Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #301  
Old 12-12-2019, 07:49 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
The Betfair numbers reported by Predictwise are also moving:
22% Biden
18% Sanders
14% Warren
14% Buttigieg
8% Bloomberg
4% Yang
3% Klobuchar
1% Gabbard
0% Booker
Sanders is at 2nd, up from 4th last time I posted. The infarction helped his campaign?
Wow, they give Biden only a 22% chance of winning the nomination?

I need to get a bet down on Biden, stat! Those odds are a steal. I'd take him against the field at even money.
  #302  
Old 12-12-2019, 09:13 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,029
Yeah, I'd say the numbers for the other top 4 seem pretty accurate: Biden should get the rest and be around 50/50.
  #303  
Old 12-12-2019, 10:02 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Wow, they give Biden only a 22% chance of winning the nomination?

I need to get a bet down on Biden, stat! Those odds are a steal. I'd take him against the field at even money.
If he gets off to a worse-than-expected start in IA and NH, then there's the possibility that he could bleed supporters heading into what, right now, looks to be his bulwark: South Carolina.
  #304  
Old 12-12-2019, 12:43 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
Even if Biden's support sags a bit, and even if he loses IA and NH, someone's still got to take the nomination from him. Other than Warren briefly in the early fall, nobody's really looked like they could do that.
  #305  
Old 12-12-2019, 11:42 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
His recent insults against an Iowan Democrat disturbed me. The guy, who wasn't obviously anti-Biden until he got insulted, asked questions for which Biden needs a good answer. "Fatso, you're a liar" isn't it. Was he this bad when he was younger?

I agree that 22% seems very low, and betting Biden at Betfair may be a smart move. But this lovable dotard wasn't the smartest bulb even when he was younger, and there's a fair chance that the tantrum in Iowa wasn't an isolated blunder and that we'll be gnashing our teeth and wailing before November.

I was the Cassandra in 2016 calling for Biden to rescue us from Hillary. Now we need a white knight to rescue us from Biden. I see no enthusiasm for Michelle Obama — How about [just joking] Jimmy Carter? He is NOT precluded by the 22nd Amendment and only just turned 95 years old.

Last edited by septimus; 12-12-2019 at 11:44 PM.
  #306  
Old 12-13-2019, 06:36 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
His recent insults against an Iowan Democrat disturbed me. The guy, who wasn't obviously anti-Biden until he got insulted, asked questions for which Biden needs a good answer. "Fatso, you're a liar" isn't it. Was he this bad when he was younger?

I agree that 22% seems very low, and betting Biden at Betfair may be a smart move. But this lovable dotard wasn't the smartest bulb even when he was younger, and there's a fair chance that the tantrum in Iowa wasn't an isolated blunder and that we'll be gnashing our teeth and wailing before November.

I was the Cassandra in 2016 calling for Biden to rescue us from Hillary. Now we need a white knight to rescue us from Biden. I see no enthusiasm for Michelle Obama How about [just joking] Jimmy Carter? He is NOT precluded by the 22nd Amendment and only just turned 95 years old.
What's even more disturbing is that he didn't even call him 'fatso' or 'fat ass' - he said "Look, fat." He can't even get insults out of his mouth. A few years ago Biden was clearly a septuagenerian but he appeared to have his acuity intact; now he looks like he spends a guy who plays bridge all day.
  #307  
Old 12-13-2019, 12:09 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
And the comparison of averages:
Code:
Candidate  Average RTF   RCP  Econ

Biden             25.9  28.5  26.0
Warren            15.6  15.3  16.0
Sanders           18.0  17.8  16.0
Buttigieg          8.5   9.0  10.0
Yang               3.3   3.2   4.0
Bloomberg          4.9   5.5   3.0
Klobuchar          2.6   2.5   3.0
.
So 538 has started putting out their averages:
Average as of Dec. 11, Biden 26.2% Sanders 17.0% Warren 15% Buttigieg 9.6%

I guess some lower ranked polls that you didn't include helped Buttigieg and hurt Sanders.
  #308  
Old 12-13-2019, 12:43 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
So 538 has started putting out their averages:
Average as of Dec. 11, Biden 26.2% Sanders 17.0% Warren 15% Buttigieg 9.6%
Yeah, I just saw that this morning. I'm not sure if I'll keep my average going or not, because my main motivation for it was the lack of a good-quality polling average out there.
Quote:
I guess some lower ranked polls that you didn't include helped Buttigieg and hurt Sanders.
Or it could be that they include older polls than I do - I believe that's the case. Lately Sanders' support has been increasing, and while Buttigieg's support had been increasing until fairly recently, it's started to drop. And since I drop older polls fairly quickly, it's more sensitive to that.

