2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIpsos/Reuters poll: Sanders/Clinton in deadheat - Hillary: 48%, Bernie 45%!
Clinton leads Sanders 48 percent to 45 percent among Democratic voters, according to the poll of 512 Americans, conducted Feb. 2-5 following the Iowa caucus. The poll has a credibility interval of 5 percentage points.
Democrats had been supporting Clinton by more than a 2-to-1 margin at the beginning of the year. Sanders has narrowed that lead considerably over the past several weeks.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN0VE2NG
To be clear, Ipsos/Reuters tends to have wild swings in its polling and is generally more unreliable than others, however, it is the trend that counts. And this is one hell of a trend!
reformist2
(9,841 posts)The powers that be, the 1%, Wall Street, the MSM - they are all going to go nuts.
Buckle up - next week is going to be CRAZY.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)The tsunami is building.
ram2008
(1,238 posts)Fox, CNN, ABC/Wapo, or CBS/NYtimes tend to be somewhat reliable. If there's a swing there, then it's definitely for real. I think the race moved from 10-15 Hillary lead nationally to 5-10 after Iowa. Hopefully after a big win in NH it goes to a national tie.
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)And now she and Sanders are in a dead heat.
I suspect Sanders' rising popularity has been concealed by that same media that had been ignoring him. I just don't think it can change that much, that fast.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)The media has been covering Sanders more since the holidays, there's been two debates and two town halls in the past few weeks...Sanders did very well in all of them, and there was a lot of media coverage of a virtual tie in Iowa with surprised the pollsters and pundits. Plus, Clinton and her surrogates recent attacks and smears are just getting Sanders more attention and Google searches. It all adds up to a sizeable shift.
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)Was an old one that perhaps nobody wanted to pay to have updated, since it was so favorable to her, and since Sanders going up in the polls is not something they really wanted people to know about.
I'm not sure how this all works though. I just can't see such a fast switch.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)That after Iowa and the strong youth turnout that the pollsters have changed their models to reflect more youth support than they had previous.
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)rocktivity
(44,555 posts)Sounds more to me that they've gotten into the habit of trying to contribute to the "narrative" by producing results that the mainstream media wants to hear.
rocktivity
Robbins
(5,066 posts)it's a dead heat now.go bernie.
californiabernin
(421 posts)kenn3d
(486 posts)...and this Ipsos/Reuters rolling poll especially has been widely discounted, often producing wide and unlikely swings day to day. I have pretty much ignored it for months since Godhumor and others here cast doubt (to say it nicely) on its statistical veracity.
Still the trends we see emerging now seem to be echoed even here:
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR131
With no filtering: 634 Dem + 200 Indy + 129 Rep = 963 Respondents
So, FWIW, this pollster has never shown anything anywhere near to this apparent statistical tie.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Of course, PPP had Hillary +8 just before the Iowa Caucus...
demwing
(16,916 posts)was by getting Hillary's attention. I think it's fair to say that Sander's got Clinton's full attention in Iowa.
Bernie hasn't run a "perfect" campaign, but it has had perfect moments, and will be one for the history books. Even if Bernie doesn't win (and winning seems more and more possible every day!) he's already had a bigger affect on our society than has Clinton.