I'm confused. Why did I just get an email from MoveOn claiming the latest polls show both Clinton and Sanders have lost their lead over Trump?
If these were the numbers after the Democratic nominee was chosen then I would be worried. Right now the polls are comparing a presumptive nominee with a candidate still in a primary fight. The Republicans are mostly now supporting Trump despite his abhorrent racist and xenophobic politics while the Democrats remain spit. You cannot expect to get valuable polling data in that situation. Trump seemed to start closing the gap with Clinton after he became the presumptive nominee. Meanwhile Clinton is still battling it out with Sanders.
From the headline: "Should Dems Be Freaking Out? In First, National Polling Average Shows Trump Over Clinton"
"Dems" (the "leadership" of the Democratic Party) should not be "freaking out," they should be calmly and rationally preparing to nominate Bernie Sanders at their convention in Philadelphia. They should be calmly but firmly preparing Hillary Clinton to drop out.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Truth, fiction, or friction?
Bernie, The Donald, or Hillary?
(Hint, the last two are interchangeable.)
Should Dem's be freaking out? Damn straight they should. They have been to a lot of trouble to rig elections and make Bernie look like a spoiler. And now he's double digits ahead of Trump while Hillary is losing. All that fixing and rigging for nothing. They will either wake up and save this country from Trump or stick with the old dog to the bitter end and lose. Since both candidate will go to convention with out a clear win, the decision with fall to the super delegates. Guess we'll see how much they love Hillary then.
Go Bernie, never Hillary.
Yes, disgusting, and I read it over at Smirking Chimp. I expect as much from Counterpunch but not Smirking Chimp. Counterpunch has been carrying out a crusade against Bernie for years.
Far too early for Dems to be worried about polls. But should HRC and the DNC be worried in general? Yes, especially if they keep going down the Establishment path.
It should be a "new day" for 3rd party support, with social media being a big driver with under 40's. Myself being over 60, I don't delve into that world, but if things got rolling on FB, etc. after the dim convention, I see no reason why the Green Party could not pick up enough support, and votes, to give the repugs and dims a run in November. Let the movement begin. Get on board Bernie!
Of course, after the democrat nominee is chosen it will be too late. But what the hell. I see your point. Let's take a chance.
The battle of who is the most unlikeable? Vote for the one that has the " least" unfavorable ratings? If this is not a dog and pony show for the masses, what is! That has me freaking out!
It isn't wise to tell Hillary supporters to leave this site. Common Dreams is for everyone. Frankly, the world would be a better place if more people were exposed to the ideas here, even if they do argue with them. Too many exist in bubbles that consist only of like-minded people, and that is dangerous, even here.
And yet, Sanders is battling it out with Clinton and his polling numbers are stellar by comparison...
Correct! But I believe that the corporate bosses of the Dem. leadership would rather see Trump than Bernie as President.
I am so sick of rubbish like that piece! C-P is full of crap articles like Stauber's (and Street's), bashing Sanders and denigrating his integrity/moral compass and his supporters! These sb's write their rubbish like they have a crystal ball to see the future - all crap! The writers (or whatever they call themselves) of such drivel and propaganda have some devious agenda not in the interests of people with the least bit of faith, and are not worth reading. F- 'em!
Oddly enough, you're not the first person to have thought of this:
The GOP field once had many candidates, and before their candidate was decided, people may have been reluctant to commit to a particular candidate. Once the nomination was wrapped up, they were forced to commit, so people who weren't as firm in their support for Trump may have become moreso. Now suppose that the dominant consideration among the Democrats is not commitment, but confidence. Imagine, Democrats are confident in their support for any Democratic candidate because they feel like they have their options. Sanders provides an alternative, so with him in the race, voters feel confident in their nominee. However, unlike in other races, if Sanders dropped out leaving only Clinton, voters may suddenly feel like they have no alternative to Clinton, thereby making them feel less confident in their support for her.
Do you enjoy playing dice?
First time I've ever agreed with you, Lrx.
Perhaps this will help the cause.
Earlier this morning I (and all others on the source's client list) received, from a source known to me to be sane, sober, and reliable, but presumably without direct access to the data, what purported to be a list, by date, group, and location, of fees received by Clinton for speeches she gave.
The total, from 2013 through 2015, was $21,667,000 (Yes -- eight (8) digits).
Here are some highlights:
Goldman -- $750,000 @ $250,000 / pop (That seems to be the average hit)
The high was $400,000
Two for $100,000
Two for $335,000
No source for the data was given.
I replied -- "Do you have a source for this?"
The reply came back:
Actually this is from the mandatory financial disclosures (that everyone except Trump appears to release) that were disseminated this month."
"Meanwhile Clinton is still battling it out with Sanders" - And Clinton's poll numbers are sinking just based on the lightweight attacks he gets from Sanders. If Clinton becomes the nominee, then just wait and see how her poll numbers will do under Trump's attacks. imo, Trump has not attacked much yet, as he would rather face Clinton than Sanders, so he probably doesn't want to weaken Clinton now.