February 26, 2016 11:00 AM
Clinton Dominates Bernie in WABE Poll
Hillary Clinton has 61.5% of all likely Georgia Democratic voters backing her campaign and Bernie Sanders has 29.3%. The only area where Sanders is competitive is with young voters. He splits that vote with Clinton.
On Thursday, WABE released the results of their GOP primary polling and both that and the Dem poll mirror what WXIA found in their polling of both parties’ primaries.
About Author
edatlanta
23 Comments
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I would love to hear why African American Democrats are supporting Hillary over Sanders? The Clintons family between trade policy, immigration policy, foreign policy, War on Drugs/Three Strikes and you are out…..have been horrible for the community by any measure. The Pew institute pointed out that ending the Clinton War on Drugs policy would eliminate 30 percent of poverty. Why would anyone think that would change under president Hillary who is bought and paid for by the private prison industry? Please help me understand?
Please do not say electability because Trump will destroy her one on one on the above…..
“Please help me understand?”
John, you’re asking that question as though anything in this race–for either party–makes sense or is subject to the normal rules of reality.
Very valid point, what is bizarre, the big issue in the lower income ares ie BLM movement is all about criminal justice. The Clintons created the environment that caused the majority of problems. Irronically the Koch brothers from the right get the problem, while Hillary racks more cash from the lobbyist.
You watch not one Hillary supporter will come up with any real defense.
If you can figure out why there are so many “Richard Lankford for sherriff” signs in SW Atlanta it’s probably the same answer.
The last time Hillary was in the White House it took a team of lawyers to get our furniture back. She’s way more clever.
Here’s an essential answer to your question, John. Because she can win, because she’s a known quantity, and because she’s enough of an orthodox politician to reward loyalty.
The African-American vote in 1992 and 1996 wasn’t going to make or break Bill Clinton, and he legislated accordingly. That is fundamentally untrue today — a weak turnout by black voters will kill Clinton’s campaign and she knows it. There’s no percentage in triangulating this time around. More to the point: she’s enough of a politician to understand that. Sanders, though I love his policies and his approach, has no reputation for political baksheesh for the black political establishment to weigh. Basically, black voters are expecting Hillary Clinton to make up for the mistakes of Bill Clinton in office, as political payback for their support.
I think the private prison industry is screwed, regardless of who wins. The political tide is turning on both the left and the right with regard to mass incarceration. Everyone is looking for ways to make it go away. It’s one of the few points of consensus. The only question is pace. The same goes for the War on Drugs. Clinton may be the president that ends it, simply to notch a political win.
But beyond this lay the simple calculation that Clinton can beat Trump in a fight in the mud, which is where this is going. Sanders has never been smeared like Trump is likely to smear him, so we can only guess how he’ll react. We know what Clinton is going to do — fight like hell, hit back, dig dirt, and eviscerate Trump one-on-one on the stump and in debate.
Add to this the fact that she served in the Obama Administration, that Bill Clinton remains generally beloved on the left, and that as the first woman elected president she can continue a narrative thread about out-groups achieving power that started with the election of the first black president, and you can see why black voters generally support her.
George,
We are friends and I hope you take my comments in that spirit.
1) “black voters are expecting Hillary Clinton to make up for the mistakes of Bill Clinton in office”
Sounds like battered wife expecting different behavior. You discount the fact it was not a mistake it was bought, and paid for policy driven by lobbyist. You know I gave you facts from the left showing the donations the Clintons’ got connected to the policies that hurt the AA community. Does it not bother you Hillary is using the same lobbyist to run now, the only difference is they got personal money verse just campaign money , why would anything change?
2) “I think the private prison industry is screwed”
Does it not bother you Hillary is still taking money from them in this election cycle, especially since her family created the problem driven by this industry last time?
3) “Clinton can beat Trump in a fight in the mud”
In one quick jab from Trump, Big Bill fell over 10 points in his approval ratings, and her numbers fell so low Bernie tied her in Iowa and beat her in NH and grew over 30 points in Nevada. You really think Trump does not know how to hit the Clinton family?
4) “Bill Clinton remains generally beloved on the left, and that as the first woman elected president she can continue a narrative”
How does that change the “narrative”, the Clintons sold out American jobs for speaking fees, and campaign donations? I sent you the links from the left showing Hillary was a sell out. At the end of the day the Clinton family created an environment of mass incarceration, and if you survived, your choice was endless wars in Iraq or your job sold off to the highest bidder. You want to know why youth unemployment is 50% in the AA community…..As I said BLM movement was directly created by the Clinton Family pay for policy machine. And now you are going to double down?
Andrew,
Ivana has already endorsed Trump, and said glowing things about him, not like the Monica situation, who was an intern working for Clinton a few years over the legal age. I am not defending Trump, but strange allegations happen during divorces, not like an employer 40 years older than the employee. Trust me, this would be a stupid attack, as the media compares the situation. Bill and Hillary would just drop further in the polls…
Huh? The Monica Lewinski scandal was never ” debunked”? In fact Hillary shamed her in public and never apologized, even after the truth came out. You know President Clinton did violated the rights of the workers at the White House? We have very clear rules at the work place, and beyond cheating on his wife with a teenager, this is a clear case of sexual discrimination at the work place. Do you really not understand how wrong what Billy and Hillary did?
Hillary defense for shaming Monica is Trump said some stuff that was not PC? We saw how that worked out in last exchange, Bill fell more than 10 points and Hillary got a real opponent who was not even close. HUH????
Andrew,
That is not a talking point, as a father of a daughter it goes way deeper, obviously you are not a parent.
