Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is worth a try, and the president picks supreme court justices too. Thousands of young men and women have died for a government by the people, of the people. Not this billionaire competition where ordinary people are shut out of the political process. Nothing will get done if we dont send a signal to all our elected officials. And what better signal than to elect a president who has fought for campaign finance reform and an expansion of democracy for decades and is funded by millions of donations from ordinary people? It will send the most powerful signal of all to all of Congress, that if you keep acting as puppets for wealthy campaign donors and special interests, and dont listen to the demands of the people, you too will get the boot. I think the internet has really started to revolutionize campaigns and expanded democracy enormously. I also like how Jim Hightower, former Texas agriculture commissioner said it:
The message that will be sent is that Americans are stupid voters who fall for media hype and empty promises that can never be fulfilled. The real message to congress goes out every two years when 80% or more of them get sent back for another term. We love you, keep up the good work.
Average of the 4 major National Pollster averages as of February 12th, 2016 (FiveThirtyEight Average, HuffPost Pollster Model, RealClear Politics Average, 270 to Win Average)
50.4% - Hillary Clinton
37.1% - Bernie Sanders
12.6% - Others / Undecided
Average of the 4 major National Pollster averages as of February 12th, 2016 (FiveThirtyEight Average, HuffPost Pollster Model, RealClear Politics Average, 270 to Win Average)
50.4% - Hillary Clinton
37.1% - Bernie Sanders
12.6% - Others / Undecided
Things change too quickly in the primaries. I see little point in averaging in old polls taken before the voting or the gaffes of the candidates. And national polls at this point are, well, pointless. Let's see some current SC and NV polling.
Things change too quickly in the primaries. I see little point in averaging in old polls taken before the voting or the gaffes of the candidates. And national polls at this point are, well, pointless. Let's see some current SC and NV polling.
The Nevada poll looks good for Sanders. With that being said, it is just one poll ans comes from a Republican firm that has done little Democratic polling, so we really need to see more polls.
Average of the 4 major National Pollster averages as of February 13th, 2016 (FiveThirtyEight Average, HuffPost Pollster Model, RealClear Politics Average, 270 to Win Average)
50.3% - Hillary Clinton
37.2% - Bernie Sanders
12.5% - Others / Undecided
The Nevada poll looks good for Sanders. With that being said, it is just one poll ans comes from a Republican firm that has done little Democratic polling, so we really need to see more polls.
The Nevada poll is kind of ridiculous. First, it's by a Republican organization with no real track record at all - and which isn't even going to be conducting any Republican polls, which you would think they would be doing if they were interested in actually trying to determine who is ahead.
Plus the the questions were basically "Hillary Clinton is going to jail - does that make you more or less likely to support her?" vs. "Bernie Sanders is going to give you free stuff - does that make you more or less likely to support him?"
And there aren't going to be other polls to compare it to, because the legit polling organizations know there is no way to take a valid poll in a state that isn't only a caucus state (notoriously hard to poll), this is only the third time they've even had a caucus.
The Nevada poll is kind of ridiculous. First, it's by a Republican organization with no real track record at all - and which isn't even going to be conducting any Republican polls, which you would think they would be doing if they were interested in actually trying to determine who is ahead.
Plus the the questions were basically "Hillary Clinton is going to jail - does that make you more or less likely to support her?" vs. "Bernie Sanders is going to give you free stuff - does that make you more or less likely to support him?"
And there aren't going to be other polls to compare it to, because the legit polling organizations know there is no way to take a valid poll in a state that isn't only a caucus state (notoriously hard to poll), this is only the third time they've even had a caucus.
The leading questions were after the initial head to head poll question so that is something to keep in mind. With that being said Repubican pollster with very little track record polling a race that has very few other polls. I would think Clinton might be a slight favorite in Nevada, but of course Sander's current momentum and the unpredictable nature of a Caucus can change all that. Either way, unless we see a slew of polls over the next few days trying to come up with any real prediction for Nevada is a pure guessing game.
Average of the 4 major National Pollster averages as of February 16th, 2016 (FiveThirtyEight Average, HuffPost Pollster Model, RealClear Politics Average, 270 to Win Average)
50.1% - Hillary Clinton
37.0% - Bernie Sanders
12.9% - Others / Undecided
Great to see supremely-qualified Hillary maintaining a sizeable advantage nationally.
Hopefully the voters in Nevada aren't gullible enough to fall for Bernie's unrealistic, pie-in-the-sky promises.
If Hilly can get the win there, and win big in SC, the Fat Lady can start warming up those vocal chords...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.