Check out our slate of Daily Kos-endorsed candidates

You hear this a lot: "I would vote for Bernie, but he's just not electable. We need a candidate who can beat the GOP." Sounds reasonable enough, right? So I started digging into the data. And it turns out, that not only does Hillary not poll better against GOP candidates than Bernie, but Bernie consistently polls better than she does.

A quick note on methodology: I am using only pollsters that use live pollsters and include cell phones because they have the best track record. I am not including any internet pollsters because some people don't trust them for some reason, even though they also have a pretty good track record. Robo-pollsters like PPP, have the worst track record and are therefore not included, even though PPP has stated over and over that Sanders runs just as well as, or better than, Clinton. See here and here. Also, I am only using recent data: only polls since September.

Before I start, keep in mind that pollsters, in their infinite wisdom, were often polling Biden, a non-candidate in head to heads, but not Sanders. As a result, there are fewer general election polls testing Sanders. However, there are some early-state polls that test general election head to heads.

So let's start with Trump, because he's the most frequently tested:

Clinton v. Trump:

CNN: Clinton by 5
NBC: Clinton by 10
Quinnipiac: Clinton by 2
Survey USA: Trump by 5
ABC: Clinton by 3

Sanders v. Trump:

CNN: Sanders by 9
NBC: Sanders by 16
Quinnipiac: Sanders by 5
Survey USA: Tie

FINAL RESULT
Sanders' average lead: 7.5. Clinton's average lead: 3

Now onto Bush, who's also been tested a lot and is much more like a generic Republican than Trump.

Clinton v. Bush:

Fox: Bush by 4.
NBC: Clinton by 1
Quinnipiac: Bush by 2
CNN: Bush by 2

So on average, Bush leads Clinton by 1.75 pts. Unfortunately, the only national poll that has tested a hypothetical Sanders-Bush matchup is Quinnipiac which shows a tie. Clinton was losing by two in that poll.

But, we have state data!

Iowa:

NBC: Bush leads by Sanders by 2 and Clinton by 10

New Hampshire:

NBC: Sanders is tied with Bush, while Clinton trails by 7

So, in every major poll testing both Hillary and Bernie against Bush, Bernie does remarkably better.

Now onto Rubio:

NBC: Clinton up by 1; Sanders up by 4

Now onto Cruz:

NBC: Clinton up by 8, Sanders up by 12

Fiorina:

NBC (Iowa): Fiorina leads Clinton by 14 and Sanders by only 3
NBC (New Hampshire): Fiorina leads Clinton by 8, but Sanders beats her by 2

So there you have it. Sanders runs 3.5 pts higher than Hillary against Trump. And everywhere they've been tested together, Sanders runs better against Bush than Hillary. Sanders also runs better against Rubio, Cruz, and Fiorina. So, at this point, if you catch yourself saying "Hillary is more electable than Bernie," remember, all the available data says you're wrong.

To the extent that this data has any predictive value (many claim it has very little this far out -- I disagree -- polling around this time in 2011 showed Obama beating Romney by two pts, very close to his actual margin), it's pretty clear that Bernie is the stronger general election candidate. I'll admit that I'm just as surprised as you are that a crotchety old Jewish socialist has more appeal than a polished and experienced potential-first-female POTUS. But this is a very strange election cycle that is defying the laws of conventional wisdom. Our political system is more broken than any other point in modern US history, and establishment politicians like Hillary and Bush are not appealing to people on either side.  

And to those who claim that these polls are meaningless because "Sanders is just functioning as a generic Democrat," here is my response: do you really want to nominate a candidate who is polling below a generic D? I mean, why not nominate Martin O'Malley? Generic is practically his middle name.

And to those who will inevitably comment "but the GOP attack machine hasn't started on Bernie yet! Just wait! They're gonna call him a socialist!!" Um, OK? They've been calling Obama a socialist for 7 years now. They'll call Hillary a socialist. I'm really not worried about a word, and if you are, you're overthinking it. Whoever the Dem nominee will get endless hours of national airtime, so Bernie will have plenty of time to explain what democratic socialism is. And trust me when I tell you that the GOP would rather run against a candidate advocating a vague Rube-Goldberg type policy to lower college debt based on some Byzantine income-based formula than a guy advocating FREE college for everyone.

So go ahead. Make your case about why Hillary should be the nominee. Maybe you think she is stronger on guns. Maybe you think she is more experienced. Maybe you want the first female POTUS instead of the first Jewish POTUS right now. But whatever your reason is, don't say it's because she is "more electable." Cuz it aint true.