Running Primary Poll Thread

Making a thread here in the politics section regarding the 2020 Dem primary partially out of boredom and also to see if we can track where the voting bases of each candidate goes as the election season progresses and as major things happen. This was mainly inspired by the most recent poll out of Iowa showing that one candidate in particular has, effectively, shit the bed. 

In a recent Iowa Monmouth poll ( I like to RCP because it aggregates polls that you can follow right to the original poll https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html ) Two major shifts took place that might fly under most people's radars

With Biden, Warren, Sanders, and Harris are the front runners with double digit support, the first big shift occurred with one of those in the bottom tier of candidates whose numbers took a gigantic hit: Beto O Rourke, who is now polling at <1% in Iowa https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_IA_080819/

This is a big deal because previously, Beto was polling at around 6% in Iowa, meaning that he has effectively lost his ENTIRE voter base in the first crucial primary state in the election cycle. 

I know 6% isnt much, but seeing how all but 5 candidates are polling under 6% in Iowa right now, Beto just went from possibly breaking out into the upper-tier of candidates to being pretty fucked. If you cant get at least 5% in Iowa, your entire campaign is effectively screwed heading into New Hampshire, and Beto is now effectively in that category..... If you look at second pick voting, meaning who would pick certainc andidates as their second choice, Beto's drop was even harder, going from 8% down to 1%  https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_IA_080819/

The poll also indicates who may have taken that support, or who at least benefits from it.... Beto dropped around 5.5 points, but the only candidates who made any major gains since April have been Warren (+12%) and Harris (+4%).... Biden's numbers have stayed about the same, and the only other big loser brings us to our second big shift, Sanders dropped 7 points from 16% down to 9%..... Assuming Warren absorbed all of Sanders's support he lost, either her or Harris were the ones who then benefitted most from Beto's dropout in support (assuming that he didn't lose his support to some other candidate, who then also lost just about as many supporters to a third candidate) 

With the primaries still months away, it looks like the very left-wing vote is beginning to coalesce around Warren, while more moderate voters from lower tier candidates are starting so shift to Warren as well, or support Kamala Harris instead.... Pete Buttigieg, the next kind of 'centrist' candidate similar to Biden, didn't see his numbers shift at all in the same Iowa poll after Beto bottomed out, which means he might become the next middle-tier candidate to fall apart, since supports of lower tier candidates are not switching to him after they jump ship. 

 

Democrats bad

LIZZIE LIZZIE KEEP 'EM BUSY!

NURTURE, TEACH, LOVE AND PREACH!

"Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids”

  - Dum Dum

I just want to weigh in and state that I hate all of the main contenders except Warren, and to a lesser degree, Sanders.  They are the only non-pathetic candidates on the stage.

Joe Biden is, while probably the least radical on the stage, out of touch and his age is showing worse than Bernie's.

I hate the disgraceful performance that NBC put on for the first debate.  I hate CNN's performance too, but NBC's so called debate takes the win for worst debate in the history of the Democratic party, both in terms of its content and substance; and in terms of the degree to which it is likely to get Trump re-elected.

I hate the pathetic, fake, cheap, fraudulent wokeness that has defined the narrative theme of the primaries so far.

It is beyond obvious that Kamila Harris's reference to Biden's record on "bussing" is fake, dishonest, and as cheap attack that no one buys at all; as is evidenced by the fact that Harris is polling among blacks lower than anyone else who should be winning with them, except of course Booker.

I think Booker's bullshit on guns is offensive and absurd.  

Kirsten Gillibrand blood curdlingly disgusting; a lying, pathetic hypocrite who embodies each and every one of Hillary Clinton's worst faults to the (n)th degree.  Her absolutely fraudulent attacks on Biden are beneath contempt. 

Tulsi Gabbard's foreign policy is weak and she lacks the sophistication to even understand most of the more challenging foreign policy issues we face, but she was absolutely right that Harris's "social justice" new-found wokeness is a complete fraud on the country in light of her prosecutorial record. 

Yang's idea of giving $1000/month to every American is, while better than the current welfare infrastructure we have now, little more than pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

Michael Bennett is offensively pathetic, and that has nothing to do with the fact that he looks like a Keebler Elf.  Rather, it is because he has all the charisma of a failed parent who can't even get their child to eat broccoli after bribing him with access to an iPad... which is to say, he is even more pathetic than Chuck Schumer.  Worse, he needs to focus on remaining in the Senate, given that he is from a swing state and we cannot afford to lose more senators.  He adds nothing to the race other than sucking out oxygen from the people who matter, in whose ranks he certainly does not fall.

