Sanders has higher unfavorables amongst Democrats than Hillary.

[Renew Deal]

I'm kind of surprised by that. And that's with 36% of people not even knowing who he is. The more people learn about him the higher his unfavorables will go.

Why does Sanders turn off so many Democrats? The easy answer is that he's not actually a Democrat, but I don't think party label is the real reason.

Q2 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Hillary Clinton?
Favorable 74%
Unfavorable 21%
Not sure 5%

Q4 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Bernie Sanders?
Favorable 38%
Unfavorable 26%
Not sure 36%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_51315.pdf

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026702535

[djean111]

1. Early days yet.

The primaries should be interesting!

[Renew Deal]

7. I agree

Though the numbers are surprising to me.

[djean111]

11. I am not going to pay attention to poll numbers this far out.

For one thing, this far out, poll numbers are just name recognition. Poll numbers after the debates? Those will be interesting.

[Art_from_Ark]

82. Yup-- this far out, poll numbers don't mean diddly

[arcane1]

2. Do you have prior numbers we can compare to?

[Renew Deal]

6. I don't at this time

[arcane1]

12. How do you know his unfavorables go up as people get to know about him?

[Renew Deal]

15. As people learn about him they will fall into one of two categories.

[arcane1]

16. "The more people learn about him the higher his unfavorables will go"

That's only one category.

[JI7]

3. it's not that much different , sanders is mostly an unknown though

[hrmjustin]

4. Interesting.

[randys1]

5. Democrats are stricken with the same disease republicans are, unable to acknowledge

the socialism that exists in our society already and that we would be far far better off with a little more

these stats dont surprise me at all

[Renew Deal]

9. I wonder if it's a different reason.

I wonder if it's because of Hillary's large lead. People have picked sides and automatically see him negatively. Then again, if this poll ran with Warren in it I doubt she would have such high unfavorables.

[malokvale77]

31. "Democrats are stricken with the same disease republicans are"...

I thought you were going to say idiocy, lol.

After all, everyone started getting dumbed down 4 decades ago. It started right here in Texas.

[randys1]

32. A sure sign of how dumb we are is how we think one candidate over another can make

all the difference, somehow.

Or if we cant have exactly who we want, then we wash our hands of the whole mess and walk away.

Both dumb.

I will never forget what I learned from one of the smartest men who ever lived, ever...

He said "these people dont care about you" and he was right, George Carlin might have a soft spot for the first Black president or for Bernie as Bernie is a quasi socialist hippie like George and I am and probably you, but he would remind us that once they are in that system, a whole lotta shit happens to them that we dont see.

now, if you wanna talk DUMB....just look at these guys

[malokvale77]

42. I totally agree with your "GOP clown car" graphic...

but if you think Dems haven't been subjected to the same dumbed down education system, I can only say, WOW.

[randys1]

45. Oh we have, completely. I think that if you are a Democrat in the first place, you are

showing you have some awareness of what is going on around you.

To that degree anyone who self identifies as a liberal or even Democrat is showing some knowledge of where we are and how we got here, dont you agree?

[malokvale77]

62. Where to begin?

"To that degree anyone who self identifies as a liberal or even Democrat is showing some knowledge of where we are and how we got here, dont you agree?"

Actually, no. I see a lot of "self identified" liberals and/or Democratics who have no clue how we got here, and worse, seem to be happy where we are.

[BlueJazz]

61. I thought the same thing and worse, I was going to agree with it.

[malokvale77]

64. We are not all blind...

yet.

[True Blue Door]

8. Don't trust every poll.

Bernie will get some trustworthy internal polling people for the campaign to track what's going on.

And even then, don't obsesses on every blip.

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. "Don't obsesses on every blip." Great advice. Does this qualify as "a blip" as well?

"Bernie Sanders' Poll Numbers have been steadily rising since January"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026640997

[joshcryer]

10. That appears mostly down to the "not sure."

Also people have used Sanders in the past to attack Democrats (even though he's an ally and caucuses with Democrats) so that could make up for the 5% unfavorable.

It's all a perceptions game. It'll change over time.

[neverforget]

13. Name recognition: Not sure 5%; Sanders Not sure 36%. Nearly every Democrat

knows who HRC is as opposed to Sen Sanders from Vermont. Their unfavorables are much closer 21% Clinton, 26% Sanders. It's kinda hard to form an opinion when few people know who Sen Sanders is.

[MaggieD]

19. As the OP states, his unfavorables will go up....

As his name recognition goes up. That's just the way it works. He is starting from a very bad spot.

