First Scientific Post-Debate Poll Says Hillary Crushed Bernie
After I wrote that Hillary Clinton was the clear winner over Bernie Sanders in this week’s debate (full article reprinted below), I got some pretty fierce pushback, so before I proceed, let me make a few things clear. First, debates are not decided by opinion polls, they are decided on the merits. My critique, therefore, consists of two separate arguments: that Hillary Clinton won the debate on the merits, and that those who are arguing that Bernie Sanders won the debate are doing so based purely on meritless criteria like online polls, focus groups, and social media mentions.
I clarify this because the “Bernie won” narrative relies largely on unreliable, unscientific online polls, and so before I present the results of the first scientific poll on the debate, I want it to be clear that I am not saying that this poll determines the winner any more reliably than those garbage online polls. All it measures is whom people think won the debate.
With that being said, the first scientific poll taken since the debate says that Hillary Clinton smoked Bernie Sanders by…READ MORE
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Tommy Christopher
Tommy Christopher is The Daily Banter's White House Correspondent and Political Analyst. He's been a political reporter and liberal commentator since 2007, and has covered the White House since the beginning of the Obama administration, first for PoliticsDaily, and then for Mediaite. Christopher is a frequent guest on a variety of television, radio, and online programs, and was the villain in the documentaries The Audacity of Democracy and Hating Breitbart. He's also That Guy Who Live-Tweeted His Own Heart Attack, and the only person to have ever received public apologies from both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
65 responses to First Scientific Post-Debate Poll Says Hillary Crushed Bernie
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Suzanne McFly October 16th, 2015 at 16:12
Bernie lost that debate because it highlighted what his stance on guns have been and it also shows he knows very little about foreign affairs. He could of easily beefed up his knowledge on foreign affairs, that would of helped him out but the A+ rating from NRA is something I would not support in any office let alone the Presidency.
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 17:01
Agree with you completely
Suzanne McFly October 16th, 2015 at 17:48
:)
CandideThirtythree October 16th, 2015 at 17:20
He has a D- rating from NRA
KillAllTheRednecks . October 16th, 2015 at 17:27
Anyone to the left of Yosemite Sam gets a D rating from the NRA.
Suzanne McFly October 16th, 2015 at 17:56
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/13/bernie_sanders_on_guns_at_the_debate.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/13/bernie_sanders_on_guns_at_the_debate.html
Read these stories, his votes for the gun manufactures speaks loudly to me.
CandideThirtythree October 17th, 2015 at 01:21
But those only tell part of the story.
“He’s always supported closing the gun show loophole. He’s always
supported commonsense measures like limiting the size of cartridges.
That’s why he’s got a lifetime D-minus rating from the NRA.”
He is fine with holding gun sellers liable for selling to people they shouldn’t but not the manufacturers and they always put both in the same bill. There is no line item veto for senators.
You can’t hold a manufacturer liable unless their product is faulty and causes harm because of a defect. The guns are not defective, they are working as intended, no matter how unsavory that is.
You and I both know that congress is notorious for putting poison pills in bills and giving bills deceptive titles just to stir up their base. Very few in congress even READ the bills before the sign them.
Remember what Lincoln Chaffee said during the debate…when he voted for the patriot act? Other people were doing it so he just wet along with the crowd? That happens a lot, but Bernie always reads them. There are hundreds of C-Span videos of him alone on the floor talking about what is in a bill. If he says something was wrong with them, then I believe him.
Suzanne McFly October 17th, 2015 at 11:48
You are supporting him and I understand why, I have no issue with anyone who supports him. I will vote for him if he is up against a republican but I would rather vote for someone who feels stronger about limiting the 2nd ammendment more than Bernie does.
CandideThirtythree October 17th, 2015 at 01:44
Another thing, He was the congressman from Vermont, he is the senator from Vermont, it is his job to do things for Vermont.
Vermont
has virtually no crime, almost no gun violence, it has the lowest
amount of murders of any state no matter which weapon is used. They just had 2 gun murders in the whole state in 2012!! Even though 70-75% of the people own guns.
It also happens to not have any gun laws, they never needed any because there was never a problem. Falls in line with the , if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Vermont is the most liberal, least religious state in the country, they have no death penalty, 92% high school graduation rate and 35% have at least a bachelor’s degree, their unemployment is one of the lowest in the country.
So this is not the same caliber of people that we have in other states, they can control themselves without a bunch of laws.
Suzanne McFly October 17th, 2015 at 11:50
I am from Connecticut and I have been to Vermont multiple times, it is a beautiful state. I know he was representing them but he did not say how his stance would change if he represented the whole country. I can only assume his stance would not change if he doesn’t say otherwise.
