Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Democratic Primaries

Polybius

(22,021 posts) Tue Feb 18, 2020, 03:13 AM Feb 2020

Sanders up by 19 in Nevada [View all]

Brand new poll. Feel the Bern!

http://filesforprogress.org/datasets/2020/2/nv/nv_2_17_2020.pdf

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sanders up by 19 in Nevada [View all] Polybius Feb 2020 OP

BOOOOOOOOOMMM!! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #1

I nqever heard of the "Data for Progress" poll. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #2

Bloomberg is not on the ballot in Nevada Bumperstickers Feb 2020 #3

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2020 #4

So if Sanders at 35% is accurate, that means he slipped 12 points from 2016. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #6

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2020 #7

well, no. in point of fact -- it isn't. (nt) stopdiggin Feb 2020 #8

Why hasn't he hit 50% in NV with his name recognition alone? SunSeeker Feb 2020 #10

Spare us that tired argument Polybius Feb 2020 #9

Why "of course"? He ran in the Dem caucus there just 4 years ago. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #12

It's unrealistic to think that he'd have the same numbers. tecelote Feb 2020 #14

I'm not the one grasping at straws. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #22

Hillary had around 52% Polybius Feb 2020 #15

"Different time" doesn't explain it. It is the same electorate. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #19

Thanks another excuse Polybius Feb 2020 #23

Nope. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #25

O'Malley never got any traction Polybius Feb 2020 #26

Do you get group talking points ? CentralMass Feb 2020 #13

Do you always resort to insults? SunSeeker Feb 2020 #20

With 60% of the vote in, Sanders has 46% of the vote Polybius Feb 2020 #29

LOL. Sanders got 47.29% in NV in 2016. He slipped even in NV. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #30

1% is basically identical Polybius Feb 2020 #31

1% is all Trump needs to win. Hell, he did it on less than that. SunSeeker Feb 2020 #34

See, now that he tied 2016 with 47%, it's "why didn't he build on 2016?" Polybius Feb 2020 #37

Are you serious with that messed up logic? Bonobo Feb 2020 #39

No he didn't. squirecam Feb 2020 #38

Cue all the people saying Nevada is too White and not an accurate reflection of "real" America in jcmaine72 Feb 2020 #5

Warren second MoonlitKnight Feb 2020 #11

Bernie and Liz 1 and 2 would make me very very happy. Nanjeanne Feb 2020 #24

Sigh, a poll with a conflict of interest no matter the accuracy of one poll uponit7771 Feb 2020 #16

Impressive he found 19 people whistler162 Feb 2020 #17

Data for Progress has a political agenda, and unless other pollesters who do NOT have a political still_one Feb 2020 #18

You were right, they were way off. Bumperstickers Feb 2020 #32

Reading is fundamental. I never said they were way off, I said they had a political agenda, and was still_one Feb 2020 #33

The reply was meant to another post sorry. Bumperstickers Feb 2020 #35

Everything is fine. We are just discussing our differences, and that is a good thing still_one Feb 2020 #36

Never go by just 1 poll. Look at an aggregate. Garrett78 Feb 2020 #21

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2020 #27

It's hard for me to see a scenario where Bernie isn't the nominee now Alhena Feb 2020 #28