4/14 Reuters Poll: Bernie Sanders Takes National Lead

[amborin]

New Reuters Poll Shows Bernie Sanders Taking National Lead

Rosette Newcomb | April 14, 2016

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday shows Bernie Sanders beating Hillary Clinton by one point with registered Democratic voters.

The survey of 1,680 registered voters, 635 of whom identified as Democrats, was conducted between April 9 and April 13.

Among all Democrats and Democratic-leaning independent voters, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton by a 47-42 margin, with 11 percent of respondents saying they wouldn’t vote for either candidate.

Sanders beats Clinton by a narrow margin of 49-48 among registered Democrats, and he demolishes Clinton by 16 points among self-identified independents. The poll’s margin of error is 2.7 percent.

http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-sanders-leads-new-national-poll/

[redgreenandblue]

1. This is a problem if Clinton gets the nomination.

She built her lead during the early stages of the primaries when support for Sanders was still building up. She will likely get the nomination based on that early lead alone. Problem is, support for her has been eroding ever since. In the end we will end up with a nominee that a majority of voters disfavors. Not a good setup going into the GE.

[merrily]

5. She did not build. She polled very high out of the gate because of name recognition and having been

First Lady and other reasons. (I cannot think of a First Lady who has not made the most admired women in the US list while in the White House and stayed there for some time after leaving.) Also, no one else had announced and America had been told since 2012 that, if she wanted the nomination in 2016, it would be hers: No Democrat would even bother to challenge her.

As she went along, she lost points, same as 2008 and same as when she went on her book tour. Bernie actually gave her a bump in ratings when he let her off the hook about her "damn emails." The more she's out there, the more her ratings go down. (That is why she wanted only four debates.) Happened in 2008, happened on her book tour, is happening now and will be scary by November if she is the nominee. If she is the nominee, Dems better pray that Trump is the nominee, not Kasich or even Jeb! or some other GOP establishment pick.

[amborin]

9. yes, her popularity has steadily declined, along with trustworthiness, etc....

[truedelphi]

32. Another important factor - in 2012, Americans were so exhausted from having to

Rebuild their lives after the Great Economic Collapse of 2008, that they thoughtlessly went along with the stoopid meme of "Lesser of two evils."

Now Americans have been woken from their slumber. Granted some people still have had such comfortable lives that they don't get it, and the fact that this is basically a police state has not helped matter s much either.

But people I talked to all during Spring and early Summer of 2014 told me that they
"had had it." Often they commented such statements as "No more voting for the lesser of two evils. No more voting for Corporate-owned candidates who' re owned by The Big Financial Partners."

[pat_k]

2. kick 'n' rec!

[Warren DeMontague]

3. Gee, I've been accused of not being able to "Do Math"

but I would think that might be a tad concerning to the Hill Folk.

[amborin]

21. very concerning; it portends major loss if she is the nominee

[truedelphi]

35. Well let's admit it - it is easier for the Hillary folks

To believe what they believe if they live inside the comfortable bubble of reality fashioned by the thought police here on DU. Apparently they do not go onto more progressive sites, nor do they have friends who are Bernie followers, etc.

And some of them live inside the bubble within the bubble that is the HRC group!

[R B Garr]

4. Yet she leads the popular vote by well over TWO MILLION. Reality.

Her lead in delegates is higher than Obama's ever was during his winning primary season.

Those are real and measurable stats.

[bobbobbins01]

6. But Obama was running against Hillary.

So of course she couldn't overcome that.

[merrily]

8. If it had been a fair fight, starting in 2012, that might mean a lot more in terms of who

wants who in office than she and her fans try to imply.

Also, I assume your statement about Obama includes super delegates. BTW, that Obama came out of a state legislature, few had heard of him before 2004, etc., yet he defeated her by any measure says a lot. This time, with the DNC, media and everything else at her back since her 2008 defeat, she has a modest pledged delegate lead over Sanders, who few had heard of a year ago. Wowza.

[R B Garr]

11. Oh, please. Obama was a superstar after his 2004

keynote Covention speech. Where was Sanders? Did he attend that Convention to support real Democrats like Obama did?

And I notice you omitted that Hillary also won the popular vote in 2008. So it looks like you're only into anti-Hillary spam that fits your limited world view.

[morningfog]

40. She didn't win the popular vote. Tsk tsk.

You can't include FL and MI.

[R B Garr]

48. Tsk @ desperate BernieMath.

[morningfog]

54. Who said anything about Bernie?

So touchy, so sensitive. Like a nervous tic. BERNIEMATH!