(I can't really say which way is better - my way, you can show real movement sooner, but you can also show meaningless, transitory shifts in the numbers that disappear the next week.)

Also, 538 has state-level averages for states where they feel they have enough polls. Here's Wisconsin, for instance.
  #309  
Old 12-13-2019, 01:04 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,826
Well, I hope you keep it up. You basically have a slightly more ruthless version of what Silver is doing and I'm curious to see how much of a difference his extra thousand lines of code makes.
  #310  
Old 12-19-2019, 06:37 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
What the hey, let's keep doing this!

We've got a shitload of polls this week, and almost all of them are new.
A-rated: Fox, Emerson, Suffolk, Marist, and Monmouth (all new except Monmouth)
A/B rated: NBC-WSJ, CNN-SSRS, and IBD-TIPP, all new
B-rated: Quinnipiac, Ipsos, YouGov (all new or weekly except Ipsos)
B/C rated: Morning Consult (weekly)
C-rated: HarrisX (new - no longer repeats weekly)

So here are the numbers:
Code:
Candidate  9/12 9/18 9/25 10/2 10/9 10/15 10/24 10/31 11/8 11/15 11/27 12/4 12/11 12/19

Biden      26.5 28.5 28.4 27.6 26.2  28.7  28.4  28.1 27.1  27.2  26.3 26.6  25.9  26.9 
Sanders    17.9 16.9 16.8 16.4 15.3  13.6  16.9  16.6 16.6  17.2  18.8 18.6  18.0  19.3
Warren     17.6 18.6 21.5 22.4 25.0  25.4  21.6  21.2 20.7  20.8  15.7 15.9  15.6  14.9
Buttigieg   5.0  5.7  5.8  5.6  5.2   6.0   6.2   7.1  7.6   7.5  10.0 10.3   8.5   8.4
Bloomberg                                                          2.5  2.8   4.9   4.8
Klobuchar                                   2.0   2.1  2.3   2.3   1.9  1.9   2.6   3.3   
Yang        2.5  2.8  3.0  2.9  3.1   2.4   2.2   2.3  2.5   2.7   3.2  3.1   3.3   3.1
Booker                                                                              2.4 
Everyone else < 2.0
And the poll comparisons:
Code:
Candidate  Average RTF   RCP  Econ  538

Biden             26.9  27.8  26.0  27.0
Sanders           19.3  19.3  16.0  18.0
Warren            14.9  15.2  15.0  14.8
Buttigieg          8.4   8.3   9.0   8.8
Bloomberg          4.8   5.0   8.0   4.6
Klobuchar          3.3   3.3   4.0   2.8
Yang               3.1   3.3   4.0   3.4
Booker             2.4   2.5   2.0   2.0
I think I'm a bit ahead of 538 on Bernie's rise in the polls, as well as the Klobuchar and Booker boomlets. None of these depend on a fluke poll or two: Klobuchar and Booker are at 2% or higher in every poll except Ipsos, which rates everyone low; Bernie is in the 20s in 6 of the 8 A or A/B rated polls.

And I think Bloomberg's finding that you can spend $100M to get you to 5% in the polls, but the next $100M won't get you to 10%. Must be nice to have that sort of money to throw around.
  #311  
Old 12-19-2019, 07:30 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,826
Yay!

Yeah that Bloomberg comment links to a pet peeve of mine. Yes, less private money in politics would be good but people act like raising $100M is twice as likely to win an election to some schlub who only raised $50M. There are diminishing returns at that level.
  #312  
Old 12-31-2019, 05:30 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
My reports of the Predictwise/Betfair numbers may be unpopular, so I'll promise to make this the last report this year.

