What the hell happened in Michigan?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Trade is going to kill Clinton in the Rust Belt.

Yeah, just like it did in 2008 in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Trade is going to kill Clinton in the Rust Belt.

Yeah, just like it did in 2008 in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana.

Obama did not drive home that point as hard as Sanders has.

Obviously you don't remember that campaign well.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Worth noting that Bernie has outperformed his polling in every non-Southern State so far except Nevada and Vermont (lol). Not sure if that's predictive of anything, but still a heartening pattern.

That doesn't say much considering that for most of those states there was literally no polling (Colorado, Nebraska, Maine) or very little and of dubious quality (Kansas).

[Landslide Lyndon]

Ed Kilgore is skeptical that Sanders won because of his anti-trade stance.
Of the 58% of Democratic primary voters who said that trade kills jobs Sanders only got 58% of them.

[Landslide Lyndon]

They say that the problem was the companies stopped polling before Sunday's debate but I can't take this excuse seriously. Almost everybody, even foreign media, said that Clinton had a strong performance.
But even if they were wrong it would take a Sara-Palin-with-Katie-Couric type of meltdown to lose a double digits lead in one day.

[Landslide Lyndon]

They say that the problem was the companies stopped polling before Sunday's debate but I can't take this excuse seriously. Almost everybody, even foreign media, said that Clinton had a strong performance.

Did you watch the debate, though?  Sanders did quite well in it and Clinton's performance was below average, with several poor answers that highlight her inability to give straightforward responses.  With the debate in mind, the numbers in Flint make a lot of sense.

Did you read the rest of my post? Unless she had a nervous breakdown or said the that the voters of Michigan are morons there is no way a mediocre, or even downright awful, debate performance to wipe out in a day a double digit lead.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Also, for those saying that Clinton was hurt by her debate performance.
She actually won late deciders 51/44. Sanders' margin of victory came from those that had decided a month or more ago.

[Landslide Lyndon]

What a joke!

Yes, you are.

[Landslide Lyndon]

WaPo thinks they figured it and and apparently it is all Howard Dean's fault...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/09/why-were-the-polls-in-michigan-so-far-off/


Basically the likely voter screens of pollsters were using models based on the weird 2008 race and were underestimating the number of men and young voters.  So in theory MI is an anomolie because of their issues with the 2008 election, which shouldn't apply to polling in other states like OH.

Lets see, the newspaper that recently ran 16 hit pieces against Bernie in just 16 hours is trying to convince people that some election 8 years ago screwed up all the polls in Michigan, and none of the other 49 states could be used as models? What a joke!

How many negative stories do you think they've run on Hillary Clinton? Probably like a thousand based on the email faux scandal alone!

You're thinking of the New York Times and their phony Clinton scandal stories.

In general, both Clinton and Sanders get hit a lot harder by the media then Repubs as MM esp cable news are just completely terrified to go after Republicans nowadays ("liberal media" my ass).

However, I definitely believe that, speaking very, very broadly, Clinton clearly gets more favorable or at least far, far less dismissive coverage than Sanders.

You could argue that Sanders gets less coverage than he deserves (which can be said for almost every candidate not named TRUMP). But to say that he gets more negative coverage that's just ridiculous.
Just think that after so many months running nobody even bothered to search for old statements and videos like the one praising Castro and Ortega.