NBC News/Marist Poll results in Iowa and New Hampshire released Sunday

[kenn3d]

Here are the favorable/unfavorable scores of half a dozen presidential candidates among all registered voters in Iowa:

• Bernie Sanders +3 (30 percent/27 percent)

• Marco Rubio -1 (31 percent/32 percent)

• Scott Walker -1 (30 percent/31 percent)

• Jeb Bush -12 (34 percent/46 percent)

• Hillary Clinton -19 (37/56 percent)

• Donald Trump -28 (32 percent/60 percent)

Notably, the NBC News/Marist Poll points out that Clinton’s favorable/unfavorable score in Iowa among all registered voters mirrors the numbers found by a recent Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll conducted there.

Here are the favorable/unfavorable scores of half a dozen presidential candidates among all registered voters in New Hampshire:

• Sanders +12 (41 percent/29 percent)

• Bush -5 (40 percent/45 percent)

• Walker -6 (28 percent/34 percent)

• Rubio -6 (28 percent/34 percent)

• Clinton -20 (37 percent/57 percent)

• Trump -40 (27 percent/67 percent)

As reported by International Business Times
SUNDAY, JULY 26, 2015

http://www.ibtimes.com/voters-new-hampshire-iowa-have-negative-opinion-every-2016-candidate-except-one-2024842

[LWolf]

1. Sanders is the only candidate with a positive in both states.

Those are numbers that I like.

[OKNancy]

10. if you include Republicans

among Democrats her favorables are 20 points higher than his.

[LWolf]

15. I'll refer you to the title of the article:

Voters In New Hampshire And Iowa Have A Negative Opinion Of Every 2016 Candidate Except One

That one is not "her."

[OKNancy]

21. If you include Republicans

look at the chart I posted below. It's from the actual polling site.

[questionseverything]

16. you got that backwards

hillarys UNFAVORABLE S are 20 points higher than bernies

[OKNancy]

19. no...

if you include Republicans they do, if you look at the actual poll numbers of Democrats only, he favorables are 74%, Sanders is 54%

[questionseverything]

37. you mean the potential democratic column?

i see 71/65....which is nearly within the moe

http://www.view-pdf.com/ViewPDFFile.aspx?file=http://www.htmlpublish.com/newTestDocStorage/DocStorage/9869c9e644fe4354bc0d82dde2a3b0eb/NBC%20News_Marist%20Poll_New%20Hampshire%20Annotated%20Questionnaire_July%202015.pdf

[A Simple Game]

40. The best way to think of these numbers is that the favorable means

I could vote for you, the unfavorable means I will don't want to vote for you.

Over 90% recognize have an opinion of Hillary and majority of those say they don't want to vote for Her.

Bernie's recognition numbers are 57% and 70% of which a majority say they could vote for him.

You might not think these numbers look bad for Hillary but I would bet her team sure think they do.

[Ed Suspicious]

47. +1 is a number I'll give your post.

[A Simple Game]

48. Thank you, I appreciate the compliment. n/t

[Scuba]

72. Perhaps you're not aware that Republicans vote.

[LWolf]

84. "All registered voters" include Republicans. nt

[Fred Sanders]

2. Trump is better known to the masses than Sanders, that is just one fucked up thing the media has going on

Sanders numbers are very impressive, his name recognition is going up even as Celebrity Candidate Trump's is at the same level it has been for 20 years...and Sanders favorable/unfavourable ratio, to the favorable side, is holding.

It is impressive.

Any "comparisons", more like plaintive wails, of Sanders to Trump, in any way whatsoever, will have evaporated for anyone interested in still trying to compare Sanders with Trump, which would be anyone I would not give a shit about.

Just writing their names in the same sentence gives me the creeps.

[sabrina 1]

3. Bernie's only hurdle re winning is increasing his name recognition.

So far his campaign and his army of volunteers is doing a fantastic job of this and his rising poll numbers are proof that once people know him, they like him.

And it's only been two months! And with no Corporate Funding!

