Hillary Clinton is ahead by a "commanding" 41 points over Bernie Sanders in Iowa. Of course, only several weeks ago Sanders was ahead of Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire. According to a CBS News poll in September, Time wrote that Bernie Sanders had overtaken Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire:
The Vermont senator's secret might be his legion of "enthusiastic supporters"
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has become the Democratic primary's frontrunner in the key caucus states of Iowa and New Hampshire, according to a CBS News poll, conducted with YouGov.
He has the vote of 43 percent of likely Democratic caucus voters in Iowa, whereas Hillary Clinton has 33 percent.
Among 1350 voters in New Hampshire, Sanders lead widens to 52 percent versus Clinton's 30 percent, with a margin of error of +/- 7.4 percent.
Remember, only several weeks ago, before Clinton's "commanding" lead in a recent poll, Bernie Sanders had become the "Democratic primary's frontrunner in the key caucus states of Iowa and New Hampshire."
In 2015, it's important to know why a candidate owns a lead or surges in the polls. It's also important to know why polls change so dramatically within several weeks. Whereas "enthusiastic supporters" bolster the Sanders campaign, polls indicating Clinton leading in Iowa and nationally are undermined by landlines, questions about Clinton's value system, and overall negative favorability ratings.
According to the Monmouth University poll showing Clinton now ahead by 41 points, the recent Iowa poll was conducted from "a statewide random sample of 400 Iowa voters" that included "300 contacted by a live interviewer on a landline telephone and 100 contacted by a live interviewer on a cell phone."
The pollster used the phrase "commanding," after surveying 400 people; 300 of whom answered their landline and spent time with a live interviewer on the phone.
You've also heard that Hillary Clinton is ahead by 31 points nationally, in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll where 650 out of 1000 people were contacted via landline telephone. According to the poll, the survey consisted of "1,000 Adults, including 350 respondents with a cell phone only." As a result, it's logical that Hillary Clinton would lead with voters who use primarily landlines.
However, these polls also have a precedent for ending in the victory of Clinton's challenger. The same poll showing Clinton increasing her "dominant" lead over Bernie Sanders also has a section of prior data. The following information on page 14 within the actual poll extolling Clinton's lead speaks volumes:
2007-2008 Democratic Primary Comparative Data
Which of the following candidates do you think has the best chance to defeat the Republican candidate and retain the White House?
1/08 9/07 4/07
Hillary Clinton 51 54 39
Barack Obama 29 18 32
John Edwards 8 15 22
Yes, the same poll that has Clinton supporters giddy with joy also shows a time period when Clinton dominated President Obama in the polls. In January of 2008, as well as September and April of 2007, Hillary Clinton had a "commanding" and "dominant" lead over Obama.
But you're biased, these polls are accurate!
If this is true, then these same polls mirror the poll cited in a recent Yahoo article titled More Americans distrust Hillary Clinton than trust her. This article cites a CNN poll that states 57 percent of Americans find Hillary Clinton "not honest and trustworthy" and 50 percent feel "she does not inspire confidence." The Yahoo piece also cites an ABC News poll that finds Clinton's trustworthiness rating "has dropped from 53 percent a year ago, then 46 percent two months ago, to 41 percent now."
Likewise, the same NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showing Clinton with a commanding 31 point lead over Bernie Sanders also states that most Americans view Clinton in an unfavorable manner. In this poll, 26 percent of respondents gave Hillary Clinton a 1 out of 5 (the lowest rating, titled "Very Poor Rating") and 11 percent gave her a 2 out of 5 pertaing to "Having the right temperament."
So, 37 percent of respondents didn't feel Clinton had the "right temperament."
As for "Being compassionate enough to understand average people," the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 30 percent of voters gave Hillary Clinton the worst rating, or a 1 out of 5.
Most surprising is that when voters in this poll respond to "Having high personal standards that set the proper moral tone for the country," 37 percent of respondents give Hillary Clinton a "Very Poor Rating" of 1 out of 5.
So, apparently Clinton leads Bernie Sanders by a commanding 31 points nationally, but 37 percent of respondents in the poll don't think Clinton will set the right "moral tone" for America and 37% don't feel Clinton has "the right temperament."
Again, 37% of respondents in a favorable poll extolling a "commanding lead," do not feel Hillary Clinton has "high personal standards" or will set the right "moral tone" for the country.
Yet, these people will still vote for Hillary Clinton to be president, even though they don't approve of her moral tone and temperament, and also don't feel she's compassionate.
Speaking of moral tone, I explain in my latest YouTube segment that when Democrats vote their conscience, only one candidate will be victorious in 2016.
In presidential history, when have voters elected a person with negative favorability numbers?
You won't find a president with the same favorability ratings as Hillary Clinton because Americans have never elected a person they find "not honest and trustworthy."
As for how these polls are conducted, they'd be very relevant in the 1970's. First, the majority of these polls call primarily landline telephones. Sorry, but the latest poll with Clinton 30 points ahead of Sanders states the respondents were "1,000 Adults, including 350 respondents with a cell phone only." Also, the Iowa poll with Clinton up by 41 points asked 300 (out of only 400 people) respondents via landline telephone.
The biggest issue here is that almost half of Americans don't use a landline telephone; especially Americans under 45 years old. A Time article titled Landline Phones Are Getting Closer to Extinction highlights why landline surveys could be skewed towards Clinton's favor:
41% of U.S. households were wireless-only by of the end of 2013, according to new data from the National Center for Health Statistics.
Young adults are unsurprisingly the cohort the most likely to live in wireless-only homes, with 66% of people between 25 and 29 using cellphones exclusively. Americans between 30 and 34 were the next largest group of cord-cutters, with 60% of them living in wireless-only homes. 53% of people between 18 and 24 are now cellphone-only, while 48% of people aged 35 to 44 and 31% of people aged 45 to 64 have made the jump.
Just 14% of adults over 65 have dumped their landlines, though. Overall, more than half of wireless-only adults are now 35 or older, up from 47.6% in the second half of 2010.
Since the demographic groups most likely to use cell phones are likely to vote for Bernie Sanders, it's logical that polls show Clinton ahead when primarily landlines are surveyed.
Also, the flawed rationale in automatically assuming Biden's votes must go to Hillary Clinton ignores the honesty that Biden voters crave, and also ignores the fact Biden is closer to Sanders in terms of foreign policy. If anything Biden's theoretical votes should go to Bernie Sanders, not Clinton.
Finally, an article in Yahoo titled Hillary Clinton wins debate, but her lead on Bernie Sanders slips explains that Sanders surged after the Democratic debate:
But the new poll -- conducted over three days after the debate -- shows support for Clinton (45 percent) is up just 3 percentage points while support for Sanders (29 percent) has jumped five...
One possible reason for Sanders' post-debate rise: Those who watched the debate viewed him favorably.
So yes, the debate helped Sanders tremendously, especially in terms of fundraising.
As a lifelong Democrat, I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders and I explain why in this YouTube segment. My reasons correlate to what undermines Clinton's lead in the polls, namely the fact that Bernie's value system is more important to me than Clinton's evolution on key topics. Also, one can't accept money from prison lobbyists, like Clinton, and expect to keep any current lead in the polls, no matter how many landline telephones are called.