February 25, 2016
Who's More Electable?

Take a look at these figures, from Glenn Greenwald. Iím not entirely convinced yet, but my head and my heart are moving towards alignment.

With a consensus now emerging that the real estate mogul is the likely GOP nominee, it would stand to reason that the most important factor for many Democrats in choosing their own nominee is electability: meaning, who has the best chance of defeating the GOP Satan in the general election? In light of that, can Democrats really afford to take such a risky gamble by nominating Hillary Clinton?

In virtually every poll, her rival, Bernie Sanders, does better, often much better, in head-to-head match-ups against every possible GOP candidateÖ


abernie-sanders1.jpg

Webding3.jpg

Posted by Jerome Doolittle at February 25, 2016 01:52 PM
Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Comments

Interesting, but unconvincing. What do the polls say when we're sure that they know Sanders is an athiest, socialist and proposes the most expensive budget proposal in my lifetime? I'd love to think that we are beyond the whole religion thing in our presidential candidates, but if you poll Americans, it turns out that they would rather their kids marry anyone else, Muslim, someone from a different political party, different religion, rather than someone who is an athiest. But most importantly, he has to be able to win the primary in a state that has a different makeup than Iowa or Nevada. So we should have an idea of how viable he is by the end of March.

Posted by: Mike on February 25, 2016 7:44 PM

Animals, bow down to gods.
Human Beings, do not.

Posted by: Ten Bears on February 26, 2016 10:39 AM

Americans love to hate the Clintons - even dims.

This thing is wide open and many dims like in 04 think it's a given.

Posted by: One Fly on February 27, 2016 9:29 AM

It's always "wide open" until the day after election when it becomes "obvious," and/or "I figured it would end this way all along."

Meanwhile I'll take Dims over the Reprehensibles and their substrata of Repulsives and Revoltings.

Posted by: PW on February 29, 2016 12:34 PM

Well, Trump already has a record of eviscerating in debates, getting under the skin of, and electorally crushing well-funded, "inevitable," establishment-favorite candidates from political dynasties.

Trump is an expert at flicking at and picking at each of an opponent's scabs and scars one by one, until he finds the one that re-opens, hurts and bleeds. Why then would any party seeking to oppose Trump nominate the candidate with the largest number of battle scars since Leo DiCaprio in The Revenant?

Posted by: on February 29, 2016 2:56 PM

Predictwise, which combines polling with data from bookies, is 97% positive Hillary Clinton will win the Dem nomination and Trump will get the Rethuglican nod, and that she'll beat him in the general.

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-democratic-nomination

I'm not sure I buy that, but looks legit.

Posted by: Charles D on February 29, 2016 4:18 PM

Trump's misogyny will undo him in an extended series of debates with Hillary.

Posted by: Erich on February 29, 2016 10:54 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?