-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Poll: Sanders nearly tied with Clinton nationwide
- Thread starter Bel Marduk
- Start date
- Status
Aaron Strife
Banned
Quinnipiac is a terrible pollster.
entremet
Member
You don't think the Obama Presidency changed anything?
Long article, but worth skimming.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/obama-biggest-achievements-213487
Even if you didn't agree with the Adminstration's policies, he "changed" a lot.
Unfamiliarity I'm guessing. Quinnipiac has been in the polling game for a long time.
Garrett Hawke
Member
BuzzFeed and Reddit should hold a poll tbh.
Because you want to nominate someone who can resonate with the voters, and the only way to test that is to have them run a campaign. I know it works differently in places with a parliamentary government, but plenty of voters here largely vote for a person, not a party.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
I refuse to believe that Ted Cruz is actually electable.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
After what his campaign did to Carson, he's done.
Skiptastic
Member
Well, given that he has a job as an elected official, you can't refute the facts.
Parties are not in the US constitution. They formed after the presidential selection system was in place for a few elections, due to factions of politicians coalescing around particular policies.
To have party bosses decide the candidates themselves would be seen as incredibly undemocratic. It's already not a hugely democratic process as it is due to the electoral college and extremely lax campaign finance laws. This would let entrenched powers be able to pick and choose their representatives with even less input from the people.
Why is everyone shitting on quinnipiac now? They have a b+ on 538 and they were more accurate than most other pollsters on the Iowa caucus.
What's funny is that most of the posts are from known Hillary supporters on this board, who (rightfully) scoff at other people when they dismiss polls that say she's winning.
What's funny is that most of the posts are from known Hillary supporters on this board, who (rightfully) scoff at other people when they dismiss polls that say she's winning.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Me too. Can't wait for the smear campaigns.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
that sounds backwards when the candidate might barely matter because of the parties.
but they can't seriously be nominating trump
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I simply find it unlikely this one random poll that shows Sanders gaining like 30 points for no actual reason is accurate.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
I'm talking about the POTUS here, not a seat on the senate.
And_Gignac
Member
He tied Iowa.
Futurematic
Member
Because two other polls released today don't match and Q didn't release internals so we don't know what the PoC breakdown is (to get this big a shift Sanders would likely have to make in roads with them but the standard wisdom is that Clinton has those demographics locked down).
Historically Clinton losing 20+ points nationally is what usually happens when a front runner loses Iowa or New Hampshire on the Democratic side, but she (however narrowly) won it. So simply not enough data, really, but the gut feeling would be that they're wrong.
Now just flip that around and you have the GAF poll :x
Because it's an outlier from every other poll, because they fucked up in 2014 hard, because they have had Hillary's worst numbers this cycle by a country mile, they had Bernie winning Iowa (which is fine, but makes me think their screen isn't working to reflect reality).
If other polls show this, sure. But Q Pac has been an outlier this entire cycle. So.
excelsiorlef
Member
No he didn't.
Welcome to GAF. Hillary is to GAF as Bernie is to Reddit
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Except we've known about the closeness of Iowa and Sanders' lead in NH for a long time. This poll right not appears to be an outlier.
Actually it looked like this:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1coDCWa4HzVDPtq6ZaFl5btIdhv_YwOSv_p_O1kSMweE/viewanalytics
Pre-Iowa of course.
excelsiorlef
Member
No it isn't.
And Al Gore is president and Norm Coleman is a Senator.
Veritigo_X
Member
Not even close to being true. There seem to be way more Bernie supporters on here (as well as on the internet in general).
And_Gignac
Member
He did. That was the narrative after Iowa. Clnton won nothing campaign or momentum wise. Sanders did.
Maybe the Hillary supporters are more outspoken here? Just my perception, I am open to being wrong.
You can say that you believe this poll is an outlier and that the margin of error probably favored Sanders. I think so too. That doesn't maker qpac suddenly complete garbage.
Bernie winning Iowa by like 1 point is still more accurate than other pollsters giving Clinton 3-4 points in favor.
excelsiorlef
Member
Epsilon-delta
Banned
They're just the loudest. It's easy to spot them in every Sanders thread.
And_Gignac
Member
People dont think in numbers or in absolutes. Winning by 0.2% was a defeat for Clinton.
excelsiorlef
Member
Whatever suits your narrative.
They had Bernie winning Iowa by 3 in their last poll. And, their biggest issue seems to be under sampling people of color, which isn't quite a problem in Iowa. Still, they missed the mark on Iowa, and have been an outlier from work this entire cycle.
This reminds me of Republicans believing in their hearts that Rasmussen was right until the end in 2012.
SliceSabre
Banned
He has done nothing but disappoint me and I doubt history will view him kindly. He has made me realize hope and change people like him and Bernie are the wrong kind of people to put your vote behind.
People don't or you don't?
Because the concensus was and is that he lost Iowa. Why would a Bernie "win" result in Hillary gaining some ground in NH post Iowa?
There's more folks here who spend their time unnecessarily criticizing posters who support Bernie Sanders for various nonsensical strawman reasons which might skew your perception.
Otherwise there's likely a slant towards Sanders over Clinton, which makes sense given the demographics (age, race, education, and political alignment) represented here. There seems to be more random one off posters who appear to write about supporting Sanders than there are who do for Clinton.
what happened to them anyway?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Except it wasn't 1. It was 5, 4, and 3 in their last three polls.
People saying I'm gonna wait for more polls to see if this is an outlier don't need to wait. We have numerous polls around this period that don't even show a TREND towards Sanders let alone an erasing of a 20 point lead.
Perception is reality, and the media spin has been pretty favorable for Bernie since Iowa. I suspect that most voters see it as a tie.
Personally I agree that this poll is too drastic to be trusted for now, but I'm not as skeptical as some. Quinnipiac was solid in Iowa.
Chezzymann
Member
By like, less than one percent though. He got 20 delegates and hillary got 22 right? For all practical purposes its essentially a tie
Wait a minute - do you want to tell me Rubio has a higher favorability rating than both Sanders and Clinton among Democrats, or we're other people asked This?!
teruterubozu
Member
I hardly think this is a Karl Rove level meltdown.
Mushroomer25
Member
He didn't, but I'd be willing to bet most people polled believed that he did. And that's what matters here - perception. A subset of Sanders supporters believe he lost by a coin toss.
entremet
Member
Could you give me specifics?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked