#1  
Old 03-04-2019, 07:58 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243

2020 Polls


Everyone should have this link bookmarked: 538 Latest Polls archives all known US political polls and updates frequently.

Although it is obviously early, the Democratic race appears to have a clear hierarchy. Almost all national polls have Biden, Sanders, Harris, Warren in that order, with Biden around 30% and Warren in the high single digits. Sometimes Beto or Booker beats or ties Warren for fourth. Nobody else ever gets more than a few percent, except that a couple included Hillary and she got 8-10%...and one included Michelle Obama and she got 25%, tied with Biden for the lead.

On the dark side, Trump is clearly getting re-nominated, unless he is in Hell or prison by then.

In the general election, cautious, conditional optimism seems appropriate. National polls consistently show any of the plausible Democratic candidates beating Trump; Biden, and to a lesser extent Sanders, appear to be the very safest options in this regard. However, there are no signs of a landslide; Trump seems to be comfortably ahead in all the usual red States.

The massive potential turd in the punchbowl, however, is Howard Schultz. In almost every sample that included Schultz as a third option, Trump won (Schultz himself, of course, only got about 10%). Which makes me worry that even if Schultz doesn't run, someone that the GOP brain trust sees as "Schultz-like" will.
  #2  
Old 03-04-2019, 08:40 PM
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Although it is obviously early, the Democratic race appears to have a clear hierarchy. Almost all national polls have Biden, Sanders, Harris, Warren in that order, with Biden around 30% and Warren in the high single digits. Sometimes Beto or Booker beats or ties Warren for fourth. Nobody else ever gets more than a few percent, except that a couple included Hillary and she got 8-10%...and one included Michelle Obama and she got 25%, tied with Biden for the lead.
One thing you have to take into account is, primary states work much differently than caucus states, especially with the Democrats. In a primary state, all votes for candidates who don't get 15% or more are wasted at that level (Congressional district or statewide). However, in a caucus state, the voters for the underachieving candidates can then switch to other candidates, or to "uncommitted."
  #3  
Old 03-04-2019, 10:31 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,584
You have to discount these things this far out. Most polling at this point is just name recognition. No one other than the hardcore will know who Buttigieg is at this point. Same with a lot of the also-rans not in the top four. But there will be.

For now, watch fundraising totals and endorsements. The polls aren't really indicative of anything.
  #4  
Old 03-04-2019, 10:44 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,807
A useful link at some point in the future. The distant future. The kids aren't even close to being done getting into the pool.
  #5  
Old 03-04-2019, 10:54 PM
digs's Avatar
digs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West of Wauwatosa
Posts: 9,391
I wonder how Obama would've polled in March of 2015...
  #6  
Old 03-05-2019, 05:33 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by digs View Post
I wonder how Obama would've polled in March of 2015...
Pretty well, I'm sure, if not for the 22nd Amendment.
  #7  
Old 03-05-2019, 06:52 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,269
I agree that the polling is way too early to be meaningful, but there's one take-away that's worth remembering, which is that as unpopular as Trump may be, the presidential election will be a choice between Trump and someone else. And that someone else will have his or her own baggage, and voters will bring their own biases into the decision to vote.

Generally speaking, the mindset of most voters is, if something isn't broken, there's no need to fix anything. That is to say, if people perceive that things are going well for them and their neighborhoods and the country at large is doing okay, Trump will almost surely win re-election. It doesn't matter how intensely his opponents don't like him, either.

There's another problem that Democrats have, which is a brewing conflict in their own party between moderates and ideological progressives. As it is with the GOP, the ideological wing of the Democratic party is starting to take control from the more pragmatic wing. The problem is that a moderate Democrat from Illinois, Ohio, or Pennsylvania may come from a district that doesn't identify with progressives but the left will put them under increasing pressure. Voters in these districts could come to a kind of compromise of sorts: re-elect my moderate Democrat to keep Trump under control, but re-elect Trump to keep the House and Senate from falling into the hands of the radical left.

Last edited by asahi; 03-05-2019 at 06:56 AM.
  #8  
Old 03-05-2019, 11:51 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Of course it's early, but it's not THAT early. Candidates have announced and are raising money and seeking endorsements. It's true that most of what's being measured now is name recognition, and it's certainly not too late for one of those currently polling 1% to emerge from the pack. Still, there's a significant advantage to already having name recognition and being able to skip that step. It's like the baseball standings three games into the season; you'd be a fool to think that they're highly predictive of the final standings, but you'd still much rather be 3-0 than 0-3.

