Where do Warren voters go? Clinton (Marist Poll)

MSNBC ^ | 02/18/15 | Alex Seitz-Wald

[presidio9]

What happens to supporters of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren if she doesn’t run for president in 2016? Do they join up with Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, or former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, both of whom are considering bids as liberal insurgents?

Unfortunately for progressives spoiling for a fight against all-but-declared frontrunner Hillary Clinton, most Warren supporters seem to be ready to support Clinton, at least at the moment.

That’s one takeaway from the new NBC News/Marist poll, which removed Warren from its survey of the three early presidential states, citing the senator’s frequent insistence that she’s not running for president.

Warren captures about 10-15% of Democrats’ support in most polls of the potential 2016 field that include her name. With Warren removed, the “lionshare” of her voting bloc appears to go to Clinton, said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, which conducted the poll with NBC.

“There’s no sense that they’ve gone anywhere other than to the well-known Clinton,” Miringoff said. “She’s cornered the market on liberal Democrats.”

That’s bad news for everyone not named Clinton in the primary, who desperately need Warren’s bloc of voters in their camp. With the former secretary of state capturing close to 70% of the vote in a Warren-less field, challengers will have to start stripping away big chunks of her base to be competitive. The “anybody-but-Clinton” vote is simply nowhere near big enough at the moment.

First, some caveats: A lot could change in the year between now and the Iowa Caucus. Clinton could stumble or a challenger could start to eat into her support, even just by boosting their own name ID, as voters look for choices. Polls also consistently show that Democrats want a contested primary, so anyone who challenges Clinton will likely -SNIP-

[cripplecreek]

They go where they’re told.

[lee martell]

Like ALice Cooper once said; “You can go To H*ll!”

[Lakeshark]

The bigger question is when the dems will dump the shrew, and who is it they will try to fool us with this time........

[Mr. K]

The dem ticket is going to be HilLIARy/Warren

[Jim from C-Town]

Too bad Karl Marx is dead. He would be a great Democrat candidate.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Post of the day!

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

If Satan was running as a democrat they would support him...or her.

[CMailBag]

Where do the Hellary voters go after she is stricken with a mystery illness??? Or an attack of the Grandmas???

[AlanGreenSpam]

MSNBC: “Do they join up with Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders...”

Ummm... Bernie Sanders is a self-declared SOCIALIST. Please refer to him as such, not an independent.

[Texan Tory]

“Too bad Karl Marx is dead. He would be a great Democrat candidate.”

Probably not far enough to the left, but they might settle for him to satisfy the moderate wing of the party.

[Cicero]

They go from one idiot woman to another.

[Vigilanteman]

Airheads who value sexual genitalia above all else tend to seek out like-minded candidates.

[ballplayer]

Hillary will tell them whatever they want to hear as long as they vote for her

[DPMD]

I’ll be happy to tell them where they can go.

[realcleanguy]

So Warren supporters will vote for a rich, elitist Wall St whore? So in reality, those who support Warren really only support the rich and the 1%rs.

[presidio9]

What a lot of people forget about from the 2007-2008 DNC primary process is the debate that took place in October in Philadelphia. Prior to that Ms. Rodham-Clinton was in pretty much the same position that she is today. She had some minor fumbles in earlier debates, but the other candidates pretty much left her alone, for fear of alienating her enormous group of supporters.

Prior to the October debate, Senators Obama and Edwards said they planned to "go after her." At that point, neither had much to lose. In the preceding weeks, The National Enquirer had begun reporting on Edwards' extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter. The national media (Fox in particular, of course) was just beginning to take notice. Senator Obama was a year into his first term, and still relatively unknown on a national level.

Ms. Rodham-Clinton had a disasterous performance. She failed to answer several questions, and attempted to take both sides on others.

I have always believed that this performance (and Edwards' subsequent implosion) opened the door for voters to begin taking Senator Obama seriously. This October, Ms. Rodham-Clinton will be 68 years old. She has shown no signs of learning from any of this. I am looking forward to seeing what happens if she is again kept afloat by a sympathetic media. Sooner or later she will have to answer the tough questions convincingly. I see no evidence that she will ever be up to this.

If you happen to have an hour to kill, the CSPAN video of Ms Rodham-Clinton's collapse is available HERE

[xzins]

I was surprised at how slow-thinking that Hillary was when her most recent public comments had folks wondering at her mental dexterity. She eventually got around to having ‘trickle down’ come out of her mouth, but it was a painfully slow process for her to get that out. You just had to wonder about the rumors she had been downed by a stroke.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Vagina Uber Alles...

[areukiddingme1]

I think there is a yoga class at 3:30 and a meditation class at 5:00...they can go there. They would seriously just be in the way anyway while the rest of us try to clean up the mess obamadork left behind.