Hillary Clinton’s Growing Problem With Independents

[Playinghardball]

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton faces a mounting challenge among independent voters following months of attacks from rival Bernie Sanders.

An April Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that Mrs. Clinton’s favorability rating among independents had dropped 15 percentage points in the last four months alone. That poll found that 20% of independents viewed Mrs. Clinton positively, compared with 62% who viewed her negatively—a gap of 42 percentage points. In January, that same poll found her with a positive rating of 35% and a negative rating of 54%—a gap of fewer than 20 percentage points.

A year earlier, four months before she launched her presidential campaign, that gap stood at just four percentage points—35% positive to 39% negative.

Mrs. Clinton’s favorability ratings have also declined among Democrats. Her positive rating among Democrats dropped to 63% last month from 71% in January, while her negative rating rose six points to 20%. Last April, when she first announced she was running for president, 76% of Democrats viewed her positively while just 8% viewed her negatively.

While sinking favorability ratings are common for presidential candidates as voters learn more about them, the striking decline in independents’ view of Mrs. Clinton is indicative of the unexpected popularity of Mr. Sanders, who served in the Senate as an independent before running for president as a Democrat. The Vermont senator is far more popular among independents and has ramped up his criticism of Mrs. Clinton in recent months, even as his path to winning the nomination looks increasingly narrow. Mr. Sanders in recent days began laying off hundreds of field staffers but has said he plans to stay in the race until the July Democratic convention.

The nosedive Mrs. Clinton’s rating has taken among independents suggests she has a lot of work to do to win those voters over in a general election. Her campaign has already begun fretting about the lasting damage Mr. Sanders’s criticism of her could have in the general election, and has publicly encouraged the senator to rally his supporters behind her for the sake of the Democratic Party.

More here:http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/05/03/hillary-clintons-growing-problem-with-independents/#:NeDQ1JgM9QVm_A

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. There's a price to be paid for closed primaries.

[casperthegm]

5. ^^^Bingo

And it's not just a Hillary problem. It's a Democratic party problem. The party is shrinking and the DNC thinks that excluding millions of potential members is the way to grow it? Ok, good luck with that.

[Jester Messiah]

10. Yep, that one's gonna sting.

Can't say they weren't warned though.

[Katashi_itto]

2. Ya think?

[1StrongBlackMan]

3. I wonder if the drop in Independent favorability ...

is at all correlated to the increase in Bernie supporters that are newly registered as Independents?

If so, those numbers aren't nearly as bad for the G/E ... since the majority polling negative will either vote for her anyway or choose to not vote at all.

[Armstead]

8. No it's a longstanding problem

She tends to do really well in favorability when she's out of sight.....But when she comes into the spotlight, not so much.

That's been my own experience. I was fine with her as Sec of State..Even kind of liked her. It was only when she stepped back into the public eye and making gaffs ("Dead broke&quot and started making noises that she and her husband want back into the WH that she began to seem less appealing again.

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. Well ...

She tends to do really well in favorability when she's out of sight.....But when she comes into the spotlight, not so much.

Doesn't that apply to just about every high profile person?

But still ... My initial wondering hasn't been answered. Just as, Bernie's vote count and favorability numbers among independents are heavily influenced by Bernie's primary supporters being independent, so would HRC's negatives.

[brush]

4. Give it a rest already with the independent problem

Sensible progressive whites who don't want Trump appointing the next 3 SCOTUS justices, Latino Americans, African Americans, women, gays, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and sensible, left-leaning and moderate independents — collectively these demographic segments are who mostly voted for and elected President Obama twice, and will also elect Clinton to the presidency.

Notice I included "sensible left-leaning and moderate independents who don't want Trump appointing the next 3 SCOTUS justices in the coalition.

Trump will lose spectacularly. The London bookies already have Hillary at 8 to 1, and you go broke real quick going against professional handicappers.

And btw, Trump will win some independents too. They are not a monolith as this OP and many others here on DU would have people believe.

[bettyellen]

6. bullshit from January?- her numbers have been climbing in all new polls.

