Support NeoGAF

[Black Republican]

1. Trump still far ahead in NH, but Christie and Rubio distant 2/3rd places
   
2. Pretty much a tie in Iowa with margin of error for Iowa GOP/Dem races. Clinton and Sanders very close in NH.
   
3. Jeb moves up a little in NH but still DOA everywhere
   
4. Spoiler

   Carson is still high in Iowa but nationally never coming back lol
5. overall Lots of tighening

Brand-new NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of IA (LVs) for the Dem race:
Clinton 48
Sanders 45
O'Malley 5

Brand-new NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of NH (LVs):
Sanders 50
Clinton 46
O'Malley 1

Brand-new NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of NH (LVs):
Trump 30
Rubio 14
Christie 12
Cruz 10
Kasich 9
Bush 9
Paul 5
Carson 4

Brand-new NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of Iowa (LVs):
Cruz 28
Trump 24
Rubio 13
Carson 11
Paul 5
Bush 4
Christie 3
Fiorina 3

hypothetical

In Iowa:

Clinton leads Trump by eight points among registered voters (48 percent to 40 percent), but Sanders is ahead of him by 13 (51 percent to 38 percent);
Cruz tops Clinton by four points (47 percent to 43 percent), but Sanders beats him by five (47 percent to 42 percent);
And up Rubio is up by five points over Clinton (47 percent to 42 percent), while he's tied with Sanders (44 percent to 44 percent).
In New Hampshire:

Clinton is ahead of Trump by just one point (45 percent to 44 percent), but Sanders tops him by 19 points (56 percent to 37 percent);
Cruz beats Clinton by four points (48 percent to 44 percent), but Sanders leads him by another 19 points (55 percent to 36 percent);
And Rubio bests Clinton by 12 points (52 percent to 40 percent), while Sanders leads him by nine points (50 percent to 41 percent).

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/poll-neck-neck-2016-races-iowa-new-hampshire-n493361

 

[wildfire]

It's only one state. Super Tuesday will pretty much decide it.

 

[Deft Beck]

Sanders vs. Trump would be legendary, but Hillary has too much money and connections to not get the boost to edge Sanders out of the playing field.

 

[RPGamer92]

Woah, Christie's made a big leap over the last month or so.

 

[XenodudeX]

Wow those hypothetical polls aren't good for Hilary.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Some interesting facts from this poll:

In Iowa, Sanders does on average 6.3 points better than Clinton when matched against any Republican candidate. In New Hampshire, he does on average 12.6 points better.

Clinton loses Iowa, a relatively safe Democratic state, to Rubio and Cruz, by at least 4 points. For context, Obama held it by over 5.

Sanders' supporters are actually considered mildly more likely to vote than Clinton supporters.

 

[Kusagari]

So Sanders does better in every head-to-head by a decent margin, including having an actual majority against Trump.

 

[Blader]

Woah, Christie's made a big leap over the last month or so.

He has been campaigning big in NH.

Although I'm a little confused about his strategy. He's pouring all his resources into NH, but how well can he mobilize that around the rest of the country? Especially if he doesn't even win?

 

[A Human Becoming]

Wow those hypothetical polls aren't good for Hilary.

They don't mean anything. A lot can happen in 10 months.

 

[Black Republican]

He has been campaigning big in NH.

Although I'm a little confused about his strategy. He's pouring all his resources into NH, but how well can he mobilize that around the rest of the country? Especially if he doesn't even win?

i think he knows now he wont go far, but rather go out with a decent showing in NH rather than a wimper in any state like Fiorina/Paul/Carson etc will

 

[numble]

It's only one state.

Iowa and New Hampshire are 2 states.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

They don't mean anything. A lot can happen in 10 months.

Very true. The only worry is that the main thing that happened to Clinton in the last 10 months was this:

That's not a candidate who looks like they're going to improve over time... There was a slight amelioration after the Benghazi hearing, but she can't break the overall trend of being less and less popular as time goes on.

I mean, given Clinton is still far more likely than not to be the Democratic nominee, this is seriously worrying for the Dems.

 

[Into]

Like liberals love proclaiming "Its 2016!", yet who is going to suddenly jump ship on Clinton's boat? Who is going to be swayed now after all this time?

More can happen yes, more of her support can dwindle and diminish. Which i think will happen.