[GeorgeGist]

86. Illogical

[woolldog]

87. Very logical

unless you assume that ALL of the 36% who don't know him or are unsure will ALL have a favorable opinion of him once they get to know him.

Even if the 36% eventually break something like 70-30 or 80-20 favorable (unlikely), his unfavorables will still go higher

[Renew Deal]

20. But that's what makes it so strange

His name recognition is much lower, but his unfavorables are measurably higher.

[neverforget]

21. i would bet that has mostly to do with the Independent label. It'll be interesting to see what

happens once his positions are known and compared and contrasted with others and/or the (I) becomes (D).

[DanTex]

14. This is strange. I don't see any reason why a Dem should have an unfavorable opinion

of Bernie. His Hillary-bashing supporters, sure, but he is great.

[arcane1]

17. It would be interesting to see how those unfavorables voted on other candidates n/t

[MaggieD]

18. He is seen as a fringe candidate, IMO

Although I do think the party label WILL matter in the early primary states where they are professionals at this sort of thing, so to speak. They are party loyalists, and he will not change that (I) to a (D) and that matters to people.

I think he will also be seen as someone with pie in the sky ideas that are not serious proposals, such as breaking up the banks, and FREE, FREE College for everyone! If they take those proposals seriously they will consider him a fringe candidate, like Dennis Kucinich. If they don't take the proposals seriously he will be seen as a panderer extraordinaire!

Lastly, primary voters often focus on the electability issue. And I think most will recognize that an avowed socialist is not electable in the U.S.

[malokvale77]

35. "He is seen as a fringe candidate, IMO"

And it is your job to push that narrative, IMO.

[MaggieD]

36. Are fantasizing that I get paid to post here?

Can I fantasize that you get paid to post here too then? LOL!

That's what I love about you guys -- no facts needed!

[malokvale77]

49. Fantasize away.

I prefer to live in the real world where real people are hurting. That's where my priorities are.

PS: I like facts. Something you seem to be short of.

[MaggieD]

52. You first - it was YOUR idea

[malokvale77]

63. "You first - it was YOUR idea"

Another of you fantasizes?

[99Forever]

22. And when those "poll numbers" turn around 180 degrees, as they most certainly will...

... you'll be sure to make a big deal about it here, right?

[kentuck]

23. It looks like the difference is in the "not sure" responses?

Hillary leads 5 to 36... That's 31 points right there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Because your definition of liberal democrat will be different

in Arkansas or Ohio than Berkeley.

That is like basic poli sci 101. Why campaigns have to tune to local conditions.

Not being partisan allows clarity on this shit, really.

[MaggieD]

38. His numbers are even worse in Iowa

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. And this should shock me precisely how?

Politics 101...

And if his campaign understands this, they will calibrate.

[MaggieD]

41. I'm saying his state by state numbers are no better....

... among liberals. So you're wrong again.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Again this should shock me how?

Kid you are telling me that I am wrong when the original statement read this way.

nadinbrzezinski (137,057 posts)
24. Because your definition of liberal democrat will be different

in Arkansas or Ohio than Berkeley.

That is like basic poli sci 101. Why campaigns have to tune to local conditions.

Not being partisan allows clarity on this shit, really.

You are disagreeing to just disagree and say I am wrong. I am reminded of those piggies yesterday... they do fly. And by the way, this is quite disagreeable. But when you believe in your heart of hearts that I am going to attend a bernie meet up (there is one nearby soon), and be a volunteer in his campaign... you are starting from the wrong foot.

My candidate is big money. And big money, unfortunately, will win and continue to distort democracy.
In fact in a couple of months I will write the big editorial endorsement for big money. I just need to find an appropriate graphic to go with big money that is copyright free. That will be the chore here.


I recommend reading comprehension here and not partisan blinders.

Oh and please feel free to have the last word though.

[MaggieD]

48. Oh, so none of the liberals in any state have a clue?

LOL! We're all just morons. If only we would check with Nadine prior to responding to polls and/or voting we could make smart decisions. Got it.

[zappaman]

67. you just got served, kid!

[Agnosticsherbet]

25. The 36% not sure is about his lack of name recognition.

Everyone knows Secretary of State Clinton. Senator Sanders, is relatively unknown.

Check back in a few months, and it will have changed.

[HERVEPA]

26. For all intents ands purposes, he is a Democrat.

He caucuses with them, he votes with them, he is running their primary, and would not be part of a third party challenge. And he sticks to Democratic ideals more than 90% of those with the"D" after their name do.