[R B Garr]

55. Touchy yourself. She's winning popular vote and

delegates. Reality. LOl @ desperate BernieMath that can't accept REALITY.

[morningfog]

56. BERNIEMATH! There it is again.

I hope you make it through July 24, BERNIEMATH! Oh good lord, it's contagious BERNIEMATH!

[R B Garr]

58. REALITY.

[morningfog]

59. Tic BERNIEMATH tic BERNIEMATH tic tic BERNIEMATH....

[R B Garr]

62. Counting only what you want is BernieMath.

You obviously know that drill.

And I can type BernieMath 3 times, too.

BERNIEMATH BERNIEMATH BERNIEMATH

[morningfog]

63. And I made no comment on the delegate count in this

race. That is what makes your obsessive tic so noticiable. You can't seem to stay on topic, BERNIEMATH!

[R B Garr]

64. You counted only what you wanted.

BernieMath.

[morningfog]

65. Again you BERNIEMATH are confused.

I made no BERNIEMATH comment on the 2016 race.

I only corrected your error with BERNIEMATH respect to 2008.

[R B Garr]

66. You only counted what you wanted. Read your posts.

The posts are numbered. You picked your own popular vote. BERNIEMATH.

[morningfog]

67. Obama math, genius.

And the super delegates agreed in 2008. Maybe you don't remember what happened then.

[R B Garr]

68. Your whole schtick is to discount Hillary

through bogus BERNIEMATH.

Obama has nothing to do with your twisted calculations today, LOL.

[morningfog]

69. I think you are confused.

My initial response to you was only that Hillary did not win the 2008 popular vote. That was it.

Maybe you thought I was another poster. Maybe you have a nervous tic. But, you distracted from that point, which was my only point -- to correct your error.


It is there for your review.

[R B Garr]

70. No, you are obviously playing games.

You used BERNIEMATH to discount the 2008 popular vote. The posts are numbered. Go read them.

LOL, and someone else was asking me for links to basic election results as if what I initially said is not common knowledge.

[morningfog]

71. Oh boy. Number 40, my first response to you.

Not a godamned thing to do with Bernie. Go read it. I was correcting you and your error.

I have not made a single comment on the 2016 math.

[R B Garr]

73. Your post 40 is BERNIEMATH.

You only counted what you felt like. Read your post.

Seriously, this is obviously a ploy to get posts hidden. Not buying your confused efforts to pretend Hillary didn't win the popular vote in 2008. Quit spamming with this obvious nonsense.

[morningfog]

74. Lol. Whatever.

You can't count MI and FL. Obama didn't campaign there, the DNC sanctioned those states for moving up in the calendar. Obama won the popular vote of the sanctioned states.

Nothing to do with Bernie, nothing. Hence, my comment on your nervous tic, which apparently include paranoia, lol.

[R B Garr]

75. LOL @ your desperate BERNIEMATH.

But if I said you had a nervous tic, I bet someone would alert on my post.

That's how it's worked before. A Bernie fan follows me around and insults me, but if I answer in kind, MY posts are hidden. That's how it's OBVIOUS your tortured logic trying to discount Clinton's popular vote win in 2008 isn't worthy.

[morningfog]

76. Wow. Okay. So long.

Done with you and the strange chip on your shoulder.

[R B Garr]

77. Holy crap, you got called on your BERNIEMATH, and then you

still try to make it personal with insults. Yeah, SO LONG.

[morningfog]

78. Bye!

I'm going to put you on ignore. I don't mind idiots and I tolerate assholes.

But both is too much.

[R B Garr]

80. HAHa, if I called you an asshole idiot, my post

would be hidden. But you enjoy yourself. It's all about you. Reality and common knowledge about the 2008 popular vote is only for you to determine, i.e., BERNIEMATH.

[merrily]

50. No, that is your imagination in hindsight. His 2004 speech was great, but

it didn't make him known nationally. He started the race 30 points behind Hillary because he was not known. Like Bernie ,the better he got known, the higher his numbers his numbers got.

As far as your fake posting rules and ad homs, no one cares.

[JoePhilly]

16. 2011-2015 ... you guys wasted those years complaing about Obama and doing little else.

You should have built up a slate of acceptably liberal candidates back then.

Instead, you did nothing ... then finally tried to draft Warren, who said "no thank you". So Bernie said "ok, I'll do it."

If you wanted a fair fight, you needed to start preparing for it a lot earlier.

[morningfog]

41. Yeah! You lazy no good. Why didn't you create a non-corrupt candidate????!??

You've had 8 years to build a person!

[merrily]

46. Which imaginary "guys" are you talking to me about? I never tried to draft Warren, even though

she's my Senator. I tried to draft Sanders. I'm not saying I succeeded, but it turned out the way I hoped.