 

[Valhelm]

Sanders taking Iowa and New Hampshire would be insane

 

[Kathian]

Like liberals love proclaiming "Its 2016!", yet who is going to suddenly jump ship on Clinton's boat? Who is going to be swayed now after all this time?

More can happen yes, more of her support can dwindle and diminish. Which i think will happen.

Seems likely to me too; she doesn't come across all that well and I think the US has no wish for dynasty. See JEB

 

[teruterubozu]

Like liberals love proclaiming "Its 2016!", yet who is going to suddenly jump ship on Clinton's boat? Who is going to be swayed now after all this time?

More can happen yes, more of her support can dwindle and diminish. Which i think will happen.

She needs another Benghazi hearing.

 

[Kettch]

Not seeing any breakdown of minority voters for the dem polls here, probably because there are so few in these states. Bernie is definitely going to have to rely on winning these early ones to start changing minds, but it would be nice to see if he's improved any beforehand as it's still a big mountain to climb.

 

[JustenP88]

This is going to be an interesting year. I'm excited and terrified at the same time.

 

[NimbusD]

But GAF told me that Sander's won't win!

They also said a little while before that that Trump wouldn't either!

So confused.

 

[Black Republican]

a little off topic but

GEORGIA
Impression of Ted Cruz:
Favorable 38%
Unfavorable 46%
Unsure 16%
(Atlanta Journal Constitution/Abt SRBI, RV, 1/4-7)

damn even the south dont like Cruz, what is it about him the GOP voters doesnt like, but yet would take a bullet for Trump?

 

[noshten]

What is the history of the eventual nominee losing both Iowa and NH and how many nominees have won both only to lose the nomination?

But GAF told me that Sander's won't win!

They also said a little while before that that Trump wouldn't either!

So confused.

It would be fine if they just said he won't win, but there are certain people that downright downplay any of his achivements in this campaign. On the democratic side we are covering topics we wouldn't otherwise and votes haven't been cast yet - so you can't say Sanders is going to lose months before a vote is cast. Sure Hillary has the whole Establishment behind her but Bernie is gaining ground in the states where the majority of investment has been made. It's about showing he is indeed a factor and the nomination for Hillary isn't a formality. In the end people will have to decide which of the two they prefer - either way the democratic nominee has no chance of losing the actual GE. I still can't believe how close these hypotheticals are in terms of Hillary vs the Circus - are people turning a blind eye on the insanties Trump Cruz and co are regurgitating daily.

 

[kittenbreath]

Very true. The only worry is that the main thing that happened to Clinton in the last 10 months was this:

That's not a candidate who looks like they're going to improve over time... There was a slight amelioration after the Benghazi hearing, but she can't break the overall trend of being less and less popular as time goes on.

What happened tp Hillary in the last 10 months is that she announced she was running for president. All politicians tend to pull high favorable ratings when they aren't holding or running for an office. When they do, their ratings come back down to earth.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Sanders taking Iowa and New Hampshire would be insane

It would be insane if we kept doing what we're doing as a nation and expect people's lives to improve.

It's only "insane" because the media told you it wouldn't be possible. They'll shift the goal posts yet again...Nevada, South Carolina, Super Tuesday. While Bernie may not win every state in the process he's going to win a majority of them and delegates. Clinton won't be the nominee and even if she were, she would not win the White House. She is unelectable.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

What is the history of the eventual nominee losing both Iowa and NH and how many nominees have won both only to lose the nomination?

In the modern primary era ('76 onwards), nobody has ever won both Iowa and New Hampshire but failed to win the nomination. One person has won neither and gone on to get the nomination (Bill Clinton), but that's slightly misleading because he didn't actually contest Iowa at all.

That said...

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/electoral_precedent.png

 

[ErasureAcer]

What is the history of the eventual nominee losing both Iowa and NH and how many nominees have won both only to lose the nomination?

No Democratic nominee has won both and lost the nomination.
Bill Clinton lost both(if lost is defined as not coming out as #1) and became the nominee in 1992.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

What happened tp Hillary in the last 10 months is that she announced she was running for president. All politicians tend to pull high favorable ratings when they aren't holding or running for an office. When they do, their ratings come back down to earth.

Those aren't down to earth - they're underground. At -9, she's the joint fourth least popular presidential nominee of all time, tied with Goldwater. She's not far behind Bob Dole!

 

[numble]

What happened tp Hillary in the last 10 months is that she announced she was running for president. All politicians tend to pull high favorable ratings when they aren't holding or running for an office. When they do, their ratings come back down to earth.

