Hillary Clinton’s early-state poll numbers just went from bad to nightmare

[Lorien]

There are two groups of people that are excited about the new CNN/WMUR poll of Democrats in New Hampshire: Bernie Sanders fans and political pundits.

Both are excited because this poll is a doozy of the blink-twice, ask-a-co-worker-if-you're-reading-the-numbers-correctly variety. Since the last CNN/WMUR poll in December, Sanders's then-large lead of 10 points has inflated to 27 points -- the sort of margin of victory that makes it hard for campaign staff to feel a lot of motivation to get out of bed in the morning.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/19/hillary-clintons-early-state-poll-numbers-just-went-from-bad-to-nightmare/

&w=1484

[catnhatnh]

1. Check your link please. N/T

[Lorien]

3. Thanks! Got it!

[onehandle]

2. He's been ahead in NH for half a year...

...and just today announced he's ahead there like its new news.

Weird.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511033655

[litlbilly]

5. If those were Hillary numbers they would sure be news to you

[draa]

6. He hasn't been 27 points ahead.

That's a large increase since the last polling and if Iowa, who's polls we haven't seen since Clinton's change on single payer, is showing similar movement then she's got problems in those 2 states.

The last Iowa poll was Ann Seizer Thursday and it showed Sanders in a virtual dead heat (down 4/margin 4).

This is the first NH poll. It's showing this much movement so it's going to be a problem elsewhere I'd imagine. Even if you use the 16pt advantage from NH in that outlier poll - not sure I ever trusted that one - then that's an 11 point swing. If use you the +8 it's 19 points.

[tex-wyo-dem]

14. The media message thus far has been...

"Sanders has a slight lead over Clinton in NH"

Apparently the latest poll numbers have them rethinking the "slight" part.

[Duckfan]

15. And in another thread, the Wa-Po is trashing Bernie

So they run this story on his poll numbers in a positive light? If you were to ask me, I'd say the management there has no clue as to what the front end or back end is doing at the same time. They're going in different directions all on cue.

[Betty Karlson]

16. Slight? That's what their reports were to Sanders.

Other than that: I think the polling is started to reflect reality, without "adjustments" to benefit the status quo. Pollsters don't want to end up with egg on their face, and as reality will not conform itself to their earlier "poll results" it will have to be the other way around.

[merrily]

27. Not sure your statement is accurate. He started strong there, but she went up there after that.

Then, they were within the margin of error.

[WillyT]

4. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Trajan]

7. This is extraordinary ...

I am trying to not get too excited ... but ... This fella Bernie is blazing like a rocket ....

With the stories I have read about Clinton's Iowa (dis)Organization, and the fact that Bernie is operating offices in ALL 11 Super Tuesday states while Hillary is spending 90% of her funds in Iowa and New Hampshire ?

Like I said ... I don't want to get too excited .... but .... DAYUM !

Unprecedented ...

[Ned_Devine]

8. O'Malley deserves better than those numbers at the bottom

Before 2015, I had picked O'Malley to run and do well. He's a nice guy with some progressive values. I don't know enough about him to know his dirt, but I like just about everything he says. If Bernie weren't in this, O'Malley was my candidate.

[zentrum]

9. Agree.

I'm with Bernie, but OMalley deserves better. He's been really helpful to the progressive message in the debates and has been treated terribly by the moderators.

I think he has a future. 2020 or beyond. May be in a Bernie administration as well in 2016.

[Volaris]

11. Your last sentence up there.

Im not at all familiar with his background or policy history, but for some reason I'm thinking he would make a good Sec.-HHS..

[Betty Karlson]

17. Personally, I'd rather have him as DNC chair.

Someone needs to clean out the Augias stable that Debbie has made - and O'Malley seems like the man who can restore the dignity and impartiality the DNC needs to have.

[Volaris]

19. I can get behind that..but after DWS pretty much anything would be an improvement.

[Betty Karlson]

20. Almost anyone would be an improvement, indeed, but O'Malley would be better than an improvement:

we need more than just an improvement. We need someone who is more than adequate. We need someone unafraid to ditch 20th century thinking, and embrace the possibilities of the 21st century.

[Ed Suspicious]

30. I like him. One problem I have with him, and that is,

he seems overly rehearsed. He's got a bit of a politician thing going. While Bernie to me (who could not be more rehearsed at this point in the campaign) comes across as focused, Martin has this sort of "spent too much time running my lines" feel. I like him alot, seriously, but there is a problem with is delivery I think. I think the VP would be a good position for him to be positioned well for a later presidential run.

[Ned_Devine]

35. That's my problem too. He needs to just loosen up and be himself...unless his "self" sucks

[99th_Monkey]

10. I guess Hillary's "No We Can't!!" message is resonating

but not like she hoped it would.

[Tommy2Tone]

12. One white state

Show me where she is doing well in a representative state.

[Delver Rootnose]

21. And I'm sure....

..that if Hillary wins Iowa you will be trumpeting the victory as if Iowa represents more than corn and wheat.

Sheesh.

