Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 24, 2019, 03:07:27 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls (Moderators: AndrewTX, Likely Voter)
  CA-NBC/WSJ: Clinton +2
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print
Author Topic: CA-NBC/WSJ: Clinton +2  (Read 6921 times)
Ebsy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: June 01, 2016, 07:09:19 pm »

Sanders desperately needs symbolic victories because he can't win actual ones.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,445
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: June 01, 2016, 07:12:58 pm »

He didn't compete in Texas as well because there were a ton of other states voting, including some much more favorable and it costs a ton of money to compete in the air wars in Texas.

Let's dispel with the notion that Sanders didn't compete in Texas. He spent time and money there and withdrew only after he saw that he wasn't making any progress.

Or we could stop thinking about Hispanics as a monolithic group and accept that differences exist between states and areas.

Again, Clinton has carried Hispanics in every state but Illinois. From Connecticut to Florida and from Virginia to Arizona.
I see many saying that California's Hispanics might be more young and that's why it's plausible Sanders winning them. But young Latinos also supported Obama in 2008, yet still Clinton won them overall in California 67-32. I can believe that Sanders will overperform Obama but not by THAT much.

Also according to the 2008 primary exit poll California isn't an especially young state. The 18-29 voters were 16% of the electorate, just about the same as the entire US.
Logged
For Trump everything, for immigrants the law
xingkerui
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.63, S: -6.13

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: June 01, 2016, 07:17:42 pm »

Sanders desperately needs symbolic victories because he can't win actual ones.

The states of AK, HI, WA, OR, ID, UT, WY, CO, NE, KS, OK, MN, WI, MI, IN, WV, RI, VT, NH, and ME all say hi. I mean, yeah, he's not winning the nomination, and narrowly winning CA wouldn't change that, but let's not pretend that Sanders has done nothing.
Logged
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,418
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: June 01, 2016, 07:29:00 pm »

Clinton winning by 2% would gain her 242 delegates and she needs 257 to reach 2026, which is the magic number in pledged delegates. Once that number is reached, the race is officially done. I cannot see how Sanders continues to campaign when all the contests are up.
Logged
psychprofessor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,076


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: June 01, 2016, 07:29:52 pm »

Sanders desperately needs symbolic victories because he can't win actual ones.

The states of AK, HI, WA, OR, ID, UT, WY, CO, NE, KS, OK, MN, WI, MI, IN, WV, RI, VT, NH, and ME all say hi. I mean, yeah, he's not winning the nomination, and narrowly winning CA wouldn't change that, but let's not pretend that Sanders has done nothing.

Do you mind telling Bernie and Jeff Weaver this?
Logged
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42,368
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: June 01, 2016, 07:52:24 pm »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.
Logged
psychprofessor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,076


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: June 01, 2016, 08:05:31 pm »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: June 01, 2016, 08:20:14 pm »

He didn't compete in Texas as well because there were a ton of other states voting, including some much more favorable and it costs a ton of money to compete in the air wars in Texas.

Let's dispel with the notion that Sanders didn't compete in Texas. He spent time and money there and withdrew only after he saw that he wasn't making any progress.

Or we could stop thinking about Hispanics as a monolithic group and accept that differences exist between states and areas.

Again, Clinton has carried Hispanics in every state but Illinois. From Connecticut to Florida and from Virginia to Arizona.
I see many saying that California's Hispanics might be more young and that's why it's plausible Sanders winning them. But young Latinos also supported Obama in 2008, yet still Clinton won them overall in California 67-32. I can believe that Sanders will overperform Obama but not by THAT much.

Also according to the 2008 primary exit poll California isn't an especially young state. The 18-29 voters were 16% of the electorate, just about the same as the entire US.



Not True... Bernie also won the Latino vote in Oregon, despite the lack of exit polls.

Although we don't yet have many county precinct returns available from Oregon, he won all 30%+ Latino counties, two of which an overwhelming majority of Anglos vote Republican (Malheur & Umatilla Counties). Additionally, precinct level results from Hood River County show that Bernie won 57-43 in 40%+ Latino precincts in more rural parts of the state. Additionally, the largest urban area (Marion Co.) with a large 25%+ Latino population, where again many Anglos vote Republican Bernie won 53-47%.

Results from the "Beauty Contest" in Washington State, with much lower voter turnout levels might be harder to discern, however we see similar results from >40% Latino Counties that are heavily Republican where Hillary dramatically underperformed versus her '08 results.

West Coast is quite a bit different from Arizona, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Connecticut, and California is even a totally different beast altogether.






