**SC Poll** Sanders Falls To Fifth! Biden 42% Harris 10% Buttigieg 8% Warren 8% Sanders 7%

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Biden
42%
Harris
10%
Buttigieg
8%
Warren
8%
Sanders
7%
Booker
4%


https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article230531019.html

[leftofcool]

1. But, but, I heard right here on DU that Pete would go nowhere in SC

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. He's ahead of Senator Bernie Sanders.

[redstateblues]

14. I wouldn't exactly say that Pete is on fire is SC

[IronLionZion]

67. When I hear some prediction on DU that turns out to be true

that would be newsworthy

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. K&R

[nycbos]

4. Excellent

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. What do you make of Senator Sanders' descent?

[nycbos]

8. Well since he no longer HRC to vilify...

... he just sounds like a old man who missed his nap time instead of an inspirational figure.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. Do you have any suggestions how he can get off the schneid?

[Clash City Rocker]

153. I would think less attacking his opponents and more inspiring people would be good

We know that Bernie is capable of inspiring large groups of people. Why his presidential runs have focused on attacking his opponents instead is a bit puzzling.

[Tipperary]

27. Lol!

“Old man who missed his nap time!”

[Maru Kitteh]

90. An apt description of what many of us saw from the beginning. nt

[calimary]

103. That, yes. But also there's a MUCH wider spectrum of choices now.

We have people running as serious, credible candidates in just about every demographic. More people, I think, are finding a candidate who blends with them in finer but significant points that carry a lot of weight on their own. It’s like a political custom burger menu.

There simply are more choices available. And there’s more to choose from for people who liked Bernie last time except that he ... (fill in the not-perfect or gee-if-only details here, of examples where Bernie fell short). More possibilities for finding someone whose candidacy really hits the bullseye rather than settling for degrees of closeness to said bullseye.

[katmondoo]

10. Without Hillary his message won't resonate. He just becomes another candidate

[Kahuna7]

17. We need a uniter, not a divider. nt

[SCantiGOP]

71. All three of my kids voted for Bernie in 2016

Two are now supporting Harris and the third, who has moved out west, is still supporting Bernie.

Based on my conversations at party functions and among Democrats it looks like a contest between Biden and Harris with Joe way ahead.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. Do you have any suggestions how Bernie can get his mojo back?

[murielm99]

84. He never had any real mojo.

He had a lot of rabid followers and bots. They were nasty to others IRL and on social media. They chased away people who might have been curious about supporting him.

I like real Democrats.

[SCantiGOP]

102. I think Bernie's momentum had evaporated

Warren, Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, etc are just as progressive but not 100 years old.

Most people I know are in one of two camps: Biden, because we have to win and he is most electable; or, one of the 4 named above because a sensible, attractive progressive can beat Trump and I’m not willing to compromise.

On edit: Warren and Booker have snagged some of the top operatives in the state for their campaigns, but inheriting the Obama machine should guarantee an easy victory.

[madville]

144. He was the only option besides Clinton

He doesn't have that advantage now, in 2016 he was running against one of the most disliked Presidential candidates we've seen in decades.

[rzemanfl]

146. Bookmarking. n/t

[luvtheGWN]

92. Sanders is old news.

We North Americans love NEW stuff. Unfortunately it's not always to our benefit. However, I suspect there are enough Democrats who still resent Sanders for running against Hillary (especially since he did not go out of his way to support her after she won the Primary, nor did his supporters).

IMHO, Bernie is simply touting the "same old, same old" line from 2016, and it's not working for him this time.

[pazzyanne]

104. tRump is doing the same thing.

Hopefully the "same old, same old" won't work for tRump either.

[honest.abe]

6. He's finished. He will never ever connect with AA voters.

He is wasting his time and wasting his supporter's donations. Bernie, do us all a big favor and drop out.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. These results surely have to come as a disappointment to him, yes?

[honest.abe]

11. I would say devastating.

His campaign knows he has to do well with AA voters and they thought they could improve his numbers over 2016 but clearly the numbers are worse, much worse.

[charlyvi]

65. Bernie and his surrogates dismissed the South's importance in 2016 to their great dismay for 2020.

WASHINGTON – Democrats in the Deep South aren’t taking kindly to Sen. Bernie Sanders' recent comments that he lost Democratic presidential primaries in the region because it's so conservative.

snip

The voting electorate in the South, in the Democratic primary, is substantially more African American than any other part of the country so it is a misnomer to say that they’re more conservative, when in fact, many voters in the Deep South’s Democratic primary are some of the most progressive voters in the country," he said.

Rickey Cole, chairman of the Mississippi Democratic Party, said he expected better from Sanders.