[Fred Sanders]

4. I tend to agree with that. That the celebrity candidate has more name recognition is a red herring....plenty

of time for Sanders to catch up those numbers without Trump-trolling the troll-embracing media.

And if those favorable/unfavorables hold, then who knows?

[sabrina 1]

12. People keep looking at election campaign polls. What they should also

be looking at are polls of Americans on the issues that are of importance to them.

Initially the narrative re Bernie was 'he will fade away after the initial excitement of his announcement from the Left and won't be ab le to sustain interest in his campaign.'

The reasoning was that one, he was a 'socialist' and people won't elect a 'socialist'. Again ignoring the polls showing that 7 out of 10 of young voters WANT a Democratic Socialist Gov.

AND 'he's only at 3% in the polls'

All the talking points so far are being proven to be wrong, and there are two reasons for that, polls show that Bernie on policies represents a majority of the American people, and two, he KNOWS that name recognition IS a problem for him and has been doing a great job of increasing that, with the help of hundreds of thousands of volunteers.

That army of volunteers increases the more people learn about him.

So unless those in power succeed in undermining his campaign which they are working hard to do, the people WILL elect him.

[Fred Sanders]

17. Those in power have been undermining elections, like Attila the Hun undermined Europe, for

the past decade.

In the future months let us assume that Sanders name recognition continues to increase, the favorable ratio remains the same, but isn't the primary issue in a primary election as much about electability in the general election - which, to me, is the primary criteria.

What about electability in that scenario?

Sanders versus Bush or Clinton versus Bush, that is how it will boil down to...who is more likely, even by a sliver, of retaining for Democrats the vitally needed to be retained WH for a historical 3rd term?

It is a paradox.

[JDPriestly]

56. A lot of DUers assume that Hillary is the one who can beat the Republicans.

That assumption may be true, but I don't think it is.

Her presentation is lackluster. She has some good ideas, but she doesn't have the soul and moral courage behind her presentation or her ideas that Bernie has.

Bernie is not a fanatic. People sense that right away. His ideas are pragmatic. He can compromise on issues that are not of great moral importance. But when it comes to issues of great moral importance like race, like war and peace, like a modicum of economic fairness (and we don't have a modicum of it right now), Bernie is strength itself.

I think that a lot of people who were not burned (sorry for the pun) by the foreclosure epidemic, people who were not in debt, people who have not been forced into early retirement, meaning in their 50s when they have no Social Security or Medicare and have no money, just don't get the amount of pain in this country.

One thing that Elizabeth Warren found when she did her research on families and bankruptcy is that people hide their bankruptcies. Your financially distressed friends may borrow money from you if you have it, but they are not going to tell you about how they feel now that the bank took their house and they are on the kind of bankruptcy regime and credit counseling diet that the bankruptcy "reform" legislation passed in the early 2000s (maybe 2005) impose on them.

But a lot of people are hurting. And add to that the problems with education, the lack of unions or workers' rights in the workplace. This country is really hurting.

The mass killings, the angry outburst in malls, etc.? They are always said to be the work of mentally ill people. The mentally ill are our social thermometers. The outbursts of violence reflect the frustrations and anger in our communities and the neglect of vulnerable people and their needs that the anger and frustration cause.

[Enthusiast]

73. +1!

[tularetom]

76. You read my mind and expressed my thoughts better than I ever could

[leveymg]

5. Hillary has had consistently high negatives since '07. We dodged a bullet last time.

If she's the nominee in '16, more people are likely to vote against her than for her. That's not a promising basis to run a winning campaign in the General next November.

Sanders appears to be the only viable alternative.

[Fred Sanders]

7. When did "viable" get a new definition?

[leveymg]

9. He now appears to be viable to me.

His trajectory is up, hers is down. Once he gets over the viability hump, he's going to pull even or ahead in other states. He gets the populist vote - she, not so much. Why doesn't he yet appear to be viable to you?

