Is it just possible that Hillary is polling so poorly against Trump because people can't stand her? She didn't get the message 8 years ago, though it was loud and clear. If Trump were running against my cat, he'd lose. If he were running unopposed, he'd lose. But he is doing neither. He is running against Hillary. Apparently people hate her more than they hate him. Or else they are more willing to hold their nose and vote for him than hold their nose and vote for her. Shocking. Scotty, beam me up.
127
Trump would not hesitate to viciously label Senator Sanders with nicknames if he thought Sanders was a credible threat. Trump would throw out nicknames such as "Rapist Bernie" for the rape essay, "Comrade Bernie" for the communism, "Deadbeat Bernie" for failure to pay child support, etc.
By the time Trump is done framing Sanders, huge swathes of the nation would believe that Sanders is a communist pervert who encourages toddler nudity and is ok with rape. And this is before the full might of the right wing rage machine is unleashed on Sanders.
By the time Trump is done framing Sanders, huge swathes of the nation would believe that Sanders is a communist pervert who encourages toddler nudity and is ok with rape. And this is before the full might of the right wing rage machine is unleashed on Sanders.
148
The hypothetical matchups clearly present an inconvenient truth for Hillary supporters. They would LOVE for the numbers to be reversed because would slam them down the throats of Bernie supporters, citing them as evidence that Hillary is the stronger general election candidate. Instead, the unending slew of November polls are "unreliable" and reflect their handy little narrative that Bernie hasn't been vetted properly. WRONG. Bernie has independents and she doesn't. She has tremendously high negatives and he doesn't. Yes, she beat Bernie in pledged delegates (having driven up her highest numbers in the deep red south, which is NOT an insignificant point) -- but make no mistake: the matchup polls for November ARE reflective of the facts on the ground.
112
I don't think the media could have been more negative on the Sanders campaign so not sure why we keep hearing the "well he's never been attacked before" rubric. And it's a mistake to keep making the assumption that Sanders voters will get behind Hillary. A large proportion of them want to shake up the system and Donald is much more likely to do that.
104
Demographically a Dem wins the Electoral College in November. That fact is far more reliable, as information, than any speculative polls, when the primaries hVe not yet ended. So let go off that statistical noise.
In addition to demographics, add in that HRC will be the nominee. Fact!
Do you want a delusional demogogue in the White House?
I thought not!
So we all need to unite and prevent that! No matter how devoted you've been to Bernie, it's time to facts. And be pragmatic.
I'm 71. I know what it's like to have ideals. I'm not asking anyone to let go of ideals. Just don't be blinded by them.
In addition to demographics, add in that HRC will be the nominee. Fact!
Do you want a delusional demogogue in the White House?
I thought not!
So we all need to unite and prevent that! No matter how devoted you've been to Bernie, it's time to facts. And be pragmatic.
I'm 71. I know what it's like to have ideals. I'm not asking anyone to let go of ideals. Just don't be blinded by them.
204
If the NY Times and polls as well as other media outlets, are aware of these facts, doesn't it behoove them to explain themt the same time they are pretending that Sanders would walk all over Trump but Clinton will barely raise yawns from Democratic voters?
The practice of screaming in big type that only Sanders can really whip Trump,("if the election were held today"), is misleading in a way Americans are not used to seeing media behave. This is more like the sort of reprocessed , third hand politics one expects from a high school or college student newspaper, using sloppily edited articles cut and pasted from journals all over the English speaking world, pretending they have done serious journalistic research and made actual discoveries rather then just appropriated questionable articles from newspapers printed in Northern Canada or Hong Kong.
The obvious issue ignored by the Times is that they legitimizethe idea among many voters that it is a necessity for Sanders to be the Democratic nominee, every time one of these "Sanders is leading Clinton" articles is printed. It is dishonest and amounts to propaganda. This article is hardly corrective.
The practice of screaming in big type that only Sanders can really whip Trump,("if the election were held today"), is misleading in a way Americans are not used to seeing media behave. This is more like the sort of reprocessed , third hand politics one expects from a high school or college student newspaper, using sloppily edited articles cut and pasted from journals all over the English speaking world, pretending they have done serious journalistic research and made actual discoveries rather then just appropriated questionable articles from newspapers printed in Northern Canada or Hong Kong.
The obvious issue ignored by the Times is that they legitimizethe idea among many voters that it is a necessity for Sanders to be the Democratic nominee, every time one of these "Sanders is leading Clinton" articles is printed. It is dishonest and amounts to propaganda. This article is hardly corrective.
57
Cohn and Monkovic acknowledge that given the polling data available now, Sanders performs better than Clinton does against Trump. But, they argue, they don't know the future and that "Presumably most Sanders supporters will ultimately get behind Clinton." But the head-to-head polling already contemplates a two way race! So what Cohn really seems to be saying is that some independent and other voters who now say they would rather vote for Trump than Hillary will change their minds and move to the Hillary column. Is there any evidence for a large projected changing of minds?
They fail to acknowledge that according to exit polls, independent voters prefer Bernie to Hillary 2:1 or 3:1. Winning independents is key in the general. They fail to analyze the significance in a general election of the "enthusiasm gap:" young people who step up by the hundreds of thousands to volunteer for Bernie.
Next, Cohn writes that Sanders has not yet faced a barrage of GOP attack ads. This is a bit disingenuous since Cohn fails to state the almost certain GOP attack ads that Hillary would face: allegations that foreign donors to the Clinton foundations received favors from the Sec of State, allegations that Hillary failed to disclose foreign donations, the on-going FBI criminal investigation of emails, her vote to authorize the war against Iraq (which Trump could say he opposed), her many flip-flops on a range of issues, etc.
They fail to acknowledge that according to exit polls, independent voters prefer Bernie to Hillary 2:1 or 3:1. Winning independents is key in the general. They fail to analyze the significance in a general election of the "enthusiasm gap:" young people who step up by the hundreds of thousands to volunteer for Bernie.
Next, Cohn writes that Sanders has not yet faced a barrage of GOP attack ads. This is a bit disingenuous since Cohn fails to state the almost certain GOP attack ads that Hillary would face: allegations that foreign donors to the Clinton foundations received favors from the Sec of State, allegations that Hillary failed to disclose foreign donations, the on-going FBI criminal investigation of emails, her vote to authorize the war against Iraq (which Trump could say he opposed), her many flip-flops on a range of issues, etc.
76
Just because the media keeps braying this doesn't make it so. Sanders is an old hippie politician who takes advantage of an infrastructure he is not a part of as an independent. I don't like him regardless of his message because he strikes me as a politician who doesn't follow the rules and is like the jerk who cuts in line. His supporters call justify his independence, I call it a manifestation of someone who can't work with others. He is the antithesis of Trump the deal maker. Sanders would be ineffective as president because he has no concept of how to realize his ideas - ranting and raving and blaming everything are not the signs of a leader.
157
Ah, the old trope that Bernie hasn't been attacked yet.
Did we forget when the media went crazy claiming it wasn't Bernie in those civil rights protest photos? Or when Krugman and his pals spent weeks calling Bernie's economic plans fantastical? Or when the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories about Bernie literally the day before Super Tuesday? Or when a Hillary PAC paid online trolls a million dollars to attack Bernie supporters online? Or when somebody dug up an article Bernie wrote on gender roles from 44 years ago that had a line about rape fantasies and took it out of context?
Nothing has stuck. He's still filling stadiums, winning states, raising millions of dollars per month from small donations, and doing better than ever in the polls.
It's not even clear that there ARE more attacks to be made. If people are digging up articles he wrote for a small alternative newsletter 44 years ago and taking quotes out of context, it seems the well may be running dry.
It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because attacks on Hillary are effective, that attacks on Bernie would be too.
Did we forget when the media went crazy claiming it wasn't Bernie in those civil rights protest photos? Or when Krugman and his pals spent weeks calling Bernie's economic plans fantastical? Or when the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories about Bernie literally the day before Super Tuesday? Or when a Hillary PAC paid online trolls a million dollars to attack Bernie supporters online? Or when somebody dug up an article Bernie wrote on gender roles from 44 years ago that had a line about rape fantasies and took it out of context?
Nothing has stuck. He's still filling stadiums, winning states, raising millions of dollars per month from small donations, and doing better than ever in the polls.
It's not even clear that there ARE more attacks to be made. If people are digging up articles he wrote for a small alternative newsletter 44 years ago and taking quotes out of context, it seems the well may be running dry.
It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because attacks on Hillary are effective, that attacks on Bernie would be too.
125
If Clinton loses the November election because a large % of Sanders' supporters refuse to vote for her, she will have lost the election because of her own stupidity based on arrogance.
Even though she has clearly won the nomination she and her supporters (including some of the NYTimes pundits) continue to attack the Sanders candidacy and call on him for apologies (i.e., for him to humiliate himself before the victor). Simply stupid -- they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by attacking Sanders and his enthusiastic supporters. Rather, they should be bending over backwards to praise his campaign and the issues he has brought to the attention of voters, and assuring Sanders supporters that his message will not be lost but will rather be part of the Democratic party's message -- essentially greater economic opportunity and equality for all, protection and growth of American jobs and economy, tax fairness, and election campaigns free from corruption. And most of all, honesty and transparency, as opposed to deference to Wall Street and other big donors.
With that affirmative message she can win over both Sanders supporters and many Trump supporters. With more of what she has been saying and doing, she may well lose.
Even though she has clearly won the nomination she and her supporters (including some of the NYTimes pundits) continue to attack the Sanders candidacy and call on him for apologies (i.e., for him to humiliate himself before the victor). Simply stupid -- they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by attacking Sanders and his enthusiastic supporters. Rather, they should be bending over backwards to praise his campaign and the issues he has brought to the attention of voters, and assuring Sanders supporters that his message will not be lost but will rather be part of the Democratic party's message -- essentially greater economic opportunity and equality for all, protection and growth of American jobs and economy, tax fairness, and election campaigns free from corruption. And most of all, honesty and transparency, as opposed to deference to Wall Street and other big donors.
With that affirmative message she can win over both Sanders supporters and many Trump supporters. With more of what she has been saying and doing, she may well lose.
82
"The second thing is that Sanders just hasn’t faced any major attacks on his record"
Clinton made this same claim, and Politifact found the claim to be false:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/22/hillary-c...
Moreover, Sanders faced a barrage of negative ads from his millionaire opponent in Vermont in 2006
"In the race to succeed Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords, self-made millionaire Richard Tarrant is shoveling piles of money into TV ads attacking his opponent, independent Bernie Sanders."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6137684
Result? Sanders won with 65% of the vote, and won every county in Vermont with a minimum of 57%
Clinton made this same claim, and Politifact found the claim to be false:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/22/hillary-c...
Moreover, Sanders faced a barrage of negative ads from his millionaire opponent in Vermont in 2006
"In the race to succeed Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords, self-made millionaire Richard Tarrant is shoveling piles of money into TV ads attacking his opponent, independent Bernie Sanders."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6137684
Result? Sanders won with 65% of the vote, and won every county in Vermont with a minimum of 57%
76
The PR for Sanders has everybody believing all the independents will vote for him. The false narrative is based on assuming independent voters lean left. They don't don't .. most independent lean right. Sanders would most likely lose a national contest to Trump. Little to no experience for Sanders and obvious failure to reach any kind of middle ground. He continues to burn bridges which will hurt him in the end even though he can't win the nomination.
He is the Ralph Nader of 2016. Ever see "The man who would be king" , Story revolves around a man who starts to believe his own press.. in the movie the people think he is a god. But his hubris get's in the way of what could be a great beginning to a new life for him and his friend. Instead he loses his head in the end. Appears Bernie has lost his.
He is the Ralph Nader of 2016. Ever see "The man who would be king" , Story revolves around a man who starts to believe his own press.. in the movie the people think he is a god. But his hubris get's in the way of what could be a great beginning to a new life for him and his friend. Instead he loses his head in the end. Appears Bernie has lost his.
69
It wouldn't be prudent to dismiss the possibility that Sanders would run better against Trump than Clinton, either. Even many who differ with Bernie tend to like and respect him, and in this election that may count for more than policy differences. My Gen-X son argues that the way people vote these days has much less to do with policy than with personal factors, and Bernie wins hands down on that score.
The seldom if ever asked question of Clinton supporters is whether they would support Sanders if he were the Democrat nominee. The onus needs to be put on them, no less than on Sanders supporters, to declare their support for that nominee, even if it's Bernie. If they would support him, then there's every reason to believe he would run much better against Trump than would Hillary.
I fear it's the center-right wing of the Democrat party, including the NYT, that appears steadfastly resistant to the progressive transformation of the country's political and economic status quo. It's terribly sad to think we are facing an election in which the less disliked candidate may eke out a victory, or actually lose due to the entrenched powers of the self-interested on the right.
The seldom if ever asked question of Clinton supporters is whether they would support Sanders if he were the Democrat nominee. The onus needs to be put on them, no less than on Sanders supporters, to declare their support for that nominee, even if it's Bernie. If they would support him, then there's every reason to believe he would run much better against Trump than would Hillary.
I fear it's the center-right wing of the Democrat party, including the NYT, that appears steadfastly resistant to the progressive transformation of the country's political and economic status quo. It's terribly sad to think we are facing an election in which the less disliked candidate may eke out a victory, or actually lose due to the entrenched powers of the self-interested on the right.
70
Bernie Sanders is like the stopped clock that is right twice a century.
Like Barack Obama, I view the success of Bernie Sanders campaign as a triumph of common sense over political ideology.
Much as media and politicians want to paint Bernie in one stereotype or another (socialist, communist, Jew, atheist), I think his message succeeds because it is so acutely relevant today, to so many people today.
It is a widely shared realization that the status quo in US politics, is a thoroughly corrupt failure. That's what the establishment in both parties just can't stomach; their own rejection.
Like Barack Obama, I view the success of Bernie Sanders campaign as a triumph of common sense over political ideology.
Much as media and politicians want to paint Bernie in one stereotype or another (socialist, communist, Jew, atheist), I think his message succeeds because it is so acutely relevant today, to so many people today.
It is a widely shared realization that the status quo in US politics, is a thoroughly corrupt failure. That's what the establishment in both parties just can't stomach; their own rejection.
44
Sanders has shown his true colors in this race. He is more autocrat than fellow comrade in the "revolution." If Sanders did run head to head against the Republicans and Trump, there would be more skeletons let out of the closet than you see on Halloween.
Bernie has led a charmed-life during this campaign. His "socialist" moniker would be used mercilessly to beat him in any presidential campaign. Sanders needs a reality check as he leads this scorched earth march that can only harm his supporters, long term.
Bernie has led a charmed-life during this campaign. His "socialist" moniker would be used mercilessly to beat him in any presidential campaign. Sanders needs a reality check as he leads this scorched earth march that can only harm his supporters, long term.
83
NYT -- “Bernie Sanders Does Better vs. Trump? Wouldn’t Be Prudent to Assume That”
ABC/Washington Post Poll, 5/22/16: 57% of the US voters hate Clinton as much as Trump:
“Never in the history of the Post-ABC poll have the two major party nominees been viewed as harshly as Clinton and Trump.”
He can certainly do better than Clinton, whose ratings have gone down to Trump’s level in recent weeks.
“Poll: Election 2016 shapes up as a contest of negatives”, Washington Post, 5/22/16
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-election-2016-shapes-up-as-...
ABC/Washington Post Poll, 5/22/16: 57% of the US voters hate Clinton as much as Trump:
“Never in the history of the Post-ABC poll have the two major party nominees been viewed as harshly as Clinton and Trump.”
He can certainly do better than Clinton, whose ratings have gone down to Trump’s level in recent weeks.
“Poll: Election 2016 shapes up as a contest of negatives”, Washington Post, 5/22/16
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-election-2016-shapes-up-as-...
35
"Clinton never really attacked [Sanders], either — no big negative television ad buys, for example — in no small part because she didn’t want to alienate his supporters."
Hmmm... then why has she managed to alienate so many of Bernie's supporters?
Hmmm... then why has she managed to alienate so many of Bernie's supporters?
63
Maybe an appropriate time to poll some of the early adopters of Trump to see if they are OK with the obvious collapse of his earlier promises.
We looked at a transcript ( such as it was ) from just after Super Tuesday #1 and realized Trump has cleverly faded away from his original positions or even stopped mentioning some of the key extremist points that vaulted him into his lead.
No doubt some folks know they have been duped, but most don't know and they are too committed to change horses. Hypothetically many will return to not voting at all, quietly. The question is " Are you angry that Trump lied to you about his plans or do you believe Trump's new promises are lying to you now."
Trump is an analysis of his conflicting lies. Trump is looking at the $15 minimum wage to pander the Sanders. He will wink at conservative money (that he said he wouldn't take) and hope the Bernies buy the new bull ships.
We looked at a transcript ( such as it was ) from just after Super Tuesday #1 and realized Trump has cleverly faded away from his original positions or even stopped mentioning some of the key extremist points that vaulted him into his lead.
No doubt some folks know they have been duped, but most don't know and they are too committed to change horses. Hypothetically many will return to not voting at all, quietly. The question is " Are you angry that Trump lied to you about his plans or do you believe Trump's new promises are lying to you now."
Trump is an analysis of his conflicting lies. Trump is looking at the $15 minimum wage to pander the Sanders. He will wink at conservative money (that he said he wouldn't take) and hope the Bernies buy the new bull ships.
5
Like Trump - Sanders has been big on promises but short on details. At this stage it is easy to overstate your polices without provide details how you would sell these policies to Congress and pay for them. Trump - I will build a big wall - Sanders - free college tuition. End of the day talk is cheap.
63
If Elizabeth Warren, the other great hero of the left, though Mr. Sanders could win the presidency, she would have endorsed him long ago. It would have made a material difference in the primaries and she knows that. She also knows that Mr. Sanders cannot win a general election and she does not want a Trump presidency.
52
I never get tired of quoting W.C. Fields in this regard:
“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ”
“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ”
24
"Presumably most Sanders supporters will ultimately get behind Clinton." I don't think it would be prudent to presume that.
62
Thanks Nate & Toni, sounds like Hillary's got this thing all sewn up. Other than the fact that Sanders is routinely speaking to thousands of enthusiastic voters and Clinton is routinely speaking to the elite at exclusive dinner parties.