"It's unacceptable for any presidential aspirant to minimize any state, region or demographic group," he said.

https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2016/04/23/bernie-sanders-offends-some-comments-south/83409314/


Southern voters haven't forgotten. Tin Robbins dismissed the importance of Southern primary voters by saying:
"After the Southern primaries, you had called the election. And who’s fooling who? Winning South Carolina in the Democratic primary is about as significant as winning Guam. No Democrat is going to win South Carolina in the general election. Why do these victories have so much significance?"

Link to tweet

Their significance lies in the fact that if you don't win enough Southern primaries, your campaign dies. His mistake was confusing Southern states as a whole with Southern primary voters, who are mostly African-American and a crucial part of our Dem base. They also skew way more liberal than their states as a whole. As I said, Southerners haven't forgotten. And Karma is a magnificent beast.

[honest.abe]

76. That comment about no Democrat is going to win SC in the general election is so clueless.

I heard comments like that many times during the 2016 primary. It is so dumb. What will happen in the general is irrelevant to the significance in a primary. In fact SC is a pretty good bellwether of the typical Democratic voter. I suspect whoever wins SC will likely win the nomination.

[FBaggins]

106. "whoever wins SC will likely win the nomination"?

John Edwards and Jesse Jackson probably wish that were so.

[honest.abe]

114. You had to dig to find those two.

Also, I said likely and generally speaking historically the winner of SC has been the nominee and this year I suspect that will continue.

[FBaggins]

115. Not at all... just had to be old enough to remember more than the last cycle.

That kind of perspective helps with all sorts of nonsensical claims.

Like, for instance, the implication that being at 8% and 5th place nine months before the primary means that you can't win it.

[honest.abe]

117. I just checked.. Edwards was 2004 and Jackson was 1988.

Quite a few cycles since those occurred.

BTW, Sanders is going in the wrong direction and there is nothing nonsensical about that claim.

[Kahuna7]

20. Probably...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. Do you have any suggestions how he can get off the schneid?

[Kahuna7]

53. If I knew what a schneid was, maybe??? nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. Here ya go.

Wikipedia says "to get off the schneid" means "To break a scoreless, hitless, or winless streak (i.e., a schneid). According to the Dickson Baseball Dictionary, the term 'schneid' comes to baseball via gin rummy, and in turn comes from German/Yiddish 'schneider,' one who cuts cloth, i.e., a tailor."
Wikipedia says "to get off the schneid"... - German English Words ...
https://www.facebook.com/.../posts/...to-get-off-the-schneid.../174258175982133/

[Kahuna7]

64. I hope he never gets off the schneid...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. When will we know for sure this isn't a temporary setback?

[nini]

79. he'll hang in there

too much money to be made still.

[helpisontheway]

95. Awww...Y'all mean Nina is not his magical connection to AA voters?

Say it ain’t do..🙄. That is like Trump thinking that Omarosa and that nut Kanye would help him with AA voters.

[honest.abe]

97. Yeah, hiring Nina Turner shows how clueless he is.

Really bad decision.

[comradebillyboy]

105. She's just one of many bad hires.

[Kahuna7]

130. Nina comes across as ratchet. Very unappealing. nt

[Funtatlaguy]

9. Hasn't Booker spent a lot of time in SC?

surprised he’s not doing better there.

[honest.abe]

15. Why? Because of his race?

I think SC Democratic voters consider more than skin color when selecting a candidate.

[Funtatlaguy]

21. My post mentioned TIME spent there, not race.

[honest.abe]

30. Ok. I misunderstood your comment.

[Funtatlaguy]

59. No problem. I'm just so surprised that Biden

is kicking ass everywhere.
Even in states where he hasn’t spent any time.
I think he is going to have to make a major mistake or he may just run away with it.

[honest.abe]

63. Yep. I dont see how anyone can close the gap.

Unless as you say he makes a major mistake which I dont see happening.

[customerserviceguy]

118. From what discussions I have

with African-American acquaintances, they know he is vegan, and down South, most everybody loves barbecue, fried chicken, shrimp, and ribs. It's hard to identify with someone so different from you in lifestyle, especially when you have Joe Biden in there. He was part of the team of Obama-Biden that is viewed favorably here.

[Funtatlaguy]

119. Interesting. I am southern and yes we almost all love meat.

Black or white.
Bbqing is something everyone does.
If Booker turns it down, that would not help him relate to most southerners.

[customerserviceguy]

120. Joe Biden

seems to be able to relate to many people everywhere he goes. I don't think any of the people who typically vote Democratic would find him off-putting. Well, on second thought, there are those who consider him too old, but I think I would only characterize a small minority of younger folks as ageist.

[redstateblues]

12. Great singer-great JT song

[George II]

13. Still within the margin of error....

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. Do you think the Vermont senator still has time to turn things around?

[George II]

42. It's like some sports leagues, he not only has to work his way up to the top....

.....but has to pass three others, too.

Looking at that poll another way, we have Biden at 42%, the next five combined at 37%. With 23 people splitting the support, one candidate having almost half is mind boggling.