I think everyone in the past 4 years had expectations that she would be running for office. Is there really data that all similarly-situated candidates would get such a 10-month downward favorability rating?

 

[TimeEffect]

So wait...Sanders and Trump are the top two?

 

[kittenbreath]

Those aren't down to earth - they're underground. At -9, she's the joint fourth least popular presidential nominee of all time, tied with Goldwater. She's not far behind Bob Dole!

Well, we live in a time of almost unprecedented, universal hostility to public officials. According to to HuffPo's aggregates the only two candidates who are net favorable are Sanders and Carson - and not by much.

Also, Hillary isn't the nominee yet. That makes a difference!

I think everyone in the past 4 years had expectations that she would be running for office. Is there really data that all similarly-situated candidates would get such a 10-month downward favorability rating?

I don't know offhand if there is or not. Hillary is a pretty unique candidate, given her prominence within US politics and the length of time that she's been in the public eye. Her favorable ratings were probably inflated before announcing by her (generally regarded as successful) service as Secretary of State and status as a former First Lady.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Well, we live in a time of almost unprecedented, universal hostility to public officials. According to to HuffPo's aggregates the only two candidates who are net favorable are Sanders and Carson - and not by much.

Yes - but the fact Clinton is running against a very weak pool of candidates doesn't disguise the fact she's doing rather poorly herself. For comparison, Obama is +1 and Biden is +8, Rubio is essentially 0 (minus 0.6%, to be precise). Clinton is -9. That's a world of difference.

Also, Hillary isn't the nominee yet. That makes a difference!

True. We'll just have to hope for about 4 Benghazi hearings' worth in a row of improvements and we'll be fine.

 

[lucablight]

The bookies have Clinton at $1.07 and Sanders at $8. I don't know what these polls mean but the general consensus seems to be that Hillary is an almost certainty for the democratic nomination.
Rubio is the favourite for the republican nomination at $2.88 and Trump and Cruz are at $3.25 so the bookies seem to think that will be a lot closer.

 

[OctoMan]

The bookies have Clinton at $1.07 and Sanders at $8. I don't know what these polls mean but the general consensus seems to be that Hillary is an almost certainty for the democratic nomination.
Rubio is the favourite for the republican nomination at $2.88 and Trump and Cruz are at $3.25 so the bookies seem to think that will be a lot closer.

Bush was also a big vegas favorite not long ago.

 

[kittenbreath]

Yes - but the fact Clinton is running against a very weak pool of candidates doesn't disguise the fact she's doing rather poorly herself. For comparison, Obama is +1 and Biden is +8, Rubio is essentially 0 (minus 0.6%, to be precise). Clinton is -9. That's a world of difference.

Obama is typically the one figure in Washington whose favorability ratings are above water, and he's the sitting president. Biden's numbers rose over the summer due to sympathy over the loss of his son.

The fact that Rubio has broken even isn't doing any good for his primary campaign, which continues to be dominated by Trump (-23).

And Hillary isn't doing poorly by any metric that matters.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

So wait...Sanders and Trump are the top two?

It looks like it, and Sanders appears to beat Trump.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Obama is typically the one figure in Washington whose favorability ratings are above water, and he's the sitting president. Biden's numbers rose over the summer due to sympathy over the loss of his son.

The fact that Rubio has broken even isn't doing any good for his primary campaign, which continues to be dominated by Trump (-23).

And Hillary isn't doing poorly by any metric that matters.

Rubio might lose the primary, but he'd be good in the general. Meanwhile, Clinton (who I don't dispute will win the primary barring an incredible Sanders upset), will do poorly in the general. Her metrics there are pretty terrible.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Once you put Hillary next to a Republican, she will shine. She only has bad approval ratings right now because people only think of her hypothetically, and as Killary.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

So Sanders does better in every head-to-head by a decent margin, including having an actual majority against Trump.

No independents know who Bernie Sanders is right now.

Non-Democrats hate Socialists more than even Muslims, come on, people. This would be a slaughter in the general.

Worrying about Rubio or Cruz being popular when no one outside of the Republican party has heard about their "annul all gay marriages, no abortions even for rape victims, massive tax cuts for the rich" ideas either is not smart either.

 

[noshten]

No independents know who Bernie Sanders is right now.

Non-Democrats hate Socialists more than even Muslims, come on, people. This would be a slaughter in the general.