159
There is a REAL issue with Sanders calling himself a Socialist even he modifies it by saying he is a Democratic Socialist. No, he is NOT a Communist or Totalitarian 1-part Socialist a la USSR. Sanders says he wants us to be more like Denmark - which has largely followed the Nordic Model of Capitalism - for decades they have been mainly governed led by Social Democrats - that's NOT Democratic Socialists (there are Socialist parties that have been part of the governing coalition) - that's NOT just semantics. Social Democrats still believe in free markets and private ownership; vigourous free enterprise and a real welfare state at the same time. Socialists believe in government or common ownership of means of production and property - they do NOT believe in private (even with publicly held corporations) ownership of businesses or property - that's core part of the definition of Socialism. Bernie is a great guy, a rare truly honest politician, and I like many of his policies, but no Socialist can win the Presidential election given the views of Republicans, Independents, and even most Democrats towards Socialism. Bernie has too long a history and consistency (what people like about him) of being a Socialist to be elected. The Republicans would eat him alive.
113
Sanders would sink like a rock the moment he first got Swift Boated. Anyone who doesn't understand that still believes in unicorns and rainbows.
287
The cornerstone assumptions of this piece - that most Sanders supporters will eventually get behind Hillary and that Sanders is vulnerable because he hasn't been attacked yet - are awfully shaky.
This article tries to blunt one of the most persuasive arguments for a Sanders nomination, supported by nearly every poll: he's simply a better match for Trump. It conveniently disregards the considerable baggage Hillary carries into the ring and her dismal unfavorable ratings. It also blows off Sanders' huge advantage with independents, a growing sector of the electorate.
Not your most balanced work, NYT.
This article tries to blunt one of the most persuasive arguments for a Sanders nomination, supported by nearly every poll: he's simply a better match for Trump. It conveniently disregards the considerable baggage Hillary carries into the ring and her dismal unfavorable ratings. It also blows off Sanders' huge advantage with independents, a growing sector of the electorate.
Not your most balanced work, NYT.
166
Left out is the reason Sanders does better in the polls. He's done far better with independent voters in the primaries than Clinton, according to exit polls.
In November, ALL registered voters will be making the decision, not just registered Democrats. And while 28% of registered voters are Democrats, 44% are independents.
According to exit polls, these are the percentages of independent voters who chose Sanders over Clinton in the primaries where they could vote:
71% - New Hampshire
72% - Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois
73% - Michigan
Somehow, the MSM seems determined not to explain why Sanders really is the stronger candidate.
In November, ALL registered voters will be making the decision, not just registered Democrats. And while 28% of registered voters are Democrats, 44% are independents.
According to exit polls, these are the percentages of independent voters who chose Sanders over Clinton in the primaries where they could vote:
71% - New Hampshire
72% - Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois
73% - Michigan
Somehow, the MSM seems determined not to explain why Sanders really is the stronger candidate.
134
I am left unconvinced by the rather facile manner in which this two-some dismisses Sander's advantage vis-a-vis Trump in comparison to HR Clinton's Sander's defense to possible full press Trump attacks that he's really an old time Commie, and the like, is to say yes he's been his kind of socialist all these unchanging years, and yes he still likes Fidel and the Cuban revolution especially compared to what Cuba was like before, and yes he's still proud to have spent a year at a socialist Kibbutz in Israel. The only folks who are bothered by these matters are the ones who would never vote for him anyhoo.
65
I rather believe my lying brain and vote for Hillary than follow these old male legends who are working on things that are of secondary importance to me.
49
I predicted months ago that Clinton would win the nomination and lose the election. Looks like it's going to come to pass.
It's bizarre how much ink the Times has spilt on telling us how Sanders can't win.
And yet, the biggest story in this election is how the Dem's chosen candidate can't put away an upstart socialist.
But sure, even though Sanders has higher approval ratings that Trump or Clinton, and he attracts more independents than she does, somehow Clinton is still the more electable candidate. Looks like a lot of Very Smart People will be quite surprised in November.
It's bizarre how much ink the Times has spilt on telling us how Sanders can't win.
And yet, the biggest story in this election is how the Dem's chosen candidate can't put away an upstart socialist.
But sure, even though Sanders has higher approval ratings that Trump or Clinton, and he attracts more independents than she does, somehow Clinton is still the more electable candidate. Looks like a lot of Very Smart People will be quite surprised in November.
109
None of the pundits or analysts saw Trump coming, so their credibility with me, never very strong, has vanished. Spinning out hypothetical election results more than five months before the actual election is a waste of time.
66
Senator Sanders' proposals would provide an attractive target indeed under a general election scenario. The Tax Policy Center, a joint effort by economists at the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, estimate that his proposals would raise taxes by $15.3 trillion over the next decade (14 times the size of Clinton's proposal).
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-senator-bernie-sand...
It is true that his tax increases are primarily focused on higher-income households, but middle-income households would be affected too, such as by the 6.4 percent rise in payroll taxes and the across-the-board, 2.2 percent income-tax rise. Bernie's massive tax hike (including on middle income Americans) has received very little attention from Hillary, the media, and Republicans - which tells you all you need to know about how seriously they regarded the prospect of him ultimately winning the nomination. Should Sanders have claimed the nomination, he would find that his opponents won't be so gentle.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-senator-bernie-sand...
It is true that his tax increases are primarily focused on higher-income households, but middle-income households would be affected too, such as by the 6.4 percent rise in payroll taxes and the across-the-board, 2.2 percent income-tax rise. Bernie's massive tax hike (including on middle income Americans) has received very little attention from Hillary, the media, and Republicans - which tells you all you need to know about how seriously they regarded the prospect of him ultimately winning the nomination. Should Sanders have claimed the nomination, he would find that his opponents won't be so gentle.
54
The attacks by Clinton and her supporters have been relentless this election, all while playing the victim.
Clinton blamed Sandy Hook on Sanders. She continuously lied about Sanders' stance on the auto bailout, clean power plan, immigration, and healthcare reform. She called him a tool of the Koch Brothers. During the Univision debate implied his revolution was about oppressing people and making them disappear. She literally claimed that he was no where to be found in the 90's when she was fighting for healthcare reform, when he was literally standing right behind her. Her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, literally told people that Sanders was going to take away your healthcare.
Clinton surrogates literally claimed that Sanders was not a part of the Civil Rights Movement. They have used ridiculous assumptions to attack single payer, and that his polices of minimum wage, paid family leave, and infrastructure spending will harm the economy by driving up inflation and interest rates. That the Nevada convention was worse than the 1968 with its out of control violence and chair throwing, despite no verifiable evidence.
Her supporter constantly throw around the race and sex card.
If Clinton and her camp are holding back for unity, then they are doing a terrible job at it. The reason she does not attack him more is that she can't. She has little to no ammo and her previous attacks have come off as ridiculous.
Clinton blamed Sandy Hook on Sanders. She continuously lied about Sanders' stance on the auto bailout, clean power plan, immigration, and healthcare reform. She called him a tool of the Koch Brothers. During the Univision debate implied his revolution was about oppressing people and making them disappear. She literally claimed that he was no where to be found in the 90's when she was fighting for healthcare reform, when he was literally standing right behind her. Her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, literally told people that Sanders was going to take away your healthcare.
Clinton surrogates literally claimed that Sanders was not a part of the Civil Rights Movement. They have used ridiculous assumptions to attack single payer, and that his polices of minimum wage, paid family leave, and infrastructure spending will harm the economy by driving up inflation and interest rates. That the Nevada convention was worse than the 1968 with its out of control violence and chair throwing, despite no verifiable evidence.
Her supporter constantly throw around the race and sex card.
If Clinton and her camp are holding back for unity, then they are doing a terrible job at it. The reason she does not attack him more is that she can't. She has little to no ammo and her previous attacks have come off as ridiculous.
121
Absent a black swan event, Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. If he cared about the results in November, Sanders would have dropped out weeks ago. The notion the Dems will embrace his "message" at the convention is more of fairy dust thinking. When was the last time a plank coming out of a convention dictated anything. It's a serving suggestion, conveniently ignored.
The right including its media stenographers have not laid a glove on Sanders. That's not an accident. Every day he pounds the podium and puts stars in the eyes of his supporters is another day the right doesn't have to spend a dime or a minute diminishing Clinton.
I was hoping to watch the GOP implode but it's much more likely to be the Dems, thanks to a guy who sounds much more like the oh so very certain of themselves SDS proponents on my college campus back in the day, not an adult who understands about nuance and compromise.
The right including its media stenographers have not laid a glove on Sanders. That's not an accident. Every day he pounds the podium and puts stars in the eyes of his supporters is another day the right doesn't have to spend a dime or a minute diminishing Clinton.
I was hoping to watch the GOP implode but it's much more likely to be the Dems, thanks to a guy who sounds much more like the oh so very certain of themselves SDS proponents on my college campus back in the day, not an adult who understands about nuance and compromise.
212
So glad this is out there The sotto voce drumbeat of 'Sanders is better against Trump' never seemed realistic for exactly the reasons stated here. After an entire summer of Trump's inevitable braggadocio and bombast, and in a side by side comparison, I don't think Trump v Clinton is going to be very close either. The only monkey wrench unknown is any 3rd party challenges from the left or right. Bottom line: Trump, as evidenced by his problematic 'white power' delegates will be labeled the retrograde 'racist vote', similar to Wallace in '72. And if that wasn't enough, entrusting the public institutions of a superpower to a 4x bankrupt, thin-skinned, NY casino owner (really, Donalld?) in the face of a senator, secretary of state, and former First Lady, seems equally absurd. This thing is in the bag for Hillary, if there are no severe shocks between now and November, and especially if Sanders owns up after the convention and supports the Democratic nominee.