All I know is this Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, first in nation BULLSHIT has got to end. I think the first primary states for the democrats should be New York, Illinois, and California.

[Blue_In_AK]

22. Even as a small-state democrat,

I agree with that. There's really no reason for those three states to have so much influence over presidential elections.

[JDPriestly]

24. Right. New York, Illinois and California have urban and rural areas.

One is in the Mid-West, one in the East and one in the Southwest. Maybe a Southern state should be included.

[rpannier]

25. I think it should be regional on a rotating basis

Have 4-6 regions and rotate them, so every 4-6 years that region is 1st, then 6th, then 5th and so on...
Might shorten the primary season and lessen the amount of money needed to run
Only downside I can see, is that the 1st regions might hold undue wsway. But, better a region than a couple of small states

[HereSince1628]

33. IMO, there is much to lose if you start with bigger states. Maybe too much

The small delegate counts of IA and NH make it possible to lose and make a comeback. That's important to many campaigns.

The small geography makes campaigning less expensive, and the smaller populations of those states means start-up campaigns, with their perennial shortage of money can be smaller and still function.

The small states encourage start ups with their insertion of new ideas. If everything starts out large, the pre-campaign organization has to start earlier and be bigger. I suspect that would mean never ending campaigning for the presidency which would result in entrenchment of an establishment. Imagine -every- campaign being built around a person who'd been running for the office for decades as we see with HRC. I wouldn't yearn for that. Stuff happens in society, politics needs to be more nimble to respond.

I'd prefer that the state with the biggest % turn out of registered dems, and the state with the largest % turn out for the dem candidate in the previous election be among the first handful of states. That would give an incentive to state organizations to build infrastructure to GOTV, and I suspect that's something which might also turn out to be easier in smaller population states...something that might reward state dem parties in currently inconsequential places...like, say, the Dakotas

[Tommy2Tone]

34. No I am worried and it will be close.

Neither of us should be trumpeting because there is a long way to go.

[JVS]

36. Putting a state with a huge population like CA, FL, IL or NY first would...

keep all but the most lavishly funded candidates from being able to seriously participate in the primary process.

[Delver Rootnose]

38. God I'm so bloody sick of this ....

'Retail politics' argument. Now we get people being excluded because the don't answer farm and ethanol policy questions right. These small, non representative states should not have such an oversized influence in politics. Candidates shouldn't face the first eliminating hurdle on RURAL issues like farms and the wrong side of guns. By the time anyone who wants to cut back on gun access gets out of Iowa they are either not a viable candidate in the eyes of the media or they have modified thier positions to uselessness. And this is just one issue where the vast populations of America see it differently from the rural farmers of Iowa. Think of how many years gay rights were held up by the religiosity of Iowa.

[billhicks76]

13. Yay!!! A Person Of Principle Instead Of A Lying Opportunist

[Warren DeMontague]

18. Ruh Roh!

[Old Crow]

23. ~Rummaging around in kitchen drawer for a fork~

When you consider the inescapable fact that Hillary already has all the name recognition she's ever going to have while large numbers of voters are still learning about Bernie... with the latest news about Hillary's server...

... I'm beginning to think someone's done.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

26. They'll all come to their senses any time now.....

Yeah,....any time now...

[merrily]

28. Stand back when the polls after the above top secret emails stuff sinks in.

[restorefreedom]

31. that gif....lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!! nt

[merrily]

32. Glad you enjoyed it.

[Lorien]

37. We will still need to do exit polling

they WILL try to steal it in some States, especially places like Florida and Ohio where they've gotten away with it in the past ("They" being the establishment).

[questionseverything]

39. the campaign needs to count it's supporters

there are very few states with election systems that are open or transparent enough that any voter can be sure the "reported result" is the actual result

fortunately we start with iowa which has a good system

but the nh system is lousy.....we learned during the 08 primaries after hc's "win" and recount that nh does not include the important "how many voted" number during it's "recount" so more votes than voters can easily be reported

bradblog did excellent coverage during that time and bbv tried to keep track of the chain of custody but scalan's guys made sure that didn't happen

then in sc there is literally nothing to count except the absentee ballots

i am rambling srry but the point is WE NEED OVERWHELMING NUMBERS

[Utopian Leftist]

40. I've been saying all along,

The math is easy:

Ask yourself, who votes in primaries anyway? Answer, the hardcore liberals like we at DU.

How long has it been in your personal life since you have had the opportunity in a Presidential election, to vote for someone you actually believed in? For me, it has never happened in my lifetime! I'm 52.

What self-respecting, honest, hardcore liberal would vote for Hillary over Bernie?

Hardcore liberals voting for Hillary in the primary would be like in the 2000 election when a liberal county, I think it was Palm Beach, Florida, went for Buchanan, and even he said that was impossible. In other words, it simply couldn't happen.

In the absence of an October Surprise of some sort, Bernie wins primary and national election, both in landslides. The early polling in Hillary's favor was simply due to a nationally-censored (of the truth) News Media, and a general lack of awareness about the candidates on the part of the public.