From The Des Moines Register: Clinton grows lead to 9 percent (December 14, 2015 video)

a local reputable newspaper? There is a huge difference between the Des Moines Register's numbers and the PPP.

I just don't get it.

Sam

If it's the PPP poll I think you're referring to, the questionnaire suggests that it was done using robocalls ("Press 1 for female, 2 for male" etc.) which means it was a landlines-only proposition. Also, it's considered good polling practice to rotate candidate's names, to eliminate bias, and there's no indication that was done, either.

I have checked out this site periodically and note the averaging at the top. Often there are two pollsters with similar numbers and one distinctly different. It seems, for instance, CBS often has put Sanders at better numbers than other pollsters often cited by PPP.

I am not too interested in that questionnaire. I breezed through it and found the questions asked to Republicans and towards the end the same for the Dems. I just want the bottom line.

I do think local political commentators might have more accurate information than anyone else, so that is why I went directly to these sources. Additionally, I do believe DU'ers here who live in Iowa and are working in Iowa for Sanders probably have a pretty good birds-eye view.

Thank you for responding on my thread.

Sam

ONLY nine?

Jeez, she must be losin' it there.

I went to both local papers for Iowa and New Hampshire to check what the local commentators were saying because I just could not believe the TPP and other polls. These local papers tell a different story.

I wrote this thread for morale reasons for Bernie supporters because the last I checked he was two points ahead in NH and behind 9 in Iowa. And these were purely Democratic voters.

The propaganda being promoted during this campaign has been the most misleading that I have ever seen. I do understand that Mark Penn (the Man in the Middle) is advising the Clinton campaign on polling and that is the only reason I can think of that these gross distortions are being presented.

Yet here is a thread that tells Sanders' supporters he is only 9 points behind Hillary in Iowa, yet all the conversation still lingers over the distorted numbers.

I just don't understand....

If one adds the totals currently reported by The Des Moines Register to the percentage of Independents projected to support Sanders, plus Republicans (crossing over), it is a staggering number. Bernie Sanders has his own private polling agency. One day about a month ago, he was asked about the numbers while walking out of a meeting. He replied when the reporter flashed some numbers at him: This is not what I am seeing. I am getting 25 percent of Republican voters. Now I do not have a link for that. Perhaps he could have meant historically he pulls a huge percentage of Republican votes; I know this has happened in elections in Vermont. But he made this remark after saying, "This is not what I am seeing...."

What do you think?

Sam

Only Democrats vote in the democratic caucuses in Iowa. Not sure why he thinks he is going to get independent and republican votes unless he was speaking of general support.

http://2016iowacaucus.com/how-iowa-caucus-works/

In a typical caucus, registered democrats gather at the precinct meeting places (there are close to 2,000 precincts statewide), supporters for each candidate have a chance to make their case, and then the participants gather into groups supporting particular candidates (undecided voters also cluster into a group)

bolding added

in answer to my question. That poster said if a Republican showed up the day of the caucus and wanted to support Sanders, he could if he changed his party affiliation. According to that DU'er one can do this the day the caucus begins.

I read your link which discusses only the process. I clicked on "Voter Registration" and read the information on registering the day of the caucus. Here is the link:

http://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/edr.html

Sam

This is the essence of the delusion right here; Sanders supporters just cannot possible imagine why every person isn't lining up to vote just like they do. This mindset lacks the capacity to understand that people can legitimately hold an opposing point of view, so they turn to various tropes like "the media's in it for Hillary", "I just don't believe poll XYZ", and so on.

There's going to be a harsh reality check for Sanders supporters once the primary results start to not go their way.

There are actually two Democratic candidates that I think are great, but I do think the polling in some cases in skewed. It certainly can be done in different ways to leave different impressions, and I do believe a lot of this campaign is as another DU'er described it a lot of "smoke and mirrors."

It is my sense of the situation that many Sanders' supporters do not steadfastly maintain to a certainty that Sanders will win. Many of us believe he will prevail as more and more of the Country hears his message. When he started this effort, he said he did not have the money to conduct a national campaign all at once. He said he would start in the two caucus states to build support from the funds that he had. Once that organization was in place, he would ready his campaign organization for Super Tuesday, which he is now doing with the funds he has raised. So it was clear from the beginning there would be a huge gap in his numbers from Hillary's number simply over the name recognition disparity. Not too long ago, Sanders said 25 percent of the Country had never even heard of him. That is changing little by little. If he prevails in one of both of Iowa and New Hampshire, then Sanders camp is truly off to the races.

Sam