I think Democrats saw the way he acted after the Convention and have come to the realization that he's only in this for himself, not "for America".

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Going with your sports analogy would you say he's the baseball equivalent of the Florida Marlins?

[LibFarmer]

48. The paradigm was flawed

"I'll have another shot if she loses" had a serious flaw and that flaw is being exposed now as evident from this poll (and others.)

[SouthernProgressive]

77. Of Booker. NT

[Kahuna7]

16. Hmmm...very interesting...

[Skya Rhen]

19. I see a trend and it's not looking too good for Bernie...

[donkeypoofed]

23. Wow. Guess I better get used to a Biden / Harris Ticket.

Or Biden / Warren - maybe Biden / Buttigieg?

Either way it'll be Joe at the top of the Ticket.

[busterbrown]

100. I'm telling ya..!

Biden/Harris Biden/Warren Both winners IMO

[marylandblue]

101. He's much more likely to pick Harris than Warren.

Biden and Warren have some fundamental differences that will be hard to ignore.

[LakeArenal]

25. Biden/Buttigieg. Perfect.

[True Blue American]

32. That is exactly

What I am beginning to think. Biden /Buttigieg

Pa. Born, indiana born and bred. Midwest ,here we come.

[LakeArenal]

36. Yep. Also, it may be Pete's time in history.

[brush]

38. Two white males is highly problematic considering the diversity of...

the base of the party. Pair Biden with a woman and/or POC and we've got something.

[LonePirate]

51. Two white males will not appear on the 2020 Dem ticket. Biden/Buttigieg is never going to happen.

Biden/Anyone not a white male
Buttigieg/Anyone not a white male
Anyone not a white male/Buttigieg

All of those are possibilities for the Dem ticket. Biden/Buttigieg will never happen.

[brush]

56. Agreed. Two white males won't work and IMO Biden is the one who will.

The mayor lags in AA support, an important part of the party's base.

[Cosmocat]

74. YEP

I like Mayor Pete a LOT in the roles you note, but Biden HAS to pick a minority and or woman if they wins the nomination.

[LakeArenal]

81. So is your opinion

It’s just as much Pete’s or even Biden’s time in history.

[Cosmocat]

73. He and Kamila would be game over

seriously ...

[bearsfootball516]

82. I agree, although I've seen people say her talents would be wasted at VP.

Because she’d be a kick ass AG...which she would.

[LakeArenal]

121. I'd go for that for sure.

I prefer Harris in that position. Then on to President.

[Cosmocat]

72. I like Mayor Pete a LOT, but Biden HAS to pick a women/minority

And, there a LOT of good options ...

[obamanut2012]

85. Two white guys? Absolutely not

Any combo of Biden, Harris, and Warren is what it needs to be.

[Ford_Prefect]

28. Since when was SC considered a bellwether state?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. It's the first truly heterogeneous primary.

[Ford_Prefect]

34. A technical distinction to be sure. SC has a very different cultural climate from much of the US.

Few urban areas among other influences.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Unlike heterogeneous and urban New Hampshire and Iowa?

[George II]

47. You beat me to that. Unbelievably Iowa has been considered a very important state...

...even though they represent only 0.9% of all pledged delegates, it's a caucus state, and it's 91% white. Right or wrong (I think wrong) a poor showing in Iowa has ended many campaigns.

[honest.abe]

31. Alot more "bellwether" than Iowa or NH.

or even Nevada.

What state would you define as bellwether worthy?

[True Blue American]

35. Ohio used to be!:)

I remember jumping out of my seat when Ohio was called and Karl Rove went on his rant on Fox, claiming it was not true. They had to take him backstage to prove Ohio was the one.

[honest.abe]

49. Yeah, Ohio would be a good bellwether state for the general election but..

not as good for a Democratic primary. The demographics in Ohio are more like Republican America than Democratic America.

The racial diversity among the population in Ohio is currently around 82.2% Caucasians, 12.3% African Americans, 2.6% two or more races, 1.9% Asians, .8% other races, and 0% Natives of North America.

http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/ohio-population/

Not sure which state is the best bellwether for the Democratic primary. SC is not bad. The demographics match better I would think.

[True Blue American]

78. Tell me about it.

But keep in mind Districts up and down the Ohio River that had been Republican for over 100 years voted for Obama. Sherrod Brown is known as the Working mans friend.

Portman came from a wealthy, well known Southern Ohio family. Known for their good works.

[marylandblue]

33. Since it moved to a week after New Hampshire, along with Nevada.

[Gothmog]

39. This is great news

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. Unless you're the senator from Vermont.

