**New NH primary polling (UNH) Sanders 26% Biden 22% Harris 10% Warren 7%**

[workinclasszero]

Link to tweet

https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1551&context=survey_center_polls

[irresistable]

1. It will be interesting to see if either Biden or O'Rourke get a bump if/when they announce.

[workinclasszero]

3. It will be interesting for sure

[George II]

32. Well, since only 30 of the 604 people polled were decided, there's still 574 more to bump anyone.

[Dawson Leery]

2. One early poll.

Fortunately, California moved their primary to an earlier date.

[George II]

6. Especially since 95% of the respondents haven't decided yet that's 19 of every 20 respondents!

[NurseJackie]

4. Not representative of the US demographics.

[George II]

7. Plus.............see #5 below.

[George II]

5. According to the pollster, only 5% have definitely decided who their candidate is....

....10% are leaning toward someone, and 85% are still trying to decide.

That means that 1.3% of those polled are for Sanders, 1.1% are for Biden - 97.6% are looking at someone else or haven't decided yet.

The devil is in the details. I wouldn't get too excited about this poll.

https://scholars.unh.edu/survey_center_polls/552/

[NurseJackie]

8. Ha ha ha ha ha!

[NurseJackie]

9. What a deceptive headline / conclusion...

... why would the pollster (news organization) do that? It's intellectually dishonest.

[Garrett78]

37. All of these preference and hypothetical matchup polls are meaningless.

Yet every single day they get posted.

[NurseJackie]

38. Indeed. Meaningless and fake. Meant to rally-the-troops...

All of these preference and hypothetical matchup polls are meaningless.

Indeed. Meaningless and fake. Meant to rally-the-troops, and to "demoralize the enemy". And with the level of contempt being hurled at Democrats and the Democratic party, it's clear who's being viewed as the "enemy".

Yet every single day they get posted.

Sad, isn't it? All I'm trying to say is that this type of dishonesty really serves no good purpose. It's deceptive and doesn't represent reality. It's just a twisted misrepresentation based on incomplete and flawed data.

[namahage]

18. Also interesting

Who would you not vote for under any circumstances?

When asked which candidate they would not support under any circumstances, half of likely Democratic voters (50%) say that they don't know or are unsure (35%) or that all of the candidates are acceptable to them (15%).
Thirteen percent of likely Democratic voters say they wouldn't under any circumstances vote for Warren, 8% wouldn't vote for Sanders, and 6% wouldn't vote for Bloomberg. Fewer likely voters say they wouldn't under any circumstances vote for Gillibrand (4%), Booker (3%), Harris (3%), Biden (3%), O'Rourke (2%), Gabbard (2%), Former Health and Human Services Secretary Julian Castro (1%), Buttigieg(1%), Klobuchar (1%), Hickenlooper (<1%), or Delaney(<1%). Four percent mention someone else they would not vote for under any circumstances.

[George II]

22. That means that almost five times as many respondents said they would not vote for Sanders....

...."under any circumstances" (6% no vs. 1.3% yes)

The bottom line is that this poll really doesn't tell us very much when 95% are still undecided.

[BootinUp]

10. My guys the dark horse. :)

[George II]

11. Yes, but he's less than 1.5% behind the front runner!!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

12. BOOOOM!! But, but, Bernie has no chance and should withdraw for the good of the Democratic Party!!

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

[workinclasszero]

13. LOL

GO BERNIE!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

16. You know it!! The only one who can give Bernie a run for his money is Uncle Joe...

precisely cuz he's like everyone's favorite uncle and, so personable... but don't think he's gonna run.


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

[Garrett78]

17. You do realize, right, that there are 49 other states? And that these polls are meaningless?

[namahage]

19. Didn't you know?

As goes (93.9% white) New Hampshire, so goes the nation.

[Garrett78]

26. That does seem to be a popular opinion.

Sanders supporters seem to think the race is over after NH. And they're right, just not in the way that they think.

[George II]

33. Here's the early schedule and the pledged delegates up for grabs - NH is worth only 24!:

(sorry for the format, and these are 2016 delegates, there probably will slight changes)

3-Feb IA 44
11-Feb NH 24
22-Feb NV 35

3-Mar AL 53
CA 475
MA 91
MN 77
NC 107
OK 38
TN 67
TX 222
VT 16
VA 95

That's a total of 1344, NH's 24 is only 1.7% of the delegates in the first month.

[Garrett78]

34. You left off South Carolina.

It'll be rough for Sanders after NH.

In terms of delegates, we'll be nearly 2/3rds of the way through after March 17. We may have our nominee at that point.

[George II]

35. South Carolina hasn't formally announced their date yet. There are 10-15 who haven't.

I agree, by March 17 we will have a pretty good idea who the candidate will be, or at least the top two or three. Hopefully many of the candidates will be realistic and drop out by then.

[Garrett78]

36. All signs point to SC's Democratic Primary being February 29.

That's when it's scheduled on every list I've seen, such as this one: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2020-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/amp/

[George II]

30. Well, at least so goes 94.7% white Vermont, anyway.

[George II]

21. 1.3% of all respondents said they will vote for Sanders.