I was supposed to look for rich candidates to run for President in 2011 that the DNC would accept? A year before Obama was re-elected? Really? Were you looking a year before Obama elected?

If you wanted a fair fight, you needed to start preparing for it a lot earlier.

Really? If I prepared, I could have changed the Party rules and made Debbie Wasserman, Donna Brazile and the rest of the DNC and Democratic officeholders and the media fair? Changed Great news! False, of course, but great.

BTW why the hell should anyone have to prepare to make the DNC fair, even if that were possible? Isn't that just its responsibility?

[truedelphi]

44. But from the HRC loyalists --

[h2]"WE CAN"T HEAR YOU!"[/h2]

[Loudestlib]

33. Among democrats and only if you don't count the caucuses.

[R B Garr]

49. She's winning by all election standards.

LOL at desperate BernieMath.

[realmirage]

53. When these people realize the math doesn't

add up, I wonder how much of this nastiness they'll regret. The primary is essentially already over

[R B Garr]

72. Thank you. The election results are common

knowledge now, but look at the desperation to revise reality just to discount her success. Sad. And you are right, it is nasty.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. Aren't you the slightest bit concerned that your "inevitable" candidate with the unassailable resume

and Universal name recognition is having so much trouble against this previously unknown "socialist" senator from hippie-dippy VT?

Wouldn't it indicate that maybe someone needs to fix their craptastically outdated campaign which falls flat with increasing frequency once you start talking about voters born after, say, 1965?

Hmmmmm, Just a thought.

[smiley]

43. Do you have a link for those "measurable stats"?

The only link I have is this.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_count.html

But the problem with these numbers are they don't include Iowa, Maine, Alaska and Washington and a couple U.S. Territories. But for some reason this link keeps getting posted because it shows Hillary with 2 million + votes.

Why the missing numbers?

[R B Garr]

47. Feel free to watch ANY news channel.

How silly to ask for links to basic news.

[smiley]

52. Well that explains it. You watch the news!!!!

On a serious note. Do some research instead of believing the spoon fed propaganda you get from you teevee.

You must be new here, because asking for links on DU is a very common occurrence.

So again I ask you. Do you have a link and why the missing numbers in the link that I've provided?

[R B Garr]

57. LOL, how sad for you.

Desperate.

[smiley]

60. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Nice transparency page btw.

[R B Garr]

61. From this same type nonsense. I'm glad you

noticed it.

[me b zola]

7. This thread needs snacks!

...and refreshments:



...a little music:



...and a little sofa jumping



...and finally, a hat tip to everyone's hard work:




OK, everyone back to work. Primaries are coming up and Bernie really needs us to keep at it while he is in Rome.

[AzDar]

10. Go, Bernie... GO!!

[QC]

12. And this is why Team Rightward Arrow is freaking out.

The behavior we have seen these past few weeks is not that of a confident campaign.

Their internal polling probably looks even worse--you can bet that if it showed her leading they would be proclaiming it from the rooftops.

[amborin]

23. yes, the behavior these past few weeks has been horrible to behold and signals total

lack of confidence on their part

[QC]

24. You have to admit, though, it's been entertaining, too.

People with twelve hides weeping over incivility and all that, it's good for laughs.

[Jefferson23]

13. Hey, Clinton suporters, get a fucking calculator and DO THE MATH.

[JoePhilly]

14. Now back out the states that have already held primaries.

Watching you guys search for a metric that will allow you to claim a victory that you won't actually get, is getting rather humorous.

[Jefferson23]

15. Get a calculator now, or wait it out? lol

[JoePhilly]

17. Don't need one ... the scoreboard shows the delegate count quite clearly.

You might as well be telling us about Bernie's Facebook likes.

[Jefferson23]

18. lol and that hasn't changed at all..this has been a walk through the park primary for Hillary?

The numbers in the OP are real too...things keep changing for her, funny how that goes.

[JoePhilly]

28. Doesn't need to be a walk in the park.

You can keep hunting for new metrics if it makes you feel better.

[Jefferson23]

34. I know, they're in the OP...no hunting required. n/t

[arcane1]

27. At least Bernie never had to purchase fake Facebook likes. With taxpayer money.

[IamMab]

19. Isn't it, though?

We've gone through a few of theses excuses now.
"Because the kids like him!" And we all know what informed and reliable decisions kids make, right?
"Because he attracts non-voters" We're supposed to be impressed that people who don't vote support him? In an election season? (15% of his supporters in Wisconsin didn't vote for a single other Democrat. 15%!!)
"Because he won 8 in a row" Out of over 30 states that voted. He's lost a few contests in a row too, we all know.
"Because he polls better against [Republican candidate]" So does Clinton, so that's just a question of margins.
"Because he's 1 point ahead nationally" In the final months of the primary, when he's already down over 200 delegates? Great timing.

