I don't see the value in polls -- pre-primary -- that gauge candidates against the other party

[Nuclear Unicorn]

Polls that gauge how Democrat A or Democrat B stack-up against Republican X, Y or Z don't strike me as all that valuable at this stage of the game. Those polls really only gauge one thing, Name Recognition.

However, the primaries are the sport of the parties' base, not the general populace. Once the bases have made their decision Name Recognition ceases to be a factor because the resources of the Parties are aligned behind them. Name Recognition becomes moot at that point.

I honestly think it is an over-valued attribute.

[Agnosticsherbet]

1. Living in California makes primaries a useless sport.

Because we do not vote until June, it is quite possible that there will already be a nominee, so California is just a convenient piggy bank.

[Exilednight]

4. We really need to fix the primary calander. My solution is

A rotating system starting with the state with the most delegates and the one with the fewest, then work our way inwards. The following year they go to the back of the line and the next two states meeting those criteria are up.

[Agnosticsherbet]

14. I would like to see all states hold the primaries on the same day.

The system we have gives a huge advantage to candidates with the best ground organization and most money.

[Exilednight]

15. That would give a huge advantage to the candidate

With the most money. Running nationally is very expensive.

[Agnosticsherbet]

16. The existing system already does that. People who don't win one of the early primaries are doomed.

Holding in the end is very expensive.

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. You don't think there's value in knowing which one of our candidates does best in the GE? AFAIC,

that's paramount in making my decision. I know that's not popular thought on Bernie Underground, but in the real world, it's a major consideration.

[Exilednight]

6. I have no faith in those poles. Anyone who wins the

Nod can sweep or be swept.

These polls have no play in reality.

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. Like I said, that seems to be popular thought on BU. Above ground (in the real world), gauging....

public opinion will be a major factor in who's got the "mo". There's a half dozen posts here today bragging about Bernie's momentum in a single state, do you dismiss those as well?

[Exilednight]

11. Yes I do dismiss them. 6 weeks out from the first

Primary is when polls start mattering.

[Tarheel_Dem]

12. Well, alrighty then.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. "You don't think there's value in knowing which one of our candidates does best in the GE?"

No, I don't for the reasons I stated in the OP.

One candidate may have the most name recognition before the primary and thus appear to be the best positioned for the GE but regardless of who wins the primary the full weight of the party will align behind the GE candidate, whomever that may be. At that point name recognition becomes moot.

We could randomly select a candidate from a metropolitan phone book and one we entered the GE phase that name would be one of the 2 most recognized names in America, if not the entire world.

The primaries aren't (well, shouldn't) be about the GE, they should be about what are our values as a party and which candidate best exemplifies those values.

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. The "full weight of the party" will align long before we get to the GE. Your line of thinking just

isn't the thinking of the party loyal. The same arguments have been made in favor of Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, and to a lesser degree about Ralph Nader. I think those of you who argue that it shouldn't be about "name recognition", or "fundraising", etc. have an idealism that doesn't necessarily jive with reality.

Time & time again, we see endorsements of Hillary snarkily dismissed as "WHO"? Or, "why should I care" or "he/she's a one percenter"? But an endorsement by some old 60's throwback, that anybody born since the Vietnam war probably won't even know, warrants dozens of recs? This is not minimize Sanders' appeal to a certain demographic, but it should be acknowledged that regular, everyday Joe & Jane Sixpack(s) like Hillary Rodham Clinton as well.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. I don't see your Dean/Kiucinich comparison as valid.

Not to be rude, just sayin'. None of those gentlemen when on to secure the nomination let alone proceed to lose the GE.

Nader never had a major party.

I fail to see a scenario where the electorate steps into the voting booth, looks down and sees the names of 1 Democrat and 1 Republican and say to themselves, "I don't know who that is."

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Think for a bit. I have confidence you can get it. You're arguing "values" over "name recognition".

That makes for great debate among folks who flirt with the Democratic Party from time to time, but the party faithful will always go with someone who's seen as serious. I don't get that from BS. A protest candidate can be a novelty, but they have very limited appeal, and very short shelf life. Just ask Presidents Kucinich, Dean & Nader. All are faves of "the left"....but the Democratic Party? Not so much.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. Well, there is what candidates promise and then there is how they actually conduct themselves.

Two candidates can promise the same thing but if one has a career of prevarication, triangulation and flip-flopping that candidate is useless as an elected official. Simply put, their word means nothing.

So choosing the prevaricator over the idealist simply because the prevaricator is more (in)famous is useless. In fact, in the long run I think it will do more harm than good because then the entire party becomes tarnished and that is the sort of name recognition you absolutely DON'T want in future elections.

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. As a lifelong Democrat. I want to win. Whoever offers the best chance of doing that gets my....

support. Hillary Clinton offers the best chance for "Democrats" to hold the WH for a third term. Buzzwords like "values" & "principles" are just that. I don't give a shit about the mythical "left" or what they say they want, because "the left" can include some pretty bizarre characters. I'm a "Democrat". Full Stop!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. By the way -- I'd like to take a moment to say Thank-you for the civil discourse.

Things are tense around here ATM and I genuinely appreciate the thoughtful conversation you are contributing to the thread.

[H2O Man]

3. Recommended.

Things can change mighty quick. There is some merit to these polls, but it is limited.

[Avalux]

5. The polls are used to sway public opinion.

They're not helpful for any other reason that that.

[Exilednight]

7. And according to post #2 they look like they work.

[Tarheel_Dem]

9. Including the polls about "Feeling the Bern" in New Hampshire? Is that to "sway public opinion"?

[Avalux]

10. Of course it is. My statement applies to all polls. n/t