Not sure why you’d believe me to be a left-winger in this sense. I think Sanders is a more authentic candidate, but I’d prefer Biden over him. I think Warren is more authentic than Buttigieg, but I’d prefer Buttigieg. Pretty sure I’m to your right on a number of issues.
The reason I think authenticity is important is because I believe in science. I believe the three decades of empirical work done by political scientists showing that voter assessment of candidates’ authenticity affects how they vote, and that it has become more important over the last decade.
I wish it weren’t so, because it is a bullshit metric that is highly colored by misogyny and racism. But…it is. And you cannot proclaim yourself to be just focused on who can win the general election while studiously ignoring this aspect of the candidates. You might reasonably conclude that the electability game is problematic and uncertain and so people should just vote for who they personally like. But if you’re gonna play the game, play it right.
Bill Clinton promised a middle class tax cut, and it worked out for him even though he didn’t deliver one. I think it’s a smart, albeit very cynical, play.
This is to political science what “we prayed to the sun god and the sun rose again” is to astronomy.
What is utterly lacking is any effort to determine causation. Of course, determining causation in political science is hard. The best you ultimately achieve are many different lines of evidence all pointing in mostly the same direction, instead of some definitive equation.
The evidence on this question is fairly robust. Generally speaking, voters–especially swing or infrequent voters–are not especially knowledgeable about or sensitive to policy promises or distinctions on policy. They do form superficial opinions about a candidate’s character, and chief among them is perceived authenticity.
You criticize my evidence essentially because it is not a robust prospective study with a control group. Then you give lip service to the fact that such cannot be found in studying presidential elections, especially when all but the most recent ones are disregarded as “ancient history”. You conclude with an unsupported claim that yours is the truly scientific position. :rolleyes:
If you look into the poll, Cruz is far more popular than any politician in the state or Trump… I would put him as, sadly, the most popular pol in Texas.
But that doesn’t mean Beto isn’t more popular than Cornyn or Trump, because he is. But he was never more popular than Cruz, and at no time (or for a short, very short period of time) did Beto lead Cruz in the polls.
Just living here. You’re right that I misspoke: the poll has Abbot as more popular, but I’ll also contend that this is because the Governor of Texas has less to do with the state government’s achievements (and, in Texas, it’s the Lt Governor, who has broad policy and legislative agenda powers, not the Governor) and more to do with Abbott being a relative unknown quantity other than that poor, brave man in a wheelchair we see on the local news.
But, Cruz? People here who like Ted Cruz love Ted Cruz. He’s also far better known, so the dividing line on him is pretty set.
So, yeah, I’ll stand by what I said - Abbott’s popularity may be a bit broader, but Cruz’s runs deeper.
Well, Ted Cruz has even less to do with state government achievements. Are you comparing their favorability or something? There’s ony 3 people shown, the two Senators and the governor and you’re disqualifying the governor’s score. I really don’t think you can use that poll as proof of Cruz’s status as most popular politician, especially considering he gets a negative approval rating.
It’s been a good couple of weeks for Biden. First his poll numbers recovered after the first debate indicating the resilience of his support. Then he delivered ,by most accounts, a solid debate performance which would have quietened a lot of the worries about his readiness for a long campaign. He remains the clear frontrunner and the good news for him is that no one is emerging as a clear challenger. Warren and Bernie still seem evenly matched in the left lane of the race. And now Booker has delivered a strong performance which will undercut the challenge from Harris for black voters.
These are good times for Biden, but keep in mind that poll movement can happen as the field gets smaller and as more voters start paying attention to the remaining candidates. I’m not sure that Sanders or Harris have what it takes to beat Biden, but Warren might. With so many candidates sharing the stage, there isn’t a lot of one-on-one interaction, but that’s when things could get really rough for Biden. There were long stretches last night where the other candidates got questions and gave Biden time to rest and collect his thoughts. In future debates, the confrontations are going to be frequent, sustained, and intense.
No need for the roll eyes. You didn’t misspeak, you misread the numbers. And then you defend your gut instinct by saying the governor has little to do with the state government achievements when the only other guys have literally nothing to do with it. Don’t get pissy because I had no idea where you were getting your opinion.