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. That's all good, but it doesn't explain his rising unfavorables. n/t

[MoonRiver]

27. I think people know he can't win the general.

That's a turn off doh.

[Renew Deal]

34. I don't that's a good reason to view someone negatively.

Unless people think he's trolling the race, but I never got that impression from anyone.

[MoonRiver]

46. It is being realistic.

I love who Bernie is and what he stands for. But I know he can't win the primary or general. I only think negatively about him in terms of his candidacy.

[Tarheel_Dem]

28. Could this be part of it? Some have forgiven & forgotten, but I never will.

This could explain why black celebrities are already coming out for Hillary. Bernie wasn't even a member of our party, and he was calling for someone to primary President Obama, in his re-election bid.

Sanders: Would be 'good' for Obama to face primary challenge

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/173201-sanders-says-it-would-be-good-for-obama-to-face-primary-challenge

Bernie, like Ron Paul, will appeal mostly to white college kids, but that's not who he needs to win nationally. The electorate has changed. We want to see something other than the usual older white male in the White House.

[Renew Deal]

33. I doubt most people remember that.

[Tarheel_Dem]

43. They'll be reminded. Trust me.

[MaggieD]

39. I almost forgot that!

Yeah, like I said, he is not a Dem. He just wants to play one for a few months.

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. He's resisted changing his party affiliation all these years, and suddenly he becomes a Democrat?

I know his supporters have to pump each other up, cuz Lord knows the polls aren't doing it. But, what we're witnessing here is a total dismissal of actual scientific data. You'd think they never heard the term "echo chamber".

[MaggieD]

50. He still isn't a Democrat

Still toting that (I) after his name instead of (D).

I was in the waiting area of a business the other day - TV on - when someone on CNN said "Bernie Sanders, Democrat...." And someone actually shouted at the TV - "He's NOT a Democrat."

So at least I know I'm not the only one that feels that way. LOL!

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. I think this little exercise will Nader-ize Bernie, and that's a shame.

[MaggieD]

58. Yep - could happen

[TM99]

65. In a Democracy primary challenges are a good thing.

Sanders was correct. Had there been a serious primary challenge in 2012, perhaps Obama would not now be so inclined to disrespect other liberals in his party while he pushes through the TPP with the Republicans.

Sanders appeals to men and women of all colors and orientations. Your statement is a bold faced lie. He is definitely NOT the usual older white male. Are you yet another one of those who thinks that Clinton's feminity alone is what she land her in the White House as our President?

[Tarheel_Dem]

74. Much like Kucinich, Bernie appeals to DU. News Alert: DU is not the real world. We'll see how....

much he appeals to "people of color". Being African American myself, he holds zero appeal for me. By this time in 2007, Obama was all the talk at black barbershops and beauty salons. His fans keep telling us that Bernie doesn't have all elusive "name recognition" yet. They tell us to wait till the debates, then he'll launch. While on the other side of the aisle, with each new announcement, there's a new frontrunner soon after. Bernie made his big announcement, and he's still 50 pts behind HRC. I wouldn't depend on "people of color" if I were you & Bernie.

[TM99]

76. I am not one of those Sanders supporters that

thinks that this is about Obama in 2007.

Dude, I am bi-racial. I know plenty of blacks, hispanics, and whites that find great appeal in Sanders. We are not looking for another rock-star. We are looking for someone who is actually more than a personality figure.

I could care less if Clinton becoming president would break a glass ceiling for women. She is not the right woman for the job.

This poll concerns me not. We are one month in after his announcement. It was a small poll. Public opinion can and does change rapidly.

[Tarheel_Dem]

81. Cool story bro.

[Rex]

37. And yet 90% of the people polled on DU like him better than HRC.

Crazy world.

[betterdemsonly]

55. People who really pay attention don't dig her. n/t

[Rex]

56. IMO, the only polls that matter are exit polls. nt

nt

[mythology]

68. And no true scotsman likes her either

But even if I suppose for a moment that you're right, remember the Adlai Stevenson remark that it takes more than just the right thinking people to get elected.

[betterdemsonly]

70. There is a difference between activists and partisans

There is a difference between both groups and general election voters. Neither group are plebs, but activists are atleast motivated by ideals not political power.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. I don't vote based on polls, popularity, likeability, or choices in underwear.

