Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
538 The Bernie Sanders Surge Appears To Be Over
2016 ELECTION
AUG 11, 2015
The Bernie Sanders Surge Appears To Be Over
By HARRY ENTEN
Not long ago, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was surging. In just a few months, the Vermont senator halved Hillary Clinton’s lead in Iowa and moved to within shouting distance of her in New Hampshire. But it’s probably time to change the verb tense. No longer is Sanders surging. He has surged. From now on, picking up additional support will be more of a slog.
Take a look at the monthly averages of Clinton’s and Sanders’s support in live-interview polls taken in Iowa and New Hampshire since April (the month that both Clinton and Sanders officially entered the race):
Support for Sanders rocketed up in Iowa but has leveled off since June. The story is nearly the same in New Hampshire. Sanders rose from June to July in the Granite State, but his ascent slowed.1
So what’s going on? Sanders is maxing out on gains simply because of increased name recognition. Different pollsters ask about favorability and name recognition in different ways — making comparisons tricky — but the University of New Hampshire (UNH) polled Democrats in the state in April, June and July. Sanders’s favorable rating went from 45 percent in April to 66 percent in June and then to 69 percent in July. The share of respondents with a neutral opinion or no opinion of Sanders fell from 44 percent to 24 percent and then to 20 percent during that period. In other words, between April and June, Sanders was picking up low hanging fruit: The liberal wing of the Democratic Party learned about Sanders and liked him. But now, most voters who are predisposed to like Sanders already know about him....
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-bernie-sanders-surge-appears-to-be-over/
AUG 11, 2015
The Bernie Sanders Surge Appears To Be Over
By HARRY ENTEN
Not long ago, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was surging. In just a few months, the Vermont senator halved Hillary Clinton’s lead in Iowa and moved to within shouting distance of her in New Hampshire. But it’s probably time to change the verb tense. No longer is Sanders surging. He has surged. From now on, picking up additional support will be more of a slog.
Take a look at the monthly averages of Clinton’s and Sanders’s support in live-interview polls taken in Iowa and New Hampshire since April (the month that both Clinton and Sanders officially entered the race):
Support for Sanders rocketed up in Iowa but has leveled off since June. The story is nearly the same in New Hampshire. Sanders rose from June to July in the Granite State, but his ascent slowed.1
So what’s going on? Sanders is maxing out on gains simply because of increased name recognition. Different pollsters ask about favorability and name recognition in different ways — making comparisons tricky — but the University of New Hampshire (UNH) polled Democrats in the state in April, June and July. Sanders’s favorable rating went from 45 percent in April to 66 percent in June and then to 69 percent in July. The share of respondents with a neutral opinion or no opinion of Sanders fell from 44 percent to 24 percent and then to 20 percent during that period. In other words, between April and June, Sanders was picking up low hanging fruit: The liberal wing of the Democratic Party learned about Sanders and liked him. But now, most voters who are predisposed to like Sanders already know about him....
4 Days Later
2016 ELECTION
AUG 19, 2015
Senator Sanders, You’re No Barack Obama
Clinton was the early favorite in 2008; she’s more than that now.
By HARRY ENTEN
Is the 2016 Democratic primary a sequel of 2008? The Bernie Sanders supporters filling up my email inbox think so.
Less than 24 hours after I wrote that the Sanders surge had slowed, or even stopped, a poll came out showing Sanders with his first lead in any state (other than his home state of Vermont). That poll stirred a lot of responses (some kind and some not so kind). Here’s a fairly typical comment:
One poll is just one poll; it could be an outlier, or it could signal some shift in the race. We need more data to find out. But we have plenty of data to see a number of problems with comparing Sanders’s rise to President Obama’s toppling of Hillary Clinton in 2008....
You get the drift, right?
Let's fast forward to today and their latest, slightly less overt attempt to depress the Bernie Movement.
This is from their page "Who’s On Track For The Nomination?"
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/
Here are the ones we've finished. The number after the state is total delegates for the state and the split number after each name show the actual/projected number.
2/1 Iowa 44 Hillary 23/18 Bernie 21/26
2/9 N.H. 24 Hillary 09/09 Bernie 15/15
2/20 Nev. 35 Hillary 20/17 Bernie 15/18
2/27 S.C. 53 Hillary 39/32 Bernie 14/21
3/1 Ala. 53 Hillary 44/35 Bernie 09/18
WOW! LOOK AT HOW BERNIE HAS BEEN UNDERPERFORMING ALL THIS TIME!!! I THOUGHT HE WAS DOING GREAT?!?!? WTF!
Note the numbers are retroactively adjusted to an assumed 50/50 split in national support. That type of expectation was certainly not part of the narrative as we moved towards the early contests. You remember how the narrative went, right? A steady refrain from everywhere that was just like the two 538 samples posted above. The methodology for the prediction follows, along with the latest bit of soothsaying telling us that even though Sanders is doing pretty well, he just isn't up to where he should be and that disappointment is right around the corner.
Screw that Scat.
Methodology
These interactive charts show which candidate is on target to win the Democratic nomination and which one is falling behind. They are based on our estimate of how many delegates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders would need in each primary and caucus to win a simple majority of the 4,051 pledged delegates at the Democratic National Convention.
We reached these estimates by developing benchmarks for each state based on its demographics. In particular, we used exit polls to determine the racial composition of the Democratic electorate in each state, how each state lines up on a liberal-conservative scale, and whether Democratic voters live in rural or conservative areas. Sanders does better in whiter, more liberal and more rural states. Clinton does better in states with more nonwhite voters — especially African-Americans. For more detail about these procedures, see this article.
