NBC/WSJ: Clinton leads among "could see yourself supporting"

[Mr. Morden]

This isn't a traditional poll of candidate support.  The exact question is "I’m going to mention a number of people who might consider running for president in 2016. For each one, please tell me, yes or no, whether you could see yourself supporting that person for president in 2016."

yes/no %

Clinton 50/48% for +2%
Webb 9/24% for -15%
Paul 30/47% for -17%
Walker 15/32% for -17%
O'Malley 4/21% for -17%
Warren 22/40% for -18%
Sanders 10/30% for -20%
Rubio 20/43% for -23%
Bush 31/57% for -26%
Christie 27/53% for -26%
Romney 33/60% for -27%
Cruz 17/44% for -27%
Huckabee 25/53% for -28%
Perry 19/52% for -33%

[Beet]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

[Mehmentum]

How the hell is it that 60% of people can't see themselves supporting Romney when he got 47% of the vote 2 years ago?

If this is accurate, its very bad news for the slew of Republicans (Perry, Huckabee Christie, Bush) who already have a majority of Americans against them, especially Bush.

[Kraxner]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

There's an unholy alliance against her from republicans and liberal democrats.  Also liberal democrats are a vocal minority and added with the other half of america its a no brainer why comments about her tend to be negative.

[IceSpear]

Dominating! The only positive score and #over50. You go girl!

How the hell is it that 60% of people can't see themselves supporting Romney when he got 47% of the vote 2 years ago?

They were voting against Obama, not for Romney. It's not like Hillary is going to beat Romney with 60%+. A chunk of those 60% will vote for him if he's the Republican nominee and the only way to stop Hillary. All these people have upside in that sense, even Hillary, though she'd have less than the others of course, since a small amount of those 48% will be people that would begrudgingly vote for her to stop <insert Republican nominee here>.

[IceSpear]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

There's an unholy alliance against her from republicans and liberal democrats.  Also liberal democrats are a vocal minority and added with the other half of america its a no brainer why comments about her tend to be negative.

It's actually not because of liberal Democrats. Liberal Democrats give Hillary 60-70% support in nearly every poll I've seen. As FiveThirtyEight pointed out, there's actually slightly more opposition to Hillary from the right than from the left (though both are fairly negligible in the big picture).



The real answer to the question is the fact that the internet skews young, white, and male. Not exactly Hillary's base of support, which tends to be older and female. Obviously all Republicans are going to spam hate comments about her, that's expected. Same for the libertarians. But the internet Democratic contingent is mostly made up of extremely liberal/leftist young white males who supported Obama in '08 and are pining for Warren/Sanders now, so they have no motivation to make positive comments about Hillary. But they'll fall in line once Hillary wins the nomination. A lot of them talked about how they wouldn't support "the sellout neoliberal" Obama in '12, only to fall in line in the end.

This also explains why the internet was filled with endless Ron Paul spam in 2008/2012. Young white male Republicans will likely be libertarian leaning and like Paul, and of course many are also pure libertarians and would like Paul even more. The extremely liberal young white male Democratic contingent would also be sympathetic towards Paul for his willingness to "take on the system" (which would also explain the support for Ron/Rand on a firmly center-left forum like Atlas). All of this combines to make a Ron Paul internet love orgy which is not at all representative of the general population. I remember I had to stop reading news article comments during the 2012 Republican primary because they were almost always Ron Paul spam. I wonder if that will happen again this time if Rand runs. He doesn't seem to inspire the same fanatical devotion as his father though.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Outside of older white women, a demographic that isn't prone to biovating on the internet, very few people are enthusiastic about Clinton. While I disagree with most of your political analysis, I think that your perception of the Clinton candidacy is astute: she doesn't excite passion or enthusiasm in her base. Democrats have rallied around her because she's "inevitable", not because they admire her. If you're a partisan Democrat, you should be worried about this. Democrats depend on "low turnout" demographics to win elections. The Clinton campaign needs to inspire the Obama coalition in 2016 and I'm not convinced that the hackish Clintonite campaign apparatus is up for this challenge.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty partisan and I have no interest in campaigning for Clinton in 2016 + I'm considering casting a "conscience" vote for a third party candidate if Clinton is the nominee.

[IceSpear]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Outside of older white women, a demographic that isn't prone to biovating on the internet, very few people are enthusiastic about Clinton. While I disagree with most of your political analysis, I think that your perception of the Clinton candidacy is astute: she doesn't excite passion or enthusiasm in her base. Democrats have rallied around her because she's "inevitable", not because they admire her. If you're a partisan Democrat, you should be worried about this. Democrats depend on "low turnout" demographics to win elections. The Clinton campaign needs to inspire the Obama coalition in 2016 and I'm not convinced that the hackish Clintonite campaign apparatus is up for this challenge.

Nonsense. Poll after poll shows Hillary is nearly universally liked and admired among the Democratic base. When it comes to Democrats on the internet your characterization may be accurate, but the internet isn't representative of the population at large. If it was, Ron Paul would be president/dictator for life.