Bill DeBlasio's black child should be and shall remain a meme of political stupidity.  I remember the days when John McCain's purportedly "illegitimate black child" cost him a nomination against George Bush.  It says something that now, parading your non-white adopted offspring as a token of wokeness is something that has become acceptable in this DNC.  Disgraceful.

Neither I nor anyone else who matters has even heard of Steven Bullock.  We called Montanans, and they haven't heard of him either.  Irrelevant nothing of a candidate.

The so called "Mayor Pete" is, while all cute with his husband and what I presume are a pair of french bulldogs (you know what they say about dogs and their owners, and the tendency to resemble?) is probably the least offensive person on the stage to someone like me.   He is absolutely right that the Democrats need to actually reach out to middle America and they need to focus on taking back the religious right from the right wing.  But no one seems to listen to him.  The media's blatant attacks on him for being insufficiently woke while they astroturf Harris and Booker make me want to vomit.  

Julian Castro is worse than irrelevant; he is one of the most destructive forces on the stage.  Every word he utters makes Trump's re-election more likely, whether he is discussing the "abortion rights of transgender men" or LITERALLY anything else.  Castro will be remembered as the Ted Cruz of the DNC.  He was wholly un-woke before he decided to run, now I expect him to post Instigram pics of his Avacado Toast and Quinoa and Kale breakfast while whining about how the deplorables are destroying America.

 

John DeLaney is the candidate who I wish would return to whatever corporate shithole from which he emerged, so that the air he sucks from people who matter could be returned to them.  Literally no one in America cares about him, except the debate hosts who use him as a tool of attack against candidates who out-perform the astroturfed "super-woke" dream team of yesterday's-news-token-blacks Booker and Harris (who actual black voters correctly see through with absolutely no difficulty).

Jay Inslee and John Hicken--whateverthefuckhisnameis occupies the exact same role that John DeLaney does.

Beto is Holden Caulfield all grown up.  Please excuse me while I go vomit. 

Tim Ryan is the kind of shit that would have deserved to be bullied and have his lunch money taken from him in middle school.  So was Eric Salwell.

With the field looking like this, Trump's got a damn good chance of being re-elected.  And, just like in 2016, the democrats will be too caught up in their own bullshit to see what is happening around them.  

One of the things I appreciate about YouGov polls is that they go into literal fucktons of detail showing what types of people support which candidates for what reasons. Theyre not simple 'who do you currently support' polls that are taken at face value, there almost all-encompassing diagnosis's of the current election cycle. 

Here's the highlights from the most recent one processed from data taken a week ago  https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/7jv630mjdk/econTabReport.pdf

When polled about which candidates voters hold would rate in terms of favorability (how much they like or dont like a particular candidate) a majority of candidates received votes of 'Dont Know', meaning voters just didnt know much about that candidate to have an opinion of them. Given the huge field of candidates, thats not a surprise. Whats interesting though is finding out which candidates ARE known to most voters, but are not seen in a favorable light, and there were some leaders.

Here's the list of all candidates with the worst ratio of unfavorable to favorable ratios: 

Bennett = 18% Favorable, 22% unfavorable, 61% Dont know (Pg 140) 

Biden = 41% Favorable, 41% Unfavorable (Pg 142) 

Booker = 30% Favorable, 35% Unfavorable (Pg 144) 

Bullock = 15% Favorable, 21% Unfavorable, 64% Dont know (Pg 146) 

Buttigieg = 31% Favorable, 30% Unfavorable, 39% Dont know (Pg 148) 

Castro = 26% Favorable, 29% Unfavorable, 43% Dont know (Pg 150) 

De Blasio = 15% Favorable, 42% Unfavorable, 42% Dont know (Pg 152) 

Delaney = 15% Favorable, 27% Unfavorable, 58% Dont know (Pg 154) 

Gabbard = 22% Favorable, 29% Unfavorable, 48% Dont know (Pg 156) 

Gillibrand = 24% Favorable, 34% Unfavorable, 42% Dont know (Pg 158) 

Harris = 31% Favorable, 40% Unfavorable, 29% Dont know (Pg 162) 

Hickenlooper = 17% Favorable, 28% Unfavorable, 55% Dont know (Pg 164) 

Inslee = 18% Favorable, 23% Unfavorable, 59% Dont know (Pg 166) 

Klobuchar = 23% Favorable, 30% Unfavorable, 47% Dont know (Pg 168) 

Beto = 29% Favorable, 37% Unfavorable, 35% Dont know (Pg 174) 

Ryan = 16% Favorable, 28% Unfavorable, 56% Dont know (Pg 176) 

Bernie = 40% Favorable, 42% Unfavorable, 18% Dont know (Pg 178) 

Warren = 38% Favorable, 38% Unfavorable, 24% Dont know (Pg 186) 

Williamson = 18% Favorable, 32% Unfavorable, 50% Dont know (Pg 190) 

Yang = 26% Favorable, 26% Unfavorable, 48% Dont know (Pg 192) 

Page 196 lists an entire table of who voters would most support where voters are separated based on their age. For this part, voters were allowed to select as many options as they wanted, not just the one they support the most.  