56
Given the bizarre turn of events, this is an over confident statement. Months ago people were laughing at Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Neither candidate was taken seriously, but both have taken the experts and party faithful by surprise.
Although I am for Bernie, I think (hope?) Hillary Clinton will win, but not by much. It is hardly in the bag for her. If anything, it will be a dogfight. I expect to be up very late on election night.
Although I am for Bernie, I think (hope?) Hillary Clinton will win, but not by much. It is hardly in the bag for her. If anything, it will be a dogfight. I expect to be up very late on election night.
31
Good grief, Bernie Sanders has come from all-but-unknown nationally to an admired respected force for change supported by millions. I find no reason to think Sanders could not be President.
236
How about his dismal record in the Senate and the fact he's considered a bit of a gadfly?
81
The reason that Hillary's voters would all vote for Bernie, and not vice-versa, is a reflection of their candidacies.
Hillary's voters would support any candidate with a (D) after their name. They are committed to the Democratic party, and the while the presumptive nominee is acceptable, so would any (D) presumptive nominee be. Their argument for Hillary is centered on perceived electability, not policy.
Bernie's voters, in large numbers, are people not fully invested in party politics. They need to be convinced to register and vote, they need to believe their candidate will make a positive difference in their lives. They are young and idealistic and maddening to their elders.
8 years ago, young people and urban people came out in large numbers and voted for hope and change, delivering Democrats a result that Kerry and Gore had not. This cycle, it seems Democrats will go back to the Kerry/Gore approach and nominate someone who doesn't inspire unlikely voters to vote. It's tragic, considering the (R).
And news flash: Democratic voters do not listen to swift-boating. Swift-boating is a technique for mobilizing Republican leaning voters to vote. Swift-boating has been done against every Democratic candidate in every presidential election cycle since Kennedy was assassinated. The idea that Republicans can't swift-boat Clinton OR Sanders is laughable and naive.
But by all means, rationalize away the polls...
Hillary's voters would support any candidate with a (D) after their name. They are committed to the Democratic party, and the while the presumptive nominee is acceptable, so would any (D) presumptive nominee be. Their argument for Hillary is centered on perceived electability, not policy.
Bernie's voters, in large numbers, are people not fully invested in party politics. They need to be convinced to register and vote, they need to believe their candidate will make a positive difference in their lives. They are young and idealistic and maddening to their elders.
8 years ago, young people and urban people came out in large numbers and voted for hope and change, delivering Democrats a result that Kerry and Gore had not. This cycle, it seems Democrats will go back to the Kerry/Gore approach and nominate someone who doesn't inspire unlikely voters to vote. It's tragic, considering the (R).
And news flash: Democratic voters do not listen to swift-boating. Swift-boating is a technique for mobilizing Republican leaning voters to vote. Swift-boating has been done against every Democratic candidate in every presidential election cycle since Kennedy was assassinated. The idea that Republicans can't swift-boat Clinton OR Sanders is laughable and naive.
But by all means, rationalize away the polls...
89
Wrong again.
I am with her because I know she has the policies that will work and move the country forward.
Sanders' supporters must realize that they do not have a monopoly in progressivism or morality.
I am with her because I know she has the policies that will work and move the country forward.
Sanders' supporters must realize that they do not have a monopoly in progressivism or morality.
40
i don't understand why Nate claims that if Trump keeps HRC "several notches" under 60% in NY, he'll probably be president. Doesn't she get just as many electoral votes whether she wins with 51% or 99%? What relevance is the size of the victory in a winner-takes-all system to national electoral totals?
NYT Editor -- Mark, it would signify that Trump was having a great day, and would be doing well where it matters, too, in Ohio, Florida, etc.. Toni
NYT Editor -- Mark, it would signify that Trump was having a great day, and would be doing well where it matters, too, in Ohio, Florida, etc.. Toni
5
Thanks Toni. Certainly I can see why this statement COULD turn out to be true. But then, what he was really saying was: if Trump does well everywhere [it matters], then he may get over 40% in NY. That is a very different statement than: if he get's over 40% he'll probably win the electoral college. I'm leery of drawing conclusions about other states' behavior based on an over/under for NY. It's a hunch of Nate's, not an analysis of numbers.
6
"Presumably most Sanders supporters will ultimately get behind Clinton, and, on the flip side, Clinton supporters would have been much more negative on Sanders if he had posed a more serious threat to her victory."
Really? I suspect many Sanders supporters will do what as before, sit it out when faced with the lack of a suitable candidate. The exception will be where Green Jill Stein is on the ballot, but I'd still not expect her to mobilize voters as Sanders does. Yet we're now hearing noises about how Stein will be the blame for Clinton losing. I suspect that the larger portion of the blame will be Clinton's refusal to take the far larger numbers of Sanders voters seriously.
And what could be more negative than the much of what has emerged from the Clinton camp already? It's not so much the attacks on him, as it is the dismissive way in which they've treated the issues important to millions of Americans and the evident lack of interest in doing anything except lip service to change that. When they stay home in November, it'll be because Clinton failed to excite them, not because they're marching to orders from Sanders.
"Maybe Sanders really would have survived all of the attacks from Clinton that would have come if he had been a bigger threat to win the nomination."
The only way he could be a bigger threat is to actually win it, which he is close enough to doing. If that wasn't the case, Clinton would just ignore him. She'd be smarter to embrace him -- or lose.
Really? I suspect many Sanders supporters will do what as before, sit it out when faced with the lack of a suitable candidate. The exception will be where Green Jill Stein is on the ballot, but I'd still not expect her to mobilize voters as Sanders does. Yet we're now hearing noises about how Stein will be the blame for Clinton losing. I suspect that the larger portion of the blame will be Clinton's refusal to take the far larger numbers of Sanders voters seriously.
And what could be more negative than the much of what has emerged from the Clinton camp already? It's not so much the attacks on him, as it is the dismissive way in which they've treated the issues important to millions of Americans and the evident lack of interest in doing anything except lip service to change that. When they stay home in November, it'll be because Clinton failed to excite them, not because they're marching to orders from Sanders.
"Maybe Sanders really would have survived all of the attacks from Clinton that would have come if he had been a bigger threat to win the nomination."
The only way he could be a bigger threat is to actually win it, which he is close enough to doing. If that wasn't the case, Clinton would just ignore him. She'd be smarter to embrace him -- or lose.
70
I'd like to know the percentage of minority voters in those polls that show Trump ahead. Are Latinos in particular being under-represented? I am a canvasser for Hillary in Latino neighborhoods and not only do I meet very few Sanders supporters I find a visceral hatred of Trump and an excitement not only about voting against him but positively voting for Hillary too.
89
I will laugh the most terrifying hue and cry when Trump crushes Clinton because the future was plain to see by all but not by the establishment. What a nice, polite sit-down these gentlemen had discussing the general election prospects. Republican establishment critters never foresaw the Trump primary win and denied the possibility until the end, and now we have the democratic establishment doing the same thing, gently discussing how the world works from their point of view. The democratic establishment operates today on a nasty fuel mixture of negligence and incompetence, and they will be held responsible for the Trump win come November...But how could this have happened, they'll say.
97
This was a very interesting discussion and analysis -- And if anything, just proves why polls and pundits are so notoriously inefficient at forecasting results.
But then, if that means Donald Trump won't be winning New York, or the General Election, I am totally for it.
But then, if that means Donald Trump won't be winning New York, or the General Election, I am totally for it.
22
As a conservative who despises Trump, what I find so scary about his potential is that he doesn't come with the traditional Republican social values baggage. Sure, he might say he's against abortion, but nobody believes him, in the same way people didn't believe Obama was against gay marriage. That allows Trump to at least approach huge blocs of voters who would never consider voting for a traditional GOP candidate beholden to Christian fundamentalists.
It's unfortunate to see Toni resort to the "oh, it's a FOX poll," argument. Most of the recent polls show Trump within a few points, either way, of Hillary. If you want to see a scary poll (from a Trump hater's viewpoint), look at today's Roanoke poll for Virginia which shows the two tied. That's 17 points worse than in January. All, or even most, of that can't be disaffected Bernie bros who will come home in November.
It's unfortunate to see Toni resort to the "oh, it's a FOX poll," argument. Most of the recent polls show Trump within a few points, either way, of Hillary. If you want to see a scary poll (from a Trump hater's viewpoint), look at today's Roanoke poll for Virginia which shows the two tied. That's 17 points worse than in January. All, or even most, of that can't be disaffected Bernie bros who will come home in November.
27
Lots of opinionators hold that Trump got a good bounce out of his consolidation of the nomination, which Hillary hasn't done yet. Don't worry YET.
10
I agree with Toni and Nate: the Republicans are holding their fire against Sanders, hoping that he will be the Democratic nominee.
He polls well now because he has never been subjected to the Republican attack machine. If he were nominated, he'd be dog meat.
Here's a link to a sane analysis of what he would face, published at Slate.com:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_s...
And another, more recently:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_...
He polls well now because he has never been subjected to the Republican attack machine. If he were nominated, he'd be dog meat.