Hillary going after a victim of her husband.
……….Hillary Clinton: Monica Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony toon”……….
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-monica-lewinsky-a-narcissistic-loony-toon/
Andrew,
Trump has never had work place violations of sleeping with teenage employees that work for him. I will remind you Clinton was in his 50’s….This was way bigger than his other affairs he admitted to like Jennifer Flowers, because it was a work place violation. Do you really not understand why the boss cannot sleep with workers especially teenage interns? When Bill Clinton was the boss he was working for tax payers. This is not about Dem or GOP it is about taking advantage of people. I have been 100% consistent on this issue no matter what party, I made the exact same point when Foley did it as a congressman to pages on the PP when it first became public. The issue with Hillary has nothing to with defending her husband via an affair, the point is she violated the rights of workers in the White House. Any way you spin it, this is not right!
Really? Bill was sleeping with an employee teenager, and when it became public by Monica the victim, Hillary called her naressisstic looney toone, and Hillary was working in the White House. You really wonder if Hillaty violated her rights as an employee? Do you not understand, Monica got a nice settlement for this?
For the record, I’m pretty sure she wasn’t a teenager, and secondly, I don’t think anyone claimed they were “sleeping together”.
This was from the LEFT…Bill was caught and Hillary tried to cover it up!
………Years from now, when we look back on Bill Clinton’s presidency, its defining moment may well be Clinton’s rationalization to the grand jury about why he wasn’t lying when he said to his top aides that with respect to Monica Lewinsky, “there’s nothing going on between us.” How can this be? Here’s what Clinton told the grand jury (according to footnote 1,128 in Starr’s report):
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the–if he–if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not–that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement….Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
The distinction between “is” and “was” was seized on by the commentariat when Clinton told Jim Lehrer of PBS right after the Lewinsky story broke, “There is no improper relationship.” Chatterbox confesses that at the time he thought all these beltway domes were hyperanalyzing, and in need of a little fresh air. But it turns out they were right: Bill Clinton really is a guy who’s willing to think carefully about “what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” This is way beyond slick. Perhaps we should start calling him, “Existential Willie.”……..
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/1998/09/bill_clinton_and_the_meaning_of_is.html
John. I want you to take all the criticisms you’ve just made. And I want you to compare them, as objectively as you can, to how Republicans govern with regard to affirmative action, anti-discrimination enforcement in jobs and housing and education, police brutality, income inequality — and don’t give me the jacked-up line about trickle-down economics and what not; no one is buying it — urban transportation and infrastructure development, the provision of social services like — yes — Medicaid and SNAP and HUD funding, and even the frank admission that racism affects black people’s economic outcomes.
Compare these things, between Republicans and Democrats. Then tell me why any black Democrat would ever support a modern, orthodox Republican candidate over Clinton, who is by and large an orthodox Democrat.
Bill Clinton’s record on racially-disparate crime enforcement is shameful. But no one is going to trade for the basket of Republican nonsense on race over it, which is insanity. We have reason to believe that Clinton will play ball. We have no reason whatsoever to believe any Republican in this race won’t seek to actively damage black society to show their loyalty to working-class white racists who are turning to Trump en masse.
George,
You have known me for a while, and probably seen some of the numerous articles even in the AJC, and post I have made. I have been very outspoken about bashing gays, blacks……I am anti affirmative action, but would have always been very pro equal opportunity. In the companies I have run, could carless about race, gender……all about performance.
Second I am economic conservative with a pragmatic side. I have very thick skin, and tend to look at policy over the personal BS. With that said, it all about follow the money.
Third, I lean toward a Trump over Sanders via trusting he would be better at negotiating what needs to be done. But both of them are very compiling via not being manipulated by the lobbyist. Which I am shocked this has not caught on with the Dems more. Is it not ironic the only candidates not bought and paid for by lobbyist agree on ending endless policemen of the world foreign policy, negotiating drug prices and immigrants cannot be a tool to drive down wages.
Finally, I agree that Trump has done and said things that are very disturbing. But at the end, If I had to trust Hillary/Rubio/Cruz to fix a problem verse the vested interest that paid for their campaign, we all know how that will play out. In truth the reason why Trump will be your best choice, is because your party past on the right person to lead your party. Trump/Sanders will negotiated with drug companies to lower drug prices to save Medicare. The above is bought and paid for in my opinion. The reason I supported Kasich, like him or not, he was not tainted by the lobbyist verse the people. BTW I made the same point to the GOP on this blog, if you do not like Trump why did you not support Kasich? He has over a 70 percent approval rating in Ohio , and leads Hillary by 11 points. . As a realist I will end up supporting Trump over special interest guided Hillary. Hope we are still friends.
Andrew,
Georgia actually argues the issues, you just avoid them?
You asked why black people support Clinton over Trump. I think I’ve given justifiable reasons. You don’t like the reasons, but that’s irrelevant.
We’re still friends. I fear you’re making a terrible moral error, but politics is no reason alone to damage a friendship.
George,
In all due respect, I asked why they would support Clinton over Sanders. Glad we are still friends.
Dude. He gate you an answer. As did Andrew. You don’t like the answers fine. But no one is avoiding answering.
Honestly, I don’t know you other than reading your comments here (and at PP). But for sometime, I have believed you were level headed. But your comments on this post are leading me to believe that was not the case. If you don’t like Hillary, fine. But to sit there and defend Trump in the way you are doing is in my opinion disgusting. It appears that you are willing to compromise your values (as I perceive them) just because you really really hate Hillary. And that’s disappointing.