CandideThirtythree October 17th, 2015 at 15:08
But he did, he said he was going to go hard for the universal background check and getting rid of assault rifles and more money for mental health.
Suzanne McFly October 17th, 2015 at 15:38
What about making bullet cartridges smaller and making the large capacity guns illegal?
CandideThirtythree October 17th, 2015 at 18:23
Yes, he voted against those too.
Sanders Voted YES on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets.
Congressional Summary:
The term ‘large capacity
ammunition feeding device’ means a magazine or similar device that has
an overall capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition
It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Shall not apply to the possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed before 2013.
Shall not apply to qualified or retired law enforcement officers.
Proponent’s Argument for voting Yes:
Sen. BLUMENTHAL: This amendment would ban high-capacity magazines which
are used to kill more people more quickly and, in fact, have been used
in more than half the mass shootings since 1982. I ask my colleagues to
listen to law enforcement, their police, prosecutors who are outgunned
by criminals who use these high-capacity magazines. I ask that my
colleagues also listen to the families of those killed by people who
used a high-capacity magazine.
Opponent’s Argument for voting No:
Sen. GRASSLEY. I oppose the amendment. In 2004, which is the last time
we had the large-capacity magazine ban, a Department of Justice study
found no evidence banning such magazines has led to a reduction in gun
violence. The study also concluded it is not clear how often the
outcomes of the gun attack depend on the ability of offenders to fire
more than 10 shots without reloading. Secondly, there is no evidence
banning these magazines has reduced the deaths from gun crimes. In fact,
when the previous ban was in effect, a higher percentage of gun crime
victims were killed or wounded than before it was adopted. Additionally,
tens of millions of these magazines have been lawfully owned in this
country for decades. They are in common use, not unusually dangerous,
and used by law-abiding citizens in self-defense, as in the case of law
enforcement.
Reference: Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act;
Bill S.Amdt. 714 to S. 649
; vote number 13-SV103
on Apr 17, 2013
Here is a more complete list of his votes over the years.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:06
Sanders voted against the Brady act.
Sanders voted to defund any country which registers or taxes american made guns
Sanders said after sandy hook that no gun laws or background. checks would make any diffrence in gun violence.
He voted for allowing guns in luggage on amtrak.
He voted for the plcaa
he received his rating in 1994 for voting FOR the ban of 19 semi automatic guns.
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 18:36
Yet he makes the NRA argument in not holding gun manufacturers responsible and defending immunity for them from lawsuits. Martin O’Malley burned him (no pun intended) on the gun issue.
CandideThirtythree October 17th, 2015 at 00:54
You can only hold someone liable if their product is faulty and hurts someone. The guns are doing exactly what they are supposed to do, kill people.
You can’t sue Ford if a drunk driver hits you in a Ford.
There are other things you can do to the manufacturers and that is what he said all along.
The thing about laws is that they set precedent for other laws so you have to do it right or you open the floodgates for all sorts of other unjust laws like the way the Hobby Lobby law did.
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 18:34
Milt Shook lists everything Bernie did wrong:
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/bernies-other-problem/
Suzanne McFly October 17th, 2015 at 11:33
I love the Colbert clip.
toadUso October 16th, 2015 at 16:44
Why is Biden a choice? Would be good to know, as well as more accurate, to see where those votes would fall if his name was not there.
CandideThirtythree October 16th, 2015 at 17:18
“online polls, focus groups, and social media mentions.”
Oh you mean VOTERS?
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 17:36
Many of those polls you could vote more than one time in, meaning they weren’t scientific.
But continue the “skewed polls” logic the right wing possessed in 2012 to delude themselves into a Mitt Romney landslide happening on election night.
KillAllTheRednecks . October 16th, 2015 at 17:26
LOL! Just look at all of the DNC Powers That Be continually trying to brainwash us into thinking Hillary is #1. I watched the debate, and she refused to do anything but the most minimal effort to protect & expand Social Security, and acted like the old 90’s “work with the republicans” pragmatism will prevail over daring to counter the gop. AT BEST, all Hillary would be is treading water where as with Sanders, we actually could reverse the Curse of Reagan once and for all. If the fix is in and Hillary gets nominated no matter how overwhelming everyone prefers Bernie Sanders, then I’m just going to sit out this coming General election for the first time in my life. Please don’t hand me any of that “A non-vote is a vote for the gop” trash. IMO, Hillary is no better than any of the republicans. She’s as much of a stooge for the Wall Street weasels as the gop runners are!
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 17:37
IMO, Hillary is no better than any of the republicans.
Really?
You’d believe that President Hillary Clinton would make the exact same nominees to the SCOTUS as President Jeb! Bush would?