Here's a link to a sane analysis of what he would face, published at Slate.com:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_s...
And another, more recently:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_...
59
Thank you for the links! Everyone should read them.
16
If Bernie were the nominee, you'd read/ see Socialist/ Commie. Plus how much his suggested (only suggested per $Trump) policies would cost. The Republicans haven't gone there -- yet.
43
The establishment did a test run of all this mud almost immediately and it didn't stick. Remember? Bernie honeymooned in the USSR. Bernie said positive things about Cuba. Bernie has "problems" with Black people, doesn't like immigrants, and is a sexist. Bernie will raise your taxes. Bernie just keeps getting stronger and Hillary keeps getting weaker.
13
Remember Ralph Nader? His argument was that there was no difference between George W. Bush and Al Gore, and he persuaded just enough voters to tip the election to W. Think what damage that sentiment - and Nader - did to our country. And where is Nader now? Supporting Bernie. I used to love Sanders and his ferocious advocacy for the underrepresented. But he's lost my respect, and my support. We don't need another Nader, or another Florida debacle. And we don't have the right to inflict our children with the horrendous legacy of a Trump presidency.
306
This makes no sense. Bernie has said from the beginning that he will not mount a Nader-like third party campaign. If Clinton gets the nomination, he will support her and campaign vigorously against the Republican.
7
Why is this sort of narrative still alive? Do you really think that one guy, Ralph Nader, was (is) responsible for the lack of public support for elections in general? Less than half the eligible voters showed up to vote in Florida (and elsewhere). Isn't poor turnout the big problem that has not been solved? Blaming third party candidates personally doesn't move us one iota closer to a solution.
And then there is simple fact that Sanders has clearly stated he will not run separately if he is not nominated by the Democrats. His participation in the primaries is not in any way comparable to Nader's run in the actual election. And the fact that Nader supports Sanders is similarly irrelevant.
And then there is simple fact that Sanders has clearly stated he will not run separately if he is not nominated by the Democrats. His participation in the primaries is not in any way comparable to Nader's run in the actual election. And the fact that Nader supports Sanders is similarly irrelevant.
13
at this point in time,
"national-polling" misses the point:
at least four of President Obama's 2012 Blue states
are now 'in-play' for the Reds,
while none of the 2012 Red states are available for HRC.
if voting occurred today,
the 2000 result would be a wicked recalled-memory:
HRC with the popular vote, but a loss in the Electoral College.
the Dems' Super Delegates will be considering this
potential-result long-before mid-July.
focusing on raw, country-wide voting-totals
is a sure-fired recipe for disaster.
HRC supporters do so at risk.
we do indeed live in interesting times.
and only a massive voter turnout will defeat the GOP.
23
Thank you for the timely article; an example of excellent reporting found in few other, if any, news sources. Just this morning NPR had a lengthy piece on the recent poll showing Trump ahead of Clinton. No depth, no analysis beyond the stark poll numbers.
Ever since this primary battle started between Clinton and Sanders I've tried to tell my friends that the powers that be on the right, from Fox News Nation, where they always treat Bernie with kid gloves, to the Republican establishment, are drooling at the bit to have Sanders be the Democratic candidate. There are hard drives already filled with attack ads that could eviscerate Sanders for positions he takes now and those he took in the not-too-distant past. Comrade Sanders the Communist would be one of the milder takes. Meanwhile, Clinton holds back on attacking Sanders in any way remotely similar because they don't want to, and can't afford to, offend Sanders supporters.
Twenty years of incessant attacks on Clinton are bearing fruit. And Sanders campaign, now seemingly reduced to bitter whining about the unfairness of it all, well, that's just frosting on the caked for the Republicans.
Every day that Sanders carries on this futile struggle for the nomination this nation moves that much closer to having this mean-spirited bully and professional con artist as President of the UN.
Step back NPR, and everyone else, these poll numbers are bogus to a great degree.
Ever since this primary battle started between Clinton and Sanders I've tried to tell my friends that the powers that be on the right, from Fox News Nation, where they always treat Bernie with kid gloves, to the Republican establishment, are drooling at the bit to have Sanders be the Democratic candidate. There are hard drives already filled with attack ads that could eviscerate Sanders for positions he takes now and those he took in the not-too-distant past. Comrade Sanders the Communist would be one of the milder takes. Meanwhile, Clinton holds back on attacking Sanders in any way remotely similar because they don't want to, and can't afford to, offend Sanders supporters.
Twenty years of incessant attacks on Clinton are bearing fruit. And Sanders campaign, now seemingly reduced to bitter whining about the unfairness of it all, well, that's just frosting on the caked for the Republicans.
Every day that Sanders carries on this futile struggle for the nomination this nation moves that much closer to having this mean-spirited bully and professional con artist as President of the UN.
Step back NPR, and everyone else, these poll numbers are bogus to a great degree.
184
It is not Bernie that I fear it is a corporate media that refuses to acknowledge or explain that democratic socialism is the other side of the coin that keeps democracy viable. The best countries in the world in which to live like Denmark, Sweden and Canada have democratic socialism and democratic capitalism. Democracy keeps capitalism and socialism in balance to assure the betterment of society. Fifty years drowning government in the bathtub has left democracy on life support with very weak vital signs.
High taxes and intrusive government may be the only way of reviving democracy and Bernie may be far too conservative.
America needs massive spending in education especially early childhood education to catch up. It also needs massive expenditures in 21st century infrastructure and a realization that the personal automobile is not the way of the future. Eisenhower knew what the needs of the future were back in the fifties, it is 2016 and we need at least 10 years of democratic socialism to find our way to 2001.
High taxes and intrusive government may be the only way of reviving democracy and Bernie may be far too conservative.
America needs massive spending in education especially early childhood education to catch up. It also needs massive expenditures in 21st century infrastructure and a realization that the personal automobile is not the way of the future. Eisenhower knew what the needs of the future were back in the fifties, it is 2016 and we need at least 10 years of democratic socialism to find our way to 2001.
120
As a 76-year old life-long liberal I share a lot of Bernie’s ideals. But I worked my heart out for George McGovern – an authentic war hero – to put an end to the war in Vietnam, and learned a sobering lesson on the limits of unfettered idealism.
To me, the silence toward Bernie on the part of Fox News, talk radio, and the right-wing labyrinth is deafening. For they are assuredly there, lurking in the shadows, their meat-grinder propaganda weapons sharpened and fully primed, waiting patiently, hopefully, prayerfully that the Democratic Party will nominate an old angry Jewish/atheist socialist revolutionary from Brooklyn. Once that dream is granted, they will strike with devastating effect, making the swift boaters look like rank amateurs, utterly eviscerating Bernie’s campaign, and opening a hole the size of a Trump border wall through which the Republican candidate can dance an easy waltz to the White House.
Hillary has been subjected to a decades-long propaganda war of attrition, where the right-wing noise machine made a strategic bet that a relentless barrage of innuendo, distortion and outright lies could turn the nation against her. It is disheartening, but not surprising, that many of the propaganda smears have been so effective even on the left side of the political spectrum. That she is still standing is a testament to her strength and to her grit. There is little more at this stage that the right-wing echo chamber can unleash on her. Not so Bernie.
To me, the silence toward Bernie on the part of Fox News, talk radio, and the right-wing labyrinth is deafening. For they are assuredly there, lurking in the shadows, their meat-grinder propaganda weapons sharpened and fully primed, waiting patiently, hopefully, prayerfully that the Democratic Party will nominate an old angry Jewish/atheist socialist revolutionary from Brooklyn. Once that dream is granted, they will strike with devastating effect, making the swift boaters look like rank amateurs, utterly eviscerating Bernie’s campaign, and opening a hole the size of a Trump border wall through which the Republican candidate can dance an easy waltz to the White House.
Hillary has been subjected to a decades-long propaganda war of attrition, where the right-wing noise machine made a strategic bet that a relentless barrage of innuendo, distortion and outright lies could turn the nation against her. It is disheartening, but not surprising, that many of the propaganda smears have been so effective even on the left side of the political spectrum. That she is still standing is a testament to her strength and to her grit. There is little more at this stage that the right-wing echo chamber can unleash on her. Not so Bernie.
621
Clinton is damaged goods. The fantasy that she is just fine despite the long list of controversies and borderline illegal activities she has been involved with is delusional, as shown by her approval ratings.
51
Why then did Vermont, Bernie's home state, knowing him better than any other state, give Sanders such a rousing affirmation? This is highly unusual when you think of it. Must because he's all we Sanders supporters think he is.
Fox has lost its audience. Haven't you noticed?
(I, by the way, am a 78-year-old lifelong Democrat but one who lost all trust in 'liberals' once Bill Clinton gave away my party to the bankers and hedgies.)
Fox has lost its audience. Haven't you noticed?
(I, by the way, am a 78-year-old lifelong Democrat but one who lost all trust in 'liberals' once Bill Clinton gave away my party to the bankers and hedgies.)
