General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCNN-ORC Poll-Clinton-(D) 56% -Bush ($) 39% /Clinton (D) 55% Rubio ($) 41%
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/04/20/cnnorc2016poll04202015.pdf
Posted with absolute glee and no editorial comment.
William769
(55,144 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Demonstrates youth and wisdom are not mutually exclusive.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)I've seen that term applied back to birth dates of 1980. I'm never really sure what it means.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Their anti marriage equality stance is a killer, imho. Once young folks know that, they assume you are a homophobe or bigot, and won't listen to anything else.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I suspect most nat'l Republicans secretly hope SCOTUS applies marriage equality to all fifty states so the issue is taken off the table.
But opposition to marriage equality is just part of a world view that most young folks find to be an anathema and there is little they can do to change that and remain who they are.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)her brothers (1976 and 1974) in terms of outlook. Not that either of them are conservatives, I just mean as far as overall experience growing up. Hell, I really identify more with people born in 1990 than someone born in 1976....
Or you can just consider very late 70s and very late 80s "kids" as cuspers.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
LonePirate
(13,417 posts)This group of Relublicans is simply impossible to support.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)The CNN polls have been consistent.
It's hard to compare polls because we don't have an objective standard to match it to until the election so all we can do is match them to the average of all polls.
IMHO, I do see shenanigans afoot... A close race gets more attention than a not close one.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)Her presence and fundraising needs to be a lift all boats for the party movement. The two houses need to sway back the other way and with the limited field that I see trying to enter the race, none have any real coattail ability to do this.
Renew Deal
(81,855 posts)There have been a bunch of bad poll numbers for Bush recently. He may want to consider not entering the race if this carries on.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)benefits of name recognition.
Not many folks know Rubio yet so his negatives still aren't that high.
lark
(23,091 posts)they won't want him. He's just stupid and a total flip=flopper as well.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)The establishment folks want Jeb, the far right social and pro-war conservatives want Walker or Cruz. The Libertarian wing of the GOP wants Rand. I don't think that leaves a Constituency for Rubio. It really tears me up.
lark
(23,091 posts)Me too!
True feelings -
Cha
(297,137 posts)Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)POLL4-6-
April 16-19, 2015
THEMSELVES AS DEMOCRATS AND 192 WHO
DESCRIBE THEMSELVES AS INDEPENDENTS
WHO LEAN DEMOCRAT, FOR A TOTAL OF 458
DEMOCRATS
--
SAMPLING ERROR: +/-4.5 PERCENTAGE PTS
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/04/20/cnnorc2016poll04202015.pdf
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)There was a paucity of polling in that race but even with that caveat Rahm Beat Chuy by the amount the final poll predicted, ergo:
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150405/downtown/new-mayoral-poll-shows-emanuel-with-double-digit-lead-on-garcia
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)meh...
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Watch how I dispatch of her again.
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)22. For the next few questions, let's assume that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be the
Democratic presidential nominee in 2016. I'm going to read the names of a few Republicans who
may run for their party's nomination. After I read each one, please tell me if you would be more
likely to vote for that Republican candidate or if you would be more likely to vote for Hillary
Clinton. (RANDOM ORDER)
Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush
Other Neither No
Clinton Bush (vol.) (vol.) opinion
Apr. 16-19, 2015 56% 39% * 4% 1%
Mar. 13-15, 2015 55% 40% * 4% 1%
Dec. 18-21, 2014 54% 41% 1% 4% *
Jan. 31-Feb. 2, 2014 59% 36% * 3% 2%
Dec. 16-19, 2013 58% 36% 1% 4% 1%
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/04/20/cnnorc2016poll04202015.pdf
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Crosstabs on the following pages only include results for subgroups with enough unweighted cases to produce a sampling error of +/-8.5 percentage points or
less.
Some subgroups represent too small a share of the national population to produce crosstabs with an acceptable sampling error. Interviews were conducted among these subgroups, but results for groups with a sampling error larger than +/-8.5 percentage points are not displayed and instead are denoted with "N/A"
I'd like to know what the
Non-response rates were?
90%??