[Gothmog]

80. sanders will not be the nominee of the party

There are far too many real Democrats who have long memories and who will not forget or forgive

[Gothmog]

140. I want to win

If sanders is the nominee, trump would win 45 states

[comradebillyboy]

142. That many?

[Eyeball_Kid]

41. To his credit,

Sanders ushered in a small army of young, competent, charismatic Democratic politicians, any one of which could manage the office of the presidency. He opened the conceptual door to creative thinking and a process whereby candidates have the opportunity to build constituencies on a national level. All of that is good.

Now, let's get on with the business of cultivating these people as leaders of the Democratic Party.

[Demsrule86]

43. No, I don't agree . I will never get over the 2016 general.

[Kahuna7]

57. Ditto here. I will never forget that. nt

[Demsrule86]

109. There is no good or silver lining...I am enraged when I hear this...we have two

Rightwing SCOTUS APPOINTEEES!!!

[Demsrule86]

111. There is no good or silver lining . It was a disaster for our party and our country.

[Kahuna7]

112. Yep. I can't say how I really feel on DU... But..

on twitter I let loose.

[justie18]

61. Yes!

And his behvior during the Democratic convention. What a sore loser.

[Demsrule86]

110. That finished it...we have babies in cages, right wing SCOTUS....

People dead in Pittsburgh as and other places because of Trump.and his hate speech.

[Kahuna7]

113. OMG. Don't even...

[obamanut2012]

88. Same

[Gothmog]

184. Same here

[Demsrule86]

198. Biden must win.

[LibFarmer]

55. Most of the new ones are twitter warriors

putting forth impassable unicorn proposals that generate controversy and publicity to attract donations but won't do diddly squat to actual policy that benefits people.

[ehrnst]

87. Let's unpack this:

What makes you think that "any one of which could manage the office of the presidency" - and I'm talking about those that he endorsed that managed to win their elections... What annoints them as able to "manage the office of the presidency" without experience?

He opened the conceptual door to creative thinking and a process whereby candidates have the opportunity to build constituencies on a national level.

A career politician that hasn't changed his stump speech in nearly 30 years, and has a history of calling those who disagree with him in any way, on any topic corrupt, and treats fact checks by the free press as fake news, has "opened the conceptual door to creative thinking?"



And why do candidates for a congressional district need to "build constituencies on a national level?" I thought they were elected to represent and work on behalf of their districts, not seek celebrity.

[LuvLoogie]

158. The wave was women driven, not Bernie driven.

Bernie tried to ride that wave, but he really did not have much to do with it. It was Pelosi and her establishment strategies and tactics.

[LibFarmer]

45. How should one respond to support Bernie?

The margin of error excuse, the "name recognition" excuse or the "it is still too early" excuse?

[Fresh_Start]

54. They are holding a few excuses in reserve..

1) the democratic voters want a democrat
2) there are too many candidates and that confuses the voters so they aren't voting accurately in polls
3) polls are wrong, just look at 2016

[Kahuna7]

58. Only old and POC were polled.... And landlines...

[Scurrilous]

46. ...

[karynnj]

50. The key take away is that Biden has a giant lead in this state

NO ONE is competitive with him. If this stays this way, it is also bad for Harris, who might have otherwise have had SC as the early primary state where she could have gained momentum with a win. Yes, she is second - with 10% versus 42%.

If you remember 2004, Howard Dean, after losing Iowa and NH, publicly spoke of not spending resources in the next multi-state day. His explanation was that he could better use his resources to concentrate on the set of states coming up after that day where he was more likely to win. He said that South Carolina, Delaware, Missouri, NM, Arizona, Oklahoma, and North Dakota were not states that a New Englander was likely to win .. and you do not need to win all states. Kerry, fellow New Englander, won 5 out of the 7, but Dean could have been correct had Clark and Edwards, ending any Kerry momentum, split those states leading to no real frontrunner. That would have enabled him to resurface at that point.

Like then,winning SC - the only state won that day in 2004 by Edwards - would never be part of the set of states that Sanders' team would include in his plan to get the nomination. The same would be said for Mayor Pete and Warren - although it makes sense to fight for any delegate you can get.

At this point, it is very early. There has not been a single debate. It may be that name recognition is why Biden is so far ahead. In 2008, Biden was probably the best at the debates .. and it did nothing to help him gain traction. His skill and knowledge is still there, his accomplishments now include 8 years as a very engaged VP. If he can debate as well as he did in 2008, it will be tough for any of the many competitors to make a dent into his lead through the debates.

The size of the field, if it remains as large as it is, helps Biden. I have long written that Obama needed three things to win the nomination in 2008. He had to run a near impeccable race himself, Clinton had to make strategic errors and the race had to reduce to Clinton vs Obama with various other candidates dropping out without gaining many )or any) delegates. (Note that 2016 shows - even with a much weaker, more flawed alternative candidate (Bernie) having just 2 candidates sets up a closer race.

As to a big field, consider that in the primary, no delegates are awarded if a candidate has under 15%. If the primary results were exactly as this poll (adjusted to remove the unsure/undecided), Biden would get all the delegates.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. That is genuinely great analysis.

