Home | About | Donate

Enthusiasm Gap? Quarter of Sanders Supporters Unwilling to Back Clinton in General


Enthusiasm Gap? Quarter of Sanders Supporters Unwilling to Back Clinton in General

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

A new poll that shows presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders inching ahead of rival Hillary Clinton nationally also indicates that fully one in four supporters of the Vermont senator say they would not back Clinton should she nab the Democratic nomination.

"Right now, the Sanders voters are more reluctant to support a Clinton candidacy," said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion in New York, which conducted the McClatchy-Marist national poll.


A different version of this article in the Sacramento Bee stated that some Bernie supporters would vote for a Republican. I find that hard to believe. More likely they would write his name in or vote Green or Peace and Freedomn.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Normally, I wouldn't have any problem with this, if fact in 2012 I voted for Rocky Anderson because Obama stopped talking about climate change and I live in a very "blue" state that was not contested, but I believe right now there is a climate emergency which is really is an existential threat and could actually transform the earth into a pretty hostile planet for human living for thousands of years. So these are not normal times. In fact, nothing like this in human history has ever occurred. The US is the key country when it comes to this global issue. If the next president is a climate denier the consequences in the long term could be virtually unimaginable. We absolutely need Sanders or Clinton to be the next president. Whomever is the next president should continue the progress that Obama has made on international cooperation on fighting climate and provide strong leadership at the meeting in 2020 to strengthen the Paris climate agreement. I would hope all people who are understand this emergency situation will vote for the Democratic nominee to try to save us from would could be a brutal catastrophe resulting in a population crash later this century or perhaps next century that is almost beyond comprehension.


Super delegates will not decide the nomination. If Sanders gets the number of pledged delegates he needs he will be the nominee. At which point, yes the supers will get on board.


It is not going to be a problem. No need for insults. Now if someone says they are going to vote for Trump or Cruz, insult away.


I will write Bernie Sanders in.

After all of the low things (and lies) Clinton, her supporters and the media have done to try and knock Bernie down I can't feel comfortable supporting her.

I do agree though that very few Bernie supporters would switch to a republican...


More ammunition against the myth of Hillary's supposed better electability.


Yeah, all the Clinton supporters I see calling Sanders a communist etc. will vote for him. That's bullshit. Only Sander's supporters have been repeatedly hounded from the start of this campaign to make some sort of loyalty oath to Clinton, not vice versa. That is demeaning, degrading, condescending, and frankly asinine to ask before the primary is even over, let alone months ago and every day since.


I don't care a whit about the corrupt Democratic Party. I'm an independent in NY and I'm being shut out of the primary because I didn't affiliate with the "club" LAST OCTOBER. If Bernie loses NY, the closed primary is the reason. I will ultimately vote for the candidate whom I think would be the best for the country, and that sure ain't Hillary. Thanks to the Greens, I've got a Plan B.


The groups of voters are totally different. Of course the Clinton folks would support Sanders. He has a D next to his name. That's what drives them first and foremost. Much of Sanders support comes from the alienated, people who don't think in terms of 'party uber alles'.
What surprises me is that the percentage of Bernie or Busters is so low. It tells me that they're not especially serious about the so-called political revolution, because they're placing standard issue lesser evil politics ahead of what was supposed to be a movement.
And if this holds, and Clinton wins, then this "movement" is stillborn, and it becomes just another election of candidates running on "I'm not them!!"


It is brilliant if you're not driven by fear appeals.

It's amazing how something that should be at least easy to understand is not being understood. You might not agree with it, but you could at least take the trouble to understand it.

A lot of people are no longer satisfied with merely "stopping those guys!". It hasn't gotten them anywhere. They're trying something different. And I don't blame them, because their lives will never improve if the Democrats can take them for granted. That has to be broken up, even if it means throwing an election or two to the GOP. The so-called "stupid" right has this figured out. What's up with liberals?


I will never vote for this woman:


You really can't figure out why millions of people with their lives stretched thin and their backs to the wall by the government of the people, by the corporations, for the corporations, are utterly disgusted with Hillary Clinton, one of the leading exponents of the sell-out of the Democratic Party to those same corporations? And see the election of Hillary Clinton as a loss, at a critical time in US and world history, not in any way a win?

You don't understand that? You're not very smart.


It does seem kind of spoiled. But what does "support" mean? If they're saying they won't vote for Clinton, then Keith seems pretty right on in his characterization. Are they bluffing? I don't think that'll work. Sanders has a very, very, very, very good platform. But I don't think we should forget half the meaning of a Democratic victory is keeping the dangerous and ignorant insurgency members [as Chomsky calls the Pub party] out of the White House. Whatever Sanders wants to do, big struggles are ahead...like in the days of the sequestering....congressional politicians and state politicians. The struggle would be worth it, though Koch money in media (and the hard facts) might make it seem in moments like the nation's gonna crash. Half the meaning of Bern winning will be keeping the Pubs out--we have no idea how the neocons'll try to "preempt" whatever gets introduced.

Listen to the whole thing. http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=15999


"The results reflect ambivalence on the part of a controversial subset of Sanders supporters." Ambivalence? Huh? I'm crystal clear in my lifetime resolve to never vote for a war-mongering, Netanyahu-loving, disastrous trade-deal supporting, fracking and nuclear pushing, truth-twisting, corrupt, establishment elite, equivocating politician of any stripe. Vote for Hillary? Not a chance. Bernie or bust!


Thanks for confirming your incapacity to acknowledge the totally legitimate, factual, reality-based reasoning for complete rejection of Clinton.


I like Bernie Sanders that's why I'm voting for him. If I were to write in Bernie or vote for jill stein i'd be doing it b/c those are two people I would like to see as President. The big difference I see between HRC and Trump is that Hillary will be effective at getting things done... really shitty things that involve more trade deals and fracking. Four years of Trump would be embarrassing, eight years of Clinton a disaster.


Because you have never insulted anyone here... Oops, we can read your insults. Thanks!


Yes. Yours is a clear, decisive, principled answer.