mexico, essential oil selling grand ma in Sacramento, 911 denier in Fall city, former Kucinich Portlandia female. I have lots of Canadians mixed in with Europeans and Pacific Islanders. I also look at over 250.000 who somehow decided to go listen to a politician.
You cannot see the forrest or the trees, my friend. You think this is the same. This is just like 2008 at this time. There was no way some young AA guy with no experience was ever going to get the country to vote for him.
The thing is, 2008/10 wiped out a lot of people. And most have never reached the point where they were. And they are starting to see that it is all business as usual. And that means, we get screwed. H will screw us . She might save women's rights, but who knows....she will bend and change if she feels she needs to prove something.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Everybody I knew at the time voted for McGovern
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Truly a perfect reply. There simply isn't someone like Obama running this time. He was in a league of his own with respect to connecting with people. Neither Sanders or Hillary are Obama.
artislife
(9,497 posts)President Obama is a man unto his own. I am very honored that he chose to serve this country.
We Want Bernie
(45 posts)Just like in 2008.
Historic NY
(37,451 posts)but please proceed perhaps you'll convince some neophytes.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/10/gallup-wont-run-presidential-primary-polls
We Want Bernie
(45 posts)Taught by Professor Clinton.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)"According to the Sept. Gallup Panel survey, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents choose Clinton as the candidate best able to handle a wide variety of national issues."
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)That President Obama isn't in the race eh?
How people can equate Burnie Sanders to President Obama is beyond me.
Some people need to stop living in the past. Food for thought.
artislife
(9,497 posts)is beyond laughable.
frylock
(34,825 posts)in fact, he's doing better than Obama in several metrics during the same time period. See you on 3/2!
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)To judge by the poll results from October that year. In fact by those numbers, he was just another dangler-on sucking wind in Clinton's wake. Mind, this was after THIRTEEN DEBATES featuring all the candidates. I'm sure Clinton supporters on DU were falling over themselves to say the same things they're saying now about these numbers.
Barack Obama is not a wizard. There is no eldritch sorcery involved in turning those numbers around. I doubt it was a cakewalk for the people inside the Obama campaign, but no magic was required. No inexplicable "special something" that only Obama contains. If your only response is "Sanders isn't obama!" then you're missing the greater point. Sanders doesn't need to be Obama.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)*Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama.
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #16)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)You're done.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Gee, no fucking shit? Sanders has more single donors, more money, and is polling better than Obama was at this stage in 2007, so yeah, you're right. Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama. But I get the impression that you aren't acknowledging those differences when you and others make that claim, so feel free to explain what you mean when you say that Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama. You can do that here, or there's an entire thread set up for you to enlighten us all.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251669444
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Fucking apples/fucking oranges.
Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama in any way, shape or form. Not on his best fucking day.
And not only no, but hell no to any
MG thread.
frylock
(34,825 posts)truly enlightening, and on so many levels. I'm glad I took the time to engage someone with such invaluable wisdom.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)The link to Manny was sheer fucking genius.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Well let's see...
Obama:
charisma, gravitas, temperament, campaign organization that has yet to be matched, historical figure, world-class orator, brilliant wit, two-term president.
For starters....
Sanders:
Senator from Vermont, marched with MLK, Brunch with Bernie, (this is where I get stuck).
Yeah, now I'm pretty much done.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Sanders lacks charisma, is not serious, and uncontrollably angry? I think those massive crowds would disagree with you there.
Campaign organization? Sanders is doing better in polling, donations, and crowd size at his rallies than Obama did during the same time frame. What metric are using to gauge organization?
Historical figure? Obama is Black, so no, Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama in that regard. You got me there.
Bernie don't talk too good, hunh? And he's also slow witted. Okay.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)* just quoting my comadre up thread....
artislife
(9,497 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Do you want to wait until your compadre responds?
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)what more is there to say?
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Does it really matter?
"what more is there to say?"
Did you have a point here?
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)one sentence repeated. wtf back at you.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Thanks.
840high
(17,196 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)when Bernie finishes his second term.
Boov
(30 posts)Yes. FDR.
JI7
(89,254 posts)she kept her hispanic, lgbt and other groups which are still supporting her now.
the reason Biden entering the race lowers her numbers is because he is taking the black voters from her.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)of the african american vote? i don't know where they got that from but i do not believe it for a second.
Chicago1980
(1,968 posts)that aspect of this issue can be discounted for the time being.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)JI7
(89,254 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I expected to, but I am not.
I'm in Los Angeles -- East side.
I'm wondering where the polls are being taken. It's just not to be seen in my part of town. The people who aren't interested in Bernie-- very interested in voting for him -- are anti-choice. That's their issue and they will vote Republican.
It seems very strange to me.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)1. Poll shows Clinton has support from majority of Democrats
2. Sanders supporters ridicule the results
3. Ergo, Sanders supporters are ridiculing most Democrats.
And they expect the Democrats to vote for their guy.
Ridiculous.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)any Democratic Party I've been a part of in all my years as a Democrat! Something is REALLY, REALLY wrong and I think we're going to find as time goes by that more and more people will feel this way, if they don't already.
When someone like DWS is shutting down debates and actually telling a co-chair she's not welcome to come to the debates, how democratic does that sound? And what I just said is TRUE! Something smells and smells BADLY and I'm not going to get close to it!
Is it the money? I don't know, but I do know that polls aren't reflecting what I'm seeing. I'm not ridiculing most Democrats, I'm going to distance myself from THIS show being run by DWS! It's just WRONG!
Paka
(2,760 posts)Great history lesson.
senz
(11,945 posts)Thanks!
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)Great post, Scoot!
antigop
(12,778 posts)Hillary Clinton Aides Shed Light on Bills Role in Her Campaign
http://time.com/3920153/bill-clinton-hillary-campaign-adviser/
Mook also dismissed recent poll numbers that suggest Hillary Clintons favorability numbers are slipping. According to a CNN poll published last week, 57% of Americans think the former secretary of state is not trustworthy. A lot of the public polling is not very reliable, Mook said. I dont pay a whole lot of attention to it.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...for the Republican primaries.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)liberal N proud
(60,338 posts)You need to look at each state separately.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)this is 2015!! Do they call people's cell phones? Are they allowed to do this? Most people I know DON'T even have land lines so how are these numbers relevant? I'm not saying this simply because I support Bernie I really want answers.
I can only tell you what I see and know and I am truly surprised by how many people I talk politics with are either in Bernie's camp or leading toward him. A close friend of mine who was DEVOTED to Hillary has now told me she's pretty sure she'll be supporting Bernie. I invited her to go with me to a Bernie Debate party tomorrow and she accepted. Plus I live in a very Red County and I got invitations to FOUR Bernie Debate parties! I'm not making this up, it has even surprised me just how much support he seems to be getting.
Can things change, sure but I'm feeling so NEGATIVE about our very own Democratic Party and how they are acting so much like the Repukes! They got the memo and the memo says "you can't support Bernie!" Sounds like the other side to me and it sickens me so much.
DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ is a SNAKE and my feelings toward her are so very, very negative and can't believe the Party is letting this go on! IT'S JUST WRONG!
This time around I really don't think ANY polls can be very accurate. One on one polls can measure a certain percentage, but at the very least it's much too EARLY!
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
DrBulldog
(841 posts)She basically said then that it was just a matter of time before she gets enough votes for the nomination. It's a sure thing.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Obviously manipulated by neo-liberal, corporatist, third way DINOs