BTW I'm reading John Kerry's autobiography. I'm about half the way through it.

[karynnj]

123. As you would guess, I greatly enjoyed reading his biography

He has led a fascinating, purposeful life.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

124. He would have made a fine president.

The problem with counterfactuals is when you change one fact others change. Perhaps there would have been no President Obama. I used to believe things happen for a reason. That's how I made sense of the world. Trump's election disabused me of that notion.

[karynnj]

128. He and Teresa and their respective children would have been a wonderful first family

but, he would have come in to a Republican controlled Senate and House. He also would have faced many of the problems - like the financial crisis and Iraq fighting against Congress.

What we KNOW he would have done would have been to replace Rehnquist with someone like Merritt Garland - a moderate, who the 2005 Senate would have confirmed. The same with the later vacancy. This would have meant no Citizens United. Here, we would never know what we avoided!

He would almost certainly have done what he said on Iraq, which was to have a regional summit to help Iraq move toward an inclusive government - bringing in the UN to help. This could have avoided the Sunnis, after having no power - in either Iraq or Syria, forming ISIS. Needless to say, even if everything went as well as could reasonably be expected, he would be blamed by the right for "losing" Iraq, when it did not become the democracy that the neo cons expected to lead the middle east into becoming a paradise.

He likely would have joined the Iran talks - as he urged in the debates -- and as he worked on in the Obama years. Note that the Right is currently trying to set him up as the man who made Trump's negotiations - that do not include talking to Iran, but tweeting threats and increasing sanctions - fail.

I would expect that Kerry would have done far more to deal with the foreclosure crisis - in the Senate he and Smith (R, Oregon) had a proposal that the Republican Senate approved, but which the Republicans took out in the conference bill - that might have made derivatives failing less common - as fewer loans failed. However, it likely would have happened.

I suspect that he might have lost in 2008.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

129. In the book he writes he lost an election he should have won.

He's being way too hard on himself. He outperformed the fundamentals. Re-election campaigns are referendums on the incumbent. If voters like the job he or she is doing they vote to re-elect him or her. If they don't like the job an incumbent is doing they don't vote to re-elect him or her. Approval rating is high correlated with an incumbent's share of the vote. Bush was hovering around fifty percent on the day of the election and that's where he ended up.

Fast forward to the present. If Trump doesn't improve his approval numbers he's in real trouble.


P.S. And let's not forget Bush was > 90% approval in the immediate aftermath of 9-11.

[karynnj]

132. That's who he is - and it is refreshing to have a leader who takes responsibility

He did outperform the fundamentals, but anyone who comes as close as he did has to second guess if doing anything differently would have worked out. However, as you implied in the other post, it is never clear what would have happened if you change anything.

Years ago, he had a very simple reply to someone asking what could have changed things - and he responded that maybe too many people were still too impacted by 911 when they rallied around Bush in the aftermath and he could not pull enough of them away.

As it is, though Trump is working hard to destroy everything, he might have accomplished almost as much as SoS. Neither the Iran deal or the Paris Accord would have happened without his work. In addition, though it never was high profile, he initiated the international Our Oceans conferences, which have continued and are making an impact.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

134. I usually like Bill Clinton but he gave John Kerry awful advice.

If Kerry followed his advice and came out in favor of the various anti-marriage equality amendments in the various states he would have looked like an hypocrite. Not only would he have lost votes but he would have lost his soul. All politicians are trimmers, to some extent. Politics isn't a business for saints but there has to be issues that are non negotiable, like the dignity of every individual.

[karynnj]

137. When Kerry was given the top medal France awards foreigners, the FM referred

to him as "an unusually decent person". I think Kerry is more like Carter, in having a solid moral core.

One thing that bothered me in the Boston Globe account of his life is that they quoted his answer to Morey Safer (as a 27 year old) of whether he wanted to be President as - saying that he did not know if could do what needed to be done -- when his full answer (on 60 minutes) was that he did not not know if he could do what needed to be done and keep people happy enough with him. This angered me because the full answer refuted many RW "memes". It shows that he knew that his antiwar protests could prevent him from ever being a politician - and he did them because he thought they were the right thing to do.

(I like the comment on the photo with the pope - that he called Kerry an ambassador of peace. That had to mean the world to him.)

[LibFarmer]

69. Great post

One more factor is that the non-Biden vote will continue to be fragmented and with each win, Biden will become more and more formidable.

If Biden wins IA and NH, it is pretty much over because Biden in going to win NV because of the support of SEIU and SC.

Everyone else is now running for name recognition the next time around or for VP or to write another book to add to the millions.

Also, with leads like this, no one can claim that DNC somehow rigged the election.

