Thanks for this. Still unsure on how reliable this is given then nature of Nevada but it's still interesting to see. All will be answered Saturday.

I wonder when the Gravis poll comes out

Come on Clinton

Whenever a new poll comes out the most important thing is to look at the crosstabs.



Why is "N/A" listed for half of the demographic groups? They have Hillary winning whites by 2, but her lead is only 1, suggesting that Bernie is leading non-whites...but they refuse to give the actual demographic breakdown.

Hmmm...very interesting CNN. You'd almost think they released this poll for press or something.

The sample size is probably way too small to have any percentages so instead they put N/A lol

Also given the nature of Nevada the results are skewed. Back in 2013, 43% of adults didn't have a landline (the way this was conducted), and a further 18% had cell phones. Minorities, particularly Hispanic, rely more on cell phones than others.

Republicans can also vote in the caucuses too given the rules .

Because of the NV rules, Republicans can actually vote in both caucuses. Mess.

Yep. As a Republican you have to be signed up by Feb 13th and it'll be locked in for Feb 23 when you vote. But if you register republican that day or before and then go to the democratic caucus the 20, you can use the democrat same day registration and change to vote. Then three days later you can vote republican bexause the new change won't register as you were republican before Feb 13

This definitely favors Bernie

This is sad, so sad.

It's not "sad," it's a difference of ideology. Real or ideal, feasible or unfeasible, reliance upon winning up and down the ticket and taking back the House or realizing that it's just not going to happen.

If he wins by a narrow margin, you can bet that this contributed to that win. There's been quite a bit of talk of Republicans voting against Hillary for the purposes of weakening her showing and damaging her in the long run for the primaries.

However, I think she's still going to win. Republican influence on the Nevada caucus is probably pretty small, and I don't think the real margin is as close as the last two (sketchy) polls have shown. We'll see what happens!

No, you're wrong, it's sad, especially the second post I quoted, the first isn't as bad. But at least they're at a point where they realize and acknowledge all these things that are wrong with Hillary and admittedly choose to ignore them. But I get where I disagree with them on ideology, you don't have to jump in with the real vs. ideal talking point again.

Here comes the talking point talking point

Here comes the talking point talking point talking point tbh

It's not a talking point, it's the truth. Realizing that Hillary is human and imperfect - like any other person in politics - but still choosing to support her is also not sad. Additionally, this is one of those opinion-based things that you love to tell me "no, you're wrong" about when I'm... not?

So Hillary panders sometimes. Does Bernie not? Does he not try his damnedest to get the youth to vote, to get people who are in poor economic conditions to rise up in "revolution?" Has he never changed his position on a single view? Has America itself, through actual ideological shift and not just the dying off of older generations, not seen massive changes of opinion on hugely significant issues? Are Hillary's changes not at least in pace with these societal changes?

There are things some people may find to be wrong with Hillary. Those people might also happen to prioritize either their disagreement with Bernie on policy or their view that his proposals will never come to pass under a Sanders administration, both of which - wrong or right - I would say are significantly more important than thinking "oh, Hillary panders sometimes and flip flops a little more than some other people and all those scandals seem a little shady." And I don't think that's sad at all, because politics isn't just about choosing the person you'd most like to hang out with and both sides of this argument believe their candidate to be the political superior. Quite frankly I don't care if Hillary is the superior in likability or certain character traits.

A shitload of people try to put her on the stake like some sort of modern Salem witch trial, looking for things that aren't there or exacerbating whatever they can find - but her political experience, her ability to weather a storm and perform under pressure, and the depth of her intellect more than protect her from all that!

Do NOT even try to compare Bernie to Hillary when it comes to pandering, inconsistency, flip-flopping, scandals, etc. Of course Hillary isn't perfect and I get that, and I actually applaud that person for having the guts to speak up admittedly about ignoring the many flaws that Hillary has, it's impressive compared to many biased Hillary supporters I've come accross, the "sad" part, like I said, was mostly in reference to the second post, which I know you continue to ignore.

It's really impossible to take you seriously when you're so patronizing. Act like an adult if you want to be a part of adult conversations.

This thread has become a talking point on heckings talking points about other people pointing out his talking points about addressing other people's talking points.

Hillary supporters are by definition biased. As are bernie supporters. You can't be an unbiased Hillary or Bernie supporter. Your bias has led you one way or the other

What, the sad part is the fact they see her as already having won?

I mean, if facts are sad.

FiveThirtyEight's projections for Nevada now have her with a 69% chance of winning and a polls-plus projection of 52.1 to 46. In South Carolina she has over a 99% chance of winning with a projection of 63.9 to 33.2.

And if those two states go that way, we all know what's going to happen on Super Tuesday and afterward. Like, obviously I'm still crossing my fingers and trying not to call the race since it's closer than it was ever supposed to be, but the fact is that it currently looks like a solid Hillary nomination almost across the board.

I personally find my attitude to be moderately mature and fitting, I'm sorry if calling out bias might go against the picture-perfrct scenario you plot this thread to be, at least I'm following ATRL rules and not insulting others asking them to "act like adults" - but thank you for sharing your genuine opinion.

You're, once again, trying to play with technicalities to prove a point that isn't even moderately-related to the point I was trying to make. Sure, Hillary is the likely winner and I've said it in the thread before. I was directly calling out the attitude the person was approaching, changing every "if" to a "when", the continuous biased sense of inevitability that many Hillary supporters continue to have is the sad part. Throwing polls and projections isn't even remotely related to what I was trying to say.