Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 08:48 PM Oct 2015

Morning Consult: HC: 53% BS: 26%

2016 National Democratic Primary
Asked of 688 Democratic registered voters (October 22-25, 2015)

Hillary Clinton (D) 53%
Bernie Sanders (D) 26%
Martin O'Malley (D) 5%
Other 6%
Undecided 10%

http://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/151006_topline_trend_v2_AP.pdf

Conducted partially post Benghazi. I think there are still more positive effects for Hillary to come in next polls.

54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Morning Consult: HC: 53% BS: 26% (Original Post) DCBob Oct 2015 OP
But, but, but, nobody could vote multiple times in that poll!!!!!!!!!11111one eom MohRokTah Oct 2015 #1
+1 Historic NY Oct 2015 #29
You must have seen the favorability numbers kristopher Oct 2015 #34
Actually at this early stage of the race Joe Turner Oct 2015 #31
Darn it no magic polls workinclasszero Oct 2015 #38
Thanks. msrizzo Oct 2015 #2
O'Malley got a nice bump, too. MineralMan Oct 2015 #3
He did.... He's out of the margin of error... Adrahil Oct 2015 #23
Looks like Bernie surged from 25% to 26% upaloopa Oct 2015 #4
Hillary's got a 2:1 lead, there. MineralMan Oct 2015 #5
There is a ceiling how how many Democratic Party members will side with a D- NRA rating. Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #7
He might have gone up to 26.5% had he stuck around and shmoozed with the crowd afterward. George II Oct 2015 #16
Hehe.. DCBob Oct 2015 #19
Why do these scientific polls take 2 or 3 days to compile when you can do an on-line poll like in Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #6
That poll ended yesterday. MineralMan Oct 2015 #8
My mistake. Substitute "compile" with "gather information". On-line polls compile themselves. Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #10
I know, right? NanceGreggs Oct 2015 #14
Because the professional pollsters who publish ACCURATE poll results take time to... George II Oct 2015 #15
Hmmm...seems like someone is applying sound scientific statistical principles.....good to see! Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #18
What is wrong with google's approach? kristopher Oct 2015 #35
I'll play....how do you ensure the anonymous internet clickers are Democrats? Or do not click Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #36
How do you ever ensure people are democrats? kristopher Oct 2015 #40
Science weeps. Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #44
Nice meaningless way to say... kristopher Oct 2015 #48
cranky enid602 Oct 2015 #9
There is a ceiling on Democratic Party voters siding with "cranky". Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #11
Here is Huffington Pollster's "Trend" George II Oct 2015 #12
Biden supporters are realigning pretty much as expected. okasha Oct 2015 #13
National poll: Yawn! Fawke Em Oct 2015 #17
National polls are an indicator of state polls. DCBob Oct 2015 #20
National polls are an indicator of state polls... ? kenn3d Oct 2015 #39
Give it time.. DCBob Oct 2015 #42
Neither of those two states have been polled since MineralMan Oct 2015 #45
Not so kenn3d Oct 2015 #47
Here's updated Iowa chart which demonstrates how national polls can be indicators of state polls. DCBob Oct 2015 #53
Dega vu all over again. wilsonbooks Oct 2015 #21
Bernie ain't Obama. How many times do we have to tell you? upaloopa Oct 2015 #24
But Hillary is still Hillary kristopher Oct 2015 #41
She is 27 points higher than Bernie in the polls. upaloopa Oct 2015 #43
More importantly, her numbers are twice those of Bernie. MineralMan Oct 2015 #46
As the 2007 reference shows, that isn't definitive by any means. kristopher Oct 2015 #49
'Nobody ever goes there. It's too crowded.' MineralMan Oct 2015 #50
That you choose to ignore the evidence about favorability ratings kristopher Oct 2015 #51
I see. Well, OK then... MineralMan Oct 2015 #52
You see? Really? kristopher Oct 2015 #54
Good results for Hillary. Thinkingabout Oct 2015 #22
Positive? Yes, for Bernie kenn3d Oct 2015 #25
All within margin of error, meaning flat. JaneyVee Oct 2015 #26
That's statistical noise when you have a three point margin of error. RandySF Oct 2015 #27
LOL.. only a Bernster could characterize trailing by 27 points as "positive". DCBob Oct 2015 #28
How about those favorables. HerbChestnut Oct 2015 #30
Look at the numbers SmittynMo Oct 2015 #32
I feel like that is a jump for O'Malley? Agschmid Oct 2015 #33
It is, subject to confirmation....and he earned it and more. Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #37

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
34. You must have seen the favorability numbers
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:28 PM
Oct 2015
http://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/151006_topline_trend_v2_AP.pdf

Next we will look at a list of names that have been talked about as potential Democratic candidates for President. It is a long list, please take the time to go through the list carefully and give an individual answer for each name below. For each person, please indicate if you have a Very Favorable, Somewhat Favorable, Somewhat Unfavorable, or Very Unfavorable opinion of each If you have heard of the person, but do not have an opinion, please mark “Heard Of, No Opinion.” If you have not heard of the person, please mark “Never Heard Of.”