Worrying about Rubio or Cruz being popular when no one outside of the Republican party has heard about their "annul all gay marriages, no abortions even for rape victims, massive tax cuts for the rich" ideas either is not smart either.

Such profound fear mongering in every thread about Bernie.
People have not told me how Cruz or Trump are going to beat Bernie in a general election, are minorities and older voters suddenly going to vote for either or abstain from voting?

 

[teruterubozu]

Once you put Hillary next to a Republican, she will shine. She only has bad approval ratings right now because people only think of her hypothetically, and as Killary.

Or my abuela.

 

[gutter_trash]

I hope Trump keeps on badgering Cruz about him being Canadian born.

Cruz is such an hypocrite on the subject, (his father violated an expired student visa in Texas but was a die hard anti-Obama birther)

 

[Holmes]

Hillary wins decisively against Democrats, not so much among Independents. So I guess what'll make or break Sanders is whether those Independents decide to come out and vote for him, or instead choose the Republican race for a chance to vote for (or against) Trump.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

No independents know who Bernie Sanders is right now.

What? This is nonsense. Sanders leads Clinton among independents 39-20 (the others are Republican leaning except for a small O'Malley group; weirdly O'Malley does quite well with independents relative to his performance with others). Independents are Sanders' best group! [1]

This is bizarre. Every month we get more evidence suggesting that Clinton is a poor candidate for the general and Sanders a good one; and every month people who have already decided a year ago that Clinton is a good candidate either manage to conveniently miss facts or repersuade themselves that actually Clinton must be a good candidate because reasons? Like, this is the backfire effect in full swing right here.

 

[illusionspark]

No independents know who Bernie Sanders is right now.

Non-Democrats hate Socialists more than even Muslims, come on, people. This would be a slaughter in the general.

Worrying about Rubio or Cruz being popular when no one outside of the Republican party has heard about their "annul all gay marriages, no abortions even for rape victims, massive tax cuts for the rich" ideas either is not smart either.

I've seen way more non-democrats speak favorably of Sanders than Clinton. I actually haven't encountered anyone that isn't a staunch democrat voice their support for Clinton yet.

 

[RustyNails]

Such profound fear mongering in every thread about Bernie.

It's the truth. Bernie is gonna get slaughtered so bad in the general with a complete destruction of downticket ballots, the democrats in general will be left to wilderness for the next two election cycles. All the work laid by Obama for the past 8 years will be gone in a second.

 

[Chariot]

It's the truth. Bernie is gonna get slaughtered so bad in the general with a complete destruction of downticket ballots, the democrats in general will be left to wilderness for the next two election cycles. All the work laid by Obama for the past 8 years will be gone in a second.

And fire will fall from the heavens, the sea will rise and there will be Wednesday for a thousand years!

 

[Mimosa97]

But GAF told me that Sander's won't win!

They also said a little while before that that Trump wouldn't either!

So confused.

People on GAF don't realize how many people hate hillary. Even among liberal voters.

They think Hillary has this election on lock but I have a very bad feeling about this.

 

[Third Strike]

a little off topic but

GEORGIA
Impression of Ted Cruz:
Favorable 38%
Unfavorable 46%
Unsure 16%
(Atlanta Journal Constitution/Abt SRBI, RV, 1/4-7)

damn even the south dont like Cruz, what is it about him the GOP voters doesnt like, but yet would take a bullet for Trump?

Cruz likes to position himself as an "outsider", but in the end, he is still a US Senator from the state of Texas. That's already a mark against him.

 

[MetalGearZed]

I have a feeling that O'Malley's old points will turn in to Sanders' so him needs to gtfo

 

[Mimosa97]

I hope Trump keeps on badgering Cruz about him being Canadian born.

Cruz is such an hypocrite on the subject, (his father violated an expired student visa in Texas but was a die hard anti-Obama birther)

His father is a sicko but how does this have anything to do with the rest ? Plenty of people violate their visa, I personally don't think it's wrong or some criminal offense. Who cares ?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I have a feeling that O'Malley's old points will turn in to Sanders' so him needs to gtfo

Doesn't actually matter. If you don't breach 15%, your delegates get redistributed. In a caucus, they get redistributed in the caucus themselves, which means that Iowa is essentially just Sanders vs. Clinton already, in a primary, they get redistributed evenly by voteshare. O'Malley could have a very mild spoiler effect in NH, but I doubt it would make a difference because he's polling 1% there.