PPP: Clinton leads 10 of 12 Super Tuesday and beyond states

[The Free North]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

8-5 (AS and Democrats Abroad will vote for Clinton) is  not what Sanders needs though. He needs to get one of TN and VA as well. This poll makes that look tough, though other companies are showing VA much closer.

I disagree. 8-5 is a perfectly reasonable split for Sanders in hostile territory.

[Ebsy]

Terrible numbers for Sanders. If he has a hope of winning the nomination, he has to win majorities of delegates in the actual contests outside of Vermont. That won't be happening in any of these states with these margins.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

These numbers would still give Clinton a huge delegate lead though.

PPP has been pretty friendly towards Clinton.  How does it shake out if Clinton is winning these states by 10-15 rather than 20-25?

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

8-5 (AS and Democrats Abroad will vote for Clinton) is  not what Sanders needs though. He needs to get one of TN and VA as well. This poll makes that look tough, though other companies are showing VA much closer.

Two of those eight aren't Super Tues states.  

American Samoa and Democrats Abroad vote on Super Tuesday.

[Gass3268]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

Given that he's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

As far as delegate counts go, Sanders is way behind as it is, so a blowout in several states is hardly good. I wouldn't call that a blowout for Sanders.

And out of these polls he's only leading in two states and only basically tied in one, which equals three not five.

Sanders is winning the hard delegate count right now 36-31.

[Gass3268]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

8-5 (AS and Democrats Abroad will vote for Clinton) is  not what Sanders needs though. He needs to get one of TN and VA as well. This poll makes that look tough, though other companies are showing VA much closer.

Two of those eight aren't Super Tues states.  

American Samoa and Democrats Abroad vote on Super Tuesday.

Democrats Abroad voting ends 3/8, so not on Super Tuesday. Also as unfortunate as it is, I doubt the media will even cover those two contests.

[DrScholl]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

8-5 (AS and Democrats Abroad will vote for Clinton) is  not what Sanders needs though. He needs to get one of TN and VA as well. This poll makes that look tough, though other companies are showing VA much closer.

I disagree. 8-5 is a perfectly reasonable split for Sanders in hostile territory.

Again, it's the delegate counts that truly matter and such a loss would not at all be good. These polls don't even have Sanders leading in 5 states, so I'm not sure where that number is coming from.

[Xing]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

[Fusionmunster]

Clinton leads almost everywhere, yet these are supposedly great numbers for Sanders. Such logic.

He's probably going to win the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado with these numbers, and even PPP is showing him leading or basically tied in 5 Super Tuesday states. Wasn't this supposed to be where Clinton dominates and ends Sanders? I wouldn't call a split dominating.

8-5 (AS and Democrats Abroad will vote for Clinton) is  not what Sanders needs though. He needs to get one of TN and VA as well. This poll makes that look tough, though other companies are showing VA much closer.

I disagree. 8-5 is a perfectly reasonable split for Sanders in hostile territory.

Again, it's the delegate counts that truly matter and such a loss would not at all be good. These polls don't even have Sanders leading in 5 states, so I'm not sure where that number is coming from.

Their assuming Sanders wins Minnesota and Colorado which is a pretty big assumtion given 0 polling.

[Ebsy]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

Yes, these numbers suggest a veritable delegate slaughter for Sanders.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

PPP has been very nice to Clinton, and they will tighten as they have everywhere else leading up to voting day when the attention shifts.  

[Why]

The five is the caucus's in Colorado and Minnesota, the two states he is shown as leading in the poll, Vermont and Massachusetts and the state he is only 2 points behind in, Oklahama.

A bit of a stretch but it is not totally out of the question he could win five states.

[Gass3268]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

Yes, these numbers suggest a veritable delegate slaughter for Sanders.

Yes, the South will be Sanders worst region and Super Tuesday is heavy on the South. He needs to survive Super Tuesday and get to other regions, not win it. These polls suggest he could survive 3/1.