Old voters (65 and over) would consider voting for the following candidates the most:

- Biden (63% would vote for him)

- Warren (61%) 

- Harris (48%)

- Buttigieg (43%)

- Sanders actually comes in 6th place for support among the very old (27%) behind Booker in 5th place (33%) 

Voters aged 45 to 65 are more evenly split among the top candidates: 

- Biden (53% of voters in this age range would consider voting for Biden) 

- Warren (48%)

- Sanders (42%) 

- Harris (35%)

- Buttigieg (30%) 

Voters aged 30 to 45 are more reluctant to consider voting for certain candidates, with lower numbers across the board. The candidates they would consider voting for the most though also follow the previous patterns

- Biden (44% would consider voting for Biden) 

- Warren (33%)

- Harris (31%)

- Sanders (26%) 

- Buttigieg (20%) 

The youngest demographic of voters ages 18 to 30 are the most reluctant of all age groups to consider supporting a candidate, but their support is the most different compared to other groups of voters. Here are the candidates this age group supports the most:

- Warren (39%)

- Sanders (35%) 

- Biden (33%) 

- Buttigieg (31%) 

- Harris (24%) 

On page 200, a table showing just the top preferred candidate among the same batch of voters reveals stark gaps between the leader of certain groups and the next runner ups. 

65 years old or more = Support Biden most at 33%, Second place is Warren at 16%, Third is Buttigieg at 11%. Undecided is at 19%

45 to 54 years old = Support Biden most at 27%, Second place is Warren at 18%, Third is Sanders at 15%. Undecided is at 12% 

30 to 45 years old = Support Biden most at 20%. Second place is a TIE between Sanders and Warren at 15%. Undecided also at 15% 

18 to 30 years old = Supports Sanders most at 16%. Second place is Warren at 14%, Third is Buttigieg at 12%. Undecided is at 11%

While younger voters for the most part already have an eye on who they support the most, the support is pretty evenly distributed, while older voters increasingly lean towards Biden at larger and larger gaps the older the voting block becomes. 

Are you impressed at all for my early prediction for Warren?

If you could advise Warren, what would you tell her she needs to do to beat Trump?

Not particularly since 1) Biden still has massive leads in almost every demographic bloc of the Dem voter base 

and 2) Warren is having a very large size of her max voter base split with Sanders while Biden has almost no serious centrist/moderate competitor at the moment 

Im starting to think Sanders will inadvertently fuck Warren out of even having a chance at winning the nomination by splitting early primary states with her. 

I'll remind you in a few months of course.

>If you could advise Warren, what would you tell her she needs to do to beat Trump?

She needs to draw a direct line of contrast between herself and the rest of the DNC crowd.  She will do this both by affirmative doings, and things to avoid doing. 

What she needs to do is: (1) relentlessly stay on message that this election is about the future of America; (2) showcase the extent to which Trump has lied to and deceived the American people while failing to deliver results; (3) clearly and non-condescendingly meet Americans where they are (state their problems so that the American people know that she understands them, without patronizing them or blaming them); (4) control the news cycles and lead polls, not by waiting around to see where the polls say she should be in terms of policies, but lead the polls by defining why what her policies (foreign and domestic) are SHOULD be where Americans are; and (5) prove that she is the sole viable alternative to Trump and other Democrats by (a) having clear ideas that directly impact the majority of Americans, (b) being able to clearly articulate how her plans solve Americans' problems, and (c) relentlessly draw contrast between the future of America where she is in office, and where Trump is re-elected.

What she must not do, or she will lose is: (1) absolutely refrain from engaging in any form of identity politics, competitions of "wokeness", or any mention of sex, gender, sexuality, and above all race; (2) refrain from allowing Trump from making this election about immigration or "wokeness" because if that happens, he wins re-election; (3) refrain from losing control of the narrative either because of the absolutely disgusting #FakeNews media or Trump who lives in that media shithole. 

I agree with all of that, especially 1 and 2.

