Reuters primary polling: tracking thread.

[Eraserhead]

So Sanders actually lost ground in this? None of the real national polls are showing that. Junk poll!

[Eraserhead]

Sanders within 14% in a national poll. Another high water mark.

[Eraserhead]

Full Poll:

Clinton 39
Sanders 31
Biden 16
O'Malley 2
Cuomo 2
Chafee 1
Gillibrand 1
Webb <1

What is it with this polling of Cuomo and Gillibrand?

It's very stupid and their inclusion probably hurts Clinton's numbers slightly.

[Eraserhead]

With non-whites, it's

Clinton 42
Sanders 30
Biden 20

Trash it.

[Eraserhead]

Wow, Sanders has totally collapsed since last week in this poll. From only single digits behind Clinton to about twenty points behind!!

Geez, and that's including Biden!

Probably just moving out a bad simple.

[Eraserhead]

Hillary and Bernie both up, Biden down. Makes sense. He better get in soon.

[Eraserhead]

Like all junkes, this forum needs a poll fix bad. Right now we are searching couch cushions for leftover morsels

my sources tell me we're getting a real humdinger of a SHOCK POLL tomorrow, so stay tuned

What exactly are these sources saying?

A Quinnipiac poll showing Republicans beating Hillary nationally by 20+.

Or a PPP poll showing Clinton beating Sanders in New Hampshire by 15+.

[Eraserhead]

Sanders within 15%? Has that ever happened before post-Biden?

[Eraserhead]

Polling on New Year's Eve, wow.

Very, very disrespectful.

[Eraserhead]

I'm wondering if this polling bump for Sanders is just statistical noise. Some polls aren't showing it at all, while others with questionable records have been posting obvious outlier numbers.

What polls haven't shown it other than this one and Gravis Marketing?

[Eraserhead]

Clinton - 46% (-9)
Sanders - 44% (+1)

Timber!

[Eraserhead]

Clinton: 55
Sanders: 43

Those numbers only include Democrats.

[Eraserhead]

If the New Hampshire primary had only included Democrats, Sanders would have won by 4% instead of 22%+.

[Eraserhead]

If the New Hampshire primary had only included Democrats, Sanders would have only won by 4%.

But Reuters doesn't narrow it down to "independents who plan to vote in the Democratic primary" or even "Democratic-leaning independents." It's just "independents." Which includes tons of right wingers who have no intention of voting in a Democratic primary. Typical from incompetent Reuters. That's probably why Pollster only uses the numbers among Democrats.

Also, there are a lot of closed primaries/caucuses.

Well, a poll that includes only registered Democrats is even less helpful since many of the primaries and caucuses are open or semi-open.