[Honeycombe8]

70. I don't think that's the key takeaway. We already knew Biden had a big lead. The takeaway....

The takeaway is the surprise. The surprise is that Harris, Pete, and Warren have risen significantly in the polls there.

[Gothmog]

185. The 15% rule may keep sanders from getting any delegates in South Carolina

Last edited Wed May 22, 2019, 03:45 PM - Edit history (1)

[karynnj]

191. If the numbers months from now at the primary are the same as now,

even scaled up because of those not making a choice, no one BUT Biden would get delegates. However, remember that - in other years with a wide open nomination - things have changed very quickly.

One recent example was 2004 - in one national poll in December 2003, Al Sharpton polled above John Kerry, who was steadily gaining strength in Iowa. After a win that surprised the national pundits (even though the Des Moines Register had him number one in their poll), he suddenly was polling ahead nationally.

I suspect that it is possible for one or more candidate - not currently close - will win over people in Iowa, NH or the next group of states, including SC and NV - and even if they are not number one, they will gain the attention needed.

[NYMinute]

62. fAkE PolL nT

[Honeycombe8]

68. That's SC. Was he ever very high in the SC polls?

If he was...that's great for Harris, Buttigieg, and Warren!

[honest.abe]

94. Sanders was in the 20's back in Feb-Mar.

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/03/02/south-carolina-2020-poll-biden-leads-primary-field-by-wide-margin-president-trump-popular-with-base/

He's losing steam everywhere.

[Honeycombe8]

107. Bad news for him. Can't say I'm upset by that. Thanks. nt

[PatrickforO]

83. Interesting that Biden should have such a huge lead.

I'm happy to see Harris, Buttigieg and Warren in the top tier.

We'll see how things play out moving forward. There is a lot at stake.

[SidDithers]

86. Quick! Call Killer Mike!...

It's time for another SOUL FOOD lunch.

Sid

[oasis]

108. "Gun enthusiasts" such as Killer Mike may be considered radio active

to a 2020 Democratic campaign.

[zentrum]

89. Yet with so many of Sander's policies! Yay!

[helpisontheway]

91. Good!!! I don't want him to be our nominee...However, he is so spiteful

that he might run as an independent to get back at Dems.

[kurtcagle]

193. There's likely to be more independents this time around as well, which bodes poorly for Sanders

Sanders would sink as an independent, particularly if (as I suspect will be the case) you get an early independent challenger to Trump from one of the former Republicans. My sense is that Trump's support at this point is a lot softer than it appears in part because a lot of neverTrump Republicans might not necessarily be willing to vote for a Democrat (though I think they WOULD vote for Biden before they voted for a self-declared socialist), but they will vote for a third party candidate. The RNC's attempts to keep anyone else from being on the primary ballot on the Republican side will likely backfire on them as well, as it makes a third party independent candidate MUCH more likely to go into the general election.

[Zambero]

93. Bye Bye Bernie

No Hillary foil, no cigar.

[amuse bouche]

96. Good news.He needs to step back and just support actual Dems

[MineralMan]

98. If you add up all of the five candidates' percentages,

that comes to 37%. Biden has 42%.

That is a telling difference, I think.

He's beating his closest five opponents combined results by +5 points.

WOW!

[mcar]

99. Nice to see Sens Harris and Warren moving up

[Partisan D]

116. He's toast ... (eventually)

Yes, things change. But it won't be with Sanders. He has had the same shtick for 40 years.

Biden wins Iowa, Pete 2nd place.
Biden wins NH, Warren or Sanders 2nd place.
Biden blows away everyone in Nevada.
Biden blows away everyone in SC.

Sanders is toast this time.

[aikoaiko]

122. I love how people define politics by Bernie Sanders.

It's one of the things I like about Bernie. Whether you love him or hate him, people just can't seem to ignore him.

[honest.abe]

125. Its like not being able to ignore a gorilla in your powder room.

[aikoaiko]

139. I kinda agree.

[Tiggeroshii]

126. Yet on the verge of overtaking biden in iowa

Where they are virtually tied in current poll average. In 2016, Clinton was ahead of sanders by 40-50% at this point in the race. She won iowa by.2%. If he can overcome a 50% deficit in 2016, I'm sure he can overcome a 4% deficit in 2020 and 30% deficit in sc like he did in iowa in 2016.

[honest.abe]

127. That poll was an online poll by a pollster rated C+ by 538.

Probably flawed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

131. He has one hundred percent name recognition

Among African-American respondents — who are expected to make up the majority of voters in next year’s primary — 52% named Biden as their top choice, compared to 11 percent for Harris and 5 percent for Booker.

And he's polling at less than 5% among this critical group.

[Tiggeroshii]

133. He did pretty well in name recognition before Michigan where he was 40% behind.

And won. Polls mean little, and his ability to overperform most polling needs to be taken into account when considering his viability.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

136. You better hope almost every poll has thirty point margins of error.

How do you explain that even in his best poll:

https://iowastartingline.com/2019/05/20/starting-line-change-research-poll-biden-sanders-locked-in-iowa-tie/


he lost fifty percent of his support from 2016?