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)There was a paucity of polling in that race but even with that caveat Rahm Beat Chuy by the amount the final poll predicted, ergo:
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150405/downtown/new-mayoral-poll-shows-emanuel-with-double-digit-lead-on-garcia
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Who knew republicans
would vote for the 3rd Way
Groups supporting Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's (D) re-election received $750,000 this month from a conservative hedge fund founder who also has given money to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) and conservative groups.
Ken Griffin, CEO of the hedge fund Citadel, has donated nearly $1 million to pro-Emanuel groups in the last year, including $750,000 since March 2, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
Griffin has also contributed to Walker, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), and Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.). Schock, under fire for lavish spending, said on Tuesday that he would resign from Congress. Since last year, Griffin has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars American Crossroads, America Rising, the Republican National Committee and other conservative groups.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/17/rahm-emanuel-ken-griffin_n_6890152.html
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Remember, I told you I wasn't speaking to who should win but to who would win, based on the available polling and the polling that you spend much of your time pooh poohing was vindicated.
I really don't know how they did it... There was only one election eve poll and that poll nailed the final result: 56%-44%.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:41 PM - Edit history (1)
She's our version of the Unskewed Guy
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/unskewed-polls-founder-i-was-only-wrong-because-i-didn-t-consider-voter-fraud
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)2016 race,his "reporting of the facts" was the highlight of election coverage for me. I loved it.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I thought personal attacks were not permitted...it does not look good for a Hillary supporter.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Her raison d'etre is too follow me around and try to undermine the polls I post... I am sorry if I am not her, his your's, or anybody's pinata.
For the record if somebody started a thread where they cited a poll where another D was doing well against an R I wouldn't intrude into the thread and take the rhetorical version of a dump in it,
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Because she posts about your polls?...and that justifies your violating the rules?
It only shows to me the thin skin of the HRC supporters.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)If that upsets you it is what it is.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But I can assure you I am off sugar and won't bust you open to get to your candy.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)NT
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I did not compare you to an ugly right winger. But when the projection begins I am through.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)If you believe that is not a personal attack there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.
My thread was about skewing and unskewing, not ideology.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The poll says she has won and that is all that matters...458 people have spoken.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)What poster said she won?
If your whole premise is based of something not borne out in reality, you should probably employ a different tactic to accomplish whatever it is you are trying to accomplish.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Because it is all about the dichotomy of us and them...with us or against us.
Things like this are often used to take advantage of the band wagon effect...it is public relations 101...create the inevitability of a win and people will jump on board...because we all want to be winners.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Just kidding.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Still haven't gotten paid yet.
If she doesn't pay me yet I will go to Fox to complain.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,232 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)The palpable panic of the fascists needs to be encouraged....President Clinton II will also have President Clinton I giving advise and surely part of Cabinet...it is all good.
Look at how BAD the alternative is to a Democratic President...just imagine.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There are no vote HRC gets that ONLY she can get.
The voters are not demanding that we back a militarist corporate toady as president(with economic policies by Lawrence Summers, what else can you call her?).
We're not still stuck in 1992.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Proof please.
Those numbers are extraordinary. I doubt they will hold but if they did it would be the biggest landslide for our side since 1964.
Thank you in advance.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I'll grant you she might get some more than Bernie, but why assume that only the second-most conservative candidate we could possibly nominate could get?
The voters don't want us to stay in the Middle East. They don't want TPP or any more globalization. And they aren't obsessed with keeping budgets tight at the expense of everything else.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)That being said, if any of these candidates thought they could do better than Ms. Clinton against her presumptive Republican opponents they would so because that would greatly bolster their candidacies. The fact they aren't suggests they can't.
QuestionAlways
(259 posts)The voters don't want us to stay in the Middle East, but they do want us to defend Israel or prevent Iran from having the Atomic Bomb and ICBMs which could threaten us
The voters don't want TPP or any more globalization, but they do want fair trade and to fix NAFTA
The voters want to keep budgets tight by eliminating fraud and waste and bloated government programs
The way you express yourself makes all the difference in the world
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)we are currently part of. All such deals are simply giveaways to corporate greed and the elimination of the ability of democratic governments to hold international corporations to any social accountability whatsoever.