48
No doubt that were Bernie the sole target, this would affect his numbers. But there is a chronic unwillingness on the part of the Demorcratic Party to acknowledge that Hillary Clinton's main reason for lagging in the polls is that, like Trump, she is inconsistent, greedy, and dishonest. She is not as bad as Trump, but when she stands next to him on a debate stage she will be unable to claim any moral superiority. She will try to say that she is more accomplished, but what has she accomplished? Bernie has virtues that many of us admire, even though we realize he won't be able to accomplish half of what he wants to work for. But in this election year many of us are looking for someone who can speak with a degree of moral authority. Neither Trump nor Clinton qualify. People should be calling for Clinton, not Sanders, to withdraw from the race. A Clinton-Trump race for the presidency will be an embarrassment for those of us who live overseas--two Ugly Americans as the only persons with a chance at becoming the next president.
171
She's accomplished much more than Sanders.
14
I'm not looking for moral superiority. Leave that to private life. I am looking for policy.
14
So the votes of 13 million people don't matter because you like Bernie? It's laughable.
16
As much as I had hoped to see Trump v Sanders, as a Sanders supporter I now have my doubts about his ability to beat Trump. Not so much because of Sanders has done or not done, but because Trump (media savvy) is quickly morphing himself to be the GOP's unifying force. His speech at the NRA showed there is no difference Trump, an outsider, and the establishment GOP candidates. He is one of them, and everyday more palatable to the right and some of the center. Sanders, on the other hand, has been beaten up badly by this news outlet, NBC and especially The Clinton (Washington) Post. Versus an established GOP member, vs. a loose-lipped outsider (the former Trump), Sanders will struggle badly in a Nov. match.
I also fear the Hillary candidacy because I suspect if there is an indictable offense related to the emails (she certainly violated the rules if she worked in any decent sized and well managed company, let alone the State Dept), it will surface after her official nomination, and as close to the election date as possible. Sanders has no such baggage.
I also fear the Hillary candidacy because I suspect if there is an indictable offense related to the emails (she certainly violated the rules if she worked in any decent sized and well managed company, let alone the State Dept), it will surface after her official nomination, and as close to the election date as possible. Sanders has no such baggage.
28
Sanders has not been "beaten up badly." If he were the nominee, you would see what that would really mean; see Swift Boating for a recent example of what he would face. The right-wing smear machine has been holding their fire in hopes that they would face Sanders, not Clinton, and have not done anything to try to smear him as they surely would if he were the nominee.
32
"Rules" not "laws"
2
Thank you for the analysis; I've been wondering where this assertion that Sanders makes about who does better against the presumptive Republican nominee comes from. Let's also all remember, that, so far, Hillary Clinton has received 13 million votes, Sanders and the Republican presumptive nominee 10 million each.
126
Remember that the 13 mil vs 10 mil only represents states with primaries not caucus'. Not a very representative figure when that fact is counted.
37
While I am not a supporter, Bernie may well have had more than 3 million more votes if the election rules had open primaries vs closed ones. Trump's daughter and son couldn't switch their registration in time to vote for their own father. Both Bernie and Trump lost millions of votes by closed primaries.
44
Took about 2 seconds of research to find out where the "assertion" comes from. See this summary of polls: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_electi...
1
The popular argument of Sanders supporters that he has momentum (which seems to be more important to them than actual votes) and that Ms Clinton has high unfavorable is totally absurd. If Sanders were the presumptive candidate his unfavorable should be through the roof. Ms Clinton numbers show smear campaigns work. In a country where elections seem to be run on showcasing the other candidates faults rather than their platforms and qualifications,
It is hardly surprising that the two contenders have high negatives. Albeit, well deserved in the case of Trump!
It is hardly surprising that the two contenders have high negatives. Albeit, well deserved in the case of Trump!
129
"(which seems to be more important to them than actual votes)"
I have a news bulletin for you. In November, registered Democrats will not be the only ones voting. 28% of registered voters are Democrats, but 44% are independents.
In contests where independents could vote for Sanders, they went overwhelming for him, almost 3-1 according to exit polls.
71% in NH, 72% in WI, IN, and WA, and 73% in MI for example.
I have a news bulletin for you. In November, registered Democrats will not be the only ones voting. 28% of registered voters are Democrats, but 44% are independents.
In contests where independents could vote for Sanders, they went overwhelming for him, almost 3-1 according to exit polls.
71% in NH, 72% in WI, IN, and WA, and 73% in MI for example.
28
Gee, seeing old video of Ms. Clinton herself taking positions she now disavows doesn't seem like a smear campaign to me. Ms. Clinton does a fine job of smearing herself with her flip-flopping and secret speeches to Wall Street. She reeks of ambition for the sake of power. I don't trust her and will not vote for her.
16
So nice to see reasoned and rational analysis of the Presidential race rather than intangible feelings like momentum and anger. I am fed up with all the polling news outlets are using to fill their pages and air time. What I find so surprising is how much these numbers change in a week now Clinton suddenly more unlikeable? Now Trump suddenly a great statesman? Or is it just way too early to glean any meaningful information?
41
The article by Ornstein and Abramowitz should be must reading before anyone can look at poll results and draw conclusions. I had to turn off the TV this morning from all of the breathless coverage of Trump now being TIED with Clinton, without any context being given.
5
One should look at the momentum of the candidates and their approval ratings. Trump and Clinton are on the increase- if you consider unfavorably ratings. The era of super sized celebrity leaders backed by the establishment is past. Who exactly has chosen these two to run to an electorate that clearly doesn't want either one? The hubris of using the threat of each other is obscene. The issues that Bernie Sanders wants to focus on are crucial to over 50% of the voters. The people running the parties might want to take that into account BEFORE their system breaks down, and they are on the verge of open revolt. The chatty rationale for the Clinton/Trump campaign does not address what needs to be fixed immediately in America. The voters see that- please bread, not circuses; butter,not guns. They represent the status quo- this doesn't fly. The issue is unaddressed ANGER from the middle class and income inequality. Trying to force these two on America is not only wrong, but an open insult to most voters. Why is the press complicit? If you ask some hard questions in your polls you might find the real stories to write about. America deserves better and when Bernie Sanders rises to the top it will be the story everyone predicted but nobody covered. Cover the rate of change, the source and volume of contributions, total number of counties won and favorability. Bernie is going to win because people trust him, even though they might not agree with him. That is the factor no one covers.
67
Far too large a part of the American electorate is under the ignorant, incorrect and "dumb" impression that the solution to all of the Union's problems is all contained in the act of voting for the right person for President. It appears that having been exposed to so many Miss America contests and game shows on TV, or popularity contests in school "model elections", that a large part of our electorate believes that all a President needs do is to will away our problems or call upon our military to crush them, double time. No majority seem aware that Presidents are creatures who govern with the aid and permission of the legislature, and both may be controlled by Supreme court decisions. No President has yet shown an ability to govern alone. A few managed to give this appearance, but in reality, successful Presidents have co-operative courts and legislators.
As long as even media writers are hypnotized by the alleged god like power of Presidents, we will have quadrennial death matches after which almost nothing really changes. EIther we need new , smart candidates or we need a new constitution.
As long as even media writers are hypnotized by the alleged god like power of Presidents, we will have quadrennial death matches after which almost nothing really changes. EIther we need new , smart candidates or we need a new constitution.
25
Bernie winning is a pipe dream and isn't going to happen. Unless you think that the minority should rule, he isn't overcoming the raw vote deficit that he has.
14
"Who exactly has chosen these two ...?"
In the case of Clinton the answer is the establishment Democratic party elite and media like the NYTimes.
In the case of Trump, the majority of GOP voters in the primaries.
Ironically, the GOP choice is at least democratic.
In the case of Clinton the answer is the establishment Democratic party elite and media like the NYTimes.
In the case of Trump, the majority of GOP voters in the primaries.
Ironically, the GOP choice is at least democratic.
1
So Clinton's attacks on Sanders in New Mexico as anti immigrant, in the north east for being pro gun and across the country for not being realistic never happened? Did you forget them because they don't fit your narrative?
228
These are Republican virtues. What the Republicans attack him with will emphatically NOT be the compliments that Hillary has "criticized" him with.
19
Whatever she may have run against him in a primary is hugs and kisses compared to what the GOP Slime Machine would run against an avowed Socialist. Obama isn't one, and they hammered it on him endlessly. You're crazy if you don't think it will be 1000% worse
17
Sanders supporters don't have a clue as to why Sanders remains unscathed. If they think it is because Sanders is as pure as the white driven snowy hair on Sanders head they are deluding themselves.
Listen to any Right Wing shock jock and FOX "News". See if they can ascertain any attacks against Sanders. They won't. The worse thing they call Sanders is a democratic socialist. Some stoop lower to invoke the label communist. But that's it. Most Sanders supporters take those epithets as a badge of courage. It emboldens them.
I've heard nothing but compliments from the Right, how Sanders is fighting the good fight against the "evil", "corrupt", and "untrustworthy" Hillary. Those three words are the most used by the Right Wing to describe Hillary, and they have been dutifully picked up by Sanders supporters. They are mouthing the same words used by the Right to attack Hillary. Good going FOX. You have sold them the Kool-Aid, and they're drinking it.
The GOP dreams are seeing fruition, to have a wounded Hillary limping into a Fall free-for-all against the deeply flawed Trump. It is their only hope of pulling out a victory. If that should occur the GOP and Trump will have to thank in abundance their propaganda machine which has propped Sanders up as a straw man to knock down Hillary.
These dirty tricks is what works when you have a youthful naive segment supporting Sanders. They're being duped and don't know it.