You’d believe that President Hillary Clinton would make the same foreign policy blunders that President Jeb! Bush would?
You’d believe that President Hillary Clinton would defund Planned Parenthood just as President Jeb! Bush would?
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 17:55
Bernie will not be able to compromise or work with anyone, he is the Dems version of the tb caucus
Kick Frenzy October 17th, 2015 at 15:14
O rly?
“Not only has Sanders gotten a lot more things done than Clinton did in her own short legislative career, he’s actually one of the most effective members of Congress, passing bills, both big and small, that have reshaped American policy on key issues like poverty, the environment and health care.”
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you
tracey marie October 17th, 2015 at 16:26
Heah, I hear you, but he will not win the WH, I will vote for the Dem candidate even though Bernie believes gun restrictions, including the Bradey bill are unnecessary
Kick Frenzy October 17th, 2015 at 18:24
He has said he’s willing to look at gun restrictions again.
He also has been for many restrictions already.
The difference is he tries to allow for what the 2nd Amendment has been stated to provide at the same time.
I’m not a fan of all his gun positions, but he’s better than any of the Republican’s stances.
And he certainly does have a possibility of getting the Dem nomination.
In fact, if everyone who said “he won’t get the nomination” would go ahead and vote for him, he probably WOULD get the nom.
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:24
That is why we lose elections, your purity test smells like teabaggers purity tests.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 17:10
It does.
Someone crack a window, please…..
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 17:39
The Church of Bernie Christ doesn’t want to stick with reality, so they’re engaging in the same “skewed polls” nonsense the right did in 2012.
In the end, the American people won because there was a mature exchange of ideas and an actual debate. That the Church of Bernie Christ feels the need to thump their chests to justify their guy winning shows they have no faith that he can actually win the nomination.
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:11
Bernie has some great ideas for helping the middle glass and reigning in the corporations and wallstreet…I do not believe he will make a good President
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 18:33
I’m not attacking Bernie per se, I’m attacking his most deluded supporters who believe throwing temper tantrums is the way to get their guy the nomination. Many of them are also “Bernie or bust” meaning if Bernie doesn’t get the nomination, they’ll either sit the election out or vote third party, giving us yet ANOTHER Bush!
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:56
I agree with you, that is why we have so many teabaggers, purity tests for Dems and if they don’t get their way they stay home. It is why we lose the states and lost both houses.
cecilia October 16th, 2015 at 18:56
I don’t know who you are talking about but Bernie – for quite a long time – has insisted that EVERYONE has to get out and vote.
GET OUT.
AND VOTE.
he’s not even insisting that we should vote for him, he’s not an egotist. He just is trying to get people to understand what the issues are and that without everyone participating we won’t HAVE a country
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:57
He is talking about here online
cecilia October 16th, 2015 at 19:02
I hope that is a tiny minority
we don’t need any more Stupid
rg9rts October 17th, 2015 at 09:23
I did the McGovern thing thank you…once was enough
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 17:07
Farsighted cyclopses use middle glasses to read….
tracey marie October 17th, 2015 at 17:14
okay, you caught a typo. :)
cecilia October 16th, 2015 at 18:54
“Church of Bernie” ???
what the hell are you talking about.
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:56
He is referring to people who say “if Bernie is not the nominee I will sit home”
cecilia October 16th, 2015 at 18:58
those people have to be idiots
tracey marie October 16th, 2015 at 18:59
Exactlly, we lose elections because of that type of pouting.
rg9rts October 17th, 2015 at 09:22
More commonly known as St Benards
Ormond Otvos October 16th, 2015 at 18:16
Hillary quickly deflected two questions about how she would treat the bankers and insurance schemers, saying nothing at all.
She didn’t win. She didn’t even come in second. O’Malley did better. He sounded authentic. Hillary was just slick. Most of what she said seemed empty promises.
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 18:18
Because taking it to the banksters is more important than making sure people can get a job that pays well enough to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table.
amersham46 October 16th, 2015 at 19:47
Polls and experts are nice , but the delegates at the convention bat last
mea_mark October 16th, 2015 at 21:09
Bernie is certainly going through the trial by fire. If Bernie does make adjustments to his message and how he articulates himself, I think he may have a lot better chance than people are giving him credit for.
I guess the question is, is Bernie feeling the burn of the trial by fire and will he adapt?
One debate strengthens him, in that it allows him to refine his message and actions. It will be very interesting to see how he performs in the next debate. How much does he learn from the first and how does he respond?
Charlotte Daniels October 16th, 2015 at 21:34
Mr. Organic Farmer / “enviornmentalist” (ha!)