[betterdemsonly]

54. I think Israel and Uk election results prove polls are now irrelevant.

I also think most of Bernies support will be from people who don't generally show up in primaries, like ows and fightfor15. I don't think the polls will ever measure them as they would not be considered likely voters, or democrats and they are under 40 people with no landline.

Furthermore democratic party has shrunk in the last 8 years and has become just Obama people. Not surprised they prefer Hillary, but it also is irrelevant to Bernie's campaign.

[Cali_Democrat]

60. The 2012 PResidential polls were pretty accurate, except for a few outliers like rasmussen

Polling, if done properly, can be deadly accurate.

[fredamae]

57. I am undeterred

And I'm getting other folks to listen only to find themselves behind him.... Keep focused and ignore the early numbers. There's a Lot of time between now and next May.

We're likely going to see Bernie largely ignored on MSM type venues. And we're not going to see strong polling numbers.
That's one way they can "whittle" the growth of his candidacy. There are No scandals. No Flip-Flopping. He has a Very Solid work history of working for People...on the things "we" say we all want.

The only "number" that matters at the end are the number of votes he gets.
I'm giving it all I have to help him win around here
I actually got a devoted FOX watcher to go take a "look and listen" at his interviews etc..who knows...he represents what she says she wants in a politician.

[Thinkingabout]

59. It just may be more people are googling Bernie and he has been showing up on talk shows

frequently and perhaps they do not like what they find and what they hear. Bernie is going to have to sell himself, if he can't then it is on him. I read lots of post where the time is spent on taking about Hillary, not much about Bernie, so his backers are not even selling him.

[stevenleser]

66. Two reasons. #1 - his supporters attacks on Hillary are rubbing off on him

People are associating the negative tactics of his supporters with him. Hillary is an extremely popular figure among Democrats and they strongly dislike the attacks on her. I see it happening here. Bernie was almost universally liked here on DU. I was even happy he joined the primary, until his supporters started attacking Hillary. Now I personally feel less favorable about him.

#2 - Even among some Democrats the Socialism label is not popular.

[zappaman]

69. More #2 than #1.

The only Sanders "supporters" who are nasty and negative are here on DU and DU is but a tiny percentage of Democrats in the US.
But "socialism" will be a tough sell to the electorate.

[stevenleser]

71. I've had Sanders supporters in one of his FB groups attack me for being a Hillary supporter

And I haven't said anything negative about him on FB.

[JI7]

85. the problem is they seem more anti hillary than pro sanders

[brooklynite]

75. Disagree...

...As obnoxious as some Sanders supporters are here, the reality is that what happens here has no bearing on the campaign in the real world.

[stevenleser]

72. Anyone who knows politics knows that unfavorables are hard to convert to favorables

People who don't know you or aren't sure? Yeah, you have a shot at those, but once someone decides they don't like you, that's hard to change.

It's also not hard to change a favorable to an unfavorable.

[hrmjustin]

73. I always liked him.

But these numbers will change over time.

[Jackpine Radical]

77. Well, he does better than Emily Farris.

Emily Farris teaches a survey research class at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Texas.

She has no national profile. She's 31, which is too young to be president and besides, she told NPR, she has "no kind of political aspirations. I like my job a lot."

Yet, nearly a quarter of likely primary voters who responded to a recent poll said they have an opinion of her. And it was overwhelmingly negative.

Farris jokingly tweeted at Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling firm with a reputation for sometimes asking wacky questions, asking it to include her in its next survey, "as someone with no national profile."


She said it was meant to be a joke. PPP, which is an automated poll, actually did it.

The result? Twenty-three percent of the more than 1,200 respondents had an opinion of Farris. Three percent of respondents said they liked her; 20 percent had an "unfavorable" opinion of her; the rest — 77 percent — answered "not sure."

[YOHABLO]

78. We have a voting population that is not very astute when it comes to politics. Sad, very sad.

They don't understand that Hillary is a corporate Dem. and they don't understand what a Democratic Socialist is. Anything with Socialist in it's name is viewed as bad for the country. And like someone above pointed out, we already have social programs to help people. Pell Grants, Medicaid, Medicare, you get the idea.

[drm604]

79. According to your link, the margin of error is 4%.

So 26% against 21% doesn't really say much.

[AtomicKitten]

80. The more people recall why they didn't vote for her last time,

the more they remember what assholes she and her husband were/are.

Her name recognition ratings have nowhere to go but down.

[Warren DeMontague]

83. Then I guess she's got nothing to worry about.

All aboard the Inevitability Train!

[eridani]

84. And about favorable + unsure?

Clinton 79% and Sanders 74%