DD
Manhattan
Listen to any Right Wing shock jock and FOX "News". See if they can ascertain any attacks against Sanders. They won't. The worse thing they call Sanders is a democratic socialist. Some stoop lower to invoke the label communist. But that's it. Most Sanders supporters take those epithets as a badge of courage. It emboldens them.
I've heard nothing but compliments from the Right, how Sanders is fighting the good fight against the "evil", "corrupt", and "untrustworthy" Hillary. Those three words are the most used by the Right Wing to describe Hillary, and they have been dutifully picked up by Sanders supporters. They are mouthing the same words used by the Right to attack Hillary. Good going FOX. You have sold them the Kool-Aid, and they're drinking it.
The GOP dreams are seeing fruition, to have a wounded Hillary limping into a Fall free-for-all against the deeply flawed Trump. It is their only hope of pulling out a victory. If that should occur the GOP and Trump will have to thank in abundance their propaganda machine which has propped Sanders up as a straw man to knock down Hillary.
These dirty tricks is what works when you have a youthful naive segment supporting Sanders. They're being duped and don't know it.
DD
Manhattan
476
Polls show that young voters LIKE the idea of socialism.
See, this is what the establishment doesn't get. The next generation doesn't think like they do. Change is coming.
But I think it's going to get bad before it gets better because, like all sick societies, the ruling elites are too full of hubris to see it coming.
See, this is what the establishment doesn't get. The next generation doesn't think like they do. Change is coming.
But I think it's going to get bad before it gets better because, like all sick societies, the ruling elites are too full of hubris to see it coming.
192
Dear E.Nowak:
What you have this year is a disgruntled disillusioned electorate. I lived through the Sixties and this revolution of which you speak is nothing. It is mild, tame, almost innocuous. People thought change was coming in '68. What we got was Nixon, more than doubling the deaths in Vietnam and Watergate, followed by impeachment, Carter's malaise and to top it off Ronnie Reagan. How do you think that revolution worked out? Mind you, we witnessed riots in cities throughout America, buildings bombed by SDS Weathermen Underground, the most horrendous and divisive generational gap in the last century. And what do we have to show for it? The ruling elites you refer to today were those revolutionaries of yesteryear. The Clinton's, John Kerry, they were at the vanguard. Want to see what the future hold for Sanders and Trump supporters? All you have to do is look at "The Establishment" of today. Do think otherwise is delusional.
DD
NYC
What you have this year is a disgruntled disillusioned electorate. I lived through the Sixties and this revolution of which you speak is nothing. It is mild, tame, almost innocuous. People thought change was coming in '68. What we got was Nixon, more than doubling the deaths in Vietnam and Watergate, followed by impeachment, Carter's malaise and to top it off Ronnie Reagan. How do you think that revolution worked out? Mind you, we witnessed riots in cities throughout America, buildings bombed by SDS Weathermen Underground, the most horrendous and divisive generational gap in the last century. And what do we have to show for it? The ruling elites you refer to today were those revolutionaries of yesteryear. The Clinton's, John Kerry, they were at the vanguard. Want to see what the future hold for Sanders and Trump supporters? All you have to do is look at "The Establishment" of today. Do think otherwise is delusional.
DD
NYC
22
Anyone who uses the term "ruling elites" and "establishment" in the same brief post is either a freshman in college, or mentally a freshman in college. We've all felt that we possessed such clarity and vision, and held the same condescending views, but most of us grow out of this. You have no idea how boring and trite your "revolutionary" ideas appear to others. Time to cancel the subscriptions to Monthly Review and The Nation - you're not the vanguard of the proletariat. The real world needs tending to, and African American and Latino voters, and armies of Democratic women, as usual, are going to have to do the work to bail us out.
27
Polls shmolls. For those who continue to cite polls which predict Bernie Sanders would do better against Donald Trump in the general election than Hillary Clinton, I have but one relevant question: Are those the same "reliable" polls which so confidently assured us Hillary would trounce Bernie in he Michigan primary?
23
The notion that Sanders' record has not been examined at this point is, in one word, laughable. Clinton went after him on guns, healthcare, distorted his record on trade, and more. He loudly calls himself a socialist, so that's not exactly a skeleton that the Republicans will be able to drag out. I know that the company line is that Sanders hasn't been examined, so please, enlighten us readers on what exactly this Sanders bombshell is. Considering the fervency that every Sanders slip up has been reported with, if it existed, the press would have gone hog-wild with it. Meanwhile, Princeton Election Consortium has done an actual analysis and found that polls 6 months out are quite accurate. I would not count on Sanders' supporters flocking to Clinton in droves after the convention, especially with the heavy handed admonishments the DNC has been doling out to him lately.
224
The polls also say that from 20% to 40% of Bernie Sanders supporters will not support Hillary Clinton in November. Even if Bernie himself gets down on his knees and begs them to get behind Hillary.
Without that support, Hillary cannot win the Presidency. That means we get Trump, unless a third party nominee like Romney surfaces to split the GOP vote and deny Trump for the sake of the country.
Without that support, Hillary cannot win the Presidency. That means we get Trump, unless a third party nominee like Romney surfaces to split the GOP vote and deny Trump for the sake of the country.
26
Have a look at this
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_...
or this
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_s...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_...
or this
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_s...
3
Psh, please. Have you noticed that there are basically zero attack ads/smears/ et al coming from the right regarding Sanders? Why do you think that is? Some people literally believe that the Affordable Care Act created "socialized medicine" in this country. Socialism/higher taxes/welfare queens/union thugs... these are the scary scary buzzwords that will be screamed from the rooftops by the GOP if Sanders gets the nomination. Just because he isn't hiding the fact that he's "a socialist" doesn't mean that the GOP can't use that as a tool to hammer him with. Sanders supporters have been whining about a "media blackout" for months now. Well, there's two sides to that coin.... not all media attention is good.
7
If the press gave any time to any candidate besides Trump, whose every word they deem a headline, perhaps things wouldn't be close at all. On the other hand, with the news being Trump 24/7, perhaps voters will be sick to death of him by election time, as I already am.
111
@Tess,
Trump 24/7 and being sick of it as you are? Perhaps that's where the term overexposure comes in? Almost a week ago, in a completely different article, someone suggested a 3 day break from Trump. I took the suggestion as best I could. I felt refreshed. One can survive--heck, even thrive--without hearing or reading his name.
5-23-16@11:12 am
Trump 24/7 and being sick of it as you are? Perhaps that's where the term overexposure comes in? Almost a week ago, in a completely different article, someone suggested a 3 day break from Trump. I took the suggestion as best I could. I felt refreshed. One can survive--heck, even thrive--without hearing or reading his name.
5-23-16@11:12 am
8
Both Rubio and Kasich polled better against Clinton than Trump. But at this point it is clear to say that people don't care about electing an 'electable' candidate.
4
No, and using the word assume is never a good idea. Sanders voters are flipping for Trump in the Fall. Read some of the exit polling.
28
I've talked with a good bit of Sanders supporters that are saying they're going Trump over Clinton. It will be interesting to see what actually happens.
I'd assume the majority would go Clinton. However, if anything, this election has showed us that you cannot predict what will happen. I mean, we have made the two biggest con-artist are nominees...
I'd assume the majority would go Clinton. However, if anything, this election has showed us that you cannot predict what will happen. I mean, we have made the two biggest con-artist are nominees...
16
I won't vote for either of them.
Sanders 2016
Sanders 2016
9
No, that is inaccurate. Most Sanders supporters are Bernie or bust and will not play into trying to pick between the lesser of two evils. The ones that cannot write in Sanders will be voting mainly for jill stein. Hillary is a weak candidate and obviously no matter how many times it is shown that Sanders is the obvious better candidate Hillary supporters and the DNC cling to her. Stop trying to make Hillary happen, you will get Trump. She is terrible.
3
"Clinton never really attacked him"
1) Senator Sanders will strip you of your health insurance while a contentious debate over single payer ensues.
2) Senator Sanders is partly responsible for the deaths at Sandy Hook and elsewhere by not "standing up to the NRA" (i.e., refusing to have gun manufacturers held liable for selling legal products, yet losing an election by insisting on banning assault weapons).
3) Sanders isn't really a Democrat: "Well he ISN'T!" -- despite being a real FDR Democrat vs. Mrs. paid speech and hiding transcripts
4) Sanders was absent during the Hillarycare debate (despite the inconvenient signed photo that emeregd -- where she warmly thanked him during that period).
Hillary attacked Bernie on his greatest strengths and tried to make them weaknesses. She is a pit bull and she below the belt time and time again.
3)
1) Senator Sanders will strip you of your health insurance while a contentious debate over single payer ensues.
2) Senator Sanders is partly responsible for the deaths at Sandy Hook and elsewhere by not "standing up to the NRA" (i.e., refusing to have gun manufacturers held liable for selling legal products, yet losing an election by insisting on banning assault weapons).
3) Sanders isn't really a Democrat: "Well he ISN'T!" -- despite being a real FDR Democrat vs. Mrs. paid speech and hiding transcripts
4) Sanders was absent during the Hillarycare debate (despite the inconvenient signed photo that emeregd -- where she warmly thanked him during that period).
Hillary attacked Bernie on his greatest strengths and tried to make them weaknesses. She is a pit bull and she below the belt time and time again.
3)
228
@Rob–those are weak attacks that were meant for democrats to draw contrast. Trump will go for Bernie's character and yes he has skeletons in his closet that oppositional research will show. Don't kid yourself.