[kenn3d]

6. MSNBC's analysis of these Marist and the new CNN polls

http://www.msnbc.com/up-with-steve-kornacki/watch/did-mccain-comments-hurt-trump-in-polls--491430979831

[OKNancy]

8. Those numbers include Republicans - Talk about selective figures... lets' look at something else

IOWA

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

New Hampshire

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[leveymg]

11. The polls that include Repubs and Independents are the only ones that mean anything

You shouldn't put too much weight on the Democratic name recognition contest polls. This on the deciding factor of negatives in General elections - please see, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251452687

[sadoldgirl]

13. Do you know the % of registered voters,

who are independents? In my state, for instance, that
% is higher than the one for either party.

[Scootaloo]

14. Wasn't the argument, "Hillary can attract the center and independents" though?

What, do the center and independents suddenly "not count"?

You know, like the left has already been declared to "not count" by you guys?

Who, exactly, are you thinking Clinton is going to win with, if the right, the left, the center, and "independents" all "don't count" OKNancy?

[OKNancy]

18. the primary... she will have plenty of time to fight against

the lies of the right and some of the left once she wins.

[Scootaloo]

20. You can't win a general election on a mere plurality of democrats n/t

[George II]

27. And you can't win the Democratic nomination by being consistently behind by 40+ %

[Scootaloo]

29. Welp, looks like we're fucked then.

[geek tragedy]

23. she's not doing that now? nt

[London Lover Man]

31. In other words, changing the goal posts again...

Desperation is definitely reeking out isn't it?

[geek tragedy]

22. Wow, voters in those two purple states can't stand Hillary Clinton. Practically in Trump territory

Ugly stuff, that she can't hold states that went Democratic 3 out of the past 4 elections is an extremely troubling sign.

[George II]

26. Where do you see that she "can't hold" Iowa or New Hampshire?

She's ahead of Sanders by 56-24 in Iowa (+32) and 46-32 in New Hampshire (+14) How ugly is that?

[geek tragedy]

28. in the general. There's no way she wins those states at -19 favorable/unfavorable

[London Lover Man]

33. Then falls back to the tired old pattern "Lesser of the two corporate evils"

Which is exactly what we are hoping to avoid this time around with Bernie.

[George II]

34. And there's no way Sanders is going to win either of those states while sitting on the sidelines....

....which is what he'll be doing unless he goes third-party.

Is it any surprise that he polls well (although still double digits behind Clinton) in the state that is almost identical demographically to his home state and shares a 200 mile border with his home state?

I wonder how he polls in New York, New Jersey, California? We already know he's polling 43% behind Clinton in Florida and 39% behind her nationally.

These "unfavorability" polls are useless. Sure people look at her "unfavorably"- remember that Obama had a low rating himself but won two historic elections. Even with these "bad" ratings, Clinton is ahead of Bush, Cruz, Walker, Rubio, Christie, and Paul.

[geek tragedy]

35. Obama was never -19 nt

[George II]

38. The ballot will read:

President:

Democrat - Hillary Clinton (or Sanders)
Republican - Take your pick

It will NOT read:

Favorability:

Democrat - Hillary Clinton (or Sanders)
Republican - Take your pick

[geek tragedy]

39. Every Republican not named Trump is doing much better than Clinton nt

[A Simple Game]

45. I bet Hillary doesn't think the unfavorable numbers are useless.

Those are the numbers that say "I don't want to vote for you."

[stevenleser]

49. And yet she clobbers Sanders in those states. There was a good article about this I need to find

that either Nate or someone else penned a few days ago.

Folks may find her unfavorable, but when a choice is presented versus Sanders or the other folks, they are going to vote Hillary.

[George II]

24. The poll includes all voters

[LWolf]

85. Which points exactly to the arguments

about which D can win the GE.

[George II]

86. Voters don't vote for "favorability", they vote for the best candidate for President, and....

....Clinton still leads Sanders by double digits in both states (and by ~40 points nationally) and leads ALL republican candidates.