Logged
Fusionmunster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,490


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: June 01, 2016, 08:41:05 pm »

If anyones interested, the RCP for California in 2008. The only pollster who was close was........SurveyUSA and Mason-Dixon.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ca/california_democratic_primary-259.html
Logged
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42,368
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: June 01, 2016, 08:51:02 pm »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.

So what? The man is more beloved than any other politician in the state and it's not even close. There is zero chance of him ever losing an election in Vermont.  You did see him deny Clinton viability there, right?
Logged
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42,368
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: June 01, 2016, 08:58:15 pm »

He didn't compete in Texas as well because there were a ton of other states voting, including some much more favorable and it costs a ton of money to compete in the air wars in Texas.

Let's dispel with the notion that Sanders didn't compete in Texas. He spent time and money there and withdrew only after he saw that he wasn't making any progress.

Or we could stop thinking about Hispanics as a monolithic group and accept that differences exist between states and areas.

Again, Clinton has carried Hispanics in every state but Illinois. From Connecticut to Florida and from Virginia to Arizona.
I see many saying that California's Hispanics might be more young and that's why it's plausible Sanders winning them. But young Latinos also supported Obama in 2008, yet still Clinton won them overall in California 67-32. I can believe that Sanders will overperform Obama but not by THAT much.

Also according to the 2008 primary exit poll California isn't an especially young state. The 18-29 voters were 16% of the electorate, just about the same as the entire US.



Not True... Bernie also won the Latino vote in Oregon, despite the lack of exit polls.

Although we don't yet have many county precinct returns available from Oregon, he won all 30%+ Latino counties, two of which an overwhelming majority of Anglos vote Republican (Malheur & Umatilla Counties). Additionally, precinct level results from Hood River County show that Bernie won 57-43 in 40%+ Latino precincts in more rural parts of the state. Additionally, the largest urban area (Marion Co.) with a large 25%+ Latino population, where again many Anglos vote Republican Bernie won 53-47%.

Results from the "Beauty Contest" in Washington State, with much lower voter turnout levels might be harder to discern, however we see similar results from >40% Latino Counties that are heavily Republican where Hillary dramatically underperformed versus her '08 results.

West Coast is quite a bit different from Arizona, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Connecticut, and California is even a totally different beast altogether.

He probably won the hispanic vote in Wisconsin as well.
Logged
○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 45,652


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: June 01, 2016, 09:00:17 pm »

Among those who already voted, Clinton leads 58 to 41.

Hillary always does better with early voters. Even in Oregon, where it was all by mail.

Yeah but 41% of primary goers in 2008 voted early. If she wins early votes by 17 points and breaks even on election day, she wins.

Who says she breaks even on election day? Also, we might not know who wins for a while; there could be a lot of provisional votes, and those will go strongly for Bernie.
Logged
Fusionmunster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,490


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: June 01, 2016, 09:05:11 pm »
« Edited: June 01, 2016, 09:07:12 pm by Fusionmunster »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.

So what? The man is more beloved than any other politician in the state and it's not even close. There is zero chance of him ever losing an election in Vermont.  You did see him deny Clinton viability there, right?

It wouldnt be hard to make Sanders remaining years in the Senate miserable you know. Chairmanships and committees? Nope, all gone. Anybit of power and influence hes built up in this party all these years can be easily taken away.
Logged
Fusionmunster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,490


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: June 01, 2016, 09:08:37 pm »

Among those who already voted, Clinton leads 58 to 41.

Hillary always does better with early voters. Even in Oregon, where it was all by mail.

Yeah but 41% of primary goers in 2008 voted early. If she wins early votes by 17 points and breaks even on election day, she wins.

Who says she breaks even on election day? Also, we might not know who wins for a while; there could be a lot of provisional votes, and those will go strongly for Bernie.

Or polling could be like 2008 and SUSA are the only ones who know what there doing. Guess we'll find out June 7th.
Logged
dspNY
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,583
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: June 01, 2016, 09:10:30 pm »

Among those who already voted, Clinton leads 58 to 41.

Hillary always does better with early voters. Even in Oregon, where it was all by mail.

Yeah but 41% of primary goers in 2008 voted early. If she wins early votes by 17 points and breaks even on election day, she wins.

Who says she breaks even on election day? Also, we might not know who wins for a while; there could be a lot of provisional votes, and those will go strongly for Bernie.

If she wins 60% of the early VBM by 17 she would have to lose the remaining 40% who vote on Election Day by 22-23 pts or more to lose the state
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,464


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: June 01, 2016, 09:10:41 pm »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: June 01, 2016, 09:12:17 pm »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?
Logged
Fusionmunster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,490


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: June 01, 2016, 09:13:53 pm »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

Hes the guy the Clinton camp pays to rig the machines.
Logged
This account no longer in use.
cxs018
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,352


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: June 01, 2016, 09:45:07 pm »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.