[Fusionmunster]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

PPP has been very nice to Clinton, and they will tighten as they have everywhere else leading up to voting day when the attention shifts.  

They really haven't.

[trickmind]

Is PPP planning on doing the same for the GOP?

[RI]

Is PPP planning on doing the same for the GOP?

Unlikely as this poll as done for a client.

[Mehmentum]

Sanders isn't winning the nomination with just New England and caucus states.

[Gass3268]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

PPP has been very nice to Clinton, and they will tighten as they have everywhere else leading up to voting day when the attention shifts.  

They really haven't.

Yes they have. They over estimated Clinton's lead in Iowa by 7-8% and underestimated Sander's lead in New Hampshire by 10%.

[This account no longer in use.]

Looks like targeting OK was a good choice.

Sanders isn't winning the nomination with just New England and caucus states.

Weren't you and the other Hillbots saying Sanders wouldn't win MA a few days back? Now you're saying "He may win MA, but he won't win the nomination!" You just keep moving the goalposts.

[Ebsy]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

PPP has been very nice to Clinton, and they will tighten as they have everywhere else leading up to voting day when the attention shifts.  

They really haven't.

Yes they have. They over estimated Clinton's lead in Iowa by 7-8% and underestimated Sander's lead in New Hampshire by 10%.

Their last NH Poll was January 2-5, way too far before the election to be considered a prediction of the result.

[Gass3268]

Obviously, Sanders needs to improve on these numbers, but they're not that bad for him. If he is winning in MA, and could conceivably win OK, he'll survive Super Tuesday. Those MI numbers also don't look as bad for him as I thought they would. He almost certainly needs to do better than a 20+ point-loss in TX and VA, though.

PPP has been very nice to Clinton, and they will tighten as they have everywhere else leading up to voting day when the attention shifts.  

They really haven't.

Yes they have. They over estimated Clinton's lead in Iowa by 7-8% and underestimated Sander's lead in New Hampshire by 10%.

Their last NH Poll was January 2-5, way too far before the election to be considered a prediction of the result.

If it is their last poll, it is their prediction of the result.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Sanders isn't winning the nomination with just New England and caucus states.

Weren't you and the other Hillbots saying Sanders wouldn't win MA a few days back? Now you're saying "He may win MA, but he won't win the nomination!" You just keep moving the goalposts.

[Holmes]

It was obvious that Sanders could win Massachusetts after winning New Hampshire so convincingly. Because it's an establishment machine state and more non-white than New Hampshire, I'm thinking it'll be close to a 10% margin for Sanders. She'll still probably get more delegates from the state with the supers.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Let's relax for a bit. I remember back in 2008 many non-crappy polls were showing Obama winning New Jersey and California.
These numbers are useful but let's wait for more data.

[The Other Castro]

Just in case people are confused by the titling of these numbers, 9 states polled are from Super Tuesday, 1 is from March 5th, and 2 are from March 8th. Some glaring omissions from this list (because caucuses are trickier to poll) are the 5 caucus states that Sanders is generally considered very competitive in. Without context, it seems like Clinton is sweeping every states, but factoring in the caucuses you have a pretty even split between Clinton and Sanders. If Sanders were to make up the 2 point deficit in Oklahoma (not a tall task) and carry the caucuses as well as the states he's currently leading (Vermont and Massachusetts), these early March states would split with Clinton winning 9 states and Sanders winning 8 states (not factoring in Samoa or Dems Abroad).

Super Tuesday (3/1):
Alabama
Arkansas
Colorado (Caucus)----State not polled by PPP
Georgia
Massachusetts
Minnesota (Caucus)----State not polled by PPP
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
*American Samoa

3/5:
Kansas (Caucus) ----State not polled by PPP
Nebraska (Caucus) -----State not polled by PPP
Louisiana
Maine (Caucus) -----State not polled by PPP

3/8:
Michigan
Mississippi
*Democrats Abroad