[NewJeffCT]

23. New Hampshire is practically a home state for Sanders

so, him getting 26% when he received over 60% there in the 2016 primaries is not a great sign for him.

Biden will get a bump if he officially announces, and O'Rourke will as well.

I'm the guy that posted that math says that Sanders has a shot at winning the nomination a month back or so. But, him getting 26% in what is almost a home state is not a great sign the week after he announces.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211736440

[George II]

28. It's a very very weak poll, subject to huge inaccuracy. For example:

There were 604 people polled. The % in the OP are based on only 30 people who have decided. That's a statistically useless sampling. Further, of those 30, using the % in the OP, here are the number of people who have decided:

8 for Sanders
7 for Biden
3 for Harris
2 for Warren

10 for all the others.

Those are individual people, not %! So only one person in 604 is separating the top two, and only 6 people in 604 is separating the top four.

Can't see how anyone can get excited over this.

[Dem2]

31. Lol

Early polls are usually pretty lame, but this is ludicrous.

[George II]

25. See post #24.

[JDC]

14. NH and Vermont are a very close community.

not discounting the poll, just saying I was in VT a lot when I lived in NH and felt like I was in my home state often. Others feel that way also, so they might feel more ties to Bernie there than many other state.

All of New England is a tight community, but VT and NH really are sister states imo.

[jalan48]

15. Luv it!!

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. It is still early, but there is something significant to be gleened, with important impliations

Regardless of Sanders currently being identified as an Independent, this poll and others show that he still retains broad support among millions of Democrats. That is not something I simply assumed would be the case before the race for the 2020 nomination took off for real. I thought it was true, but I wasn't sure to what degree his 2016 support was just based on those who wanted someone other than Clinton as our nominee.

Clearly some of his 2016 support came from those voters, but now Sanders has competitors like Warren and Harris and Biden and others who will draw liberal support. Even with that he is holding his own and remains among the top contenders for the nomination.

Bernie Sanders pretty much like every other leading Democrat has his flaws, and we all can differ on how we rank the relative flaws of different candidates in regards to how significant they are. But Sanders support runs deep among Democrats as a whole though it remains to be seen which potential candidates will emerge with the deepest support in the field. Bernie can not be dismissed as a fringe candidate among Democratic voters. Whoever wins the Democratic nomination will need the help of current Sanders supporters (regular voters) to win in in the 2020 general election.

I can't say that I've read more than a fraction of the threads in DU GP-Primaries, but from what I have read I am somewhat positively surprised. I was bracing myself for many to the exchanges in this forum to dive into the sewer, and for it being used as a blatant means to tear down candidates with vile innuendos. I've seen less of that than I expected, given what it has been like on DU for the last couple of years. I am encouraged by that. We have to conduct our debates now with the certainty that we must come together once we have our nominee.

[George II]

24. To put this entire poll into perspective:

There were 604 respondents (almost half of whom are republicans). Only 30 have said they've made up their minds. If you do the math, EIGHT said they'll vote for Sanders, SEVEN said they'll vote for Biden. Sanders is ahead by ONE person.

It's a LANDSLIDE!!!!

[BootinUp]

29. TY :)

[MrsCoffee]

40. BOOOOM!

[RandySF]

27. Biden's not acting like someone anxious to get in

and he shouldn’t unless he’s 100% committed.

[gristy]

39. Has there been discussion regarding ranked voting for the D primaries?

What is the key organization that would need to get behind this and help make it happen?
Trump never would have been nominated if the R's had used ranked voting.
And the best candidate would surely result if the D's used it next year.

https://www.fairvote.org/where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used
Using RCV now:
Basalt, Colorado: Adopted in 2002 and will be used when three or more candidates run for mayor.
Berkeley, California: Adopted in 2004 and has been used since 2010 to elect the mayor, city council and city auditor
Cambridge, Massachusetts: In use since the 1940s in multi-winner RCV form for the nine seat city council and six seat school board elected citywide
Carbondale, Colorado: Adopted in 2002 for mayor when there are three or more candidates
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2009, in elections for 22 city offices, including mayor and city council in single winner elections and some multi-winner park board seats
Oakland, California: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2010 for a total of 18 city offices, including mayor and city council
Portland, Maine: Adopted in 2010 and used since 2011 for electing mayor
Maine: Adopted in 2016 and first used in June 2018 for all state and federal primary elections
San Francisco, California: Adopted in 2002 and used since 2004 to elect the mayor, city attorney, Board of Supervisors and five additional citywide offices
San Leandro, California: Adopted as option in 2000 charter amendment and used since 2010 to elect the mayor and city council
Santa Fe, New Mexico: Adopted in 2008 and used since March 2018 for mayor, city council, and municipal judge
St. Paul, Minnesota: Adopted in 2009, used since 2011 to elect the mayor and city council
Takoma Park, Maryland: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2007 in all elections for mayor and city council
Telluride, Colorado: Adopted in 2008 and used since 2011 to elect the mayor when three candidates run, as in 2011 and 2015