Data For Progress: Sanders +2 in NC, Sanders +9 in TX

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Texas:

Sanders - 30
Biden - 21
Bloomberg - 21
Warren - 13
Buttigieg - 9
Klobuchar - 5
Steyer - 1
Gabbard - 1

North Carolina

Sanders - 27
Biden - 25
Bloomberg - 18
Warren - 11
Buttigieg - 10
Klobuchar - 6
Steyer - 1
Gabbard - 1

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2020/2/27/sanders-leads-in-texas-and-north-carolina

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Great numbers for the next Prez

[2016]

Texas seems to be in line with CNN & that Univision University of Houston TX Poll.
North Carolina will be close, no matter what (I don't believe that Civitas Poll btw which has Biden up Seven or Eight). There ain't as much African Americans in NC as they are in SC. There is a fair bit of Hispanic Population in the State.

[ShamDam]

If Bernie wins Texas by 1 point he’ll be strongly favored to win the nomination. If he wins by 9 points I think it’s basically over, combined with a double digit win in California.

[CookieDamage]

A mouthful of thick, sweet, sassy molassy

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

That's awesome. I'm personally waiting to see how far Biden wins SC by before declaring anything in NC.

[morgieb]

[2016]

That's awesome. I'm personally waiting to see how far Biden wins SC by before declaring anything in NC.

SC has 60 % Black Electorate, NC has about 30, maybe 35 if it's high Turnout. Big Difference IMO.

[NOVA Green]

WOW--- moment of truth for Data for Progress.

Did they just happen to hit the mark better than others in IA, NH, and NV or is their model transferable to other states.

Polling these days is tricky business, what with many people not responding to traditional polling methods, so any organization that can come close consistently is a big deal....

True test is in the South (Plus Texas which is only partly Southern).

[Xing]

Another great poll for Sanders in Texas and a poll showing a Toss-Up race in NC. I’ll want to see how this pollster’s numbers match up with the results in SC, but it looks like Biden will need either a big polling error in his favor or a huge late surge to win Texas.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Bloomberg is hurting Biden big

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

This is the 3rd TX poll of the day with a significant Sanders lead. 2 had a 9 point lead and 1 of the polls had a 6 point lead. That is an average lead of 8 points...

And given that something like half, give or take, of the vote has already been cast in early votes...

Anything resembling this solid of a win in TX combined with a win in CA in line with the CA polls will seal the nomination right then and there.

[OneJ]

NUT!

[GoTfan]

He's not winning Texas.

[Xing]

He's not winning Texas.

He very well still could. You can’t extrapolate the SC results to TX of all places. He’s probably not winning NC (though I doubt polling will be quite as off there as it was in SC), but Sanders has plenty going his way in TX.

[GoTfan]

He's not winning Texas.

He very well still could. You can’t extrapolate the SC results to TX of all places. He’s probably not winning NC (though I doubt polling will be quite as off there as it was in SC), but Sanders has plenty going his way in TX.

He was barely in front there. This result in SC is going to evaporate that.

[Devout Centrist]

He's not winning Texas.

He very well still could. You can’t extrapolate the SC results to TX of all places. He’s probably not winning NC (though I doubt polling will be quite as off there as it was in SC), but Sanders has plenty going his way in TX.

He was barely in front there. This result in SC is going to evaporate that.

What are you smoking? Texas has a robust early vote; most Democratic primary voters have already cast their ballot.

[Adam Griffin]

Sanders can theoretically afford to do as bad (or at least close to it) as he did in the Confederacy: as long as he keeps the Southern periphery in check, it's fine (not to mention CA's effects). Clinton won TX 2:1 in 2016: even if Sanders loses slightly, it's really not a big deal, as he'll be taking 50+ delegates net away from a candidate like Biden. The only major contest where he's likely to get rat-f[inks]ked is FL.

Little known fact: Sanders won more delegates outside the Confederacy in 2016 than Clinton:

Non-Confederates:
Sanders   1448
Clinton   1432

Confederates:
Clinton   700
Sanders   332

[DrScholl]

The Confederacy trope is back again. How predictable.

[Adam Griffin]

The Confederacy trope is back again. How predictable.

It was always destined to rise again, some might say.