I couldn’t care less about access to Freakout Nation or whatever that garbage I stumbled onto was. What biased, narrow minded tripe. I purposefully antagonized the so called moderator. How can you be that dense?
mea_mark October 17th, 2015 at 10:00
Apparently you care enough to stalk me and track me down at another site. You truly are an internet troll.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 16:33
You’re the one being dense, claiming to dislike FON but trailing leading FON figures here. It looks to me as if you have a lot of time and very little to do.
So why you chasing him around?
Is it those impressive ham-slab pecs?
His dimples?
His melodious basso profundo?
The cute way his hair kinda curls and gets burnished by the sun in the summer?
The way those tight jeans fit his……………………oh never mind…..
mea_mark October 17th, 2015 at 16:34
LOL.
NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ October 16th, 2015 at 22:24
Bernie’s got more than his message to address, and Milt Shook points out what he needs to do:
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/bernies-other-problem/
mea_mark October 17th, 2015 at 09:57
I read it before I left my comment.
Charlotte Daniels October 17th, 2015 at 08:52
Read this take on the debate:
http://ethicsalarms.com/2015/10/16/ethics-musings-ii-the-dark-side-of-the-democrats-debate/#more-29157
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 16:27
Excellent points.
Sanders is going to have to knock her out to get the nomination and he doesn’t seem willing to go after her.
mea_mark October 17th, 2015 at 16:34
I don’t think he really needs to go after her. I think he just needs to refine the delivery of his message. Staying positive and offering solutions while talking about the benefits and gains that can be made would go a long way.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 17:01
That is what I’d prefer to see. If he ends up getting the nomination, I’d prefer it be through making stronger arguments that appeal more to voters in the positive sense you describe.
At this point with Hillary cruising, hitting her stride with a large lead, I don’t think he can overtake her that way unless she commits a colossal boner.
So I think to beat her he needs to not just run faster, but to reach ahead and grab the back of the collar of her shirt and yank her back to the pack.
I wouldn’t say she “crushed” him, as this poll says. I think they both helped themselves but she helped herself more than he did, though.
mea_mark October 17th, 2015 at 17:11
With so much negativity coming from the republicans, the easiest way to win is to be positive. If Sanders gets it great, if Hillary gets it I won’t be crushed, just a little disappointed. Unless of course, she keeps moving to the left and becoming more progressive as she appears to be doing.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 19:40
I feel the same way, or that’s what I’d prefer to see. If I had to pick a fave out of those at the Dem debate, it would be Webb. I was talking to someone about him earlier and said nearly every politician I’ve met had a plastic sheen to them. The look hard at (not into) your eyes and pretend to look interested.
Webb’s not like that.
I’m trying to keep as open a mind as possible with all of the Democrats. There is no need to pick one now. It seems to me that this is the better course for us right now. Give them all plenty of chances.
One objection I have had with all 3 televised debates is the way the networks have been unfair about the amount of time the candidates have had to speak. I’m not a Huckabee or Rand Paul guy, but I feel it was a disservice to all of us to not give them a fair shot.
I remember how Jimmy Carter came out of nowhere and how Superstar Bill Clinton was in sixth place going into the New Hampshire primary.
I think what they should have done with the Republicans is divide them into 2 groups, but put them in separate rooms and ask both groups the same questions.
maggie October 17th, 2015 at 22:28
I am going to partially disagree with you on this…and say it’s not about money….but how much effort they put out to be present and reach out to voters to tell them what their platform was/is….there were so many republicans “running” and I mean that for some intentionally in quotes…that they just didn’t deserve the time…because they didn’t put in the effort…the same thing with Jim Webb….even tho I strongly dislike/disagree with jim webb (rush limbaugh positively has been gushing in love with him this week); Jim also has not put any effort into his campaign…On this basis I think a moderator has a right to curtail their time based on the effort they have put in …;)
maggie October 17th, 2015 at 22:23
agree
maggie October 17th, 2015 at 22:21
really agree with this statement
rg9rts October 17th, 2015 at 09:19
A lot of St Bernards have a mean streak and are quite intolerant of others
maggie October 17th, 2015 at 22:20
TC is right from a forensic debate perspective, she won….I am not voting for Bernie…with all the bloody massacres….he can’t make up his mind about where he wants to stand on the gun issue….that is why he is a regional politician….and why HRC is polarizing …she’s not afraid of not being popular to part of the population and doing the right thing….when one considers her domestic and foreign experience and her overall record in context….( I consider her time as senator of NY when I look at her voting record, knowing she didn’t have a choice…on some of the war issues….so even if I myself would not have voted the same way I consider that she was representing new york…..she is also responsive to the body politic…she is listening…and when people show her an issue is of overwhelming importance….she listens….HRC2016