[jillan]

13. Read it again..... they are comparing April's poll to the one done in January.

An April Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that Mrs. Clinton’s favorability rating among independents had dropped 15 percentage points in the last four months alone. That poll found that 20% of independents viewed Mrs. Clinton positively, compared with 62% who viewed her negatively—a gap of 42 percentage points. In January, that same poll found her with a positive rating of 35% and a negative rating of 54%—a gap of fewer than 20 percentage points.

[That Guy 888]

7. Clinton can't accept responsibility for her actions.

Her campaign has already begun fretting about the lasting damage Mr. Sanders’s criticism of her could have in the general election

Sanders hasn't attacked her as much as he could have. I think a lot of the "damage" done to her campaign is the poor judgement Clinton has exhibited over the years. IMO the only damage Sanders campaign has done to her is allowing time for her poor judgment to be discussed among Democratic voters, and giving those same voters an alternative candidate.

[Vincardog]

9. Bingo exposing her corporate ways has consequences, why blame Bernie? Because nothing is her fault.

[pat_k]

15. Yes. And in addition, her "No We Can't" stance...

... is down right depressing. It certainly does nothing to counter the negatives.

Bernie is the carrier of Obama's "Yes We Can" message of hope. That inspires positive feelings.

If the stark difference between "Yes We Can" and "No We Can't" has done "lasting damage," it's self-inflicted.

She's made it tough, but ultimately, if she's the nominee, it's up to us to make sure she beats Trump. Let's have some confidence in our power to make it happen.

Bernie puts his confidence in our power. He's confident that if the American people stand up, we can stop Trump. He's committed to doing whatever he can to make that happen (regardless of who the nominee is). Let's embrace that confidence.

[pat_k]

17. Totally valid position.

I have no issue with the choices others make.

My underlying assumption is that stopping Trump by making sure the Democratic nominee wins, regardless of who that is, is a desired outcome for lots, and lots of people. To be motivated to make that outcome a reality those people need to have hope and confidence in their own power to pull it off.

If keeping Trump out of the White House is not a desired outcome for you, undermining motivation to make that outcome a reality with defeatist predictions presents no problem or inconsistency.

[That Guy 888]

18. If I don't suck it up and support Clinton I'm supporting Trump, that's basically what you're saying.

It's one of the refrains of the spineless Dems that I've heard all of my life. "But if you don't support us like we don't support you, the republicans win".

I'm not into their emotional blackmail anymore.

If they want my vote, they should fight when they need to, and earn my vote.

I know Trump would be a disaster. I think Clinton would be a disaster for many reasons. So given those two choices, I'm not interested in either Party with those candidates. If Clinton is nominated I might lurk here but will abide by the post-primary rules about not "talking down" support for the Democratic Party Nominee. That's post-primary.

[pat_k]

12. "...rally his supporters..." Plenty of time for that after the convention.

As I pointed out in an earlier post today, he should not "drop out" or "fall in line" until the delegates vote on platform, procedures, and nominee at the convention.

...
His point has always been simple: "Wait until voters in every state have their say, and then give the superdelegates a chance to consider, perhaps change their minds, and vote accordingly at the convention.

No one can possibly argue that the race did not change substantially after most of the superdelegates came out and endorsed Clinton. He is right. He needs to stay in until the convention to give those superdelegates a chance to take subsequent developments into account.

If he loses the remaining states by large margins, he'll simply be calling on the delegates he won to go to the convention and make their voices known; to make it clear that there are substantial numbers who believe this nation desperately needs a New, New Deal. (A position that many Hillary delegates are likely to join in, particularly given that exit polling shows that many made their choice, not on positions, but rather on their belief about "electability.&quot

In other words, however it goes between now and June 14, he should not "drop out" or "fall in line." In the former case, he would deny the superdelegates the chance to reconsider; in the latter case, he would deny his delegates the opportunity to advocate the Sanders agenda on his behalf.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511899803

[George II]

14. She doesn't have any "growing problem with independents". That is perceived to assuage...

....egos who can't accept that Clinton will be our nominee.