Winner of election Nov. 3, 2020, sorted by likelihood. First number is chance of winning the D nomination. ('*' denotes numbers missing from Predictwise which I therefore borrowed from Betfair. Gabbard's numbers seem inconsistent; perhaps some weird scenario is envisioned.)
- 50% Trump
30% 15% Biden
21% 10% Sanders
16% 6% Warren
10% 4% Buttigieg
7% 4%* Bloomberg
3% 2%* Yang
4%* 2%* Clinton
2% 1% Klobuchar
0% 1% Gabbard
- 1% Pence
- 1% Haley
Chance of Democratic Control in 2021:
70% House of Reps
49% White House
31% Senate
Sorry if the numbers are becoming more dismal.
  #313  
Old 01-13-2020, 01:59 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
I haven't bothered to put up the averages for the past few weeks, because other than the regular repeaters (Morning Consult, YouGov, and Harris) the only pollster that's done a national poll since my last update has been Ipsos.

That's been a pretty thin field to do an average of - I'd hardly need a spreadsheet to do the average, the back of an envelope would suffice. If that changes, I'll resume putting up my numbers.

Right now the action's in Iowa anyway.
  #314  
Old 01-14-2020, 10:27 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
The numbers from Betfair prediction market get more depressing. The first number is for November victory; 2nd is to become the D nominee.
55.1% - Trump
14.9% 31.1% Biden
13.0% 29.2% Sanders
6.0% 10.5% Bloomberg
3.5% 11.4% Warren
2.3% 6.8% Buttigieg
1.8% 2.3% Yang
1.2% 2.9% Clinton
0.7% 1.4% Klobuchar
0.4% - Pence
0.4% - Haley
0.3% 0.7% Steyer
0.3% 0.4% Gabbard
0.2% 0.5% Obama, M.
(The numbers do not imply that Bloomberg or Yang would necessarily be a strong candidate, just that if things get so peculiar that one of them gets the nomination, that same peculiarity whatever it is might propel them to November success.)
  #315  
Old 01-14-2020, 01:04 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
Naturally, later yesterday, Quinnipiac and IBD/TIPP both published new national polls. I'll be posting new numbers either tomorrow night or Thursday.

I might even do an Iowa average.
  #316  
Old 01-15-2020, 12:04 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Barely 24 hours after my last post the numbers at Befair have shifted. Red is the new chance to win the nomination; Black is the chance a day ago, before the debate.
33.1% 31.1% Biden
28.7% 29.2% Sanders
10.3% 10.5% Bloomberg
12.5% 11.4% Warren
.5.8% ..6.8% Buttigieg
.2.1% ..2.3% Yang
.3.2% ..2.9% Clinton
.1.1% ..1.4% Klobuchar
.0.4% ..0.7% Steyer
.0.2% ..0.4% Gabbard
.0.5% ..0.5% Obama, M.
Biden and Warren are up a bit; Buttigieg down a bit. I'm curious: Does this correspond to debate performance? Or is it just noise?
  #317  
Old 01-15-2020, 01:53 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 4,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Biden and Warren are up a bit; Buttigieg down a bit. I'm curious: Does this correspond to debate performance? Or is it just noise?
My guess would be mostly noise. Overall the debate last night was uneventful. Biden managed to look stable and was gaffe-free so if anything that would be the main takeaway for me. Warren’s response about a woman being able to win was very well stated so that was a good moment for her. But that was pretty much it.
  #318  
Old 01-15-2020, 04:55 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Biden and Warren are up a bit; Buttigieg down a bit. I'm curious: Does this correspond to debate performance? Or is it just noise?
Little bit of A, little bit of B. Before the debate there were some rumors that Sanders and Warren were going to start to go after Biden hard, but that did not materialize at all. So Biden's numbers predebate may have been slightly lower based on that expectation.

Also a lot of people commented that Buttigieg seemed to disappear in last night's debate. Especially compared to the December debate when other candidates were treating him as someone to go after, this one they just treated him like an also ran.
  #319  
Old 01-16-2020, 08:35 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
So now that the Christmas polling hiatus seems to be more or less over, I'm back with January numbers.

So far this year, we've had polls from A/B-rated IBD-TIPP and B-rated Quinnipiac and Ipsos, plus the latest iterations of the weekly polling from B-rated YouGov, B/C-rated Morning Consult, and C-rated HarrisX. And here are the numbers:
Code:
Candidate  1/15

Biden      26.0 
Sanders    19.0
Warren     16.8
Buttigieg   7.6
Bloomberg   6.8
Yang        3.6
Klobuchar   2.8
Steyer      2.1

Everyone else < 2.0%

Comparison with other averages:

Candidate   RTF   538   RCP  Econ

Biden      26.0  26.8  27.2  27.0
Sanders    19.0  18.8  19.2  18.0
Warren     16.8  16.0  16.0  17.0
Buttigieg   7.6   7.1   7.2   6.0
Bloomberg   6.8   5.9   6.6   5.0
Yang        3.6   3.7   3.6   4.0
Klobuchar   2.8   3.1   3.2   4.0
Steyer      2.1   2.1   2.2   1.0

Last edited by RTFirefly; 01-16-2020 at 08:36 AM.
  #320  
Old 01-19-2020, 12:16 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
And just for the hell of it, Iowa. Within the past 2.5 weeks, we have polls by A-rated Selzer and Monmouth, and B/C-rated Neighborhood Research and Media, whoever the hell they are.
Code:
Candidate  1/19

Biden      20.1
Sanders    17.5
Buttigieg  16.6
Warren     15.8
Klobuchar   7.7
Yang        3.7
Steyer      2.8

Everyone else < 2.0
  #321  
Old 01-19-2020, 12:53 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,826
Thanks for keeping it up!

I've been ruminating on how different things would be if the spoiler Sanders wasn't in the game. Applying Morning Consult second choice numbers to yours:

Biden 26+(.27 19)= 31.1
Warren 16.8+(.3319)= 23.1
Yang 3.6+(.0919)= 5.3

So Yang coulda got another debate maybe! Otherwise, maybe not that big a difference.
  #322  
Old 01-19-2020, 12:56 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
538 has a good article about the polls in the early primary states.

If I understood/recall it correctly, it seems like Warren and Sanders are cannibalizing each other in Iowa because of the new rules involving selecting a number two candidate. I confess that I am not quite sure I fully understand IA's caucus rules, but the gist of it is that if a number 1 doesn't get to 15% and they all somehow split the vote then the number two matters and could reshape the outcome. Not surprisingly, Warren and Sanders voters list the other as their number two. This would seem to give Biden and Buttigieg a clearer path to victory in Iowa, but that's only if we have a split electorate.

What seems more likely is that at least three of the top four - and maybe all four - might get over 15% in which case all could effectively proclaim themselves winner even if they don't come in first place. Delegates are effectively split proportionally. The nightmare scenario for anyone not named Biden is that Biden does better than expected and the other three do worse, and if I understand IA's rules correctly, I think that would give Biden a winner-take-all victory. That would be some serious momentum going into the rest of the February states.

The wildcard is impeachment. The trial will take Warren, Sanders, and Klobuchar off the campaign trail. They won't be able to have as much camera time. This would be an advantage for Biden, but his name will almost certainly be brought up and not in a good way. The lone beneficiary of an impeachment trial is Buttigieg.
  #323  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:15 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Not surprisingly, Warren and Sanders voters list the other as their number two. .
As I noted above, Morning Consult numbers have Biden getting a fair share of second choice numbers on both of those candidates supporters. So that is actually a little surprising. Is there a cite for that or was it your gut?

Last edited by CarnalK; 01-19-2020 at 06:16 PM.
  #324  
Old 01-19-2020, 11:06 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
As I noted above, Morning Consult numbers have Biden getting a fair share of second choice numbers on both of those candidates supporters. So that is actually a little surprising. Is there a cite for that or was it your gut?
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-early-states/

Quote:
By contrast, among very liberal voters, Sanders led with 29 percent support with Warren in second at 25 percent,
Admittedly, conceding that it's not quite how I characterized it initially.
  #325  
Old 01-26-2020, 09:59 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Predictions from the Betfair market have shifted dramatically since my report ten days ago. The first number is chance to be D nominee; 2nd number chance to be November winner:
- Trump 54.4%
35.5% Sanders 16.5%
29.9% Biden 13.7%
12.3% Bloomberg 7.0%
7.2% Warren 2.6%
4.6% Buttigieg 1.6%
1.9% Yang 1.4%
2.6% Clinton 0.7%
0.9% Klobuchar 0.6%
- Pence 0.4%
- Haley 0.3%
0.6% Obama 0.2%
Sanders is up sharply (first time he's led since last April); Bloomberg is up. Warren, Biden and others are all down sharply.
  #326  
Old 01-26-2020, 11:46 AM
racepug is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: the State of Columbia
Posts: 1,491
Elizabeth Warren all the way, for me. Of course, I'll vote for whomever the Dem nominee is next November ('course, I'd vote for a dead crab before I'd ever vote for Lid'l' Donny Drumpf for anything - other than in a "Most Odious Person on the Planet" contest) but Elizabeth Warren is my favorite, by far. I'm concerned, though, that the Dems are gonna make the same mistake they made last time in picking a nominee so as much as I'd like to see Angry Lid'l' Donny voted out of office (and as much as deserves to be), I'm no longer very hopeful that that is going to happen.
  #327  
Old 01-26-2020, 03:47 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
Haven't actually done this in a while, but here's what I've got (no major surprises really):

