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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:49 PM Nov 2015

In polling: 2015 is not a repeat of 2007

I'm not going to go through a huge analysis, but there has been, for awhile, this belief that a similar spread between Clinton and Obama is proof that 2015 is following the same pattern. It is not.

First, Clinton's support at this point in 2007 was around 45% today it is at 55+%. I really hope I don't need to explain why being over 50% is significant.

Secondly, in 2007 the top two candidates accounted for only 67% of total support. There were still significant room to gain extra supporters from Edwards and undecideds. Obama ended up picking up the majority of that remaining 33%. In 2015, the top two candidates account for 85+% total support. There is not a deep well for easy votes.

Obama was able to take the upper hand from Clinton without drawing significantly from her base of support. The only way Sanders can win is to convince Clinton supporters to change candidates. This is possible but a much harder job than Obama had in 2007.

In this case past is not prelude, because the races are in much different places. Sanders' path is much more difficult than Obama's.

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In polling: 2015 is not a repeat of 2007 (Original Post) Godhumor Nov 2015 OP
Have to agree even though I wish it were not true Jarqui Nov 2015 #1
I think Sander's campaign knows this too. msrizzo Nov 2015 #3
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #2
Last five polls Jarqui Nov 2015 #7
If Kentonio Nov 2015 #4
Sure. This will be there year that groups that have never historical voted will vote enmass Godhumor Nov 2015 #8
You're the statistician right? Kentonio Nov 2015 #11
So far, 2015 is very different thant 2007 Gothmog Nov 2015 #5
Yea but what about that rousing speech Bernie upaloopa Nov 2015 #6
Upaloopa! Gamecock Lefty Nov 2015 #9
Some just don't want to believe how impressive what Obama did was. NCTraveler Nov 2015 #10
Agreed MaggieD Nov 2015 #12
It makes so much sense when you explain it like that!! (Thank you!) NurseJackie Nov 2015 #13
Good points. Also the super delegates are very different. K & R . nt Persondem Nov 2015 #14
Going to keep bumping every time a 2007 thread takes off n/t Godhumor Nov 2015 #15
Oh look, there is another one n/t Godhumor Nov 2015 #16

msrizzo

(796 posts)
3. I think Sander's campaign knows this too.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:55 PM
Nov 2015

This is why they are getting more aggressive about hitting Hillary. But that's not a great place to be at this point and although Bernie Sanders will throw out a few hits, I don't see him going scorched earth which is almost what it would take at this point.

Response to Godhumor (Original post)

Jarqui

(10,128 posts)
7. Last five polls
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:09 PM
Nov 2015

CBS/NYT Clinton +19
FOX News Clinton +25
McClatchy Clinton +22
Quinnipiac Clinton +18
NBC/WSJ Clinton +31

It's pretty hard to deviate from "Clinton is very comfortably in front" because those polls are way outside the margin for error.

She got the Benghazi email thing behind her. Had a pretty good first debate.

And she's pivoting to start spending her millions on ads ... that the M$M would like to get their mitts on ... so they've likely got their hand out and are going to play nice for a while.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
4. If
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:58 PM
Nov 2015

If this was true..

"Obama was able to take the upper hand from Clinton without drawing significantly from her base of support. The only way Sanders can win is to convince Clinton supporters to change candidates."

Then you would indeed be correct. Lucky it is not true. Sanders does not only have Clinton's supporters to draw from. The percentage of people who vote in primaries is awfully low. Huge numbers of people have never voted in them, and many others don't because they've become disaffected by the party, or just don't think the party speaks to their needs. They represent a frankly vast potential voter base, and its rather sad that we've reached a point where that huge majority is basically just ignored by the party in general.

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
8. Sure. This will be there year that groups that have never historical voted will vote enmass
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:17 PM
Nov 2015

And even if they did, all indications are they're not breaking to Sanders nearly as much as people here would like to think.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
11. You're the statistician right?
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:02 PM
Nov 2015

How would we know how they're breaking? What proportion of polls are using the 'must have voted in at least one of the last two primaries' criteria? Serious question, if you wouldn't mind indulging me, as I genuinely don't know.

As for them voting en mass, that's basically his mountain to climb. If he wants the presidency and if we want him to get it, that's probably what's required. If he can't pull it off then fair enough, back to regular viewing for another 8 years.

Gothmog

(145,475 posts)
5. So far, 2015 is very different thant 2007
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:59 PM
Nov 2015

The key issue is that Sanders appears to have a very narrow base of support that is not expanding. African American and Latino voters are not supporting Sanders but are supporting Clinton which will make the Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses fun to watch

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
6. Yea but what about that rousing speech Bernie
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:02 PM
Nov 2015

gave at a previous Dem convention that put his name on everyone's list of possible Presidential contenders and his popular autobiography.
Oh wait that was Obama.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
10. Some just don't want to believe how impressive what Obama did was.
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:34 PM
Nov 2015

And it didn't happen by luck or just going around talking. He put together a team as formidable as any campaign team we have seen. The only team even close to that right now is Clintons. Second closest is O'Malley, which is why we are starting to see him move. The line of though when people trot this out is simply offensive to what Obama did in '08.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»In polling: 2015 is not a...