If anyone thinks polls are really completely meaningless at this time, I'll make a wager at even odds. I'll bet that the nominee will be one of Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, O'Rourke, or Booker, and you can have the whole rest of the field. Any takers?

BTW, 538 also has a handy endorsement tracker. Spoiler: nothing much going on there yet. Nobody has a significant number of endorsements from outside their home State.
  #9  
Old 03-05-2019, 11:57 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,631
Still very early as others have mentioned. My prediction is barring a Howard Schultz type candidacy that Trump's ceiling is the 2016 map plus Minnesota. The Democrat's ceiling is the 2012 map minus Ohio, which I think will go red regardless of who the Democratic nominee is. That means the upper Midwest and to a lesser extent Florida is where the 2020 battleground will be. Even though it's early, I'll predict that Texas and North Carolina will stay safely red, and that Virginia and the western "swing" states of Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico will stay safely blue. Hopefully the Democratic nominee is someone who will do well in those areas.
  #10  
Old 03-05-2019, 12:13 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
I think that Ohio will continue to be a bellweather, and that if Democrats can't win Ohio, we'll also continue to struggle in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan for the same reasons. We've got to get the working-class vote back on our side.

It's definitely not yet time for Texas to turn (if it were possible, O'Rourke would have pulled it off against Cruz), but for North Carolina, the wildcard is whether they can fix all of their myriad problems with their voting systems. I think that the people of North Carolina are already slightly blue; it's just not enough to overcome the systemic problems yet.

I agree, though, that Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico are no longer swing states. They've already swung, and are now reliable blue. Arizona just might be the next to follow.
  #11  
Old 03-05-2019, 06:41 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Although, I do see that the only recent poll of Texas showed Biden, Sanders, or O'Rourke losing only narrowly to Trump (other Dems doing much worse).
  #12  
Old 03-05-2019, 08:26 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,064
Third-party candidates tend to drop precipitously in the polls between two years out and Election Day. Schultz would be lucky to get 3% of the vote in November 2020.
  #13  
Old 03-05-2019, 09:06 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,269
It's too early to tell anything at this point, but I think that if the Democrats could somehow elect a moderate center-left pragmatist type, they would sweep the Rust Belt and the states that Clinton lost in 2016. Unfortunately, their path to the nomination is difficult.

While voters in certain states still hold out hope for a center pragmatist, much of the Democratic party and even many voters have given up on that idea. This is going to be a holy war for the American soul, and it's hard to see how a pragmatist does well in that kind of environment.
  #14  
Old 03-05-2019, 09:08 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,158
Just for fun I worked up a list showing the differences between 2012 and 2016 Presidential elections. To keep it from being a distraction, I enclose it in Spoiler tags.

SPOILER:

The first number is (Obama percent minus Romney percent); the second number (which is used to sort the states) is "anti-Trumpness" — the difference between (Obama minus Romney) and (Clinton minus Trump). Note that Utah has by far the highest anti-Trump score, though not nearly enough to flip the state blue. States that voted for both Obama and Trump are colored Black. A lighter color is used for states that were close — within 5% — in 2016.

Utah, -48.04 29.96
California, 23.12 6.99
Texas, -15.79 6.8
Arizona, -9.06 5.52
Massachusetts, 23.14 4.06
Dist Columbia, 83.63 2.78
Georgia, -7.82 2.69
Virginia, 3.88 1.44
Kansas, -21.72 1.12
Washington, 14.87 0.84
Maryland, 26.07 0.35
Illinois, 16.87 0.2
Idaho, -31.91 0.14
Colorado, 5.36 -0.45
Alaska, -13.99 -0.74
Oregon, 12.09 -1.11
North Carolina, -2.04 -1.62
New Mexico, 10.15 -1.93
Florida, 0.88 -2.08 ⇐⇐⇐
Louisiana, -17.2 -2.44
Oklahoma, -33.54 -2.85
Arkansas, -23.69 -3.23
Nebraska, -21.77 -3.28
Connecticut, 17.33 -3.69
South Carolina, -10.47 -3.8
New Jersey, 17.79 -3.8
Nevada, 6.68 -4.26 ⇐⇐⇐
Wyoming, -40.82 -4.95
New Hampshire, 5.58 -5.21 ⇐⇐⇐
Alabama, -22.19 -5.53
Tennessee, -20.4 -5.6
New York, 28.18 -5.69
Pennsylvania, 5.38 -6.1 ⇐⇐⇐
Minnesota, 7.69 -6.17 ⇐⇐⇐
Mississippi, -11.5 -6.33
Montana, -13.65 -6.77
Kentucky, -22.69 -7.15
Delaware, 18.63 -7.26
Wisconsin, 6.94 -7.71 ⇐⇐⇐
Indiana, -10.2 -8.71
Vermont, 35.6 -9.19
Missouri, -9.38 -9.25
Michigan, 9.5 -9.73 ⇐⇐⇐
Hawaii, 42.71 -10.52
Ohio, 2.98 -11.11
South Dakota, -18.02 -11.77
Rhode Island, 27.46 -11.95
Maine, 15.29 -12.33
Iowa, 5.81 -15.22
West Virginia, -26.76 -15.31
North Dakota, -19.63 -16.1