1. Biden
2. Sanders
3. Warren
4. Buttigieg
5. Bloomberg
6. Yang
7. Klobuchar
8. Steyer
9. Gabbard
10. Bennett
11. Delaney
12. Patrick

Takeaways:

#1: The first one is that Biden needs to place at least in 2nd place in Iowa. Biden could place 2nd in both IA and NH and still turn out okay because he will likely hold on to win in South Carolina. But if he places 3rd in Iowa, that would introduce fresh doubts, it would energize Sanders, and it would likely result in another, even more lopsided loss in New Hampshire. Biden would be taking that baggage into South Carolina, which is his bulwark at this point. But I think Biden needs an impressive victory somewhere early on and South Carolina's his best bet to do that. And if he can't, he will really struggle to keep up with the enthusiasm of the Sanders campaign.

#2: A related takeaway is that Sanders is for real. Moreover, I think he's even stronger than he was at this time in 2016, and I am not convinced that Biden is even as strong a candidate as Hillary was. He's not dealing with "ZOMG! EMAILS!" But he's dealing with a pretty messy manufactured campaign of his own with his son's work in Ukraine.

#3: As interesting as he has been, we're probably nearing the end of Pete Buttigieg's campaign. His numbers are strong among predominately educated white progressives; they start going south once you get into places like South Carolina and Nevada. Buttigieg doesn't just have a Black voter problem but also a Latino voter problem as well, and there's no evidence that he's going to win them over in this election cycle. The question is, who do Buttigieg voters support as his campaign begins to fade out of sight? I tend to think they could scatter in different directions. Buttigieg attracts more pragmatic moderates in terms of policy but he's also attracting people who want fresh faces and people who want new blood in the system. If Warren were polling stronger, I tend to think she'd actually win a fair chunk of his voters but that's just my gut - I don't know who his voters prefer as a second choice.

#4: Keep your eyes on Bloomberg. Along with Sanders, he's the one candidate who can legitimately claim to be surging. He's onto something with his ad campaigns, and he's rapidly building a strong organization in key states. He's clearly setting his sights on Super Tuesday, and it's not clear how that will impact the race.
  #328  
Old 01-27-2020, 02:27 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Haven't actually done this in a while, but here's what I've got (no major surprises really):

1. Biden
2. Sanders
3. Warren
4. Buttigieg
5. Bloomberg
6. Yang
7. Klobuchar
8. Steyer
9. Gabbard
10. Bennett
11. Delaney
12. Patrick
Yeppers. Only way I'd differ is that I'd just cut it off after Warren, and even Warren's hanging on by her fingernails at this point, as I said in the "Is it Biden versus Bernie?" thread.
Quote:
#1: The first one is that Biden needs to place at least in 2nd place in Iowa. Biden could place 2nd in both IA and NH and still turn out okay because he will likely hold on to win in South Carolina. But if he places 3rd in Iowa, that would introduce fresh doubts, it would energize Sanders, and it would likely result in another, even more lopsided loss in New Hampshire.
I don't know about that. The candidates are bunched pretty close together in Iowa, and 3rd or 4th isn't going to be that much different from 2nd in all likelihood.

Particularly if Bernie wins Iowa (the most likely outcome if Biden doesn't), it really sets up a Biden v. Bernie race, and people who don't want Bernie aren't going to have anywhere else to go.
Quote:
#2: A related takeaway is that Sanders is for real. Moreover, I think he's even stronger than he was at this time in 2016, and I am not convinced that Biden is even as strong a candidate as Hillary was.
Concur entirely here. Bernie's for real, and Biden is a way weaker candidate than Hillary.
His support has been in the 26-28% range since Labor Day, which isn't exactly the mark of a dominating candidate. He's been a weak front runner all along; it's just that nobody else has been strong enough to supplant him.

