BERNIE SANDERS IS BEATING KAMALA HARRIS 2-1 AMONG BLACK DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS, NEW POLL FINDS

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

Despite a persistent notion that his supporters are disproportionately white male “bros,” the new survey suggests that Sanders is actually slightly more popular among black Democratic voters than white ones, indicating that the narrative that developed during the 2016 campaign may no longer hold, if it ever did.

(snip)

There appears to be a strong class element at play in the finding. The same poll found that the demographics Sanders is least popular with — at 19 and 17 percent, respectively — are Democrats who make more than $100,000 per year and Democrats who have post-graduate degrees (two qualities that typically, if not always, overlap). Because of structural wealth and income gaps, that population is heavily white.

Sanders, meanwhile, receives his strongest support support from those making less than $50,000 — a group that is, for the same reasons, much more diverse. The poll found that 30 percent of those with the lowest incomes backed Sanders.

(snip)

The findings pose both challenges and opportunities for Sanders. Wealthy and middle-class Democrats tend to be more likely to vote than the working class and poor, but Sanders is running a 50-state field and digital program that aims to unleash over a million Sanders volunteers to register and turn out voters who have stayed home in the past. That work could then pay dividends in the general election, which was decided in three states by just tens of thousands of votes in 2016.

(snip)


https://theintercept.com/2019/03/06/bernie-sanders-black-voters-2020/

[Gatoloco]

1. Misleading info from Glenn Greenwald's website

The Intercept won't say what's the name recognition for both candidates among African Americans.

[Uncle Joe]

3. You didn't read the article, name recognition is addressed as well. n/t

[namahage]

8. Did read the article. Doesn't answer the question.

Since apparently the relevant statistic is African American approval (IOW, "identity politics" is now important when it fits OUR narrative), how does an overall name-recognition/favorability stat translate to AA voters?

Strangely enough, the numbers aren't provided, other than "supplemental data" that Morning Consult provided but that the Intercept, for whatever reason, doesn't want to disclose.

[vsrazdem]

2. Thanks for the info, but most here won't believe it.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. Of course not... it benefits Bernie!! We can't have that!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Hortensis]

59. LOL. No, I don't believe it's valid. Junk polls will be generated

by the hundreds before we start getting a solid idea of who "black Democratic primary voters" are favoring. Whoever they are.

But itm this is from The Intercept, which should be 'nuf said right there. They might have tried to sell less than 2:1, but guessing the 2:1 was chosen to generate spitting far and wide by excited slurpers.

[WeekiWater]

4. As the article states, name recognition.

That said, this sounds like another one to add to Sanders wiki page. It's as good as voting.

[Demsrule86]

15. This is an Intercept online poll...I can't figure out why it is posted here.

[still_one]

26. I think you can feel hire out why.

[Gothmog]

5. According to Glenn Greenwald's rag

This poll is based on name id. Joe Biden is blowing sanders away with African American voters.

I doubt that sanders will do well in the Southern primaries on Super Tuesday. Time will tell but many African American voters are still not happy about sanders delegates booing Congressman John Lewis.

[SidDithers]

6. ...

Sid

[Me.]

40. Allow Me To Join You

[Squinch]

7. Bullshit name recognition poll from Glen Greenwald. And you presented it like it was

legitimate and like it means something.

Pitiful and shameful.

[58Sunliner]

9. Really? Uh-huh.

The interviews were conducted online and the data were weighted to approximate a target sample of registered voters based on age, race/ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, and region.
What are the means?
"weighting calibration is post-stratification. Post-stratification means adjusting the weights to ensure the sample proportions estimated by the sample fit the distribution of the population in some key characteristics, usually demographics."

[TwilightZone]

10. Morning Consult is an exclusively-online polling company.

Online polls can be...questionable.

[Andy823]

12. Online polls should never be used

This is the same crap that happened last time, using online polls, that you can vote multiple times on, to try and show Bernie in the front of the pack.

[Gothmog]

19. Who is surprised by this?

This polling is not very reliable

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

30. The polling could be A++ rated... still wouldn't be good enough if it's positive for Bernie.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Gothmog]

51. This type of poll is worthless

I really doubt that sanders will get a significant percentage of the African Smericam vote in the primary Time will tell. It is me belief that sanders will be eliminated on Super Tuesday. sanders delegates booing Congressman John Lewis will be a factor.

[progressoid]

20. 538 gives them a B-

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/

[TwilightZone]

21. Slightly above Rasmussen...

who was rated a C+ and who we know for certain is unreliable.

[progressoid]

22. And the same rating as Pew Research

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. That's good enough for me... and Bernie!!

Feel the Bern!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Demsrule86]

11. Are you putting an Intercept poll out as evidence of this? Oh please.

[workinclasszero]

13. Great info thanks

We know Bernie has a diverse base but here of course it will be denied to the bitter end.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. You got that right!! People can deny Bernie's broad appeal all they want.

But, numbers don't lie... Bernie rocks!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!

[MineralMan]

14. The Intercept. Enough said.

Any port in a storm, I guess.

