Quote:Nevadans expected to participate in next week’s Democratic presidential caucus are evenly split between the party’s two candidates, according to a new Washington Free Beacon poll.
The poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders tied at 45 percent each among likely caucusgoers. Clinton narrowly edges Sanders among those who have completely made up their mind. But undecided caucusgoers and those who might change their mind say recent scandals involving Clinton make them significantly less likely to support her.
...
Clinton’s campaign has worked to downplay expectations in Nevada ahead of the Democratic caucuses there. “There’s going to be a narrowing in [South Carolina and Nevada]—we’re clear-eyed about that,” campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said this week.
Fallon falsely claimed that Nevada is 80 percent white, suggesting that Sanders does better among white voters while Clinton leads among minorities. In fact, the state is roughly 51 percent white.
…
Though Sanders’ numbers have improved, it remains to be seen whether Nevada voters who support him will turn out in large enough numbers to hand him another early-state victory. Among those who have participated in the Democratic caucus before, Clinton leads by 11 points, while first-time caucusgoers support Sanders by six points.
Like Iowa’s Democratic caucus, Nevada’s is open to any registered Democrat—including those who register on the same day. Sanders is hoping that a sizable chunk of independent voters end up participating; among Democrats, Clinton leads by 11 points, but she trails by 27 among independents, according to the poll.
The demographic breakdown in caucusgoer support reflects the trends of the previous two Democratic presidential contests. Sanders enjoys overwhelming support among young people; by 63-16, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 support the Vermont senator.
Clinton leads by seven points among women, but women under 30 back Sanders by a 40-point margin.
This poll was conducted before the debate, which Sanders won 25-9 in a Nevada focus group:
(02-12-2016 12:03 PM)Max Power Wrote: Fallon falsely claimed that Nevada is 80 percent white, suggesting that Sanders does better among white voters while Clinton leads among minorities. In fact, the state is roughly 51 percent white.
They must have been counting white-latinos in that figure
In all seriousness, I expect them to be very close to tied in most states. She's floundering just like 8 years ago, but with much more baggage this time.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2016 01:00 PM by 200yrs2late.)
Without knowing the history of how the state votes politically, Nevada feels like a state that can be "down for whatever," so I'm not too surprised if Bernie does well there.
Plus Nevada has a lot of young people so it's not surprising Sanders could do okay there. I still expect Clinton to win South Carolina convincingly, but I'd be shocked if she's over 60 pct of the vote.
Clinton needs to get some stars to start stumping for her. Bill doesn't do it anymore - his health looks so crappy that Bernie Sanders looks and sounds a lot younger than President Clinton.
(02-12-2016 01:12 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote: Plus Nevada has a lot of young people so it's not surprising Sanders could do okay there. I still expect Clinton to win South Carolina convincingly, but I'd be shocked if she's over 60 pct of the vote.
Clinton needs to get some stars to start stumping for her. Bill doesn't do it anymore - his health looks so crappy that Bernie Sanders looks and sounds a lot younger than President Clinton.
If Nevada is only 51% white, and Clinton loses there, then her southern "firewall" is constructed out of newspaper and lighter fluid.
No chance the superdelegates swing the election at the convention. They'll fall behind the leader like in '08.
Bernie can win Nevada but South Carolina will be tougherm. Still if he can get that to single digits it can be spun as a win. Sharpton and Clyburn's possible endorsements loom large.
Quote:Nevadans expected to participate in next week’s Democratic presidential caucus are evenly split between the party’s two candidates, according to a new Washington Free Beacon poll.
The poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders tied at 45 percent each among likely caucusgoers. Clinton narrowly edges Sanders among those who have completely made up their mind. But undecided caucusgoers and those who might change their mind say recent scandals involving Clinton make them significantly less likely to support her.
...
Clinton’s campaign has worked to downplay expectations in Nevada ahead of the Democratic caucuses there. “There’s going to be a narrowing in [South Carolina and Nevada]—we’re clear-eyed about that,” campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said this week.
Fallon falsely claimed that Nevada is 80 percent white, suggesting that Sanders does better among white voters while Clinton leads among minorities. In fact, the state is roughly 51 percent white.
…
Though Sanders’ numbers have improved, it remains to be seen whether Nevada voters who support him will turn out in large enough numbers to hand him another early-state victory. Among those who have participated in the Democratic caucus before, Clinton leads by 11 points, while first-time caucusgoers support Sanders by six points.
Like Iowa’s Democratic caucus, Nevada’s is open to any registered Democrat—including those who register on the same day. Sanders is hoping that a sizable chunk of independent voters end up participating; among Democrats, Clinton leads by 11 points, but she trails by 27 among independents, according to the poll.
The demographic breakdown in caucusgoer support reflects the trends of the previous two Democratic presidential contests. Sanders enjoys overwhelming support among young people; by 63-16, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 support the Vermont senator.
Clinton leads by seven points among women, but women under 30 back Sanders by a 40-point margin.
This poll was conducted before the debate, which Sanders won 25-9 in a Nevada focus group:
Doesn't matter. As we saw with NH, Hillary has already bought up all the "Super delegates". How else would a 60% to 34% loss leave Hilldog with more NH delegates. From Wasserman Schultz on down - THE FIX IS IN - Bernie won't win even if he wins the majority of voters......