I've placed black arrows by states where Ds should focus campaign efforts. Sorry for any errors.
  #15  
Old 03-06-2019, 07:11 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,631
Interesting chart. It looks like Wisconsin has a pretty good chance at being the tipping point state. If Wisconsin goes blue it’s likely that Michigan and Pennsylvania did as well, and if it goes red the Democrats will probably be left hoping for a Florida miracle.
  #16  
Old 03-06-2019, 09:26 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
Utah's anti-Trumpness is mostly due to McMillan's independent run. If you look at McMillan + Trump vs. Clinton, it'd look a lot more like Romney vs. Obama.
  #17  
Old 03-14-2019, 02:26 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Just wanted to bump this for the following quote

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate Silver, 3/13/19
As we documented in a three-part series back in 2011, the notion that early polling is meaningless or solely reflects name recognition — a popular view even among people we usually agree with — is wrong, full stop.

Other things held equal, for instance, a candidate polling at 25 percent in early polls is five or six times more likely to win the primary than one polling at 5 percent.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 03-14-2019 at 02:27 PM.
  #18  
Old 03-14-2019, 04:00 PM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,037
2020 will be tricky, the brain drain from the upper Midwest will continue, but the electoral votes won’t be reallocated until the 2024 election. Every college student in State College, Ann Arbor, and Madison needs to realize how important their vote is and this isn’t a time to pout over Bernie or buy into conspiracy theories about the DNC.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #19  
Old 03-14-2019, 08:15 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
2020 will be tricky, the brain drain from the upper Midwest will continue, but the electoral votes won’t be reallocated until the 2024 election. Every college student in State College, Ann Arbor, and Madison needs to realize how important their vote is and this isn’t a time to pout over Bernie or buy into conspiracy theories about the DNC.
Ideally Bernie will be there holding rallies at all those locations in October and early November, regardless of whether or not he’s the nominee.
  #20  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:24 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Just wanted to bump this for the following quote
Yes, it's an interesting post.

Digging deeper into how he takes current polls by current favorability ratings is where it gets more meaningful to me.
Quote:
Biden has easily the best favorability score in the March Iowa poll, at 75.4. Remember, we’re not counting voters who didn’t rate the candidate, so he’s not advantaged by his high name recognition. The second-best favorability score belongs to Harris, however, at 71.3, and both her favorability score and her name recognition are improved from December — more evidence she’s had a strong rollout period. The third-best favorability score belongs to O’Rourke — although his numbers are down from December — with Sanders in fourth.

It’s true that this is just one poll — and not one with a huge sample size (401 Democrats) — but it generally squares with other polls that also measure favorability. If you look at the ratio of favorable to unfavorable ratings in those polls, Biden generally rates first, and then Harris, Sanders and O’Rourke appear in some order behind him, occasionally also joined by Cory Booker.

So it probably helps to distinguish the cases of Biden and Sanders. Biden leads the field by every polling-based metric: first-choice support, whether adjusted for name recognition or not, as well as in favorability ratings.
But then again remember that Clinton had high favorability ratings before the last season began. It dropped pretty quickly to where she was far underwater on favorability by midseason.
  #21  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:41 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Biden is leading literally every serious poll in the OP link, always with Sanders in second, far ahead of the third place finisher.

One interesting recent poll had Biden leading Sanders 28-25, one of Sanders' better polls. But that poll also asked who voters would choose if Biden didn't run, and then Sanders led Harris 32-15. Which, if I'm doing the math right, means one-quarter of Biden voters had Sanders as their second choice?! "Ideology be damned, I just want a really, really old white guy!".
  #22  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:50 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,815
Or that Biden and Sanders share the group that says "I will at this point choose between choices that I think I already know enough about."