If Warren doesn't win Iowa, then I'd expect a lot of Warren supporters in subsequent states to shift to Bernie. And then the anti-Biden vote will coalesce around Bernie, and the anti-Bernie vote will coalesce around Biden. I don't know if Bernie will win that sort of race, but I think he can win it.
Quote:
#3: As interesting as he has been, we're probably nearing the end of Pete Buttigieg's campaign.
Thank goodness. He has no business running for President. He's so green, he can't make up his mind what sort of candidate he wants to pretend to be.
Quote:
#4: Keep your eyes on Bloomberg. Along with Sanders, he's the one candidate who can legitimately claim to be surging. He's onto something with his ad campaigns, and he's rapidly building a strong organization in key states. He's clearly setting his sights on Super Tuesday, and it's not clear how that will impact the race.
I think Super Tuesday is really too late to start winning. Maybe Bloomberg will prove me wrong, but once the race has some real definition to it, voters are more apt to think a vote for someone who's not on the leader board is a wasted vote. And there's essentially zero time in between SC (2/29) and Super Tuesday (3/3). If you're a Presidential candidate, life comes at you fast once we get this close to Iowa.
  #329  
Old 01-27-2020, 03:15 PM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,269
Keep in mind Iowa is not winner-take-all. What happens if Bernie eeks out a win in Iowa, but Warren and Biden get almost as many delegates?
  #330  
Old 02-06-2020, 12:36 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
I'm afraid the latest numbers from the Betfair prediction market will not brighten up your day. The first number is the chance to win the November election; 2nd number is chance to be the Democratic nominee.
58.6% Trump -
16.8% Sanders 39.8%
10.3% Bloomberg 18.3%
5.9% Biden 15.4%
3.3% Buttigieg 8.9%
1.7% Warren 5.7%
0.7% Clinton 2.3%
0.7% Yang 0.8%
0.3% Obama 0.5%
0.3% Klobuchar 0.3%
0.3% Pence -
0.2% Haley -
Since the ratio of Sanders' numbers (16.8 and 39.8) is just 42.2%, and Biden's ratio only 38.1%, while Bloomberg's (10.3/18.3) is 56.2%, the numbers might be interpreted to mean that Bloomberg is predicted to have a better chance than Sanders or Biden, and especially Warren, to beat Trump if he's the nominee.
  #331  
Old 02-12-2020, 08:26 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Betfair numbers are moving fast. (It was even hard to take a snapshot: Bets were changing as I wrote them down.)
59.3% Trump
14.5% Sanders 32.5%
13.9% Bloomberg 26.2%
4.6% Buttigieg 13.3%
3.2% Biden 8.5%
1.8% Klobuchar 4.5%
0.6% Clinton 2.9%
0.5% Warren 1.4%
0.5% Pence -
0.4% Obama 0.4%
0.3% Haley -
Bloomberg, Klobuchar and Buttigieg are rising. Biden and Warren both sinking fast.
  #332  
Old 02-12-2020, 08:28 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,451
It's interesting to look at PredictIt and compare it to Betfair. There are some significant-seeming differences.
  #333  
Old 02-12-2020, 11:27 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
It's interesting to look at PredictIt and compare it to Betfair. There are some significant-seeming differences.
Betfair has about $27 million matched on its President bets. How much betting at Predictit? (Betting markets tend to be more reliable the more money is wagered.)

I can't access Predictit.Org. (Any experts think they might explain this if I show 'tracert'?) Predictwise.com used to quote odds from both Betfair and Predictit; and quoted its own odds (which were almost identical to Betfair's.) However Predictwise hasn't updated the relevant page since Jan. 25. (David R. writes me about "cache issues.")
  #334  
Old 02-23-2020, 08:15 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Latest numbers from Betfair prediction market. First number is chance to become the winner in November (Trump is the youngest among the top Four); 2nd number is chance to be the D nominee.
59.3% Trump -
24.0% Sanders 51.7%
.9.3% Bloomberg 19.0%
.2.9% Biden 6.5%
.2.2% Buttigieg 8.5%
.0.9% Clinton 2.4%
.0.4% Pence -
.0.4% Warren 0.7%
.0.2% Obama 0.4%
.0.2% Haley -
.0.1% Klobuchar 0.2%
It may be futile to read too much into these numbers, but bettors expect that if Buttigieg is the nominee, his November chance is low. A divided convention settling on Hillary is the best chance to see a female in the White House!
  #335  
Old 02-23-2020, 02:17 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
I'm calling it. Bernie Sanders will be the nominee unless he has another heart attack. His V.P. running mate might be Castro, Booker or a woman (Klobuchar?).

