Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumWhen 'the pundits' say only 'some' women like Hillary:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/01/29/what-polling-data-actually-shows-about-hillary/208277
Ana Hauhet
(67 posts)Great to have real numbers! As I see it the under 25 did not experience HRC and Bill Clinton the way the over 25 did! The over 25 have a clearer picture of HRC and what happened during the Clinton years. We also have a clearer picture of how the Republicans have treated her and will treat any Democratic president.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)"Its a real possibility that the Democrats may actually nominate a socialist," the fundraising letter said. "Self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders is catching fire in the Democrat primary. He's smashing online fundraisng [sic] records and has even reported over two million online donations."
Republicans are fundraising off Bernie Sanders with a hammer-and-sickle image
If Sanders and his supporters feel Hillary is too negative - you ain't seen nothing yet!
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)winning the nomination.
But yes, that's what the Republicans will be using to scare Americans into either staying home or voting for one of their puppets.
Cha
(296,853 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)They have been lumping the 'under 45' vote together and pitting younger women against older women.
Electing the first female president is no big deal.
Neither is sexism, ageism, racism...
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)pandr32
(11,557 posts)...have yet to struggle with caring for children and trying to balance their needs with working full-time, and many haven't suffered women's health issues yet. Those issues, and others are the kind of reality that resonates with Hillary Clinton's commitment to help women not only "catch up" but to be able to "get ahead" in life.
vorgan24
(50 posts)The older and wiser you are, the more likely you're to vote for Hillary. Real life experience makes you more likely to vote for a realist.
Bernie has broad appeal to the younger crowd much the way Ron Paul did.
wildeyed
(11,243 posts)His predictions are great, but many have done similar poll aggregators before. But his stance on pundits was revolutionary. One of the best things to happen to journalism in the past ten years, IMO. From 2012:
My argument, rather, is this: weve about reached the point where if Mr. Romney wins, it can only be because the polls have been biased against him. Almost all of the chance that Mr. Romney has in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, about 16 percent to win the Electoral College, reflects this possibility.
Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking.
Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the race is too close to call. It isnt. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you cant acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.
http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-silver-on-who-political-pundits-who-are-mostly-entertainers-2012-11
Sheehy is just writing entertainment for the white liberals who make up much of the NYT readership that appeals to their cosseted little world view. It is NOT hard to look up these statistics at all. Seems like a serious news source would make an effort. But nothing suprises me after the body shaming hit piece they did on Serena Williams last year. Nothing.