After we arrived at baseline estimates of candidate support, we adjusted their support proportionally in each state until both candidates were tied nationally. Finally, we multiplied each candidate’s adjusted share of support by the number of pledged delegates available in each state to arrive at delegate targets (unlike Republicans, Democrats award all of their pledged delegates proportionally). Because there is limited data available to model the 99 pledged delegates from six delegations — American Samoa, Democrats Abroad, Guam, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands — we set both Clinton’s and Sanders’s targets in those contests at half of the delegates available.
These interactive charts show which candidate is on target to win the Democratic nomination and which one is falling behind. They are based on our estimate of how many delegates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders would need in each primary and caucus to win a simple majority of the 4,051 pledged delegates at the Democratic National Convention.
We reached these estimates by developing benchmarks for each state based on its demographics. In particular, we used exit polls to determine the racial composition of the Democratic electorate in each state, how each state lines up on a liberal-conservative scale, and whether Democratic voters live in rural or conservative areas. Sanders does better in whiter, more liberal and more rural states. Clinton does better in states with more nonwhite voters — especially African-Americans. For more detail about these procedures, see this article.
After we arrived at baseline estimates of candidate support, we adjusted their support proportionally in each state until both candidates were tied nationally. Finally, we multiplied each candidate’s adjusted share of support by the number of pledged delegates available in each state to arrive at delegate targets (unlike Republicans, Democrats award all of their pledged delegates proportionally). Because there is limited data available to model the 99 pledged delegates from six delegations — American Samoa, Democrats Abroad, Guam, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands — we set both Clinton’s and Sanders’s targets in those contests at half of the delegates available.
2016 ELECTION 1:55 PM FEB 25, 2016
Bernie Sanders Doesn’t Need Momentum — He Needs To Win These States
By NATE SILVER
The media narrative of the Democratic presidential race is that Bernie Sanders has lost momentum to Hillary Clinton. After nearly beating Clinton in Iowa and then crushing her in New Hampshire, Sanders had a setback on Saturday, the story goes, losing Nevada to Clinton by 5 percentage points. And this weekend, Sanders is about to lose South Carolina and lose it badly.
All of this is true insofar as it goes. But it doesn’t do nearly enough to account for the demographic differences between the states. Considering the state’s demographics, Sanders’s 5-point loss in Nevada was probably more impressive than his photo-finish in Iowa. It was possibly even a more impressive result than his 22-point romp in New Hampshire. Meanwhile, a big loss in South Carolina would be relatively easy to forgive.
That doesn’t mean Sanders is in great shape, however. Based on the polling so far, Sanders is coming up short of where he needs to be in most Super Tuesday (March 1) states, along with major industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania where he’ll need to run neck and neck with Clinton later on.
These conclusions come from a set of state-by-state targets we’ve calculated for Sanders and Clinton, which are based on some simple demographic factors in each state. As has been clear for a long while, Sanders performs better in whiter and more liberal states. But the abundance of new polling from Super Tuesday states, along with the Nevada result, gives us the data to establish more accurate benchmarks than the ones we set before. (See last week’s article “Bernie Sanders’s Path To The Nomination” for our previous estimates.) In particular, although Sanders might not have won the Hispanic vote in Nevada, he’s clearly made up ground among Hispanic voters. African-Americans, in contrast, remain overwhelmingly in Clinton’s camp. There may also be an urban/rural divide in the Democratic vote, with Sanders performing better in more rural areas....
Bernie Sanders Doesn’t Need Momentum — He Needs To Win These States
By NATE SILVER
The media narrative of the Democratic presidential race is that Bernie Sanders has lost momentum to Hillary Clinton. After nearly beating Clinton in Iowa and then crushing her in New Hampshire, Sanders had a setback on Saturday, the story goes, losing Nevada to Clinton by 5 percentage points. And this weekend, Sanders is about to lose South Carolina and lose it badly.
All of this is true insofar as it goes. But it doesn’t do nearly enough to account for the demographic differences between the states. Considering the state’s demographics, Sanders’s 5-point loss in Nevada was probably more impressive than his photo-finish in Iowa. It was possibly even a more impressive result than his 22-point romp in New Hampshire. Meanwhile, a big loss in South Carolina would be relatively easy to forgive.
That doesn’t mean Sanders is in great shape, however. Based on the polling so far, Sanders is coming up short of where he needs to be in most Super Tuesday (March 1) states, along with major industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania where he’ll need to run neck and neck with Clinton later on.
These conclusions come from a set of state-by-state targets we’ve calculated for Sanders and Clinton, which are based on some simple demographic factors in each state. As has been clear for a long while, Sanders performs better in whiter and more liberal states. But the abundance of new polling from Super Tuesday states, along with the Nevada result, gives us the data to establish more accurate benchmarks than the ones we set before. (See last week’s article “Bernie Sanders’s Path To The Nomination” for our previous estimates.) In particular, although Sanders might not have won the Hispanic vote in Nevada, he’s clearly made up ground among Hispanic voters. African-Americans, in contrast, remain overwhelmingly in Clinton’s camp. There may also be an urban/rural divide in the Democratic vote, with Sanders performing better in more rural areas....
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-doesnt-need-momentum-he-needs-to-win-these-states/
34 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Peace be with you. 
These maroons have declared Bernie's campaign dead in the water so many times, like Chicken Little. No credibility any more.
Favorability trends. Just generally across the board, the more people learn about Bernie, the more they like him.
Both charts Mar 2015 to present
Hillary
Bernie
"Both Clintons declined to be interviewed or comment for this article."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money
at first I thought that this was from today and I was about to lose it. 