If he gets 43+% of pledged delegates on the 1st ballot, it's his. Otherwise, the question is: Will there be a Stop Bernie Movement?

First note that All Candidates are severely flawed:
  • Sanders: Left of party; moderates will be horrified; much opportunity for adverse propaganda.
  • Bloomberg: Right of party; leftists will be horrified; much opportunity for adverse propaganda.
  • Biden: UNACCEPTABLE. Review his "liar ... fat" tirade against a possible supporter. He was never the brightest bulb, and is a shadow of his former self.
  • Buttigieg: UNELECTABLE. Maybe U.S.A. will be ready to elect a gay in 2028. Not today.
  • Klobuchar: Without sudden turn for the better at the ballot-box, will be seen as a Loser.
  • Warren: Without sudden turn for the better at the ballot-box, will be seen as a Loser.
  • Clinton: WON'T HAPPEN. I was rooting for the DNC to draft Biden to save us from Hillary in 2016. The converse might almost make sense this turn, but the suggestion would be laughed at.

Is there any chance that Biden and Buttigieg would throw their support to Bloomberg? Could we have some 45% to 45% endgame, Sanders vs Bloomberg? If so, Bernie would have to get the nod: The grass roots would be too angered and horrified if not.
Is there a chance that D delgates will get confused and pick one of the unelectables? Probably, but [fingers crossed] we must hope that cooler heads prevail.

GO BERNIE! WIN! WIN! WIN!!
  #336  
Old 03-01-2020, 08:57 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Betfair numbers still moving fast. An active trader could be having a lot of fun!
57.4% Trump -
23.0% Sanders 51.1%
11.3% Biden 26.2%
4.8% Bloomberg 11.2%
0.7% Clinton 1.8%
0.5% Buttigieg 1.7%
0.4% Warren 0.9%
0.4% Pence -
0.2% Obama 0.4%
They've just started a market for Dem VP nominee. Too early to quote odds, but six front-runners are all women, including Nina Turner.
  #337  
Old 03-03-2020, 06:13 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Betfair numbers have changed dramatically, of course. With polls about to open across the land, Biden is back on top.
57.3% - Trump
21.6% 48.8% Biden
14.9% 39.1% Sanders
2.9% 5.6% Bloomberg
0.7% 2.2% Clinton
0.6% 1.3% Warren
0.4% - Pence
0.2% 0.6% Obama
  #338  
Old 03-04-2020, 06:31 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Betfair numbers, just a day later. $39 million total has been wagered at the two Betfair markets whose latest prices are depicted here.
56.6% - Trump
33.0% 75.5% Biden
7.0% 17.4% Sanders
0.7% 2.6% Clinton
0.5% 1.1% Bloomberg
0.4% - Pence
0.3% 0.5% Warren
0.2% 0.6% Obama
0.2% - Haley
  #339  
Old 03-06-2020, 03:28 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,627
https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-...ew-poll-2020-3

Biden opens up a 16% lead nationally.
  #340  
Old 03-14-2020, 02:44 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Betfair numbers, just a day later. $39 million total has been wagered at the two Betfair markets whose latest prices are depicted here.
56.6% - Trump
33.0% 75.5% Biden
7.0% 17.4% Sanders
0.7% 2.6% Clinton
0.5% 1.1% Bloomberg
0.4% - Pence
0.3% 0.5% Warren
0.2% 0.6% Obama
0.2% - Haley
Ten days later, the numbers have moved. According to the Betfair bettors, the D's are now a (very slight) favorite to win the November election.
46.5% - Trump
44.4% 88.1% Biden
2.7% 3.1% Sanders
1.9% - Pence
1.6% 6.1% Clinton
0.5% - Haley
0.5% 1.3% Obama
0.2% - Harris
0.2% 0.2% Warren
(The market for Dem V.P. nominee is too small to heed, but the front-runners are Harris, Klobuchar, Abrams.)
  #341  
Old 03-22-2020, 12:40 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
I noticed a headline at one of the liberal news sites suggesting that his Covid-19 response doomed Trump's re-election chances. I clicked to Betfair to see if the punters there had also taken leave of their senses. They haven't:
46.5% Trump
44.9% Biden
1.7% Pence
1.5% Clinton
1.4% Sanders
0.5% Haley
0.5% Obama
Who will the Dems nominate as VP running mate? Punters have three favorites:
31.6% Harris
21.1% Klobuchar
18.7% Abrams
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017