Which is more than just name recognition. People feel they well know who Biden and Sanders are. I don't think so many can say that about Harris or even Warren, let alone the rest of the pack.
  #23  
Old 03-15-2019, 11:10 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,183
In 2015 we were wondering if Scott Walker or Jeb Bush would be the nominee. Months later, Scott was out and Jeb was pleading with a small crowd "Please clap".

Plenty of time to sort things out. Best thing for the Democrats is for Biden to jump in. This really crowds out Bernie, who has to share the left plank with Warren and the old white guy lane with Biden.
  #24  
Old 03-17-2019, 12:29 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Or that Biden and Sanders share the group that says "I will at this point choose between choices that I think I already know enough about."

Which is more than just name recognition. People feel they well know who Biden and Sanders are. I don't think so many can say that about Harris or even Warren, let alone the rest of the pack.
Yeah, but...it's still weird. Is there anyone in this forum who has Biden and Sanders as their first 2 choices?
  #25  
Old 03-17-2019, 01:49 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Yeah, but...it's still weird. Is there anyone in this forum who has Biden and Sanders as their first 2 choices?
Uh...actually yeah.

For me, it's all about the industrial Midwest. For point of reference: I was a union organizer for 16 years, including 2014-2017 with the Michigan AFL-CIO.

Originally, my top two were Brown and Biden. Now I'm actually leaning Biden and Sanders. Why? These two seem to have the most support with blue-collar families in the Midwest, specifically every union member I know in Michigan. Union members I know in Michigan were and still are most excited about Sanders (there was some serious donating going on on Bernie's announcement day)- but they also like Biden. And unless something drastically changes, they probably won't jump for joy for Kamala or Beto or Booker or Butteigeg or Castro or Gillibrand or Gabbard.

Personally, and I know this is anecdotal, but my rule of thumb is who will my Uncle George and Cousin Dylan vote for? One is a retired railroad worker in the Detroit area (66 years old), the other is currently a utility worker and a member of the UWUA, also in Metro Detroit (33 years old). Both voted for Obama; one sat out '16 and the other voted for Trump. Both would vote for Biden over Trump in a heartbeat. As far as Sanders goes, one would absolutely vote for him, and the other would probably vote for him with the right running mate (a vet like Duckworth, ferinstance).

So, yes, there are people on this Board who have Biden and Sanders 1 and 2. If, between now and 2020, some other candidate convinces me they can do better than B & S in the industrial Midwest, I'll be happy to support them.
  #26  
Old 03-17-2019, 07:43 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
I rather like that metric. Obviously most of us don't know your Uncle George and Cousin Dylan, but most of us do know people who voted for Obama but then didn't vote for Clinton, and those are exactly the sort of people we need to be winning back.
  #27  
Old 03-17-2019, 11:31 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
... Union members I know in Michigan were and still are most excited about Sanders ... but they also like Biden. And unless something drastically changes, they probably won't jump for joy for Kamala or Beto or Booker or Butteigeg or Castro or Gillibrand or Gabbard.
What about Klobuchar or Hickenlooper? Hickenlooper is a long-shot, but Amy Klobuchar is at least as likely to be the nominee as several you do name. (Is Minnesota considered part of the Rust Belt region?)

Disclaimer: I don't have evidence that Klobuchar is a great heroine or inspiration. I persist in recommending her by process of elimination. I have great fear that some of the front-runners have "faults", whether real or imagined, that could lead to miserable failure in the general election.
  #28  
Old 03-17-2019, 12:54 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,903
Klobuchar? No, she honestly fails my George and Dylan litmus test. I just don't see any way she would catch fire in union halls, and by extension union households. She's already forced to impossibly balance between being seen as a ball-busting bitch and being too "Minnesota nice" to actually beat Trump. Everything she does will likely be picked apart through those two lenses. Plus, and I know it's 100% sexist, she's a bit frumpy, like Hillary, which unfortunately doesn't help with these guys.

To win the union/blue collar vote, you need a candidate to catch fire within this population. Trump did, Sanders did, Obama did, Biden probably could. On the flip side, "Hillary hatred" also caught fire in the union halls, which led Uncle George and his wife to just skip voting for president last time (they also hatred Trump). I could see "Klobuchar hatred" catching fire too in union households and halls, for better or for worse. And from what I've seen, she's not a great speaker.

This blue collar population also rarely makes political donations, outside of money they give to their union PAC. (Bernie has proven to be the exception to this.) So that means Amy would have to look to other small donors to fill her coffers, and being from Minnesota and largely unknown, she's already at a disadvantage compared to Sanders, Harris, and probably Biden and Beto. If she can't raise money, she can't get her message out, no matter how fantastic it might be.