In all seriousness, it's just the easiest way to define "the South" in a conversation where so many disagree about what constitutes "Southern" and what does not. Personally, I don't consider TX or LA Southern, but most disagree.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

MALARKEY

[Ljube]

Sanders can theoretically afford to do as bad (or at least close to it) as he did in the Confederacy: as long as he keeps the Southern periphery in check, it's fine (not to mention CA's effects). Clinton won TX 2:1 in 2016: even if Sanders loses slightly, it's really not a big deal, as he'll be taking 50+ delegates net away from a candidate like Biden. The only major contest where he's likely to get rat-f[inks]ked is FL.

Little known fact: Sanders won more delegates outside the Confederacy in 2016 than Clinton:

Non-Confederates:
Sanders   1448
Clinton   1432

Confederates:
Clinton   700
Sanders   332

This is why the other candidates need to stay in the race to deny Sanders the majority of the Non-Confederate delegates.
The Confederate delegates are already strongly Anti-Sanders.

Based on the South Carolina results, we can conclude with certainty that the undecided voters or late deciders are Anti-Sanders and that they will break for Biden. That means that Biden may even win Texas.

[Adam Griffin]

Sanders can theoretically afford to do as bad (or at least close to it) as he did in the Confederacy: as long as he keeps the Southern periphery in check, it's fine (not to mention CA's effects). Clinton won TX 2:1 in 2016: even if Sanders loses slightly, it's really not a big deal, as he'll be taking 50+ delegates net away from a candidate like Biden. The only major contest where he's likely to get rat-f[inks]ked is FL.

Little known fact: Sanders won more delegates outside the Confederacy in 2016 than Clinton:

Non-Confederates:
Sanders   1448
Clinton   1432

Confederates:
Clinton   700
Sanders   332

This is why the other candidates need to stay in the race to deny Sanders the majority of the Non-Confederate delegates.
The Confederate delegates are already strongly Anti-Sanders.

Based on the South Carolina results, we can conclude with certainty that the undecided voters or late deciders are Anti-Sanders and that they will break for Biden. That means that Biden may even win Texas.

It still wouldn't stop him from winning the largest share. I know you'd love this, but if Sanders goes into the convention with the most delegates and gets denied the nomination, 5,000,000 Democratic votes in the margin disappear overnight and the election is over. Trumps gets 330+ EVs and possibly a majority of the PV to boot.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Sanders can theoretically afford to do as bad (or at least close to it) as he did in the Confederacy: as long as he keeps the Southern periphery in check, it's fine (not to mention CA's effects). Clinton won TX 2:1 in 2016: even if Sanders loses slightly, it's really not a big deal, as he'll be taking 50+ delegates net away from a candidate like Biden. The only major contest where he's likely to get rat-f[inks]ked is FL.

Little known fact: Sanders won more delegates outside the Confederacy in 2016 than Clinton:

Non-Confederates:
Sanders   1448
Clinton   1432

Confederates:
Clinton   700
Sanders   332

This is why the other candidates need to stay in the race to deny Sanders the majority of the Non-Confederate delegates.
The Confederate delegates are already strongly Anti-Sanders.

Based on the South Carolina results, we can conclude with certainty that the undecided voters or late deciders are Anti-Sanders and that they will break for Biden. That means that Biden may even win Texas.

Kinda. Bloomberg should definately drop, Klob should drop after winning MN on Super Tuesday, Warren could go either way, but Pete should probably stay in and suck up the anti-Biden anti-Sanders vote for a while. Of course, Biden could absolutely win a delegate majority, but things will become clearer on Wednesday.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Sanders can theoretically afford to do as bad (or at least close to it) as he did in the Confederacy: as long as he keeps the Southern periphery in check, it's fine (not to mention CA's effects). Clinton won TX 2:1 in 2016: even if Sanders loses slightly, it's really not a big deal, as he'll be taking 50+ delegates net away from a candidate like Biden. The only major contest where he's likely to get rat-f[inks]ked is FL.

Little known fact: Sanders won more delegates outside the Confederacy in 2016 than Clinton:

Non-Confederates:
Sanders   1448
Clinton   1432

Confederates:
Clinton   700
Sanders   332

This is why the other candidates need to stay in the race to deny Sanders the majority of the Non-Confederate delegates.
The Confederate delegates are already strongly Anti-Sanders.

Based on the South Carolina results, we can conclude with certainty that the undecided voters or late deciders are Anti-Sanders and that they will break for Biden. That means that Biden may even win Texas.

It still wouldn't stop him from winning the largest share. I know you'd love this, but if Sanders goes into the convention with the most delegates and gets denied the nomination, 5,000,000 Democratic votes in the margin disappear overnight and the election is over. Trumps gets 330+ EVs and possibly a majority of the PV to boot.

Could you be more of a hack?