[Tiggeroshii]

138. By the fact they are probably no more reliable than they were in 2016?

We will see. There have been no debates, ads or a whole lot of campaigning almost a year until the first primaries. I just wouldn't use polls to declare victory almost a year from the first primary. I will promise you one thing, however: Whoever is ahead after Super Tuesday, I will fully get behind. We have no use for a long, damaging primary like 2016 clearly was.

[highplainsdem]

135. I posted that Change Research poll here earlier today, and included the caveats about the poll's

reliability in the TPM article about it.

I decided to post it, even though it isn't the most reliable poll, to give Sanders' supporters here some good news (and because I usually post any poll I find, if another DUer hasn't already posted it).

At the moment that poll seems to be an outlier.

There's no sign in most of the polls of Sanders "overtaking" Biden. If anything, he seems to be steadily losing support to Biden and Warren.

[Gothmog]

186. Only if you trust.an unreliable online poll

[comradebillyboy]

141. Allison Kraus is pretty wonderful. I've been a fan since the 80s.

[George Eliot]

143. date represents May 6 to 9. 595 people. Only includes 200 Ds and Is. Rs not included in count.

Don't know if you can open. Hope so. https://docsend.com/view/5eniwwe You can find it here but you have to provide email and they send. https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/the-safe-choice-biden-widens-sc-lead-in-democratic-presidential/article_f727895c-731f-11e9-888a-af4280777b2a.html

Skewed Republican for sure. Read it.

[honest.abe]

145. Thats a different poll.

[George Eliot]

147. Are you sure? I don't think so. IF you think so, post the poll source.

[honest.abe]

148. The link in your post goes to a poll conducted by Change Research.

The OP poll was done by Crantford Research.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

149. Why do we care a lot about SC? Dems aren't going to win those Electoral Votes.

I don't understand why a state that is NOT going to go Dem has such an early impact on the primaries. But, I'm not on the DNC, so I must be missing something.

But, hey, good to see Biden is getting support from people. I don't have a problem with that. Just not sure why it's a big deal he's going to win a primary state he will lose in the general if he's the nominee.

[honest.abe]

154. The importance has nothing to do with winning the state in the general.

Its about the demographics of the state which portend the winner to do well in other primaries in southern states and other similar states.

[Autumn]

150. Whee!! I'll save my excitement for when any Dem who wins the primary in SC wins in the general.

SC hasn't gone to the Democrats in a Presidential election since 1976 when Jimmy Carter ran.

[Kurt V.]

151. + one million . hard to figure ppl sometime

[Autumn]

152. What's hard to figure out is what a poll showing any Dem candidate ahead in SC

is something to be excited about. Other than it knocks out the candidates they don't like it means nothing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

155. It couldn't be because

It couldn't be because partisans of a certain candidate refer to the group that forms a majority of voters in the Palmetto State low information voters, i.e. stupid.

[Gothmog]

159. LOL

[Autumn]

161. "partisans of a certain candidate refer to the group that forms a majority of voters in the

Palmetto State low information voters, i.e. stupid." Who would that be? And who the fuck ever said that SC voters are low information voters, i.e. stupid? What does that have to do with SC not voting for a Democrat for president? Not surprised at all that's where you go to. Facts are facts. SC has not voted for a Dem president since 1976.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

168. Please see Post 163

Thank you in advance.

[Autumn]

189. No interested in tracking down your post. Thanks anyway. nt

[George II]

187. This isn't the general election, this is the primary we're talking about....

The winner of the South Carolina primary has gone on to win the nomination in five of the last six contested primaries going back to 1992 (1996 and 2012 were not contested since the incumbent President was Democratic).

To even the casual observer the South Carolina primary is very important, at least about 83% of the time.

[Autumn]

194. Yes. After the primary comes the GE. A Democrat has not won SC in the GE since 1976.

I'll get excited when a Democrat, any Democrat wins SC in the GE. A Dem winning SC in the GE primary is a win. A Dem winning the SC primary and not the GE? That, in my books is a loss and I'm not going to get excited about any poll numbers for any Dem in SC.

[George II]

195. Remember, NO Democrat who has not won the nomination of the Democratic Party has won....

....the general election in a long, long, long time.

[George II]

192. I remember that, it was like blacks in the south weren't capable of voting....

....intelligently on their own. It wasn't just the Palmetto State, it was throughout the South.

[George II]

165. Apparently it's something that excites Senator Sanders, he's already had about a half dozen....

...campaign stops in South Carolina since March. Must be pretty important to him.

Sanders hopes to be more competitive in S. Carolina in 2020

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — South Carolina gave Bernie Sanders the cold shoulder in 2016. Four years and several visits later, Sanders hopes the state is ready to warm to him.