224
RJS -- PLEASE, name some.
In his home state, he is wildly popular with Democrats, independents, and REPUBLICANS. He has had a long career and has been vetted over and over by voters. He won a Senate seat, which have very tough elections with a ton of scutiny.
The Clintons have always run dirty campaigns. If there had been anything in Bernie's past, they would have dug it up.
In his home state, he is wildly popular with Democrats, independents, and REPUBLICANS. He has had a long career and has been vetted over and over by voters. He won a Senate seat, which have very tough elections with a ton of scutiny.
The Clintons have always run dirty campaigns. If there had been anything in Bernie's past, they would have dug it up.
140
Don't fool yourself. He's never been properly vetted in Vermont either. Those elections are only marginally contested, and the right amount of money has never been invested. We've heard about Clinton supporting welfare reform, but nothing about Sanders' bizarre fascination with the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and his argument that people lining up for food was a positive thing. Or his honeymoon in the Soviet Union, the same Soviet Union that was imprisoning its opponents in Gulags and where tens of millions were intentionally starved to death in the name of "socialism." You've yet to hear the Rs shine some light on Sanders' economic plan, his voting record (which supported policies which were detrimental to many communities of color), nor on the fact that even his supporters don't want to pay for the policies they're advocating for. There's more to come.
35
Bernie I love you, but, I love our country more---we just cannot survive a Trump--so take a few more weeks to feel the Bern and then, let's get Sec. Clinton into the White House.
563
Would a Clinton presidency really be much better? It's a double-edged sword, either side is gonna hurt.
28
Sorry. There are other options beyond these two. My vote doesnt go to "keep someone out". I will vote for who I believe in or not vote and live with what America has decided.
41
Is this not similar to the arguments some people said in 2000 - no difference between Gore and Bush. With hindsight, I think there was a big difference between the two and that we would have fewer problems today if Gore had won Please let us not make the same mistake again because Clinton is not "perfect ". She is still way better than Trump
25
You don't need polls to know that Trump would much prefer to run against Bernie. Bernie has obviously been treated with kid gloves as Clinton fears alienating his supporters. Trump would fill this vacuum with a fuselage of Bernie mockery and would ridicule by Tweet Bernie daily. Trump debating Bernie ...."Senator Sanders name one real job you have created and worked in your life other than mayor, congressman or senator? " Bernie will come off as an arrogant college kid that never grew up and never worked a real job. The presidency is much more complex than Bernie's one issue and Trump would seize that opening. Though the press is accused of being biased towards Clinton, the real bias is the lack of investigation into Bernie's complete and utter ineffectiveness.
401
"Bernie will come off as an arrogant college kid that never grew up and never worked a real job. The presidency is much more complex than Bernie's one issue and Trump would seize that opening."
Arrogant college kid?
Being a mayor, congressman and senator are not "real jobs"? Being a corrupt lawyer representing Monsanto and Walmart is a "real job"?
The jobs Sanders created as a politician don't count?
What universe do you come from?
Arrogant college kid?
Being a mayor, congressman and senator are not "real jobs"? Being a corrupt lawyer representing Monsanto and Walmart is a "real job"?
The jobs Sanders created as a politician don't count?
What universe do you come from?
234
The fact that you see his "one issue" as something so simple as "one issue" just shows you do not understand the scale of the problem. Clinton claims she'll be able to improve on health care, infrastructure, education, etc, so shes a "multiple issue" candidate. Ridiculous. How do you suppose you can make changes in health care when lobbyists and the like pay money to politicians in such large amounts that it effectively drowns out the concerns for the regular man? How do you suppose you make improvements when lobbyists and the like pay money to politicians in such large amounts that it effectively drowns out the concerns for the regular man? Etc. etc. etc. Bernie's "one issue" is THE issue, its an umbrella that covers all facets of how government will either work for or against the will of the many for the wants of the few. And if you want to know why I wont vote for Clinton, look no further then how she portrays this little "single issue." That's all the information I need to know to understand what kind of President she will be.
7
No, they are not real jobs. Those are government jobs. I thought Bernie voters hated the establishment. How is being a career politician anything other than being "establishment" exactly? Think he's won all those elections without dancing with the same devils the Clintons have, albeit on a much smaller scale? His wife has had a real job or two, but you might wanna look into how the got it and the bogus qualifications she used to be considered - same old same old as everyone else in politics. Why believe the hype?
18
It's absurd to think that Hillary will do well against trump (at least when compared to Bernie). Bernie has way less scandals, and he's immune to Donald Trump's most compelling argument. What's the thing that sunk the rest of the Republican nominees? Trump's "you're bought and I'm not" argument. Hillary can't defend against that because she is the physical embodiment of corruption. Bernie has a people funded campaign, so he can't be criticized for it. Hillary embodies everything Donald would love in an opponent.
210
Way less scandals. Oh, really? Illegitimate son who he initially tried to pass off as product of first marriage. When reporters said to him that the son was the son of his first wife, Bernie said nothing to correct the record. I personally don't care about the illegitimacy issue, but I am bothered about Bernie's failure to say his son is illegitimate.
When Jane ran some small college in Vt. She was accused of cooking the books in her favor. Allegation not proven, but she left with a $200,000 golden parachute. The details surrounding the deal will have to see the light of day.
As the article notes, Hillary has refused to play dirty. I am sure Karl Rove and company has been scrutinizing Bernie under a microscope, so there may be other things out there we know nothing about.
When Jane ran some small college in Vt. She was accused of cooking the books in her favor. Allegation not proven, but she left with a $200,000 golden parachute. The details surrounding the deal will have to see the light of day.
As the article notes, Hillary has refused to play dirty. I am sure Karl Rove and company has been scrutinizing Bernie under a microscope, so there may be other things out there we know nothing about.
143
Yep.. plus his praise of bread lines and the murderous Sandinistas, honeymoon in the Soviet Union (what did he do there, exactly?), his wife's bogus degree which got her the job you cited as well as the previous one, votes in favor of policies which were detrimental to the environment in poor communities of color.. There's only one reason Trump and Hannity are praising him now - it's because they have enough to sink him later. I'm a longtime listener of talk radio and their formula is delightfully formulaic. They despise socialism more than they despise the Clintons, so any sort of praise for a candidate advocating it is strategic, nothing less.
44
Well, both Trump and Sanders have this little problem with releasing their taxes. Sanders "can't find" his taxes? Because his wife prepared them? Are you kidding me? I can find any of my tax returns from the last ten years in five minutes. They are both hiding something in their taxes. Bernie has not had scandals because he has not been subjected to the GOP scandal mongering, and that's it.
23
Republican's have their panties in a bunch because the polls show Trump and Clinton close. Problem. I understand the media and talking heads need a horse race to maintain and audience. But they keep leaving out the Hillary pool of additional millions of voters. You do know Clinton would beat Trump just on her own, but there is another Democrat in the race and he has millions of voters. When Hillary wins the nomination where do you think these Bernie voters are going to go? A small percentage to Trump or won't vote, the rest like every Presidential election and now Republican's already have, to their preferred Party nominee. Hillary has a several million voter upside the second she wins the nomination, race over, case closed, Democrat's by a landslide.
72
@Jim Russell,
Perhaps the case is closed. We'll know for sure after election day, provided the country doesn't have anymore voting problems on that day.
5-23-16@11:30 am
Perhaps the case is closed. We'll know for sure after election day, provided the country doesn't have anymore voting problems on that day.
5-23-16@11:30 am
6
There were 3 million Independents kept out of the New York Democratic primary by the Democratic National Committee and Governor Cuomo with New York's 193-day rule (Independents had to reregister as Democrats no later than October, 2015 in order to vote for Sanders in the April 19, 2016 primary). Hillary won by approximately 250,000 votes over Sanders, notwithstanding the mass disenfranchisement of New York's 3 million Independents.
If you were an Independent in New York, would you vote for Hillary in the national election unless Bernie Sanders asked you to do so? I would not. There were other states like New York in which Democratic Party rules kept Independents from voting for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party nominee for President.
Hillary Clinton better keep her promise to debate Bernie Sanders in California before the June 7 primary there, or she is going to have more problems than she knows how to deal with in Philadelphia. And, I am not talking about any violence or threats of violence from true Bernie Sanders supporters.
I, for one, am not going to vote for Hillary Clinton in the national election unless Bernie Sanders says to do so.
If you were an Independent in New York, would you vote for Hillary in the national election unless Bernie Sanders asked you to do so? I would not. There were other states like New York in which Democratic Party rules kept Independents from voting for Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Party nominee for President.
Hillary Clinton better keep her promise to debate Bernie Sanders in California before the June 7 primary there, or she is going to have more problems than she knows how to deal with in Philadelphia. And, I am not talking about any violence or threats of violence from true Bernie Sanders supporters.
I, for one, am not going to vote for Hillary Clinton in the national election unless Bernie Sanders says to do so.
5
Mainstream democrats just don't get it. Bernie supporters are not coming back. The party establishment has alienated a huge block of younger voters, and a good amount of the no longer so young. They are not going to vote for Clinton. She represents everything that they are fighting against.
7
Calif Congressman Xavier Becerra would make a good running mate for Hillary, under her new campaign theme, "Stronger Together"
7
Trump will have a field day with the crazy grandpa from an inconsequential state