Clinton: Polls Showing Sanders Could Beat Trump "Mean Nothing To Me"

[IceSpear]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

[Lyin' Steve]

Hillary has stopped playing games with Sanders.  She's frustrated at the fact that Sanders' numbers aren't falling off even though he lacks a path to victory.  Further, she wants him and his supporters to know that he won't be the nominee, and that they better get on board.

I'm, frankly, fine with her new tone.  Being gentle with Sanders and his supporters has only emboldened them to push back against her candidacy.  It's time to force them to confront reality.

The reality that they won't be voting for her, because rather than make any attempt to reach out, negotiate, or otherwise act like a politician, she's instead demanding to be crowned?

Sanders supporters have given up trying to get him elected and now all they want is for Hillary to kiss their ass and validate their delusions for a few weeks until Sanders drops out.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

That's some serious cherry-picking. The last 2 have her doing 1 and 4 points better. The previous 2 have Obama doing 9 and 6 points better. The average of the May polls was a slight Obama advantage. There were some polls where she did better, and some where Obama did better, which is very different from now, where every poll shows Bernie doing better.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

[IceSpear]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

That's some serious cherry-picking. The last 2 have her doing 1 and 4 points better. The previous 2 have Obama doing 9 and 6 points better. The average of the May polls was a slight Obama advantage.

Dude, you actually have to look at the field dates. Maybe Obama was doing better in early May, who cares? My point is that she was objectively doing better in mid to late May and early June, as the totality of the sparse national polls (and the much more abundant state polls) showed.

[Pyro]

Odysseus would be envious of Clinton's monstrous hubris.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

That's some serious cherry-picking. The last 2 have her doing 1 and 4 points better. The previous 2 have Obama doing 9 and 6 points better. The average of the May polls was a slight Obama advantage. There were some polls where she did better, and some where Obama did better, which is very different from now, where every poll shows Bernie doing better.

Even if we indulge you and accept your comically inaccurate premise, Obama had gone through Wright and bitter/cling and proven his mettle as a GE candidate.
Sanders hasn't faced 1$ worth of negative ads from both sides about how he wants to raise your taxes, take away your health care plan and the fact that he is an admirer of Fidel Castro.

P.S. And don't start me with your wild fantasies about David Brock and the "16 NEGATIVE STORIES PUBLISHED BY WASHINGTON POST".  

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

That's some serious cherry-picking. The last 2 have her doing 1 and 4 points better. The previous 2 have Obama doing 9 and 6 points better. The average of the May polls was a slight Obama advantage.

Dude, you actually have to look at the field dates. Maybe Obama was doing better in early May, who cares? My point is that she was objectively doing better in mid to late May and early June, as the totality of the sparse national polls (and the much more abundant state polls) showed.

It really varied poll to poll who did better. It's really dishonest to claim that there was much difference once averaged.

[IceSpear]

Hillary admittedly has a point. She's been the subject of attacks from the national GOP and conservative groups for almost 25 straight years without cease. Bernie has had a few afterthought swipes from commentators and candidates about being an avowed socialist. There woud be tremendous opportunity, material and resources to drive his negatives way up if the GOP needed to, but it knows it won't.

All it would take is a few months of truth telling and education on socialism  and Sanders would be McGovern 2.0

Hes 74 years old and never had a chance in hell to beat Hillary .  

If Sanders was nominated he might just be the weakest and most humiliating candidate the democratic party has ever put up.  James Cox and George McClellan are the only two I can think of who might be weaker.  Cox did a perfectly reasonable job in his election and wasn't a damaging candidate, he was just kind of an inexperienced blank slate and got absolutely obliterated because the country was doing so well and nobody wanted to switch parties.  McClellan is one of the worst generals in American history, but he was hurt more by the asinine anti-war platform the democratic party put up and the withdrawal of John C. Frémont than by any ineptitudes of his own.  McGovern was a miserable radical as well, and his "just give everyone $1000" proposal sounded even more flatly ridiculous than Sanders' ideas, but he never truly gave away his dignity, embraced the label of an extremist, inspired and defended civil disorder in his name, or attacked his own party the way Sanders has, although the party absolutely despised him afterwards anyway for being such a bumblef**k.