As a Clinton supporter from 2008, I know what they're going through. But all the anger and vitriol they can spew won't change reality for their candidate.

[JoePhilly]

20. Don't forget internet polls and Facebook likes!!!

[truedelphi]

29. You need to consider some very important numbers -

Forty percent of all American registered voters hold no deep allegiances to either party.
(Both Pew Surveys of 2008 and 2015 show this to be the case. And Gallup recently found the same statistic.

When you "dis" the notion of "non-voters" voting in this election if Bernie is the candidate, then you' re ignoring a most important statistic.

It would be wise to make the statement you' re making IF that non-allied voter statistic was not so impressive. But very fool hardy to make that statement with the reality being the case. (And BTW, that 40 percent is higher than either party's allied voters. Dems have ONLY 36% of all voters. Republicans have only24 to 26%)

[IamMab]

31. Because independents vote as a block, don't they? Nope. There's a split of con and lib indies.

You're also assuming, incorrectly, that every independent is a partisan ideologue, when a good portion of them are moderates and centrists as well.

I don't know, maybe you thought you'd pump yourself up by pretending to speak for a large mass of people, but the fact is that you don't. And you won't. Ever. Because independents historically don't display a pattern of coalescing around a single candidate or idea. At best, you represent a minority of a minority of a minority. Independents are a minority of all voters, left-leaning independents are a minority of that, and hard-core head-in-the-sand "Bernie Sanders progressives" are a minority of that.

Your boogeyman is broken. Get a new one.

[truedelphi]

26. Important thinking process - how much "Quid pro Quo" does a candidate get for

Agreeing to run and lose?

What did Diane Feinstein get in return for her ignoring the Democratic Party primary wins by Steve Westly and insisting that Bustamante had to be the candidate against Ahnoold Schwartzennegger?

What does Hillary get for running against Trump? Although we all know she will not win?

[Jefferson23]

36. I've been hearing how its over for Bernie from day one. lol

I think Trump will lose to Hillary if it comes to that...the violent rallies and
the blatant racism, women hate him, he's a train wreck even though she
is about as non -inspiring as one candidate can possibly be.



The Republican story is not over yet either...if they run a Third Party, that
will only help her.

[truedelphi]

38. In either event, a Trump win or a Hillary win,

the American people lose.

The Clintons simply soft peddle the trash they do to the middle and lower classes, while Trump does the damage with a relish! I have to admit I think his approach much more honest. (Not admirable, not likeable, but at least there is none of this fake sentiment for the poor and the middle class.)

[Jefferson23]

42. A set back for sure but worse with Trump..I don't like what could develop with him.

The violent rallies freaked me out.

[pdsimdars]

22. Slip Sliding Away. . . . slip sliding away. . . the nearer your destination

the more you're slip sliding away. . .

Simon & Garfunkel

[Avalux]

25. K&R. Kick!

[Joob]

30. Not looking good for Hillary.

[Mike__M]

37. Experience!

Of all the candidates from both parties, Clinton has the most experience at losing a presidential primary.

[truedelphi]

45. Thanks for providing my laugh of the day!

Much needed.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

51. she only goes down

down down down

[Land of Enchantment]

79. k&r nt

[David__77]

81. I have no idea how this will turn out!

I haven't been emphatic in endorsing any candidate. I think I will vote for Sanders here in California when the time comes.

It does seem to me that Clinton will secure the nomination. I think (and, of course, don't know) that it's likely that Clinton will ride a downward trajectory in terms of personal favorability through November. I haven't been following this election closely and haven't been following the details of each candidate's specific platform.

I haven't cared much for Clinton since the 2008 election. I supported Obama and I did not like her campaign's criticisms of Obama. I think of Clinton as pretty conservative. I have a thought that, were she to become president, it would not be a good time for the left or for the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party. I think, unless the Republicans nominate someone who would be rather unprecedentedly unpopular, it may be unlikely for her to win a general election. I do not think that she is likely to successfully build a coalition that includes labor and self-identified progressives at the core.

That so many people are voting for Sanders, who is very much the US equivalent of a "back bencher," is very interesting to me. This is mid-April, and we have a former Secretary of State, Senator, First Lady, endorsed by the overwhelming majority of pledged superdelegates, who hasn't just yet wrapped things up. I consider that she will wrap it up. I do consider it interesting that hasn't yet done so.