Home | About | Donate

Top Trump Pollster: 'No Question' Bernie Sanders Would Have Won


#1

Top Trump Pollster: 'No Question' Bernie Sanders Would Have Won

Jake Johnson, staff writer

The remarks come as polls continue to show the democratic socialist from Vermont is far and away America's most popular politician

Sanders Trump pollster

#3

I totally disagree with the poster above, genedebs…from 2014 on back through time Sanders has been a favorite around here as long as I can remember…I can recall times when people were begging Sanders to run, I don’t have dates but somewhere around 2010-2015…

I live in AZ and wrote Bernie in on my Ballot for the 2016 election…I am convinced he’s The Man.


#4

Yes, CD has posted numerous articles supportive of Clinton, and as many that were negative as well. I found CD coverage of the Sanders campaign some of the best around, like every single day until after the convention. They continue to give him positive regular coverage as well, much to the chagrin of those unable to forgive him for endorsing Clinton (as he said he would do at the gitgo). Would I prefer no DNC bolstering? Yes. Am I going to find that anywhere except on Fox, no. The World Socialist Website, Counterpunch and a few others offer great analysis of events, but not so much current news.


#5

gee…what happened to the first post? the one from genedebs raving about the green party? maybe I was hallucinating, it’s been known to happen now and then :slight_smile:


#6

Let’s face it, there is no way anybody can be sure who would have won an election between Trump and Sanders. It didn’t happen. Time to end this type of speculation and think about who will in 2020 in an actual election not a fantasy election. The Democratic voters chose Hillary Clinton to run and she lost despite the last polls showing she was almost sure to win. If Sanders had won the primary he might have defeated Trump or he might have lost. Nobody can say with any certainly what would have happened.


#7

Sanders couldn’t possibly have won the nomination because the fix was in among the party officials and the stupor-delegates.


#8

We can say with certainty that DNC operatives cheated to help Clinton.
Donna Brazile was fired for doing it. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz resigned.

We can also state conclusively that Hillary’s polling has never risen during any race she’s run.

We can also state conclusively that in the lead up to the 2016 election, the number one word chosen by survey takers to describe Hillary was liar.

Also conclusive: The Hillary team actively helped Trump win the R-party nomination.

This however, is conjecture, but I’m putting it out there anyway: The Ds managed to coronate the only candidate who could have lost to Trump.


#9

I heard this before too about Bernie being able to beat Trump, but why didn’t these blue collar whites vote for Bernie then in the Primaries? It makes no sense, since they could have switched parties during his campaign and then ultimately voted for him, but they didn’t. They voted for Trump all along. Besides, Bernie pushed Clinton more to the Left, so if these whites were paying attention they would have even voted for her over Trump, since she’s more similar to Bernie than Trump. But, again, they didn’t.


#10

They DID vote for Sanders wherever they got the chance. In the states that allowed independents to vote in the Dem primary, Bernie got 60-70% of the vote. The DNC must have known Sanders was a far stronger candidate, but they preferred to lose with Clinton than win with Sanders. Because their big funders preferred Trump to Sanders.


#11

Bernie would never have won, and I liked his ideas. Truth America, have you noticed the good people never win the U.S. President job. No, no, no, and no, and they who pull strings don’t like the good people making important decisions that can change, or upset the string pullers apple cart.


#12

That’s your story and you’re doing a great job sticking to it. Of course no one can predict with exactitude what’s going to happen in the future, but elections are fairly predictable things for the most part. Before the Democratic Convention, all the polls were saying Sanders had a significantly better chance of beating Trump. The polls were tight going into the election and weren’t that far off. Clinton did win the popular vote but with the wrong coalition. The pollsters blew that part in determining electoral college wins.

Like all things there are exceptions to the rule. Unpredictable events like a wildcat candidate, a third party success, a war, or imperfect calculations prove them wrong, but taken as a whole polls are remarkably accurate as far as analyzing the trend. As time went on Sanders began winning more and more as Clinton started to lose states. If it weren’t for all the DNC superdelegate tomfoolery, Sanders would have won. The sheer size of Bernie’s rallies compared to those of all others correlates to an upward trend and momentum for his campaign, translating into downward trends for Clinton especially, and for Trump in the general.