[LWolf]

87. What's the point in favoring a candidate

if that person is not "the best?" That makes no sense whatsoever.

And, the bottom line? This OP is about all voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, and HRC's net favorability is negative, 2nd only to Trump in both states.

[George II]

90. Lifting one or two pages from a 92 page poll doesn't give the entire picture, just a SMALL

selective snapshot of the complete poll.

It's not your OP, why are you so concerned?

THE bottom line is that Clinton is way way ahead of Sanders for the Democratic nomination, so Sanders against any republican is just a hypothetical.

[LordGlenconner]

25. The IBT and OP buried the lede

I suspect purposely so. If anyone is interested Clinton is up by 30 in the h2h portion of the Iowa poll.

[George II]

91. More, since some want to concentrate on "favorable/unfavorable"....

....Clinton's favorable/unfavorable difference is a mere 3%, Sanders' difference is an even smaller 1%, and 41% (more than 4 in 10 Americans) don't even know who Sanders is! Who knows how his favorable/unfavorable ratio will shift once that huge pool of "don't know" voters get more familiar with him?

Further, Clinton's known/unknown rating is 99 to 1, Sanders' known/unknown rating is 59 to 41. See how selectively pulling a few numbers out of 92 pages can totally skew the discussion?

[PatrickforO]

30. Good news for all of us.

Viva la political revolucion!

[vadermike]

32. Wow ugh

Well if these numbers hold , I love hillary by either she has work to do or if she is the nominee we would get our asses kicked. Ugh. I hope this is is wrong. But I will vote for whoever the nominee turns out to be. We may lose regardless on 16 because of the 3rd term curse ugh

[NorthCarolina]

55. I think if Bernie is the nominee

we won't lose, we'll win, and win BIG.

[KansDem]

36. I can live with this!

As can we all.

[BlueStreak]

41. And Trump's 60% negative ain't gonna drop below 50%. Go Donald.

[eppur_se_muova]

42. A Marxist poll ? No wonder they're reporting Bernie is up.

Oh, wait ...

[Fuddnik]

43. Clinton finished THIRD in Iowa last time.

She'll probably finish THIRD again this time.

Unless she ditches that phony southern accent she used in South Carolina last month and starts mooing like a cow.

[Divernan]

50. Oh, cripes! She did that cornpone accent again? No ways!

[Fuddnik]

53. Yeah ways

Talk about cheap pandering.

[Ed Suspicious]

51. Can you imagine Sanders putting on a southern accent for effect? I shudder to think it.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

44. Polls don't matter....

Unless someone you want is ahead.

[SoapBox]

46. Cue the...

spin against Bernie.

BTW...what shows was HRC on today, so we can see and hear what she's (currently) saying?

Oh ya, she's roped off from the media.

[Ed Suspicious]

52. Her handlers must think her best attribute is her absence.

It must be sad for her ardent supporters.

[Fuddnik]

54. I would have to agree.

[brooklynite]

59. Absence from where?

Hillary Clinton to Discuss Renewable Energy Plan at LEED Certified Building on Monday, July 27, 2015 in Des Moines, Iowa

Hillary Clinton Returns to New Hampshire for Second Town Hall Meeting on Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Hillary Clinton Back to Iowa for 3 Days on July 25-27, 2015 *Updated

Hillary Clinton Returns to South Carolina on Thursday, July 23, 2015

Hillary Clinton to Attend Organizing Events in Iowa, Speak to IDP Hall of Fame on July 17-18, 2015

[okasha]

57. Does it occur to anyone but me

to wonder why a candidate that apparently appeals to very conservstive voters shouldn't set off very loud alarms for liberals and socialists? Whatever Republicans like about Sanders, it's not likely to commend him to Democrats who are committed to social justice.

[winter is coming]

61. Well, you could ask Republicans what appeals about his message, if you

truly want to know. My guess would be that even Republicans aren't crazy about the 1% raking in nearly everything.

The thing that sets off alarms for me is when people imply Sanders is simultaneously "too far left" and "too conservative". Pick one or the other.