Nice system they have in the Democratic party....................
(02-12-2016 03:26 PM)Max Power Wrote: No chance the superdelegates swing the election at the convention. They'll fall behind the leader like in '08.
Thats the problem. With the way its playing out, they wont have to switch. The superdelegates will put Clinton just slightly ahead of Sanders, and they wont switch. So even though Sanders wins the popular vote delegates, the superdelegates will put Hillary over the top.
This wasnt the case in 08, where Obama defeated Hillary with or without the superdelegates. Many of them changed at the last minute when it was clear Hillary was going to lose the primary. So them changing didnt affect the outcome. This year, them not changing will.
No in 08 the superdelegates could have swung it to Hillary, but enough of them switched to Obama that the fight was over and the rest came over. It was eventually going to happen. They never were going to overturn the popular will. If they did the party would fracture and voters would sit out in November. Nobody wants that, except maybe some lobbyists (some of which are supers, but not a majority).
DNC Superdelegate explains the inside baseball of the Dem's nomination process. He says only about half of their Superdelegates have pledged so far, and he expects the rest to pledge for Hilldawg within the next couple weeks. Hilarious.
To quantify it further,
If you win 47.5% of elected delegates, you only have to take 64% of Superdelegates to win the nom. If you win 45% of elected delegates, you have to take 78% of Superdelegates. Hilldawg currently has 97% of pledged Superdelegates, so she basically has a 10% cushion in the primaries, assuming they don't abandon her en masse, which would be unlikely given that this system was precisely put in place to stop candidates like Sanders.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2016 09:20 PM by Kronke.)
(02-12-2016 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: If true, this is huge news. Bernie, until recently, hadn't spent hardly any time on Nevada.
Feel the Berning Revolution!!!
Okay, so just to be perfectly clear. You support someone that openly wants to take MORE of the money I have earned to redistribute to those that have you feel that I need to support. And your criteria for this government-sponsored thievery is what? Privilege, race, historical discrimination, politics? Let's just walk the path of why YOU feel it is appropriate for ME to be forced to give up the fruits of my labor to support someone that has not made the choices, done the work, attained the education ,etc. I welcome the debate.
(02-12-2016 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: If true, this is huge news. Bernie, until recently, hadn't spent hardly any time on Nevada.
Feel the Berning Revolution!!!
Okay, so just to be perfectly clear. You support someone that openly wants to take MORE of the money I have earned to redistribute to those that have you feel that I need to support. And your criteria for this government-sponsored thievery is what? Privilege, race, historical discrimination, politics? Let's just walk the path of why YOU feel it is appropriate for ME to be forced to give up the fruits of my labor to support someone that has not made the choices, done the work, attained the education ,etc. I welcome the debate.
Quote:Nevadans expected to participate in next week’s Democratic presidential caucus are evenly split between the party’s two candidates, according to a new Washington Free Beacon poll.
The poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders tied at 45 percent each among likely caucusgoers. Clinton narrowly edges Sanders among those who have completely made up their mind. But undecided caucusgoers and those who might change their mind say recent scandals involving Clinton make them significantly less likely to support her.
...
Clinton’s campaign has worked to downplay expectations in Nevada ahead of the Democratic caucuses there. “There’s going to be a narrowing in [South Carolina and Nevada]—we’re clear-eyed about that,” campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said this week.
Fallon falsely claimed that Nevada is 80 percent white, suggesting that Sanders does better among white voters while Clinton leads among minorities. In fact, the state is roughly 51 percent white.
…
Though Sanders’ numbers have improved, it remains to be seen whether Nevada voters who support him will turn out in large enough numbers to hand him another early-state victory. Among those who have participated in the Democratic caucus before, Clinton leads by 11 points, while first-time caucusgoers support Sanders by six points.
Like Iowa’s Democratic caucus, Nevada’s is open to any registered Democrat—including those who register on the same day. Sanders is hoping that a sizable chunk of independent voters end up participating; among Democrats, Clinton leads by 11 points, but she trails by 27 among independents, according to the poll.
The demographic breakdown in caucusgoer support reflects the trends of the previous two Democratic presidential contests. Sanders enjoys overwhelming support among young people; by 63-16, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 support the Vermont senator.
Clinton leads by seven points among women, but women under 30 back Sanders by a 40-point margin.
This poll was conducted before the debate, which Sanders won 25-9 in a Nevada focus group:
Doesn't matter. As we saw with NH, Hillary has already bought up all the "Super delegates". How else would a 60% to 34% loss leave Hilldog with more NH delegates. From Wasserman Schultz on down - THE FIX IS IN - Bernie won't win even if he wins the majority of voters......
Nice system they have in the Democratic party....................
which raises the question why that stupid fkr is even running within that system
and/or, how a system like that is allowable/legal
whelp, it's b/c the founders knew if the masses had their druthers, civility would be a problem with the whelpers....and we've already had one of those wars....next one is just around the bend....
the entire process is a joke, ironic, and an oxymoron as it moves forward....