The Vermont senator has spent months working to deepen his ties with the black community in South Carolina, where minority voters make up the majority of the Democratic primary electorate. He returned to South Carolina on Thursday for the first time as a 2020 candidate, eager to prove that those efforts put him in a more competitive position in a state he lost by a staggering 47 points.

Before a mostly white crowd of more than 1,500, Sanders recounted the ways in which his 2016 campaign has influenced the current sprawling Democratic field, including pushes to expand the minimum wage and revamp health care options.

“Well, a funny thing happened over the last several years,” Sanders said.

https://www.apnews.com/5dd0273098d34ba09f191e0d3839d4f7

[honest.abe]

156. This is a Democratic primary with Democratic voters.

What happens in the general is pretty much irrelevant.

The importance of SC is that its a bellwether state for other southern states and other states with similar demographics.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

157. Does

Does it seem that some people seem to hold some groups which make up our great party in higher esteem than others?

[honest.abe]

163. Yeah, it seems they want throw out all those "unimportant" states.

I guess those voters aren't good enough.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

166. It seems someone is taking umbrage to my remarks.

I.Don't. Care.

[Gothmog]

162. Agreed

No one can win the Democratic nomination without support of African American voters. I understand from Nate Silver that sanders plan was to hope for a split of the African American voter, get 30% of the delegates and win in a contested convention

Link to tweet

That plan does not look viable now.

[Autumn]

171. SC has worked out well for Republicans in the GE since 1976 . nt

[honest.abe]

174. Shall we skip all the Red states or maybe score them lower?

Would that satisfy you?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

175. Everything was chill and then out of the blue comes an attack on the South Carolina Democratic

Everything was chill and then out of the blue comes an attack on the South Carolina Democratic primary. I wonder what about the Palmetto State Democrats make them a target for derision

[honest.abe]

177. I think they are coming to the realization that their fav candidate has no hope in SC.

Thus they must now dismiss its importance.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

179. A surrogate for a certain candidate compared it, I kid you not, to Guam

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/04/07/tim-robbins-apology-guam-bernie-sanders/82749950/

[honest.abe]

181. Yeah, I saw that.

Absurd comment.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

182. It is insulting to the people of both Guam and South Carolina.

[Gothmog]

160. No one can win the Democratic nomination without significant support from African American voters

South Carolina is a great state for measuring the support of the African American voters. The lack of support from this key voting block could explain why sanders is in 5th place in this state

[Autumn]

164. And SC has not been won by a Democrat in the GE since 1976. Fact. nt

[Gothmog]

167. How does sanders propose winning the nomination if he gets no delegates in South Carolina??

If sanders finishes 5th in South Carolina, sanders will likely get no delegates due to the 15% rule. I am curious has to how sanders expect to be the nominee under such circumstances

[Autumn]

176. I don't expect him to win SC, he didn't in 2106. Hillary won. Remember?

Trump won the state in the GE, as every Republican has since 1980. As I said, I'll get excited when a Democrat, any Democrat wins SC in the GE.

[Gothmog]

188. Due to the 15% rule, sanders may not get any delegates in South Carolina

[honest.abe]

169. So? What's your point?

Are Democrats in SC less important than Democrats in say Vermont?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

170. That's an excellent question, Honest Abe.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

172. Does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to vote?

[Tarheel_Dem]

173. If that's the case, why has Sanders spent so much time there?

[Autumn]

178. Like all candidates he wants to win the nomination. Do you need primaries explained to you?

A primary election is the process by which voters, either the general public (open primary) or members of a political party (closed primary), can indicate their preference for a candidate in an upcoming general election or by-election, thus narrowing the field of candidates.

:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

180. "Do you need primaries explained to you?"

What would lead you to believe a poster in the Democratic Primaries forum needs "primaries explained" to him or her?


Thank you in advance.

[Autumn]

183. I think my response to that post was very clear, concise and on point. You're welcome. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

196. But you spoke as if SC doesn't matter because Dems don't win it in the GE. But you now admit that..

it does matter if Bernie wants to win the nomination? Did you come to that realization after finding out that BS has spent an inordinate amount of time in a state he'll never win in a GE?

[Autumn]

197. I said. It doesn't matter to me. I came to the realization the last election that whatever Dem

polls well in SC doesn't mean squat because when the votes that matter are counted it means nothing because SC goes with the Republican. Unlike you, Bernie is not the only thing that my mind dwells on. Biden, Warren or Harris being preferred by voters in SC during the primary only matters to SC. As I said I'll get excited when a Dem gets their electoral votes in the GE. Again that hasn't happened since 1976 and I doubt it will change in 2020.

[Tarheel_Dem]

199. Alrighty then.

[FloridaBlues]

190. Surprised Harris isn't doing better in SC