So what? The man is more beloved than any other politician in the state and it's not even close. There is zero chance of him ever losing an election in Vermont.  You did see him deny Clinton viability there, right?

It wouldnt be hard to make Sanders remaining years in the Senate miserable you know. Chairmanships and committees? Nope, all gone. Anybit of power and influence hes built up in this party all these years can be easily taken away.

That wouldn't end well, you know. It'd just make the Sandernistas' claims about the establishment even more believable. If anything, it'd be completely counterproductive.
Logged
Congressman Dwarven Dragon
Wulfric
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,221
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: June 01, 2016, 11:53:40 pm »

Sanders needs to consider this: if he damages the Democratic party by continuing his campaign, I wouldn't be shocked to see someone challenge him in 2018.

And win like 5% of the vote.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure. If Sanders does damage to Clinton and somehow hands Trump the presidency, I think a lot of Democrats would be on board behind the scenes to take out Bernie in Vermont.

So what? The man is more beloved than any other politician in the state and it's not even close. There is zero chance of him ever losing an election in Vermont.  You did see him deny Clinton viability there, right?

It wouldnt be hard to make Sanders remaining years in the Senate miserable you know. Chairmanships and committees? Nope, all gone. Anybit of power and influence hes built up in this party all these years can be easily taken away.

That wouldn't end well, you know. It'd just make the Sandernistas' claims about the establishment even more believable. If anything, it'd be completely counterproductive.

The socialization of the Democratic party is happening no matter what. Whether Senate Dems welcome Bernie back with open arms or very begrudgingly won't matter. Whoever is the revolution candidate next time will be favored to win the nomination.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,464


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: June 02, 2016, 12:40:40 am »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

Img


I basically agree with this map made by Holmes in another thread. I would only disagree with Napa County. As for specific counties, I see San Francisco going to Sanders by about 5-10 points, with Alameda and Santa Clara going for Clinton by similar margins. San Mateo, Marin and Contra Costa will be closer but should be Clinton wins. The San Joaquin Valley will also go for Clinton but not by 2008 margins but still solid margins in Fresno and Kern. Sacramento will be close but I still see Clinton winning. The Sacramento Valley should be won by Sanders but not by huge margins (with the exception of Butte and Yolo which should be blowouts). Sanders wins the mountains and north coast by comfortable margins.

The central coast is a little tough. I'm pretty torn on Monterey County but in any case it should be close. Santa Cruz is an obvious Sanders win along with San Luis Obispo. He should also win Santa Barbara but it will be close. Clinton wins Ventura county by about a 3-7 point margin. Los Angeles should be about 10-15 points. Orange should be about 5-10 points and San Diego should be about 3-7 points. The Inland Empire I also see at about a 5-10 point Clinton margin. Overall I am thinking Clinton by about 5-10 though looking at the latest Field poll, closer to 5 might be a safer bet. I trust the Field poll a lot and if they are finding a close race, then maybe there is something to it.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,464


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: June 02, 2016, 12:44:20 am »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

Hes the guy the Clinton camp pays to rig the machines.

Oh, come on. You really think I am a Hillary hack? I actually hope she loses in 2020 after the Republicans nominate someone decent. Of course that's a lot to ask for. I am sorry I don't want to join in your socialist revolution lol.
Logged
Fusionmunster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,490


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: June 02, 2016, 06:16:54 am »

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

Hes the guy the Clinton camp pays to rig the machines.

Oh, come on. You really think I am a Hillary hack? I actually hope she loses in 2020 after the Republicans nominate someone decent. Of course that's a lot to ask for. I am sorry I don't want to join in your socialist revolution lol.

It was my poor attempt at humor, I am a Clinton supporter making a joke about how Bernie supporters claim everything is rigged.
Logged
bilaps
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 618
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: June 02, 2016, 06:35:32 am »

^^ Sanders didn't compete in Texas, and there was legitimate voter disenfranchisement in Arizona.

What's voter disenfranchisement has to do with Sanders' poor performance among Hispanics?
If anything it's Clinton who should complain.
And Sanders lost Hispanics in a landslide even where he competed (Florida, New York).
He only won them in Illinois because of Rham's antagonism with the community.

Both NY & FL were closed primaries, I do think the surge in younger voters helps Sanders.

And if they were open Sanders would have won them, huh?
The level of delusion runs strong among Berniebots.

if anyoune should ever be called a bot that is you
Logged
Dave Leip
leip
Administrator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,317
United States


P P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: June 02, 2016, 07:06:42 am »

New Poll: California President by Marist College on 2016-05-31

Summary:
Clinton:
49%
Sanders:
47%
Other:
1%
Undecided:
3%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC