Warren supporters having Harris as their second choice instead of Bernie is just more evidence of the type of people they are. Unprincipled. There is no way you follow Warren based on content and don't land on Bernie as a second choice. They are voting on genitals or some other nonsense.

9/18/2019 3:54:04 PM

Lmao such a douche

9/18/2019 4:02:05 PM

I'm not sure if I would prefer a one night debate with eleven or so candidates on stage or a two night debate with only five or six candidates on stage.

9/19/2019 9:18:26 AM

Quote :

"she's still the number 2 pick for bernie supporters by a large margin, i don't think any of the criticisms are supporters dismissing her"

Also, twitter isn’t real life.

9/19/2019 10:19:40 AM

I'm seeing different numbers. https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

This report says Warren's supporters 2nd choices are

23% Bernie
22% Biden
16% Harris

So I don't think you can put Warren supporters in a single box, and I would guess that those in each 2nd choice group is supporting her for different reasons.

9/20/2019 1:11:15 AM

de blasio is out

9/20/2019 9:34:18 AM

Bernie reaches 1 million donors 5 months before Obama did

Feeling like some of these polls may be a little off

9/20/2019 10:35:51 AM

The polls are all inherently off (assuming they aren't made up) because they only capture registered democrats with landlines. A huge chunk of Bernie supporters are young so they don't have landlines and many are independents. Bernie is quite strong amongst democrats, but if you included all of us who are not democrats, it wouldn't even be close. Thats why I posted the donor map on a previous page.

9/20/2019 2:16:37 PM

aSsUmInG tHeY aReN't mAdE uP

Quote :

"registered voters who indicate they may vote in the Democratic primary or caucus in their state. For those who say don’t know or no opinion, they are asked to pick a candidate they are leaning towards."

Quote :

"is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults. Panelists participate via self-administered web surveys. Panelists who do not have internet access at home are provided with a tablet and wireless internet connection."

[Edited on September 20, 2019 at 2:22 PM. Reason : rEgiStErEd dEmoCrAtS wItH LAnDLInEs]

9/20/2019 2:17:54 PM

I don't trust the WSJ and Economist polls that are way off base from the rest, showing Warren 6-11 points ahead of Bernie. I also think that, in general, younger people are being underrepresented and we're going to see historic turnout for the 18-34 age group.

9/20/2019 3:10:24 PM

i mean it's fine to have criticisms of polls, but they aren't "made up" and they also aren't all only registered democrats with landlines

9/20/2019 3:26:32 PM

Yeah I don't agree with earl

9/20/2019 3:40:44 PM

I tend to think Bernie and Warren are pretty neck and neck with Biden ahead. Any given day Bernie could be second and Warren third or vice versa.

Trend wise, Biden has certainly come back to the field.

I do tend to think Warren has some build in advantages with the Democratic base that Sanders might not have. He could absolutely make that up in enthusiasm though.

Quote :

"we're going to see historic turnout for the 18-34 age group."

I hope this is true but time and again we hear this and time and again it just doesn’t happen.

[Edited on September 20, 2019 at 3:44 PM. Reason : X]

9/20/2019 3:43:50 PM

Quote :

"they only capture registered democrats with landlines. "

This take is at least a decade old

9/20/2019 3:48:01 PM

Youth turnout was up around 50% in the 2018 midterms

https://civicyouth.org/young-people-dramatically-increase-their-turnout-31-percent-shape-2018-midterm-elections/

9/20/2019 3:53:29 PM

Has anyone tried to correlate 2018 house votes to theoretical electoral college?

NM, a bunch. Here's one

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-2018-map-looked-a-lot-like-2012-and-that-got-me-thinking-about-2020/

Quote :

"As a “fun,” day-after-the-election experiment, I decided to add up the total popular vote for the U.S. House in each state, based on ABC News’s tally of votes as of Wednesday afternoon. This isn’t a perfect exercise, by any means. The vote is still being counted in many states; there are a few dozen congressional districts where one of the parties (usually Republicans) didn’t nominate a candidate. I did make one adjustment for a slightly different problem, which is that Florida doesn’t bother to count votes in uncontested races, something that cost Democrats in the neighborhood of 720,000 votes off their popular-vote tally in that state.2 ... States shaded in light blue were won by Democrats, but by fewer than 5 percentage points. So it’s noteworthy which states are not in light blue but are solid blue instead. Democrats won the popular vote in Michigan by 7 percentage points, in Wisconsin by 8 points, in Pennsylvania by 10 points, and in Minnesota by 11 points. In other parts of the country, they won Nevada and Colorado by 6 points each, New Hampshire by 12, Virginia by 15 and New Mexico by 19. The pink states — where Republicans won by fewer than 5 percentage points — are also interesting, mostly because they include Texas, where Democrats lost the popular vote for the House by only 3.6 percentage points and Democrat Beto O’Rourke lost his race for the Senate by just 2.6 points. It’s not as though Texas is exactly at the tipping point yet: Democrats came close to winning it, but they didn’t get over the top, even in a pretty blue year. But it probably deserves to be included in a group of Sun Belt states with North Carolina, Arizona and perhaps Georgia (where Democrats lost the popular vote by 6 points) as places where Democrats can compete in a good year. Among these, Arizona was the best one for Democrats on Tuesday night; they currently trail in the popular vote for the House there by 1.7 points and could make up further ground, as a lot of ballots from Maricopa County are still left to be counted."

[Edited on September 20, 2019 at 4:04 PM. Reason : E]

9/20/2019 3:59:45 PM

This is a hypothetical 2018 electoral map if the votes went to whichever party got the most representatives elected within the state. Compare the two and see the clear effects of gerrymandering.



Pennsylvania is a tossup (9D, 9R).

Michigan is 7D 6R, plus Justin Amash as an independent. He's a conservative libertarian but also has called for Trump's impeachment. So I'm not sure if that makes it a 7:7 tossup, or if that's enough of a lean to count against Trump's party.

[Edited on September 20, 2019 at 4:40 PM. Reason : -]

9/20/2019 4:39:27 PM

Jesus I'm dumb, I've never thought about the total number of electoral votes for some reason, just the number for victory, so I'm looking at those graphics adding up and look at the site name......

Giant face palm lol

9/20/2019 4:47:46 PM

I thought we put confidence in poll accuracy to rest during the last cycle. How did so many democrats completely forget everything that happened 4 years ago? For example, Clinton was up 27 points in the last Michigan polling and Bernie won the primary.

How do the participants find out they are selected? I've worked with leftist organizing groups in two States and no one knows anyone who has ever been polled. No one in our facebook group of 27k knows anyone who has been polled. We aren't being properly represented.

The map thing won't ever work because theres too many factors it overlooks. Mainly that Trump was not on the ballot in 2018. It should also be obvious that most Republicans are very different from Trump. Like imagine if Bernie was president and thinking Joe Manchin losing was bad news for Bernie.

[Edited on September 20, 2019 at 5:03 PM. Reason : i live in a leftist echo chamber and no one has ever been polled]

9/20/2019 5:02:46 PM

Isn't that Michigan primary one of the biggest poll to result misses ever? Thing something other than a historical outlier might better help your argument?

Also OF COURSE polls are innacurate no shit, but the best pollsters work to prove them and poll aggregators help to even out the noise.

Quote :

"The map thing won't ever work "

What does this even mean "work"? What do you think it's trying to do that it won't do?

9/20/2019 5:26:16 PM

Quote :

"I thought we put confidence in poll accuracy to rest during the last cycle"

I'm getting sick of this trite, BS argument. The final RCP average had Clinton at +3.3 nationally. She finished +2.1. It wasn't dead on, but being off by 1.2 percentage points certainly is not enough to break confidence.

These polls are based on public opinion, not on whether or not the people polled will show up to vote. More people preferred Clinton, but not enough to show up to vote for her in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

9/20/2019 10:57:40 PM

Pssssttt, Earl isn’t arguing in good faith. Also, he likes Trump.

9/21/2019 11:16:05 AM

Booker hinting that if his campaign doesn't raise 1.7M before the end of the quarter, he'll drop out.

9/21/2019 1:14:36 PM

its about time he focused on not being someones VP

9/21/2019 3:01:29 PM

Tulsi glad handing with Modi #Diplomacy? #AntiWar?

9/21/2019 8:18:08 PM

Its going to be a warren/booker ticket.

9/22/2019 12:47:41 AM

Lot of stats recently solidifying around warren

Still early days but I really think she’ll be the nom at this point.

9/22/2019 12:40:23 PM

Quote :

"Isn't that Michigan primary one of the biggest poll to result misses ever? Thing something other than a historical outlier might better help your argument?"

Bernie and Trump are historical outliers. That helps my point because the historical nature of their campaigns isn't going to change this time around. You still have these candidates trying to take down many of the established ways of doing things going up against a bunch of candidates trying to restore/preserve the establishment. Its even stronger this time around though because we know we were right last time.

Quote :

"These polls are based on public opinion, not on whether or not the people polled will show up to vote. More people preferred Clinton, but not enough to show up to vote for her in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania."

You have to ask the right questions. You say that these polls measure pubic opinion but how do they AFFECT public opinion?

How does seeing your candidate down 27 points just ahead of the voting affect you?

How about when those sorts of polls are combined with "electability" narratives that compliment them and are drilled daily in the media?

Bernie wasn't electable because he couldn't win independents in key states like Michigan because the polls indicated he was down 27. We had to nominate Hillary so we could be guaranteed to win states like Michigan and Wisconsin.

How long does it take to heal a fake narrative like that? It was proven wrong but the damage was already done because of the way the primary schedule is set up. The machine knows this.

Look at Moron's post above this. How does reading/hearing that sort of statement affect undecideds? How does it play into all of the previous questions I've asked?

Combine that with the fact that the media can manufacture any narrative by cherrypicking polls that fit their desired narrative and completely ignoring the ones that don't. Its how they got rid of Tulsi by using the 2/30 polls where she was weak https://www.facebook.com/TulsiGabbard/videos/2441731402607880/?t=9

its also how moron thinks warren is consolidating by being up in iowa even though bernie is leading in nh nevada. Moron isn't making things up though because his post is a reflection of what the media is saying right now. Not one mention of New Hampshire or Nevada on any network. Take a look at the front page of CNN right now

Quote :

"Can Elizabeth Warren beat Trump? • Live analysis: Warren surges to make it a two-candidate top tier in Iowa • Warren surges and Biden's lead fades in close Iowa race, new poll shows"

I could be more truthful than them and still make a headline like "Bernie builds lead in two of the first 3 states".

Its all one big positive feedback loop of media meddling.

[Edited on September 22, 2019 at 1:42 PM. Reason : they're trying to take the decisions away from voters by telling you who is already winning]

[Edited on September 22, 2019 at 1:51 PM. Reason : the daily show gave the warren rally a segment. they haven't done that for larger bernie rallys]

9/22/2019 1:38:53 PM

That’s a lot of words when you could have just said “fake news.”

9/22/2019 2:20:23 PM

Earls specialty is rants about shit nobody else cares about

9/22/2019 2:45:03 PM

^^^ what's the point arguing the merits of polls if we're not even sure they don't just make up the results?

9/22/2019 2:46:40 PM

FWIW, RealClear poll aggregation has Biden slightly ahead in New Hampshire with Bernie solidly in second; Biden and Warren essentially tied in Iowa with Bernie a distant third; Biden ahead 7 in Nevada with Sanders solidly in second; and Biden WAY ahead in SC.

Tbh, I don’t know what Earl is talking about? Maybe cherry-picking polls like a MAGA?

All the obvious hedges, of course — early, polls are just a snapshot in time (not a prediction), Biden losing while Warren gains, etc, etc

[Edited on September 22, 2019 at 8:02 PM. Reason : Also, Bernie’s favorability numbed in the new Ann Seltzer poll in Iowa are ]

9/22/2019 8:01:36 PM

NH, NV, and CA are looking pretty great for Bernie

9/22/2019 8:54:58 PM

Quote :

"Bernie’s favorability numbed in the new Ann Seltzer poll in Iowa are "

which part? His net favorability dropped from 74 to 58 since December, a 16 point drop. Biden had the same 16 point drop, from 82 to 66.

Bernie's net unfavorability jumped from 22 to 36, a 14 point jump. But again, Biden had the same 14 point jump, from 15 to 29.

in terms of net favorability vs net unfavorability point swings, we have
Buttigieg at +49 (52 pt jump in net favorability vs 3 pt jump in net unfavorability)
Warren at +14
Yang at +10
Booker at +1
Everybody else is 0 or negative.

In terms of VERY favorable vs VERY unfavorable we have
Buttigieg +27 (28pt jump in very favorable vs 1pt jump in very unfavorable)
Waarren +23
Yang +2
Everybody else is negative

9/22/2019 9:50:54 PM

Quote :

"FWIW, RealClear poll aggregation has Biden slightly ahead in New Hampshire with Bernie solidly in second; Biden and Warren essentially tied in Iowa with Bernie a distant third; Biden ahead 7 in Nevada with Sanders solidly in second; and Biden WAY ahead in SC."

I posted only recent polls. You're including polls from July bra.

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 2:18 AM. Reason : so wheres your momentum talk now when it suits bernie]

9/23/2019 2:16:36 AM

^^ and Biden’s will get worse than that. Not exactly the standard you want your campaign to live up it.

^ this is incorrect. One SC poll is from July. Rest are generally late August and September across the board. It’s honestly fine. Does t mean he won’t win. Just to don’t be a MAGA-like cult member yelling into the void about polling.

9/23/2019 6:29:30 AM

Quote :

" Not exactly the standard you want your campaign to live up it."

completely agree. Bernie's not doing well (outside his base) lately, despite having reached 1M donors. my question was just more asking you to elaborate on which part was to you, there's a lot of angles in the data.

9/23/2019 9:18:00 AM

in a primary don't all candidates only do well in their base, isn't their base anyone who supports them?

9/23/2019 9:22:33 AM

no their base is anyone who supports them unconditionally you complete donut

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 10:19 AM. Reason : egg]

9/23/2019 10:18:42 AM

Who supports any candidate unconditionally

"worries this might upset their base", "have to be sure their base comes out" are very common phrases in politics that certainly don't imply unconditional support.

9/23/2019 10:34:25 AM

Question for the Warren people: which of her policies do you like better than Bernie's? In particular, climate, housing, healthcare, and foreign policy.

9/23/2019 10:58:52 AM

Quote :

" don't all candidates only do well in their base"

I don't know if there's an accepted specific definition of base, but I would say the base refers moreso to the folks in the Very Favorable camp of a candidate. So not all supporters are in the base, per se. Some supporters may only have weak preference for a candidate.

The whole point of the primary is to EXPAND your support and your base. Bernie hasn't been able to do that this cycle. Maybe he will end up being able to do so, but my sense is that by now most likely primary voters already know who Bernie is and what he stands for, and if he's not their first choice by now, he's not likely to become their first choice, absent other candidates dropping out.

9/23/2019 11:14:34 AM

so can you then define bernies base? what does it mean that he is not doing well outside of it?

this seems like a meaningless statement to me

9/23/2019 12:24:07 PM

bernies base = those who hold very favorable view of Bernie. those for whom he is their clear #1 choice. not necessarily BernieOrBust folks.

Quote :

"what does it mean that he is not doing well outside of it?"

he's completely flat. he has a very devoted base and that's great, but why hasn't he been able to build on 2016's momentum? Everybody knows who he is now. If 2016 was a matter of he was just too late for him to build name recognition and legitimacy, there's no excuse now. gotta be able to build a broader coalition if you want to get to a majority support. Warren has done a better job of doing that so far

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 12:46 PM. Reason : .]

9/23/2019 12:43:42 PM

what if i find you a random twitter poll?

9/23/2019 12:53:12 PM

cool. whatchya got, I'm happy to consider all available data

I'm personally more interested in this though

Quote :

" Question for the Warren people: which of her policies do you like better than Bernie's? In particular, climate, housing, healthcare, and foreign policy."

my guess is it's less to do with actual policy differences with Bernie. I think it's about demeanor. Warren comes across as pleasant, prepared and intelligent (which appeals to the moderate Dems), and is willing to fight against the GOP (which appeals to the #Resist Dems). I frankly don't see a whole lot of Warren supporters in my filter bubbles, but when I do, I don't recall seeing an excessive amount of vitriol (sure there are exceptions, but in generalities)

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 1:11 PM. Reason : .]

9/23/2019 1:02:51 PM

it's reach white people who prefer warren because she agitates for things that might impact their life less than sanders

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 1:16 PM. Reason : the rich white people are more polite about it because they live a sheltered life]

9/23/2019 1:15:20 PM

It all comes down to who is a better option to beat Pence in the general. Against Pence I think Bernie will come off looking like much more than the curmudgeon that he's already been made out to be.

9/23/2019 1:44:25 PM

I'm just curious about how the Bernie->Warren converts feel about her plans. She often says the right words, but when you dig into her proposals, she's much closer to Clinton than to Bernie. Decent on healthcare, but everything else honestly seems pretty neoliberal. What am I missing?

9/23/2019 2:24:53 PM

November qualifying rules released

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/politics/democratic-debate-criteria.html

Quote :

" To be invited to the November debate, candidates must have received donations from at least 165,000 individual donors and must meet one of two polling requirements. They must either receive 3 percent support in four national or early-state polls conducted by qualifying pollsters, or 5 percent support in two polls in the four early states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. Polls will count if they were publicly released between Sept. 13 and midnight seven days before the debate. The date and location of the November debate have yet to be announced. At least eight candidates have already met the 165,000-donor threshold, according to an analysis by The New York Times, though more candidates may have met it as well. Only three qualifying polls have been released since Sept. 13. Candidates must also prove they have at least 600 unique donors in at least 20 states, United States territories or the District of Columbia, the D.N.C. said."

thresholds seem pretty reasonable, just wish they'd announce which polls qualify in advance

[Edited on September 23, 2019 at 3:00 PM. Reason : .]

9/23/2019 2:57:41 PM