[Tipperary]

56. Exactly.

Thank you.

[LiberalLovinLug]

57. You might as well say...."Bernie Sanders. Enough said"

Hey. Even IF the poll is 'weighed' or 'biased' to a degree, which I am not saying. But even IF....its "only" a slim majority of AA who back Sanders, this is still a big story and flies in the face of many of you on here that want him to disappear.

[MineralMan]

58. No, it is not a big story. It is an artifact of some online polling data.

It's a small story, and an overstated story. It's almost a year before the first 2020 caucuses and primaries. There's a long, long road ahead that leads up to the Democratic convention where a Nominee will be named.

Guess what? I don't care which Democrat gets that nomination. As I always do, I will be voting for and supporting whichever one it is. You think I don't like Bernie Sanders? I do like him. I think he is an unlikely Democratic presidential nominee for 2020, though. I think this poll does not say what The Intercept tried to get it to say. I'm sure I'll comment on why I don't see him as the eventual nominee many times as we go along.

We shall see. In the process leading up to that, I will probably comment frequently here. That's what I do in my spare time. But, you don't know me, and you have no idea what or who I will end up supporting. I don't either, since it all depends on the primary process and the National Nominating convention. I will have opinions, though, before then, and you'll find them here.

My opinion about The Intercept is that it sucks. Glenn Greenwald sucks. Anything that comes from that source needs to be closely examined for bias. I'll be doing that, too.

[LiberalLovinLug]

60. Fair enough

I'll take your word that you are not like some that carry around an irrational hatred of the man. IMO one of our most, if not the most, important ally outside the party.

But I will never understand our side continuing to demonize and shut out other news orgs that speak truth to power. Just because......shocker......it might involve stepping on a few toes from our party too. Even though they may spend 90% of the time criticizing the Right. Some here seem to have no stomach at all for that, or very sensitive ones. Or because of a personality you don't like. Who cares if he was questioning just how much we should rely on nailing Trump on the Russia interference issue? He is exploring another angle. I for one, appreciate alternate investigation from the left. So I dont have to rely on right wing sites to do that.

We go after our own in Washington (Franken) and we go after news sources like Raw Story and The Intercept on the left. And if any other independent site like Buzzfeed, Vox, Vice, etc...dares to say anything that might cast shade on any Democrat or leadership, or question their decisions, they are added to the list.

Is it any wonder that Air America was shut down? And many other liberal sites after? We hand wring our peccadillos about these sites until there are few left.

[MineralMan]

61. I recommend that you follow your own sense of things.

I recommend that everyone does that. I form my own opinions, and expect everyone else to do the same. I don't take directions from anyone about those opinions. I look at information, assess its credibility, and then use my own experience, reason, and background in politics to form judgments.

Sometimes I share my opinions here. They are just that, as it says in my signature line. It's a matter of indifference to be whether other individuals agree with those opinions or not. That has no influence on my decisions regarding posting on this or any other site.

Air America failed because it did not have enough listeners and could not succeed on its own merits. That was why it disappeared. While everyone has a right to speak out on the public airwaves, nobody has a particular right to do so unless they can generate enough funds to cover the costs.

I read all sorts of sites that are progressive or lean progressive. I judge them based on their presentation, accuracy and whether or not they provide fair and honest coverage that is factual. Many do. Some do not. I leave the ones that do not.

Merely criticizing the right is not enough for me. What is also needed is finding a way for progressives and other Democrats to be elected and form majorities in state and federal legislative bodies. Unless that happens, nothing changes. So, you will not always find me deploring someone who generally votes with the Democratic caucus but is not as progressive as I would like.

I am a collectivist. I believe that we must have a strong enough position to enable us to actually accomplish things. When we do not, I consider that to be a complete failure of leadership and collectivism. There are many long range goals, but accomplishing sort range goals is also critically important.

We failed badly in 2016. We cannot continue to do that, because we risk losing the opportunity to regain power. So, I support those who can win elections and who will cooperate in forming majorities, not just those who agree with me on progressive issues. That pisses off some people, but that's of no concern to me.

Now, I've written more than you wanted to know. Perhaps, though, you will remember what I wrote sometime when you disagree with something I have said about some candidate for office.

[LiberalLovinLug]

63. Thanks for the thoughtful response

Sometimes I steel myself up for a response of LOLFL emojis, and insults from some others.

I agree with your sentiments about everyone should access information and decide for themselves. And we may not agree with every "left" news source.

After that I guess we agree to disagree.
For me, I see it as a a cumulative fight. That is, even RT was useful at one time, if it means that a few more people heard Democratic leaning, liberal voices speaking from that view of things. And so even the Intercept, is important to Democrats chances. If 90% of the direction is promoting a more eglatarian, progressive slant, even if they have 10% of articles that may be critical of some left of center parties policies. Its much better than 100% anti Democratic Faux News sites. And especially takng into the account that the right owns and controls most of the more accecable political talk media in the country. And that we cannot even rely on the MSM networks to not go all false equivalency on us either. So any help we can get, even if it comes with a caveat that one must listen to them bitch once in awhile about our own party.