Just my two nickels.
  #29  
Old 03-18-2019, 12:27 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,158
Okay, thanks for your two nickels, Happy Lendervedder. It makes me sad though. I'm not fond of Bernie's chances, so are we dependent on Joe Biden? An aging nice guy who wasn't the brightest bulb on the tree even when he was younger?

Prepare for four more years.
  #30  
Old 04-02-2019, 12:37 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Bumping this for a monthly update.

Polls of the Democratic race[ continue to show Biden with a lead over Sanders, sometimes a small lead, sometimes a larger one. The third place contender is always way back. Actually, there was one poll last month (out of like 30) where Sanders held him to a draw.

What's interesting to me -- I know we talked about it above -- is that there are now more polls indicating that without Biden in the race, Sanders would be a huge frontrunner. Two national polls show him leading by 17-19 points, and another has him winning Alabama by 10 points! (With Biden in that race, he beats Sanders by 29)

In the general election polls, there's a consistent picture of all the top-tier Democrats beating Trump (not the lesser-known ones, though, who generally lose to Trump, but with a huge number of undecideds; it appears independents aren't necessarily on the anyone-in-the-freaking-world-but-Trump wagon). Mirroring the Democratic polls, Biden always does the best against Trump, and Sanders is always next.

Although there were some lower-rated polls showing Trump doing well in PA and MI, polls of the PA/MI/WI group generally look very good for the Democrats; one suggests that with Biden or Sanders as the nominee, even Iowa might be within reach. OTOH, a recent poll shows Trump running strongly in Nevada, with only Biden beating him, and that barely.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 04-02-2019 at 12:39 PM.
  #31  
Old 05-01-2019, 02:27 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Monthly poll skim:

Big picture is that, especially recently, Biden seems to be pulling away from Sanders; there's even one poll in which Warren beats out Bernie for second (although, to be fair, there's also now one poll which has Sanders leading).

A couple polls show Beto with a lead in Texas. That's a good sign for him; home-state popularity is a good early predictor of success.

Possibly the most striking result there is the South Carolina polls, showing Biden ahead...but if Biden isn't among the choices, Sanders wins! Even in a Biden-free environment, Harris and Booker only get 27% between them, in a State where the Democratic electorate is two-thirds black. Presumably those candidates expected African-Americans to be their base; by that measure, it doesn't seem to be going too well for either of them. (Oh yeah, there were three polls of California this month, two won by Sanders and one by Biden; more less-than-great news for Team Kamala).

General election polls continue to indicate that Biden is our best matchup against Trump, with Sanders a clear, though distant, second.

Happy news in the months' swing State polling: One poll shows ALL the Democrats beating Trump in Wisconsin, while a poll of PA/MI/WI showed Sanders beating Trump by 8-11 point margins (it didn't ask about other Dems).
  #32  
Old 05-01-2019, 02:36 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Monthly poll skim:

Big picture is that, especially recently, Biden seems to be pulling away from Sanders; there's even one poll in which Warren beats out Bernie for second (although, to be fair, there's also now one poll which has Sanders leading).

A couple polls show Beto with a lead in Texas. That's a good sign for him; home-state popularity is a good early predictor of success.

Possibly the most striking result there is the South Carolina polls, showing Biden ahead...but if Biden isn't among the choices, Sanders wins! Even in a Biden-free environment, Harris and Booker only get 27% between them, in a State where the Democratic electorate is two-thirds black. Presumably those candidates expected African-Americans to be their base; by that measure, it doesn't seem to be going too well for either of them. (Oh yeah, there were three polls of California this month, two won by Sanders and one by Biden; more less-than-great news for Team Kamala).

General election polls continue to indicate that Biden is our best matchup against Trump, with Sanders a clear, though distant, second.

Happy news in the months' swing State polling: One poll shows ALL the Democrats beating Trump in Wisconsin, while a poll of PA/MI/WI showed Sanders beating Trump by 8-11 point margins (it didn't ask about other Dems).
At this point in '08, I think the majority of black Democrats supported Hillary Clinton. I think it's still too early to be making much of these polls.
  #33  
Old 05-01-2019, 02:42 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
That's right, they did. I think black Dems place a lot of value on "electability" and question whether black candidates can appeal to white voters. IIRC, Obama's black support only surged after he addressed that issue by winning Iowa. It appears that that dynamic hasn't changed in the last twelve years.
  #34  
Old 05-01-2019, 11:22 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,815
Doubt that is it this time. Then Black voters by and large were not thinking enough whites would vote for a Black candidate ... they now know that is not true. They have other reasons that they like Biden and just are not choosing based on shared identity alone.