[IceSpear]

These were two headlines based on this poll. Really media?

NBC: "Call Hillary Clinton the early presidential frontrunner - but barely"
Politico: "Voters cool to a Hillary Clinton campaign"

[HAnnA MArin County]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Are you new here? Lol there's more Hillary hatred here than on Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Michael Savage and Daily Kos/MSNBC combined on a slow news day! But you are correct regarding your Washington Post comment. Sad to see more venom coming from the left than the right about her. The left hates her because of one single vote that she took over a decade ago and the right hates her because they know she's going to win since a) they can't claim that she's a Muslim who was born in Kenya and b) even the teabagger-controlled House couldn't find "evidence" to destroy her regarding Benghazi. Time to start digging back through the old faux scandals that no one is going to care about in 2016.

Most people who support Hillary work for a living, so they don't have time to spend trolling about her on the Internet about how she's a cold, conniving, calculating, neoconservative, warmongering, corporatist, racist bitch. Those comments usually come from people who have nothing better to do than trash her, many of whom are probably the same people who post nonstop on Topix.

[Kraxner]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Are you new here? Lol there's more Hillary hatred here than on Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Michael Savage and Daily Kos/MSNBC combined on a slow news day! But you are correct regarding your Washington Post comment. Sad to see more venom coming from the left than the right about her. The left hates her because of one single vote that she took over a decade ago and the right hates her because they know she's going to win since a) they can't claim that she's a Muslim who was born in Kenya and b) even the teabagger-controlled House couldn't find "evidence" to destroy her regarding Benghazi. Time to start digging back through the old faux scandals that no one is going to care about in 2016.

Most people who support Hillary work for a living, so they don't have time to spend trolling about her on the Internet about how she's a cold, conniving, calculating, neoconservative, warmongering, corporatist, racist bitch. Those comments usually come from people who have nothing better to do than trash her, many of whom are probably the same people who post nonstop on Topix.

It's funny how six years after the primary, most democrats thought obama won that by a landslide when Hillary actually won the popular vote.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2008&f=0&off=0&elect=1

[Mehmentum]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Are you new here? Lol there's more Hillary hatred here than on Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Michael Savage and Daily Kos/MSNBC combined on a slow news day! But you are correct regarding your Washington Post comment. Sad to see more venom coming from the left than the right about her. The left hates her because of one single vote that she took over a decade ago and the right hates her because they know she's going to win since a) they can't claim that she's a Muslim who was born in Kenya and b) even the teabagger-controlled House couldn't find "evidence" to destroy her regarding Benghazi. Time to start digging back through the old faux scandals that no one is going to care about in 2016.

Most people who support Hillary work for a living, so they don't have time to spend trolling about her on the Internet about how she's a cold, conniving, calculating, neoconservative, warmongering, corporatist, racist bitch. Those comments usually come from people who have nothing better to do than trash her, many of whom are probably the same people who post nonstop on Topix.

It's funny how six years after the primary, most democrats thought obama won that by a landslide when Hillary actually won the popular vote.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2008&f=0&off=0&elect=1

Yep, Obama won because of superior organization in the Caucuses.

[IceSpear]

The only thing I don't get about Clinton is how she polls well but whenever her name comes up anywhere on the Internet, sentiment is almost universally negative. Atlas is probably the most pro-Clinton place on the Internet. Once, I remember distinctly scrolling through about 10 pages of Washingtonpost.com comments just to find one positive comment about Clinton, and the Washingtonpost.com comment section is generally center-left.

Are you new here? Lol there's more Hillary hatred here than on Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Michael Savage and Daily Kos/MSNBC combined on a slow news day! But you are correct regarding your Washington Post comment. Sad to see more venom coming from the left than the right about her. The left hates her because of one single vote that she took over a decade ago and the right hates her because they know she's going to win since a) they can't claim that she's a Muslim who was born in Kenya and b) even the teabagger-controlled House couldn't find "evidence" to destroy her regarding Benghazi. Time to start digging back through the old faux scandals that no one is going to care about in 2016.

Most people who support Hillary work for a living, so they don't have time to spend trolling about her on the Internet about how she's a cold, conniving, calculating, neoconservative, warmongering, corporatist, racist bitch. Those comments usually come from people who have nothing better to do than trash her, many of whom are probably the same people who post nonstop on Topix.

It's funny how six years after the primary, most democrats thought obama won that by a landslide when Hillary actually won the popular vote.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2008&f=0&off=0&elect=1

Yep, Obama won because of superior organization in the Caucuses.

Yeah, the "Obama DEMOLISHED Hillary so ____ can too!" revisionism is quite amusing. More like Hillary's strongest possible opponent barely beat her by the skin of his teeth back when her favorability numbers were far lower than now because her campaign was incompetent enough to ignore the caucus states. Clearly a scenario which can be easily replicated this cycle...