QuestionAlways
(259 posts)all I am pointing out is that everything depends on how you frame it.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)You are asking the question do you want six of this or one of that...if you don't want any of the six then what do you think they will pick?
The poll is meaningless except to pump you up with.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I simply asked my interlocutor to name six candidates who do as well as Ms. Clinton against her presumptive Republican opponents and provide evidence as to why.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Hillary is the only one running and the public all know that because she has all the news coverage right now.
This poll is meaningless, especially this far out, except to create the illusion that she is the winner without even running.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Feel free to post them.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)a small number of republicans and tea party supporters would crossover for her.Granted for some strange reason a small number of liberals would vote GOP over her but she gets more republican and tea party supporters.
Again Rubio and carson she still gets over 80% of non white vote showing blacks and hispanics aren't stupid and won't vote for someone just because they are black or hispanic
as expected she does well with under 50-killing idea she can't get younger support and republicans do better over 50.In presidential election that won't win white house for GOP.
Hillary can run as change candiate.last i checked we never had a female president.GOP congress is unpopular,and now they have to own it.People know her.what exactly are the GOP going to turn up on her that isn't already known.Email has no legs.People don't care.
This is hardly a left learning poll.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)They've got an easy ride while the working class will continue to suffer.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)NT
DCBob
(24,689 posts)bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Time to keep pulling ahead. Exciting time to be a democrat.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,232 posts)the nomination, so it's all good.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Mayberry Machiavelli
(21,096 posts)More crossover her direction than the other way.
A pretty good start.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)In this election!
She is savaged all the damn time by the hardcore right and the hard core left which means she carries the middle.....which gets you elected President in this country!
GO Hillary!
freshwest
(53,661 posts)On the question of his positions and the Democratic Party. I think he is purely Democrat, but I'm pretty old school, I guess.
Disturbing to see any of the GOP in the same ballpark as HRC. Really, America?
I didn't finish the PDF, but it seems they asked fair questions and not that biased, which is what I expected from CNN. So I'm not sure if these are likely voters or those who won't vote.
The enthusiasm question nearly answered that, but I sure don't see much at DU. If the poll is in any universe correct, the bashers number from 1 to 4% of the electorate. We're in a bubble.
I just don't like to see any sort of complacency about Clinton beating the GOP candidate so far out from the election. I think it's a good rallying cry for those who want her as nominee, and nothing wrong with it.
I'd rather hear that kind of praise and enthusiasm from supporters of Warren, Sanders, etc. The negativity is just sooo Tea Party, Republican, whatever to me.
People don't vote for a negative. But the negativity and personal smears, plus scandal mongering straight out of Breitbart, etc. is what got me defending Hillary.
She was never my candidate, despite her record, which I didn't know all about in terms of civil rights. The interviews of her during Clinton's first campaign when called to answer for Bill's problems, paradoxically, made me ill at ease with her.
She said such things as 'I'm not a stand by your man' woman like the Tammy Wynette song when asked about his sex life. Nor would she be 'sharing brownie recipes.' I thought, why does she even mention it?
Guess living in the South lent that flavor to her discussions, but I didn't want to go there.
Besides, dammit, I was voting for the candidate, not his wife. Then when he got elected, I blamed him for NAFTA. I only learned much later that Bush Sr. had signed it in 1992 and Clinton was stuck with it.
WTO was just more of the same, like TPP is, but the USA has not lost any of those hearings, and it was signed onto in 2005. Where were the labor and other voices in 2005?
The fact is that Asia doesn't need us anymore. We are no longer a superpower. We have to make deals with them. The USA was a third world nation for more year than it's been first world, that's history. We won't sink to the bottom of the sea because of it and Americans are sick and tired of what it takes to maintain empire. Not only that, many of us are culturally against empire, although some aren't.
Pat Buchanan and the Bircher isolationist policies have never really been in the Democratic lexicon. It was the GOP that opposed relations with China because of Communism until their man Nixon started that and they've never looked back. They took full advantage of cheap labor, even slave labor in China, to the deteriment of American workers.
Gotta go do something else.