Hillary Clinton
Total Favorable 46%
Total Unfavorable 51%
No Opinion / Never Heard Of 4%
------------------------
Very Favorable 23%
Somewhat Favorable 22%
Somewhat Unfavorable 12%
Very Unfavorable 39%
Heard Of, No Opinion 3%
Never Heard Of 0%


Bernie Sanders
Total Favorable 45%
Total Unfavorable 34%
No Opinion / Never Heard Of 22%
-----------------------------------------
Very Favorable 17%
Somewhat Favorable 27%
Somewhat Unfavorable 14%
Very Unfavorable 20%
Heard Of, No Opinion 13%
Never Heard Of 8%


Martin O'Mally
Total Favorable 21%
Total Unfavorable 31%
No Opinion / Never Heard Of 48%
----------------------------------
Very Favorable 6%
Somewhat Favorable 15%
Somewhat Unfavorable 16%
Very Unfavorable 15%
Heard Of, No Opinion 21%
Never Heard Of 27%
 

Joe Turner

(930 posts)
31. Actually at this early stage of the race
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:06 PM
Oct 2015

with Hillary's full court press smears on Bernie and in the wake of the Bengazi fiasco, I'm surprised her lead is not greater. Hmm barely over 50% in her own party after years of setting the table for the presidency.. This is not good news for Hillary. It's obvious many people have reservations about her..and they are not unwarranted.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
23. He did.... He's out of the margin of error...
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:46 PM
Oct 2015

It'll be interesting to see how he does in the next debate.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
4. Looks like Bernie surged from 25% to 26%
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 08:55 PM
Oct 2015

Must have been that rousing speech In IA last Saturday. See if you go after Hillary you gain a point.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
6. Why do these scientific polls take 2 or 3 days to compile when you can do an on-line poll like in
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:01 PM
Oct 2015

an hour with 10 times the respondents?

George II

(67,782 posts)
15. Because the professional pollsters who publish ACCURATE poll results take time to...
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:09 PM
Oct 2015

....weed out the children who can't vote and in the case of polls about Democratic candidates they eliminate republicans and people who can't vote in Democratic primaries.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
18. Hmmm...seems like someone is applying sound scientific statistical principles.....good to see!
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:15 PM
Oct 2015

Cue the Poll Truthers.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
35. What is wrong with google's approach?
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:37 PM
Oct 2015

Their selection is randomized probably better than a traditional poll and their sample size is so large that any skew due to double voting is probably very very low.

If you think it is a polling strategy that can be gamed, perhaps you'd share with us a step by step tutorial on how to go about it?

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
36. I'll play....how do you ensure the anonymous internet clickers are Democrats? Or do not click
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:46 PM
Oct 2015

more than once from various devices.....for starters.

"Why bother with science" when you got the Internet is your real question!

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
40. How do you ever ensure people are democrats?
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:31 AM
Oct 2015
Most polling allows people to self identify their political affiliation.

As for using different devices, maybe you missed the concept behind the ability to work with extremely large samples and how that will serve to diminish any effect from someone wanting to game the process with multiple votes?

I'm guessing you've never actually done any survey work?

I don't know all that much about Google's method, but from what I do know about the way they get people to participate, it seems innovative. Having known a couple of people who worked for them in research areas, I'd be willing to bet that they are able to get "science" to work for them pretty well in the realm of polling and statistics.

Face it, like everyone else lately you're just being a bit of a political hack. I don't mean it as an insult since primary season always seems to turn most of the normally rational citizens of DU into political hacks - probably even me.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
48. Nice meaningless way to say...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:02 PM
Oct 2015

...you haven't got a clue about the topic on which you opine.

BTW - Yes, I'm trained and experienced in designing, from the ground up, "scientific" polling.

George II

(67,782 posts)
12. Here is Huffington Pollster's "Trend"
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:07 PM
Oct 2015

Hillary Clinton 51.6%, Bernie Sanders 25.6%, Martin O'Malley 1.1%

kenn3d

(486 posts)
39. National polls are an indicator of state polls... ?
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 01:02 AM
Oct 2015

Really?


She doesn't seem to be ahead by 27 points in these first two states, now does she? And if she loses both IA and NH, that spread in the national polls could change pretty quickly... I'm sure she knows this.