On another note I'm happy to see Clinton finally getting more aggressive just in general.  She's been so uncharacteristically nice and inclusive this entire election.  I want to see a 3 AM phone call commercial and her deputies blitzing the media with Reverend Wright and cokehead Obama like they did in 2008.  Take your damn gloves off already girl!

She has no need to take the gloves off because she's never really been in much danger. If she's trailing Trump in the fall, get ready for the fireworks.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hillary lied about there being no negative ads against Bernie.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/22/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-wrong-negative-ads-bernie-sanders/

[Hermit For Peace]

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

What's she offering Bernie's supporters?

NOT Trump!

[Hermit For Peace]

Odysseus would be envious of Clinton's monstrous hubris.

If Trump said it, or another man said it, it would be of slight interest. But Hillary has "monstrous hubris" for speaking her truth.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

Um, pardon me, but Hillary's eventual nomination to State was not public knowledge in the April before the election.

There very well could be some kind of offers extended. But let's keep it in perspective a bit: Hillary Clinton was a serious candidate with gravitas who kept the race close through almost the entirety of the 2008 primaries. Any other candidate in Bernie's position would have dropped out two months ago. He has been beaten.

[IceSpear]

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

Are you implying Hillary would not have supported Obama if he didn't offer her a cabinet position?

I mean, the DNC and Democratic establishment treated Hillary and her supporters far worse in 2008 than they're treating Bernie and his supporters now, despite the fact that she performed far better than he did. People were constantly calling for her to drop out in the name of "party unity", very few people have called on Sanders to do so. Her supporters were constantly slandered as racists. They were also given no concessions in the platform and/or process which Sanders is almost certain to get, they were simply told to shut up and get in line.

So really, if anything, Hillary and the DNC have been relatively magnanimous and exceedingly kind.

[Lyin' Steve]

Hillary lied about there being no negative ads against Bernie.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/22/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-wrong-negative-ads-bernie-sanders/

lol @ that article.  So Clinton says he's never had an ad run against him and your response is "yes he has, Martin O'Malley's super PAC ran an ad against him once and David Brock made some YouTube videos!"  I guess you've got her beat, Sanders really has gone through the gauntlet!

Hillary admittedly has a point. She's been the subject of attacks from the national GOP and conservative groups for almost 25 straight years without cease. Bernie has had a few afterthought swipes from commentators and candidates about being an avowed socialist. There woud be tremendous opportunity, material and resources to drive his negatives way up if the GOP needed to, but it knows it won't.

All it would take is a few months of truth telling and education on socialism  and Sanders would be McGovern 2.0

Hes 74 years old and never had a chance in hell to beat Hillary .  

If Sanders was nominated he might just be the weakest and most humiliating candidate the democratic party has ever put up.  James Cox and George McClellan are the only two I can think of who might be weaker.  Cox did a perfectly reasonable job in his election and wasn't a damaging candidate, he was just kind of an inexperienced blank slate and got absolutely obliterated because the country was doing so well and nobody wanted to switch parties.  McClellan is one of the worst generals in American history, but he was hurt more by the asinine anti-war platform the democratic party put up and the withdrawal of John C. Frémont than by any ineptitudes of his own.  McGovern was a miserable radical as well, and his "just give everyone $1000" proposal sounded even more flatly ridiculous than Sanders' ideas, but he never truly gave away his dignity, embraced the label of an extremist, inspired and defended civil disorder in his name, or attacked his own party the way Sanders has, although the party absolutely despised him afterwards anyway for being such a bumblef**k.

On another note I'm happy to see Clinton finally getting more aggressive just in general.  She's been so uncharacteristically nice and inclusive this entire election.  I want to see a 3 AM phone call commercial and her deputies blitzing the media with Reverend Wright and cokehead Obama like they did in 2008.  Take your damn gloves off already girl!