You have to also remember that right wing media is supported by very wealthy companies like Clear Channel and Sinclair who have very deep pockets and can even lose money in a particular district but are happy to do that rather than host a more liberal show.

As with the media, the same goes for politicians (such a Bernie Sanders). If he is an ally, if he can be popular and bring in new voters to the Democratic party to vote, then he is a weapon against Trump and fascism. It doesn't hurt that I also agree with almost his total platform. I am baffled by the constant belittlilng and demeaning and frankly juvenille attacks he receives on here by some. To what end?

Maybe its my more international outlook. You have talked to me before of the fact that I am Canadian. I like DU because you are all for the most part, on the same page as any liberal in any country. My gawd this place was such a blessing when I found it in the throws of the Iraq invasion. I like to commiserate with my own "kind". And I look upon it as a global struggle, and and dismayed by the rise of fascist like right wing authoritarians around the globe. I see the rich getting richer and more influential, and the poor getting poorer and having less influence, and the world struggle is very much connected to the US struggle.

The right wing machine has more money, more dirty tricks, more media ownership. Heck, they even have a whole enemy nation working with them covertly.
And even the MSM usually will side with more conservative viewpoints, and have more Republican guests than Democratic. Especially looking at their Sunday show lineups.

Another thing is that I believe in the idea of 'critical mass' when it comes to moving policy ahead. Changing the "zeitgeist". If enough politicians promote, say the concept of "medicare for all" eventually it will become more of an accepted concept. Such as gay marriage or pot legalization. That is, using your language, waiting for a 'collectivist' mandate, where we think we have to water down policy to make it more palatable for some imagined threshold of acceptance, is the wrong headed approach. We should lead, by showing we are not afraid. I think Americans, or Canadians or anyone, will get behind even policy that seems too big a jump, if enough leaders show confidence in achieving them. That changes happen in leaps, both small and big. Not in any kind of slow slide. Because on a slide, you can slip backwards too easily. At the very least, lets accept we can have a two pronged approach. Some to march ahead to plant the ideas, like Sanders, AOC, Warren...and those that are more pragmatic. But all are working to achieve the same results in the end.

Anyways now I went off. sorry. I do appreciate your posts and OPs. At least 90% of them

[NastyRiffraff]

16. I didn't bother reading

The Intercept? Really? Is that all you have?

[BannonsLiver]

17. Fantasyland stuff.

Fake news. Not real.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

33. LOL... riiiight!! Bernie is the only candidate that appeals to all demographic groups!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[BannonsLiver]

43. More fantasyland stuff.

It’s top notch unintentional comedy though.

[RDANGELO]

18. The 2016 polls showed that Bernie would have gotten approximately the same African American vote

in the general election as Hillary. That vote for Hillary was a preference not a rejection of Bernie.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. Why are you shouting?

[Uncle Joe]

25. I'm not, I copy and paste the headline as it is written.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. I LIKE WHEN YOU SHOUT UNCA' JOE!!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Uncle Joe]

36. ...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

37. hahaha, yes!! love it!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[MrsCoffee]

24. Lol.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. No shock there!! Bernie is the candidate for ALL the people!!

Bernie rocks!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[pnwmom]

28. Glenn Greenwald's The Intercept is a bad source. n/t

[wasupaloopa]

29. Online poll vote early vote often and Bernie folks do

[namahage]

35. Except that even in this online poll,

Biden smokes Bernie.

And since "UNDECLARED, UNFUNDED JOE BIDEN LEADS OR TIES BERNIE IN EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC" doesn't make as appealing reading for the Intercept crowd, they needed to find SOMETHING ELSE TO SHOUT!! CAPS CAPS CAPS!!!

[demosincebirth]

38. I don't believe it.

[awesomerwb1]

39. Glen Greenwald?

Can't wait for the Infowars/ZeroHedge poll on this.

[jalan48]

41. Makes sense. Bernie's message is for everyone.

[forklift]

42. Greenwald again?

[NurseJackie]

44. ...

[Tipperary]

46. I know, right?

Hard to read this here. Dayum. Smh.

[mcar]

45. The Intercept?

[susanna]

47. Intercept? OK.

Listen, I'd line a birdcage with The Intercept - well, that is, if I had a bird.

I'll wait for more appropriate news sources.

[MrsCoffee]

48. BETTER BELIEVE IT!

[betsuni]

49. CORONATION, CROWNED, ANOINTED, THE ONE LOL.

THE SHOE IS ON THE OTHER FOOT.

[kstewart33]

50. In the future, please post legitimate polls.

This does nothing but stir up festering discord between Sanders followers and those who oppose Sanders on this site.

Our democracy is at stake in 2020. Posts like this do not help.

[louis c]

53. Bullshit.

[LexVegas]

54. ...

[LovingA2andMI]

55. "The Intercept".....

[Starry Messenger]

62. Guess you have nothing to worry about then

Success is at hand!