Warren do it, Hillary will be proud of you and no, not just for being a female president. Do it really for the Dems, you are the only candidate who genuinely has a platform that's practical and pleasant all at once. Please win.

she's anti gun so....

So was Obama.

If Warren wins I genuinely can see Europe and US becoming true allies again and USA finally joining the rest of the developed world in becoming a social democracy. If Yang wins, he'll try to make it that too hard too fast.

If anyone else wins out of the Dems it's bound to go wrong and if they don't win, shit will go 100000x more wrong, so really anything but Trump will do but I totally want Warren and I would love to discuss this in depth with someone who has a well-functioning brain and knows their core values need both pragmatic application as much as romantic foundation.

yeah and sales went crazy, wasn't a good thing or a good time.  I don't want people panic buying, it wasn't good then and it will be worse next time.  We will see the rise of 3d and other alternative material diy weapons, she will create and increase the demand imo.  It will be a focus and distraction away from the really important things and further reduce stability in the country.  I can't believe how low prices are right now, it's because no one is buying like during Obama, and that's not a bad thing.  For me personally, this is going to be another election between the lesser of 2 evils.

I think Biden will win.

I think you are right, he shouldn't win but i think he will.

I don't want Biden to win.  Who do you want to win?

I don't like any of the tbh, but I hope Biden wins because I think Trump could crush him.  Though if I absolutely had to choose it would probably Sanders.

(I know its Fox News but everyone is reporting the same thing and theyre the first website that my phone could save the damn link to for whatever reason so im using it) 

Hickenlooper was either the Governor or Senator from Colorado who did not decide to run for re-election there and instead take a shot at the presidency. Seeing as how his numbers have been close to 1% the entire race, while Colorado has races that are very winnable in comparison, it appears that Hickenlooper may have opted to drop out of the race for President because he acknowledges that his role is to flip Colorado instead.... There is a republican senator for Colorado up for reelection to the Senate this year and im fairly certain he's the most vulnerable Republican in danger of losing his seat. 

This has 2 fairly important effects despite his relatively low polling numbers:

1 - Other candidates who have options elsewhere may be more inclined to drop out 

Candidates who forgo state contests to go for the Presidency may start taking a look back at those state contests if they want to still have a future in politics. Certain candidates who were forced out of their previous position due to term limits have nothing to lose at this point and will campaign for as long as they desire, but candidates who can focus on state re-elections have to make a decision. With Hickenlooper pulling out to likely focus on Colorado, others may do the same, most notably Steve Bullock of Montana (Governor), and Beto O'Rourke of Texas (Almost Senator) 

2 - The dropping out of minor moderate/centrist candidates could all lend their support to one of the front runners. 

While 20 of the 25 current Dem candidates have about 1-2% support total, just a handful of them dropping out frees up close to 10% of voters to switch to other candidates, which is no small number by any stretch. If the supporters of the minor dropouts all drift towards a particular candidate (my money is on Biden, Buttigieg, or Harris) it could drastically shift the narrative of the race even before we start getting to the first primaries. 

Better polling source:

Alright computer is charged now so I can really get into this. 

First off I was wrong about Bullock, he was re-elected as Governor of Montana 2 years ago and still has 2 years left for his current term. He is under no pressure to drop out of the presidential race to go for a state race instead, so he has not at any current crossroads to have to consider 

Now then, If we have reached the tipping point where candidates long polling at around 1% begin to drop out to retain their previous positions or run for state contests instead, then these are the candidates most likely to drop out next: 

(Most Pressure) 

 - Corey Booker - Senator from New Jersey, he is in the last year of his term as a Senator and has the option to run for re-election there

 - Jay Inslee - Governor of Washington, he is in the final year of his term and has the option to run for a third term as Governor in the state

 - Beto O'Rourke - Almost flipped Texas blue while running for Senator in 2018, The other Senator from Texas is up for re-election in 2020 and Beto could try a run against him (John Cornyn) 

(Some Pressure)
 

 - Tulsi Gabbard - Representative from Hawaii. She is up for re-election in 2020 but would easily retain her seat as an incumbent 

 - Amy Klobuchar: Currently a Minnesota Senator, she was re-elected in 2018 and has 4 years left

(Already F-cked)

 - John Delaney: He passed on running for re-election as a Representative of Maryland in 2018 to go all-in on the Presidency, he's done in politics when he decides to stop running for President 

I do use RCP, but the main poll they show on their homepage features national standings. Iowa, New Hampshire, and the first couple of primary states are the polls that are the most important since the first few primary states dramatically shift the opinion in the rest of the country once a few contests actually get decided. 

Do you mean the swing states?