[okasha]

62. He's too conservative for me.

I do not like his views on guns, Israel, the F-35 or "economic inequality" as the root of all social justice issues. His notion that economic justice will resolve all social justice problems smells a whole lot like "trickle down."

His views on those issues cater very much to conservative voters. And, of course, he'll save them from uppity women.

[winter is coming]

63. Got a link? I've never seen him claim that economic justice will resolve

all social justice problems. And I've never seen him spout anything that sounds like "trickle down" although HRC's "profit-sharing" proposal certainly does. Nor has he said/implied that women are uppity.

I think if you take a look at his record, you'll find your "concerns" are ill-founded.

[beam me up scottie]

64. Don't hold your breath.

HC supporters who spout those talking points never bother to back them up.

This uppity woman is a Sandernista Feminista, and I know a real progressive when I see one.

The right wing of the party loves to claim he's "too conservative" but we know why they're really worried.

[winter is coming]

65. Either "he's too far left" didn't work, or they're rotating through talking points.

I'm amazed that Sanders has suddenly gone from being "too far left" to "too conservative" when his record and rhetoric hasn't changed.

[beam me up scottie]

67. I get dizzy just watching them.

HE'S TOO LEFT!!1!

No, wait: HE'S TOO RIGHT!1!!

Sounds like the geniuses at FoxNews.

[okasha]

66. I've looked at his record, thank you.

That's exactly why I'm not supporting him. He has been an ineffective legislator and shows no sign of leadership. He, and his faithful fans, have repeatedly touted the idea that economic injustice is the root of social injustice, and that solving that problem is fundamental to resolving all inequities. Find your own links. There's plenty there. I have no desire to wade through the outflux of sewage precipitated by his #blm debacle at Net Roots.

[winter is coming]

68. So you'll repeat an unsubstantiated and dubious claim without backing it up.

Looks like beam me up scottie called that one.

[okasha]

69. Despair not.

If you can't find a plethora of such posts, they'll find you.

[cascadiance]

75. Just because LEADING the fight to audit the fed isn't liked by Hillary's corporate supporters...

... doesn't mean that it doesn't count and shows "no leadership".

That in my book IS the kind of leadership that the PEOPLE want and need! And the voters will let Korporate Amerika know that soon!

[Armstead]

78. Bingo

[okasha]

79. Well, he did LEAD the battle

to get a couple post offices named....

And he's LED the pork pack to throw away $257 million apiece for the F-35 Turkey to be based in Vermont.....

And he was caught flat-footed and pie-eyed by 3 #BLM activists at Net Roots. He doesn't think on his feet. That's not good in a real crisis, where what he did half a century ago doesn't count.

[cascadiance]

93. I guess is that worse than advocating the use of privatizing government email resources

even if it is carrying secret information of our government in an unaccountable way? Is that better "leadership"? If you are going to cherry pick what you think he is "leading" on, then I get to do so too!

[Armstead]

77. I suppose you'drather have the Oligarchs contoinue to make those decisions...

The ruling elite have done such a good job of improving the lives of the majority over the last 30 years

[okasha]

80. What a silly supposition.

[Armstead]

83. No sillier than your idiotic belief that basic Liberalism is the same as Modern Conservatism

I HOPE more conservative voters wake up and realize that the surrender of the economy, politics and society to the Corporate and Wall St. elites is a scam that is picking their pockets.

[okasha]

88. Go pick a fight with somebody else.

Not playing.

[Armstead]

89. Fine but a suggestion

Learn the basic difference between conservative "trickle down" economics and progressive liberalism -- or even traditional liberalism, which is actually what Sanders is advocating).

They are opposite theories in very fundamental ways.

Maybe you don't like Sanders because he is "too" liberal or progressive. That's fine, that is your right. But at least get your terms straight if you are going to post things to stir the pot.

[okasha]

92. Two things.

1. I've been a socialist since the age of 18.

2. Bernie Sanders holds positions on key issues that are way too conservative for my taste, including his adaptation of "trickle down" economics tied up with a "leftist" ribbon. If you cannot recognize this for what it is, you have homework to do.

