How would have Sanders fared in the G.E.? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 09:36:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  How would have Sanders fared in the G.E.? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How would have Sanders fared in the G.E.?  (Read 1748 times)
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« on: September 25, 2016, 10:36:12 AM »

About the same, though he might be doing a bit better in the Midwest, and a bit worse in the South.
This. I think he'd lose NC, NV and maybe CO, and not come close in AZ/GA/TX, but that he'd be comfortably ahead in PA/MI and close in IA, and leading in OH.

If I had to chose 2 states Sanders would do much better it would be NC & CO. Colorado was a closed primary where Sanders got almost 40% with Super Tuesday where his campaign barely had any traction after the absolute drubbing in SC. That was his best result in the country among registered Democrats by far.

NC was a state with a little more of Black Population % as Virginia & he got around 10% more of the black vote in NC. Sanders won the white vote, swept the millennial vote there to get a strong 42-43-44% in a state which he should have done way worse.

NV was a state where Sanders won the white & hispanic vote according to exit polls (or almost tied) at a very early time with low traction.

In all these states, he would have the support of the Black vote in a GE meaning he only needs to do better among whites & hispanics combined than Clinton (That could come with higher enthusiasm, millennial turnout or general better performance due to his honesty).


@ The Topic - I think he will be comfortably ahead by 7-8% points maybe not the 12-15% odd in some polls. Sanders has a +25 odd Favor-ability Nationality despite plenty of attacks & hit jobs by the Clinton machine & newspapers, Senators, House members. Clinton is at -10 odd. Obama is at like +5 or something maybe despite being attacked as much as Clinton was IMO.

I think it is time to admit that Clinton was a flawed, seemingly dishonest & has way too much baggage. Anyone would do better than her. Sanders has a 87% Favorability in Vermont & the 2nd most popular Senator is at 69%. Nationally he has the best rating too. I think it is fair to say the most popular Senator will have a strong showing.

Remember in the GE, he will have the entire Black vote with him not again him!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2016, 10:38:49 AM »

Bloomberg would have no future. He would never has the 15% consistently to be in the debate. And worse the time at which he would have seriously decided to run would be too late to get into the ballot in some states. He would have given up.

Bloomberg has no campaign, no infra, no DNC or RNC to build a ground game. He would be doing way worse than Nader. I don't think he would be doing even 0.5%. He may take some votes from the RNC but Democrats would back Sanders considering Social Issues & the Supreme Court as Bloomberg certainly is a spoiler
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 13 queries.