I think Clinton’s approval relative to the Republicans is pretty close to its nadir right now. With the Republican primary being much more interesting that the Democratic Primary, all the Republican candidates are getting a lot of face time in the media, while the only time Clinton’s name comes up at all it is related to the dragging on of the email scandal. They are out their campaigning their hearts out in a desperate fight for the nomination while she is keeping her powder dry. So of course they are going to look better. Once the media actually starts paying attention to the Democratic side of the campaign, and she gets a chance to actually get her message out, I suspect her approval ratings will improve.
Every piece of evidence suggests that Biden is more electable than Hillary. His favorability is vastly higher. He polls better head to head nationally. And he polls better in swing states.
Which is why I believe he has a higher chance of winning the nomination than the conventional wisdom suggests. Ultimately I don’t think Democrats have strong preferences between Hillary and Biden. If both are equally likely to win they prefer Hillary but if they believe that Biden is significantly more electable they will drop Hillary without any fuss at all. There is no real loyalty towards her.
If Biden does enter I expect his favorability will drop but still be higher than Hillary’s. I expect his head to head advantage will remain. If he is consistently polling 5 points better than Hillary for a few months she will be toast.
People who aren’t running often *do *poll better than people who are.
Damn right. PA, OH, and FL have decided the last few elections, and are a good bet to decide the next few too.
But Biden hasn’t had anyone campaigning against him, and let’s face it, neither has Sanders. Hillary’s strategy for Sanders is just to ignore him. Once we actually start the actual primary, if Sanders is still a contender, then Hillary starts the campaign. Once Biden actually runs, then Hillary starts the campaign.
We’re not hearing a lot about Hillary in the news except from the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy still hoping for that scandal that will finally expose Hillary. You’d think after 25 years they’d figure out that scandals aren’t going to sink Hillary. Maybe they could try running a candidate against her that people want to vote for?
They’d need a platform people actually support before they can do that.
PA and OH are similar and vote similarly, with Ohio protruding farther South, but are so close to the “average” state politically, that their statuses seem different: Ohio has voted with the winner in every election since 1960. Pennsylvania, OTOH, has voted Democratic in every election since 1948 except for the Republican landslides.
If Ohio votes for the Democrat, the Democrat wins. Otherwise, assuming
[ul][li]the GOP wins Florida and Ohio plus every state Romney did,[/li][li]the Democrats win Pennsylvania plus every state where Obama got at least 52% of the popular vote,[/li][/ul]
then the election will hinge on four states: Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire. Whoever wins three of those 4 states wins the White House. If those states split 2-2, the winner of the big state, Virginia, gets the White House.
Seriously people, the taking of polls as something very significant and predictive at this point in time, at this point in the process, is cute but seriously not something that is justified.
They do not even accurately reflect what real likely voters are thinking NOW, let alone what they will be thinking months from now as the game actually begins.
I think it’s hilarious that so many think that Clinton will be more popular once the media focuses more on her rather than the Republican field.
And I think it’s hilarious you actually think this is true:
They all look unelectable, period. Every single one. Who they are running against barely enters the equation.
If that was true, the polls would show Clinton winning a smashing victory against them. She’s losing or tied.
Sanders and Biden aren’t suffering from the same problem, so it could just be that Clinton is pretty much a Republican these days in the eyes of the electorate.
Clinton has done her best to create problems of her own making. Whether out of incompetence or carelessness really does not matter.
Now we find out that her homebrew server was subject to some sort of cyber attack. Fortunately some sort of threat monitoring system stopped intrusions. But the server was apparently running without that threat monitoring system for at least three months.
The Democrats don’t need to be stuck with her as the only viable candidate if (and when?) the next problematic issue comes to light.
Biden, on the other hand, has more favorables and hasn’t had the same sort of headline grabbing gaffes in recent years as Clinton. I did see CNN repeating his " the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy" description of Obama from the 2007 campaign, but that he apologized and has apparently worked well with the Obama administration lessens any residual bite of that comment.
We can dream about a more inspiring candidate coming out of the shadows to at least make his/her bonafides and bump name recognition for future campaign(s). The Democratic Party needs to develop younger leaders on the national level to put themselves in line to take advantage of demographics that are shifting in their favor.
He’s part of the Obama administration. I suspect that his being selected by Obama as the Vice-Presidential candidate tells you all you need to know about that comment.
Polls this early mean pretty much nothing. They meant nothing in '08 and '12, and mean nothing now. If they meant something, then you’d see shifts in Predictwise, and shifts in how guys like Silver are predicting how things will go.
There has been a shift. Clinton is now at 60-70%, as opposed to 90% before. And they’ll fall much further if Biden gets in the race.
Sanders is now favored to win both IA and NH.
But that’s not due to the general election polling – that’s due to primary polling. State primary polling is different, at this point, then general election polling. The state primaries aren’t nearly as far off as the general election.
So I should have clarified that I was talking about general election polling this early in the race.
Clinton came out against TPP. I think we all know she’s lying. Vox can barely contain their derision:
BTW, the President thanks you. Now if the Republicans decide to kill TPP out of sheer bloody mindedness, Democrats can’t say shit.
You do. But that’s a given in any context.
The only way Biden is getting in the race is if something has already taken out Clinton (major medical problem, the GOP stumbles on an actual scandal instead of more eGhazi nonsense, etc) and Sanders (a quote too far to the left of the Overton Window goes viral, it turns out that a puppeteer has been doing a Weekend At Bernie’s routine with his dead body all this time, etc).
Why would they? Outside the party establishment, Democrats generally regard TPP as a mistake and/or a kowtow to special interests. If the Republicans do the right thing for the wrong reasons (i.e. stick it to “Obamatrade” to please the Teanut Gallery), well, that’s how things are done in politics.
And yet again, you miss the point in truly spectacular fashion.
It doesn’t matter if it is HRC or Biden, NONE of the characters running for the GOP nomination look electable. NOT. ONE.
The only ones who might have had a shot at this are Bush, Rubio and Kasich. The problems are as follows:
[ul]
[li]Bush - with each passing day he just seems like a less competant member of the Bush clan. Not really a selling point.[/li][li]Rubio - he might be able to get the cover of Tiger Beat out of this but no way the Presidency. He actually looks younger and less experienced with each passing day.[/li][li]Kasich - he may have had a chance but he can’t get any traction. If all the other candidates were to quit, then he would have a shot. He’s the grayest of gray candidates.[/li][/ul]
The rest are either too nutty or they can’t get anyone other than their family and a few close friends to take their campaigns seriously.
To be clear, I was responding to this comment-