She has no need to take the gloves off because she's never really been in much danger. If she's trailing Trump in the fall, get ready for the fireworks.

Oh I know, I'm not saying she needs to right now.  Just that I want to see it.  I'm hungry for some good old fashioned Clinton war games, the inclusive mother-bird Hillary is boring.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Jfern reminds me of those Japanese soldiers in the Pacific that continued to fight 20 years after WWII had ended.

[Lyin' Steve]

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

Are you implying Hillary would not have supported Obama if he didn't offer her a cabinet position?

I mean, the DNC and Democratic establishment treated Hillary and her supporters far worse in 2008 than they're treating Bernie and his supporters now, despite the fact that she performed far better than he did. People were constantly calling for her to drop out in the name of "party unity", very few people have called on Sanders to do so. Her supporters were constantly slandered as racists. They were also given no concessions in the platform and/or process which Sanders is almost certain to get, they were simply told to shut up and get in line.

So really, if anything, Hillary and the DNC have been relatively magnanimous and exceedingly kind.

As they should have.  This is presidential politics.  If you lose, you get nothing, go home.  Nobody is entitled to platform/process concessions or respect and deference just because they came in second place.

[Lyin' Steve]

Jfern reminds me of those Japanese soldiers in the Pacific that continued to fight 20 years after WWII had ended.

I've never heard of this, got a link?
I know there was that submarine commander who was told to go on a suicide mission in England the day before the war ended and instead hid under water for two months to go try to defect to Argentina, and when he came up he still thought the war was on.  There were also some Nazis trying to set up a secret base in the arctic who lost radio contact, didn't know the war had ended, and were discovered by seal hunters six months after the war ended.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So really, if anything, Hillary and the DNC have been relatively magnanimous and exceedingly kind.

How can you be that tone deaf?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Oh I know, I'm not saying she needs to right now.  Just that I want to see it.  I'm hungry for some good old fashioned Clinton war games, the inclusive mother-bird Hillary is boring.

Lately I've been wondering what the fallout would be if she literally said "f-ck you" to Trump's face. Honestly, I see few downsides.

Imagine if, at the first debate, Trump straight-up calls her an enabler and woman-hater for being angry at her husband's mistresses.

"I've only said this to one other person: my husband. It was in a moment of real anguish. I cannot explain the feelings of betrayal and anger I felt when I found out my husband had been cheating on me and disrespecting me the way he was. I hope no one has to feel that, but those women who have sadly been in the same situation know exactly what I mean. And for you, Donald Trump, womanizer extraordinaire, to stand here and lecture me for simply having these feelings...  I'll say it again: F-ck you. You would be an insult to the office of the presidency."

BOOM.

One can dream.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Jfern reminds me of those Japanese soldiers in the Pacific that continued to fight 20 years after WWII had ended.

I've never heard of this, got a link?
I know there was that submarine commander who was told to go on a suicide mission in England the day before the war ended and instead hid under water for two months to go try to defect to Argentina, and when he came up he still thought the war was on.  There were also some Nazis trying to set up a secret base in the arctic who lost radio contact, didn't know the war had ended, and were discovered by seal hunters six months after the war ended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout

So really, if anything, Hillary and the DNC have been relatively magnanimous and exceedingly kind.

How can you be that tone deaf?

In your obsessed mind Hillary could say that the sun will rise from the east and you would find it tone-deaf.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Oh I know, I'm not saying she needs to right now.  Just that I want to see it.  I'm hungry for some good old fashioned Clinton war games, the inclusive mother-bird Hillary is boring.

Lately I've been wondering what the fallout would be if she literally said "f-ck you" to Trump's face. Honestly, I see few downsides.

Imagine if, at the first debate, Trump straight-up calls her an enabler and woman-hater for being angry at her husband's mistresses.