The Clinton campaign has had a rough Spring and Summer no doubt, but re-assuming the inevitability thing now is not only unbecoming, it seems pretty premature as well imo.

A whole lot of people are turning out for Bernie Sanders. Many are new and rejuvenated voters, independents and even fed-up former Republicans. The pollsters may not be counting all of us yet. So don't let your gloat get stuck in your throat.

Anything can happen.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
45. Neither of those two states have been polled since
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 10:31 AM
Oct 2015

Biden announced he wouldn't be running. Look at the underlying data for those charts. That will change shortly. The polls those states' charts are based on are old enough not to reflect the recent news and events.

Anytime you look at a chart like those, you have to look at the underlying data.

kenn3d

(486 posts)
47. Not so
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 10:42 AM
Oct 2015

The latest poll (CBS) did NOT include Biden:

New Hampshire:
Sanders 54
Clinton 39
Biden 0


Iowa:
Clinton 46
Sanders 43
Biden 0

(within MoE - a statistical tie)

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
53. Here's updated Iowa chart which demonstrates how national polls can be indicators of state polls.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:27 PM
Oct 2015


Customized
-- 6/1 to current
-- All polls
-- Less smoothing option

wilsonbooks

(972 posts)
21. Dega vu all over again.
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:24 PM
Oct 2015
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102277/gallup-election-review-october-2007.aspx


Gallup’s 2007 national presidential polling strongly points to Clinton winning the 2008 Democratic nomination. Barring something unusual or otherwise unexpected, she is well positioned for the 2008 Democratic primaries. Obama has not been an insignificant rival: 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.


Clinton’s lead over Obama has expanded to nearly 30 points in Gallup’s latest poll, conducted Oct. 12-14: 50% vs. 21%.






MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
46. More importantly, her numbers are twice those of Bernie.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 10:32 AM
Oct 2015

She has a 2:1 margin in the most recent poll result. That is what is truly significant.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
49. As the 2007 reference shows, that isn't definitive by any means.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:07 PM
Oct 2015

The most relevant stat with the Clinton campaign is the unfavorable rating. People do not vote for candidates they DO NOT LIKE.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
51. That you choose to ignore the evidence about favorability ratings
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 03:21 PM
Oct 2015

doesn't change the impact they will have on the outcome.

Not even a teeny tiny bit.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
54. You see? Really?
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:29 PM
Oct 2015

"Regarding swing states in 2016, Quinnipiac University's July and August Swing State Polls "

Colorado
62% - 34% not honest and trustworthy;
52% - 46% has strong leadership qualities
57% - 39% does not care about their needs and problems

Iowa
59% - 33% not honest and trustworthy,
52% - 43% is a strong leader
55% - 39% does not care about their needs and problems

Virginia
55% - 39% is not honest and trustworthy
54% - 42% is a strong leader
50% - 45% does not care about their needs and problems

Florida
37% favorable - 55% unfavorable
64% - 32% not honest and trustworthy.

Ohio
36% favorable 54% unfavorable rating
60% - 34% is not honest and trustworthy.

Pennsylvania
38% favorable - 55% unfavorable rating
63% - 32% is not honest and trustworthy.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/favorability-ratings-show-hillary-clinton-is-unelectable_b_8388316.html

kenn3d

(486 posts)
25. Positive? Yes, for Bernie
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 09:52 PM
Oct 2015

Comparing with the previous Morning Consult poll:
Clinton -3
Sanders +2

Change in spread= Sanders +5 since last week.

But don't panic...

Anything can happen.

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
30. How about those favorables.
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 10:26 PM
Oct 2015

Fav/Unfav/Don't know

HRC: 46/51/4
O'M: 21/31/48
BS: 45/34/22

Those are great numbers for Bernie. He also leads the 2nd choice category with 28% compared to Clinton's 20%. Still a long ways to go in this election.

SmittynMo

(3,544 posts)
32. Look at the numbers
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:22 PM
Oct 2015

Everyone knows it will be Hilliary and Bernie. The bottom 3 constitute 21%. I wonder where that's gonna go? O'Malley is a lot like Bernie, so I would suspect Bernie will get a large percentage of the 21%. Bernie admitted on TV that 20-40% still don't know about him. And the best for last.......we still have a year to go, and 5 months to primary?

So the numbers don't mean squat to me. Actually I'm quite pleased with Bernie's numbers, especially in NH and IA.

Hey, at this stage of the game, I quite happy.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
37. It is, subject to confirmation....and he earned it and more.
Mon Oct 26, 2015, 11:48 PM
Oct 2015

Martin will overtake Samders if he has enough funds to keep at it in the Endless Campaign.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Morning Consult: HC: 53% ...