I would have given my eyeteeth to see the faux populist debate a genuine populist. Of course the Brooklyn-bred Sanders would have won, and then won.


#13

Like I said though, they could have switched parties early on.


#14

It is a puzzle how little coverage the damage that HRC (and her hubbie) has brought to this country gets. She is going around with the idiotic million dollar making ‘what happened’ - and almost no coverage from the MSM about her crucial role in giving us Trump. And the facts are all out there…in the podesta emails, in her rigidity to accept Sander’s proposals, etc etc…in the DNC movements, appointments, etc…which was basically controlled by her (and Obama). It was her greed for power and monarchical like entitlement of her turn - translated into corruption that handed us Trump. For me, it has never been the people who gave us him, it has always been her.


#15

and her acolytes.


#16

Well there was a post at the top of the page to which @Ditton and I responded, but poof.


#17

To David_Spero_Rn: Exactly.

To joes2001: you have to face facts that many voters are lazy - they aren’t going to switch parties for one election. Many went out of their way to support Sanders, many more couldn’t be bothered but if you asked them if it were between Sanders and Trump, they’d pick Sanders - I work with a bunch of people like this. The biggest blind spot I’ve ever seen is just too many Ds not understanding just how hated Hillary Clinton is. She is one of the few if not the only D who could have lost to Trump.

If the D’s really want to turn things around, I have an easy recommendation for them: completely overhaul the primary process. There are no arcane rules from our flawed constitution, you can implement whatever reform you want. Make every state the same - a primary open to Ds and Independents (no caucuses, no super delegates). Make it a ranked ballot and implement the well understood Single Transferable Vote scheme (aka RCV, IRV, and others). Allow anyone to run - D or Independent as long as they agree to a modest core principle platform (and I hope a progressive with a much more radical platform would win of course). Allow anyone who polls at 5% or more to debate. Schedule lots of debates. No funny stuff - process must be extremely open - so open that Wikileaks could never get anything that isn’t just on a website available. Hell, make all the email open - if you aren’t willing to say it in public (DNC related topics), then you can’t say it.

The person who won that primary may not win by a landslide because I agree with the analysis that there is a core base that will never leave the R candidate no matter how bad for as long as they live. 26% of eligible voters chose Trump - I’d guess about 15% of eligible voters at most - a bit more than 1/2 of Trump voters are these diehard Rs and we can never get their vote. But my hypothetical D primary winner can get enough people to come out to vote that they can overcome that 15% or even 20% easily.

Bottom line is people are clamoring for honest politicians - that is the reason Sanders is more popular among independents than was Clinton.


#18

AND the Democratic establishment still won’t get their heads out of their asses. More than likely they will support someone like Kaine, Gillibrand, Coumo, Booker, or Manchin for Prez in 2020 AND will lose to Trump AGAIN.


#19

I’m sure Gillibrand has her faults, but I was at least encouraged she voted (with Sanders) against the recent military budget increase. My new senator (Harris) and most of the people who co-sponsored Bernie’s Senate Health Care proposal voted the wrong way on that one. Kaine and Manchin are disasters - I hope neither of them run. Some people here like Cuomo, some detest him - the little I know related to BDS makes me not like him. Booker made a big mistake with the pharmaceutical drug importation issue (and has apparently been pushed off his previous position by public pressure) but I don’t know much else about him.


#20

I believe that the polls of Clinton and Trump were within their margin of error. Polls between Sanders and Trump were well outside of that margin, but, to be fair, they did not reflect the effects of a campaign as did the polls between Clinton and Trump. Also to be fair, Sanders consistently out-polled Clinton by wide margins. Of course it is all speculation now as Sanders was not the candidate, but polling showed that Sanders had a MUCH better chance of beating Trump than Clinton. We all know the outcome of that disaster.


#21

" No question Bernie would have won."

I respectfully, disagree. Because even if by some miracle he would have gotten the DNC nomination for POTUS, Bernie was not selected by the oligarchs, so one way or another, Bernie would never have been allowed to win the election for POTUS.