"I've only said this to one other person: my husband. It was in a moment of real anguish. I cannot explain the feelings of betrayal and anger I felt when I found out my husband had been cheating on me and disrespecting me the way he was. I hope no one has to feel that, but those women who have sadly been in the same situation know exactly what I mean. And for you, Donald Trump, womanizer extraordinaire, to stand here and lecture me for simply having these feelings...  I'll say it again: F-ck you. You would be an insult to the office of the presidency."

BOOM.

One can dream.

I think we've seen enough of crazy angry Hillary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC4Pvm6Oj4A

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Oh I know, I'm not saying she needs to right now.  Just that I want to see it.  I'm hungry for some good old fashioned Clinton war games, the inclusive mother-bird Hillary is boring.

Lately I've been wondering what the fallout would be if she literally said "f-ck you" to Trump's face. Honestly, I see few downsides.

Imagine if, at the first debate, Trump straight-up calls her an enabler and woman-hater for being angry at her husband's mistresses.

"I've only said this to one other person: my husband. It was in a moment of real anguish. I cannot explain the feelings of betrayal and anger I felt when I found out my husband had been cheating on me and disrespecting me the way he was. I hope no one has to feel that, but those women who have sadly been in the same situation know exactly what I mean. And for you, Donald Trump, womanizer extraordinaire, to stand here and lecture me for simply having these feelings...  I'll say it again: F-ck you. You would be an insult to the office of the presidency."

BOOM.

One can dream.

I think we've seen enough of crazy angry Hillary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC4Pvm6Oj4A

You are this dopey?

[Ronnie]

Hillary has stopped playing games with Sanders.  She's frustrated at the fact that Sanders' numbers aren't falling off even though he lacks a path to victory.  Further, she wants him and his supporters to know that he won't be the nominee, and that they better get on board.

I'm, frankly, fine with her new tone.  Being gentle with Sanders and his supporters has only emboldened them to push back against her candidacy.  It's time to force them to confront reality.

The reality that they won't be voting for her, because rather than make any attempt to reach out, negotiate, or otherwise act like a politician, she's instead demanding to be crowned?

She already said that she wants to sit down and negotiate with Sanders on the platform.

[IceSpear]

Clinton herself was polling better than Obama after it was obvious that she lost the nomination in 2008 and Republicans stopped attacking her.

No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Democratic_nominee_vs._Republican_nominee_2

The final two polls in that link both show her doing better. And that also overlaps with the mid May/late May/early June state polls I linked to that showed her doing better.

Sorry jfern, she was objectively polling better in the final few weeks of the race.

That's some serious cherry-picking. The last 2 have her doing 1 and 4 points better. The previous 2 have Obama doing 9 and 6 points better. The average of the May polls was a slight Obama advantage.

Dude, you actually have to look at the field dates. Maybe Obama was doing better in early May, who cares? My point is that she was objectively doing better in mid to late May and early June, as the totality of the sparse national polls (and the much more abundant state polls) showed.

It really varied poll to poll who did better. It's really dishonest to claim that there was much difference once averaged.

Okay, I guess I have to do this...

Let's look at polls conducted in the final 2 weeks of the race, and who performed better. The only two national polls had her doing 4 points and 1 point better, but there was an abundance of state polls during this time.

State polls:
ME: Tie
NY: C+1
OH: C+8
CO: O+9
FL: C+16
MO: C+5
NC: C+14
UT: O+10
VA: O+1
CA: C+5
FL: C+11
NV: C+11
OH: C+11
PA: C+7
MS: O+4
CT: O+14
NH: C+5
PA: C+9
AZ: O+4
CA: O+4
NE: O+2
NV: C+10
MT: O+3
MN: Tie
KY: C+34
MS: O+4
CA: Tie
NY: C+11
WA: O+1
LA: C+2
MA: C+17
CT: C+3


Here it is in map form:

Looks pretty decisive to me. The person performing far better in Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Nevada, New Hampshire, and North Carolina vs. the person performing far better in Colorado and a hair better in Virginia. Hmm...who was more electable?!