Dig into the crosstabs of the HarrisX/Rasmussen poll - on the question of favorable to unfavorable (not the who would you vote for) his strongest approval is among Black Democrats at 62%(!) strong approval and 78% approval overall. The same demographic says they will vote for him too, but not by as much. That's at 49%.
  #35  
Old 05-16-2019, 01:48 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
OK, but it looks like SC Democrats also have "reasons" for preferring Sanders, Buttigieg or Warren over Harris or Booker. Black candidates aren't doing any better there than they are in New Hampshire.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 05-16-2019 at 01:51 PM.
  #36  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:01 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
OK, but it looks like SC Democrats also have "reasons" for preferring Sanders, Buttigieg or Warren over Harris or Booker. Black candidates aren't doing any better there than they are in New Hampshire.
The race is young and Biden and Bernie are far and away the best known contenders at this time. Warren and Harris are distant 2nd and 3rd. There was actually an interesting article about he "media primary" a week or so ago that talked about this and how these four are already well ahead of everyone else.
  #37  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:22 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,914
While it's early, I still think the 2020 polls serve a useful purpose as a baseline and a starting point for discussion particularly for established candidates like Biden, Sanders and Warren.

I think Biden's numbers accurately capture his broad appeal to the working class. While he will undoubtedly be attacked in a general election, I think most people have a reasonably good idea of who he is and I don't think his numbers will change all that much. At this stage I would back him to win the general if he wins the nomination. Some of the left attacks he will face in the primary may actually increase his appeal to moderates.

Sanders also has a certain working class appeal but I also think he is the most vulnerable to a classic 1980's Atwater-style Republican attack campaign. There is enough weird lefty stuff in his background which hasn't really been aired but will be perfect fodder for attack ads targeted at older voters. I don't actually think Trump is a very skilled attack politician (he is too undisciplined to sustain a consistent line of attack) but presumably he will be able to hire competent operatives who can cut decent ads.

Warren polls the worst but I think she has the most upside potential. I think the Native American stuff is already baked into her numbers and not all that damaging anyway but she has a compelling personal story which ties with her policy message. As a general election candidate I would put her above Sanders but still well below Biden.
  #38  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:25 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
In terms of what, media coverage? In the polls they haven't separated themselves from Beto, Mayor Pete, and Warren. Those five pretty consistently finish third through seventh in some order.

Edited to add: that was a reply to asahi

Last edited by Thing Fish; 05-16-2019 at 02:25 PM.
  #39  
Old 05-16-2019, 03:09 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
OK, but it looks like SC Democrats also have "reasons" for preferring Sanders, Buttigieg or Warren over Harris or Booker. Black candidates aren't doing any better there than they are in New Hampshire.
Maybe they have similar reasons as other Democrats have elsewhere?

Sanders is Jewish. I’m Jewish. Is there an expectation that I should prefer him over other candidates? I most definitely do not. Shared identity can help a candidate but it very often is not the prime driver.
__________________
Oy.
  #40  
Old 05-16-2019, 03:23 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
I get that, but I'm still surprised that in this case it doesn't seem to be a factor at all.
  #41  
Old 05-16-2019, 03:26 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
I mean, if we pick our polls carefully, we could make a case that the top four contenders are all white men. Would anyone not have been surprised to hear that, say, two years ago?
  #42  
Old 05-16-2019, 04:22 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,474
What I find interesting is the head to head polling of each Democrat vs. Trump. It's basically static with Trump getting his 41-42% of the votes regardless of who he is running against. Seems to indicate that the Democrat actually doesn't matter a whole lot, and that Trump has his base sewn up and no one else.
  #43  
Old 05-16-2019, 04:27 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
Most polls don't look that rosy for the Dems, though. Here you can look over a bunch of head to head polling. Some polls look better for the Dems overall than others, but the pattern is consistent. Just as in the poll you linked, Biden does best, Sanders is next, and the other major candidates are clustered a few percentage points behind Bernie. The real unknowns, the Hickenloopers and Yangs of the world, consistently get only 25-30% to Trump's 41 or 42, with a lot of undecideds. So clearly there isn't a majority of voters who are currently willing to accept literally ANY Democrat over Trump.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 05-16-2019 at 04:28 PM.
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 06:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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 © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017