Bernie Sanders is MOST Electable Democratic Candidate for President

[Segami]

PRESS RELEASE


Sanders is Most Electable Democratic Candidate for President




JANUARY 8, 2016




TOLEDO, Iowa – Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on Tuesday that Democratic Party caucus goers should consider “electability.” She’s right. Now there is more evidence that Bernie Sanders is the most electable Democrat running for the White House.

Sanders outpolled Clinton in head-to-head matchups against the leading Republican candidates in a new poll release on Friday of voters in the battleground general election state of New Hampshire.

“Sanders does an average of nine points better than Clinton in the general election match ups,” according to the North Carolina-based Public Policy Polling.

Sanders does best against the candidates who are most popular among Republicans. He is favored by 20 points over both Donald Trump (54 percent to 34 percent) and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz by 20 points (55 percent to 35 percent.)

Sanders leads the entire Republican Party field by double digits. He holds a 12-point edge over former Gov. Jeb Bush; leads U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio by 14 points and he has a 19-point advantage over Dr. Ben Carson.

Sanders is the only candidate with a positive favorability rating among the overall electorate in New Hampshire “and it’s a very positive rating,” according to a news release from Dean Debnam, the polling firm president. Fifty-five percent of New Hampshire voters see Sanders positively while only 35 percent have a negative opinion of the senator.

The results fit a pattern in other recent polls. Sanders outperformed Trump 51 percent to 38 percent in a recent poll conducted by Quinnipiac University.

“Sanders is the candidate best positioned to lead the party to victory in November,” said Sanders’ pollster Ben Tulchin. “A series of polls conducted in mid-December – notably the Quinnipiac University poll, the CNN/ORC International poll, and The Economist/YouGov poll – find Sanders has the most positive reputation of any presidential candidate from either party and is significantly better positioned with independent voters than is Hillary Clinton.”



https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-is-most-electable-democratic-candidate-for-president/

[underthematrix]

1. #ImWithHer

[redstateblues]

2. Unfortunately for Bernie he will not be the nominee

Of the Democratic Party so it's a moot point.

[Punkingal]

3. That would be unfortunate for all of us.

[Segami]

5. What is unfortunate is that the Clintons will finish off

whatever is left of the Democratic Party.


So many Democrats have been duped into drinking their coronation/dynasty brew.

[CorporatistNation]

4. There IS No Question About it.... As Clinton Inc. Desperation Has Set In... K and R

Hillary has no cross over vote and in fact has a significant cohort who perceive her as someone whom they would certainly vote against if she is the nominee. This fact is well known.

[Gothmog]

6. According to Nate Silver, these polls mean nothing right now

The reliance on these polls by Sanders supporters amuse me. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/harrys-guide-to-2016-election-polls/

Ignore hypothetical matchups in primary season – they also measure nothing. General election polls before and during the primary season have a very wide margin of error. That’s especially the case for candidates who aren’t even in the race and therefore haven’t been treated to the onslaught of skeptical media coverage usually associated with being the candidate.

Sanders supporters have to rely on these worthless polls because it is clear that Sanders is not viable in a general election where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate may spend an additional billion dollars.

No one should rely on hypo match up type polls in selecting a nominee at this stage of the race.

[Gothmog]

7. Here are some warnings from Nate Silver about polls

Please note warning number 3 as to silly hypo match up polls



Sanders' only proof of electablity are some worthless polls that can not be trusted because Sanders has not been vetted or subjected to the scrutiny of the party's nominee

[CSStrowbridge]

8. Number 10.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster#2016-general-election

Sanders is better than Clinton vs. Trump.
Clinton is better than Sanders vs. Cruz and Rubio, although by tiny margins.

Those are the only three GOPers that have a legitimate shot at the moment.

History says Rubio should win, because he is the establishment's choice and the GOP always go with the establishment's choice.

Clinton has also faced the GOP full on and won. Sanders hasn't had to do that.

[Segami]

10. Well,...PPP differs with you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251986533

[CSStrowbridge]

11. You might want to re-read that list.

You might want to re-read that list. Look at the averages, not single polls.