[cascadiance]

94. So then what makes Hillary Clinton so much better than Sanders then in your mind?

What has she done that has you as a "socialist" satisfied. Unless your the kind of socialist that the Germans named their government back in the late 30's and early 40's...

I think you need to be more specific on these critiques or you deserved to have your analysis called out for the BS that it is (and in this context, BS doesn't mean "Bernie Sanders&quot ...

[Sheepshank]

81. I think it's political jockeying and strategy.

Knock out Hillary any way they can in the Primary. The most obvious way is to give another opponent a leg up. Once Hillary is out of the General Election, it's an easy march to the WhiteHouse.

[cascadiance]

95. Or make these efforts look like their scared right wingers not wanting Hillary...

when they actually WANT someone like Hillary with her higher negative ratings that they figure they have a better chance with with the growing number of populist voters from all parties that would gravitate towards a more populist candidate like Bernie. Take out the populist and the Republicans have a better shot at winning.

[Sheepshank]

96. At least my conjecture has some polling numbers to substantiate it

Where are you getting any info that Bernie has a ch ance against the Republicans? They are holding back on him. Haven't you noticed how silent they are about Bernie?

The republic namer machine will attempt to get him through the primary, and THEN, during the GE campaign, they will publically slaughter him on the socialist altar. They will invoke every fear rhetoric they have employed over the decades including Mccarthyisms..

[cascadiance]

97. Umm.. There was a poll that came out today that shows he's beating three of them now?

And most of those who do polling are owned by the corporate entities that want to keep their power over our government that Bernie wants to take away from them. By that fact alone, you'll get less polling supporting Bernie doing better even if it is true.

Oh... You mean the Koch mahine who is MORE supported by communist money of the likes of Joseph Stalin that basically help build their family empire?

They rant on and on about socialism in simplistic terms to try and keep it being an epithet, but that "epithet" is wearing thin when people study the details of what DEMOCRATIC socialism really is about that works the way in places like Sweden the way many people are discovering they want to have happen here.



http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/embedvideo1266-482-304-turns/

If the corporatist Republican noise machine keeps trying to play the epithet card, then they will get nailed back for being supported by 1%er Koch Brothers who were supported by Soviet Union 1%er Joseph Stalin too.

[ismnotwasm]

58. Yawn

Yet another misleading and ultimately boring poll.

[Thinkingabout]

60. The poll which counts is primary day. Hillary has never expected coronation and is working hard on

The campaign trail. She is smart and strong, her experience will result in a great president. I am getting ready for the big victory in the general election when Hillary wins the election.

[colsohlibgal]

70. A Great President For Wall Street To Be Sure

Sooner or later the leadership of the democratic party has to turn from Wall Street to Main Street.

That is Bernie not Hillary, not with her ties to Wall Street and the defense industry.

[Thinkingabout]

71. It is interesting because you bring up defense contractors, perhaps you should check Bernie's votes

On defense spending, you may get a surprise. Bernie meets with lobby groups for energy, tobacco and oil industries. Let's also remember Bernie's vote on the Brady Bill and AUMF, yes, votes to funds are goes to defense contractors.

[Sheepshank]

82. and.....crickets

[Babel_17]

74. High negatives this election cycle

People are not happy with the condition of the country and they blame the politicians for playing a key role in that. Sanders has enough talking points to deflect more of that than any other candidate.

There's a certain threshold of negativity that when exceeded opens the door to a different level of discourse. Long story short, politicians will find it very hard to duck the tough questions. People don't trust them to an unprecedented degree, and that's a big issue in itself.

Fox News has made it hard for Republicans with experience to enter the race. They've painted government as being part of the problem so how does an insider overcome that? One thing the occupants of the crazy clown car have in common, they are basically outsiders who were barred from the inner circles.

For Democrats there's the burden of overcoming the propaganda that government can't get things done.