these numbers are. As a trained polling junkie I confess to be fascinated by the ebbs and flows of campaigns.
I would note that the Iowa Caucus falls on February 1 followed by the New Hampshire Primary on February 9.
Conventional thinking says that whoever comes out of Iowa gets momentum where Hillary is up 17 but will face Bernies’ neighboring state home court advantage in New Hampshire where he is up by 8.
Then you hit Hillary’s Firewall in South Carolina where she has a smoking 50 point lead with the strong AA vote.
We’re 100 days out and I’m already chompin at the bit. đŸ™‚
Fred Rich LaRiccia
jconwaysays
I was an Obama field worker for the caucuses and even I was stunned we got first. We definitely started seeing the Edwards surge form but the Hillary collapse really took me off guard. Another friend spent his Christmas break with the campaign and told me the numbers weren’t looking too good for Obama and wondered if he wasted his time. Then the second choices started trickling in and I knew we had a real race, since Obama was the clear second choice of the also rans like Biden, Richardson, and Dodd.
It’s a much smaller field this time and it would be unlikely that Bernie supporters select Hillary or vice a versa. It really is going to come down to who the undecideds and O’Malley supporters break to. I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s Hillary, but I also won’t be surprised if 2016 keeps giving us upsets once voting starts.
If Bernie is smart he invests in Nevada. As a caucus, it may be more favorable to his grassroots organization and it’s more must win for him than South Carolina. His best hope is upsetting Clinton in IA, holding the NH lead, and upsetting in Nevada if he wants to have a shot at Super Tuesday. I hope it remains a civil and competitive primary.
paulsimmonssays
…wasn’t available, via HuffPo/Pollster, but the following is available from Real Clear Politics:
The RCP Averages of Clinton and Sanders are 52.5% and 26.0%, respectively.
paulsimmonssays
The polling is for swing-state aggregate, and not – insofar as I can see – segmented by State.
The favorable/unfavorable/no opinion ratings for the top three Democratic candidates are as follows:
Clinton: 61%/27%/12%
Sanders: 39%/20%/41%
O’Malley: 10%/18%/73%
That his numbers are better there than in South Carolina, even though it seems he has less of a campaign presence there. Wonder why that’s the case?
Christophersays
…there would not be polls. They drive the coverage way too much and actually change the race to the point of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies. They definitely should not determine debate participation. In fact, I wish we could seal the results of state primaries and caucuses until convention so that early states don’t influence later states.
jconwaysays
No polling results or campaign ads the two weeks before the election. Every candidate from every party had equal time to make their case in debates and on the news in one on one blocks. Something to consider, though I am sure the Supreme Court will say it’s against free speech and/or free enterprise to even temporarily ban the precious pollsters.
these numbers are. As a trained polling junkie I confess to be fascinated by the ebbs and flows of campaigns.
I would note that the Iowa Caucus falls on February 1 followed by the New Hampshire Primary on February 9.
Conventional thinking says that whoever comes out of Iowa gets momentum where Hillary is up 17 but will face Bernies’ neighboring state home court advantage in New Hampshire where he is up by 8.
Then you hit Hillary’s Firewall in South Carolina where she has a smoking 50 point lead with the strong AA vote.
We’re 100 days out and I’m already chompin at the bit. đŸ™‚
Fred Rich LaRiccia
I was an Obama field worker for the caucuses and even I was stunned we got first. We definitely started seeing the Edwards surge form but the Hillary collapse really took me off guard. Another friend spent his Christmas break with the campaign and told me the numbers weren’t looking too good for Obama and wondered if he wasted his time. Then the second choices started trickling in and I knew we had a real race, since Obama was the clear second choice of the also rans like Biden, Richardson, and Dodd.
It’s a much smaller field this time and it would be unlikely that Bernie supporters select Hillary or vice a versa. It really is going to come down to who the undecideds and O’Malley supporters break to. I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s Hillary, but I also won’t be surprised if 2016 keeps giving us upsets once voting starts.
If Bernie is smart he invests in Nevada. As a caucus, it may be more favorable to his grassroots organization and it’s more must win for him than South Carolina. His best hope is upsetting Clinton in IA, holding the NH lead, and upsetting in Nevada if he wants to have a shot at Super Tuesday. I hope it remains a civil and competitive primary.
…wasn’t available, via HuffPo/Pollster, but the following is available from Real Clear Politics:
CNN/ORC (10/3 – 10/10, Sample is 253 LV)):
Clinton: 50%
Sanders: 34%
Biden: 12%
Webb: 0%
Chafee: 0%
O’Malley: 0%
Gravis Marketing (7/12 – 7/13, Sample is 416 RV):
Clinton: 55%
Sanders: 18%
Biden: 5%
Webb: 1%
Chafee: 1%
O’Malley: 0%
The RCP Averages of Clinton and Sanders are 52.5% and 26.0%, respectively.
The polling is for swing-state aggregate, and not – insofar as I can see – segmented by State.
The favorable/unfavorable/no opinion ratings for the top three Democratic candidates are as follows:
Clinton: 61%/27%/12%
Sanders: 39%/20%/41%
O’Malley: 10%/18%/73%
Toplines are here.
Cover document in English is here.
That his numbers are better there than in South Carolina, even though it seems he has less of a campaign presence there. Wonder why that’s the case?
…there would not be polls. They drive the coverage way too much and actually change the race to the point of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies. They definitely should not determine debate participation. In fact, I wish we could seal the results of state primaries and caucuses until convention so that early states don’t influence later states.
No polling results or campaign ads the two weeks before the election. Every candidate from every party had equal time to make their case in debates and on the news in one on one blocks. Something to consider, though I am sure the Supreme Court will say it’s against free speech and/or free enterprise to even temporarily ban the precious pollsters.