[Gothmog]

15. First Read -Are Sanders' general-election numbers fool's gold

These polls are worthless because Sanders has not been vetted by the media http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/first-read-three-weeks-go-three-margin-error-races-n493946

Not surprisingly, Sanders' campaign is touting those general-election numbers. "There was fresh evidence on Sunday that confirms Bernie Sanders would be the most electable Democratic Party nominee for president because he performs much better than Hillary Clinton," the campaign blasted out to reporters yesterday. But here is a legitimate question to ask: Outside of maybe New Hampshire (where Sanders enjoys a geographic advantage), are Sanders' general-election numbers fool's gold? When is the last time you've seen national Republicans issue even a press release on Sanders? Given the back-and-forth over Bill Clinton's past -- and given Sanders calling Bill Clinton's behavior "disgraceful" -- when is the last time anyone has brought up the candidate's 1972 essay about a woman fantasizing about "being raped by three men simultaneously"? Bottom line: It's always instructive to take general-election polling with a grain of salt, especially 300 days before the general election. And that's particularly true for a candidate who hasn't actually gone through the same wringer the other candidates have.

These match up polls are not meaningful at this stage

[ucrdem]

9. In New Hampshire, sort of.

Strange poll. Seems to ask everything but the question, how does Bernie do against Clinton in the Dem primary?

For that answer RCP is helpful. They show Clinton currently leading nationally with a very healthy +19.5 spread:

RCP Average 12/16 - 1/7 -- Clinton - 52.8 | Sanders - 33.3 | O'Malley - 3.8 | Spread - Clinton +19.5

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

[Ino]

12. Most electable, AND most elected, most experienced!

Bernie Sanders first rose to elective office in 1981 and holds an elected position to this day.
Sanders has served as an elected official for a total of 34 years and counting,
which is 19 more than the average 2016 presidential candidate (15 years).

Senator, United States Senate, 2006-present
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 1990-2006
Mayor, City of Burlington, 1981-1989

Hillary Clinton first rose to elective office in 2001
and stepped down from an elected position in 2009.
Clinton has served as an elected official for a total of 8 years,
which is 7 less than the average 2016 presidential candidate (15 years).

United States Secretary of State, 2009-2013 (appointed)
Senator, United States Senate, 2001-2009

http://presidential-candidates.insidegov.com/compare/35-40/Bernie-Sanders-vs-Hillary-Clinton

[randome]

13. Irrelevant. There are these things called numbers. All of civilization depends on them.

All the numbers are with Clinton right now. You might hope for an abrupt change but that's unlikely.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[LWolf]

14. K & R

[Gothmog]

16. Democrats would be insane to nominate Bernie Sanders

Dana Milbank has some good comments on general election match up polls https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Sanders and his supporters boast of polls showing him, on average, matching up slightly better against Trump than Clinton does. But those matchups are misleading: Opponents have been attacking and defining Clinton for a quarter- century, but nobody has really gone to work yet on demonizing Sanders.

Watching Sanders at Monday night’s Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump — or another Republican nominee — would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.

The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the “socialist” label and requested that Sanders define it “so that it doesn’t concern the rest of us citizens.”

Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who don’t want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: “Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top — that’s my definition of democratic socialism.”

But that’s not how Republicans will define socialism — and they’ll have the dictionary on their side. They’ll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. They’ll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldn’t be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists don’t win national elections in the United States .

Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases — “one of the biggest tax hikes in history,” as moderator Chris Cuomo put it — to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that “hypothetically, you’re going to pay $5,000 more in taxes,” and declared, “W e will raise taxes, yes we will.” He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that “it’s demagogic to say, oh, you’re paying more in taxes.”

Well, yes — and Trump is a demagogue.

Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government “bigger than ever,” Sanders didn’t quarrel, saying, “P eople want to criticize me, okay,” and “F ine, if that’s the criticism, I accept it.”

Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.

Match up polls are worthless because these polls do not measure what would happen to Sanders in a general election where Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads.