Polling on some primaries ahead

Moderators: admin, Inquisitor, ForumModerator, WebsiteContent

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 14628
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Polling on some primaries ahead

#1 Post by highdesert » Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:49 pm

Nathaniel Rakich at 538. Graphs are in the link.
You’ve heard how South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg is coming on strong in Iowa. You’ve heard how New Hampshire is a free-for-all. And you’ve heard about former Vice President Joe Biden’s firewall in Nevada and especially South Carolina.

But the Democratic primary won’t end after those four states, especially if no clear winner emerges from them. That means the 16 states and territories that vote on March 3 — Super Tuesday — could be critical to Democrats’ selection of a nominee; together they are estimated to be worth more than a third of Democrats’ pledged delegates.

Despite these places’ importance, though, there’s been relatively little coverage of which candidates might have an advantage there. Of course, plenty will probably change between now and Super Tuesday. In addition to the normal fluctuations in the horse race, the results in the first four states will likely winnow the field, too. But I still think it’s worthwhile checking in on the polling in some important March states to see what the race looks like now. Appropriately given its outsized number of delegates, California has been one of the most frequently polled states over the past two months:

And the polls there have shown some stark disagreements: Some have given Biden a solid lead, while others find a decisive edge for Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and the most recent found Sen. Bernie Sanders in a virtual tie for first. A simple polling average shows Warren at 24 percent, Biden at 22 percent and Sanders at 19 percent. If those are their final percentages in California, the state’s huge trove of 416 delegates (the most of any one primary or caucus) would be split three ways. But, again, it’s still early.

Notably, Buttigieg is only averaging 9 percent in California, which is another reason to believe, at least at this stage, that he might have trouble building on potential strong showings in Iowa and New Hampshire. And it’s not in the table, but home-state Sen. Kamala Harris averaged 8 percent across these seven polls before she dropped out, so whoever picks up her support in the Golden State could alter the shape of the race, too.

Texas has the second-biggest delegate haul (228) of both Super Tuesday and the entire primary calendar, but unlike California, signs point to a front-runner: Biden (although, with only two polls conducted in the state in the last two months, we don’t have the clearest picture of the race there). After all, only the most recent poll — from the University of Texas at Tyler — was conducted after former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, a native son of Texas, exited the race. And he got 14 percent in that YouGov poll, so a fair number of voters may still be up for grabs in the Lone Star State.

Continuing down the line, the third-most important Super Tuesday state in terms of delegates is North Carolina with 110. We’ve gotten several polls in the Tar Heel State in the last two months, with all five indicating that Biden has a healthy lead. This should come as no surprise in a state that, like South Carolina, has a large base of black voters. In 2016, the Democratic primary electorate was 38 percent nonwhite.

But beyond those three delegate-rich states, we don’t have a lot of recent Super Tuesday polling. In Virginia (99 delegates), the most recent poll was conducted almost three months ago. And while it showed Biden with a comfortable lead, demographically the state is also fertile ground for Warren or Buttigieg, given that college-educated whites constituted almost half of its 2016 Democratic primary electorate. Indeed, Massachusetts, Super Tuesday’s fifth-biggest prize with 91 delegates, has an even higher share of college-educated white voters, and Warren led there by 15 points in the most recent poll from mid-October. But of course, Massachusetts is also Warren’s home state, which could be a factor here as well. That said, she also took 25 percent and first place in the most recent poll of Minnesota (75 delegates), in which home-state Sen. Amy Klobuchar also received a respectable 15 percent.

Beyond that, Super Tuesday is a black box. There hasn’t been a survey of Colorado (67 delegates) since August. Tennessee (64 delegates), Alabama (52 delegates) and Oklahoma (37 delegates) haven’t been polled since July, although demographically the first two at least should be good fits for Biden. Meanwhile, Arkansas (31 delegates) and Utah (29 delegates) haven’t seen any polls.

October did bring us two surveys of Maine, but they disagreed as to whether Biden or Warren was leading, but considering only 24 delegates are at stake, it probably won’t be what makes or breaks Super Tuesday for a candidate. Same with Vermont (16 delegates), Democrats Abroad (13 delegates) and American Samoa (six delegates), where there are also zero polls — although we can probably be pretty confident that Sanders will win his home state. (He has a 65 percent approval rating there and won 86 percent there in the 2016 primary.)

In summary, it looks like Biden and to a lesser extent Warren would start out with the advantage on Super Tuesday. Biden leads in two of the three biggest states (Texas and North Carolina), plus probably multiple Southern states (Tennessee, Alabama, maybe Virginia and Arkansas). Warren likely leads in two mid-size states (Massachusetts and Minnesota) but also figures to amass a significant delegate haul from California, which currently looks like a jump ball. And while we can only say with confidence that Sanders is favored to win one state, he definitely has a chance to pick up plenty of delegates by finishing a respectable second or third in many other places.

The further out you go on the calendar, there’s even more good news for Biden. One week after Super Tuesday, Michigan (125 delegates) will be the big prize, and Biden leads in an average of the three polls taken there in the last two months:

Beyond that, Biden is also ahead — for now — in Florida (219 delegates), Illinois (155 delegates), Ohio (136 delegates) and Arizona (67 delegates) for the March 17 primaries:

Polling in Florida, Illinois, Ohio and Arizona for the four leading Democratic presidential candidates, in public polls conducted since Oct. 1

Then, on March 24, Georgia (105 delegates) will vote, and Biden currently has a commanding lead there, too:

As for the states that will vote in April or later, most of them have seen no recent polling — and arguably, this is pretty justifiable, since the race is so unpredictable that deep into the calendar. It’s quite possible Biden or another candidate will have sewn up the nomination by this point anyway. But if not, look for a few states to be the differentiators. For example, Wisconsin (77 delegates) is set to vote on April 7, and recent polls show a very unsettled race there:

The last big delegate haul of the primary will be on April 28, when New York (224 delegates) and Pennsylvania (153 delegates) go to the polls, and if trends hold steady, this day could be a shot in the arm for Biden: He had a 10-point lead over Warren in New York per a Siena College poll from mid-November, and he has an 11-point lead over her in an average of Pennsylvania polls conducted entirely or in part since Oct. 1:

Of course, by this point in the race, I’d be surprised if there are more than two candidates left standing, so there may be a chance for, say, Warren to consolidate anti-Biden support and win these states, too. Like a real-life choose-your-own-adventure book, the primary could still unfold along hundreds of paths.

But it’s also important to remember there are several massive states still to vote after Iowa (41 delegates), New Hampshire (24 delegates), Nevada (36 delegates) and South Carolina (54 delegates) — and right now, Biden has far more delegates waiting for him in those states than any candidate is likely to amass in February.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... boola_feed
Last edited by highdesert on Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
senorgrand
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 19700
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:05 am
Location: LGC MEMBER: Calif Central Coast
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#2 Post by senorgrand » Fri Dec 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Early states will shuffle later state results. If Biden takes either NH or VT and holds onto NH and SC, it's over.

If Major Pete takes a first in NH and/or VT, then the deck gets shuffled. Except I think Bernie's followers will largely vote for him. As will some percentage of warren's true believers. Folks outside of VT and NH won't pay attention to the race until mid January.
Image

Grand Poobah and Bass Player for the Conspiracy of Weenies.

User avatar
mrcee12
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#3 Post by mrcee12 » Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:45 pm

Whenever they do polls they should say how many undecideds there are. Because I'll bet they're in the majority.

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 14628
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#4 Post by highdesert » Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:46 pm

senorgrand wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 6:54 pm
Early states will shuffle later state results. If Biden takes either NH or VT and holds onto NH and SC, it's over.

If Major Pete takes a first in NH and/or VT, then the deck gets shuffled. Except I think Bernie's followers will largely vote for him. As will some percentage of warren's true believers. Folks outside of VT and NH won't pay attention to the race until mid January.
I think Buttigieg hopes to win IA or NH or both and get a bump for Super Tuesday, as he's running in single digits in other states. It's front loaded now with a lot of delegates in early primaries this cycle, who knows CA could go back to it's traditional June 6th primary next presidential cycle they flip back and forth.

538 is tracking national and state polling
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po ... /national/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
K9s
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 8326
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Location: LGC Member: Georgia
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#5 Post by K9s » Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:52 am

senorgrand wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 6:54 pm
Early states will shuffle later state results. If Biden takes either NH or VT and holds onto NH and SC, it's over.

If Major Pete takes a first in NH and/or VT, then the deck gets shuffled. Except I think Bernie's followers will largely vote for him. As will some percentage of warren's true believers. Folks outside of VT and NH won't pay attention to the race until mid January.
I cannot imagine Biden taking the first four states, but it could happen. I agree that it would cement his nomination. We really won't know anything until after Super Tuesday - if then. The first four states may tell us a lot or four candidates may win four different states.

Bernie supporters are probably the most hardcore, "never say die" supporters. He will campaign to the end regardless of his total wins and delegates.

It will be interesting!
The border between civilization and savagery is porous and patrolled by opportunists. Resist fascism. Vote like your democracy depends on it.

User avatar
TrueTexan
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 16518
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 7:28 pm
Location: LGC MEMBER: The "Crazy" part of Denton Texas
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#6 Post by TrueTexan » Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:00 am

If Biden get the nomination we are screwed because Trump will get the second term. The Right Wing Reptilians will push the Ukraine BS. long and loud as they did Benghazi and other lies on Clinton.Along with his impeachment vindication by Moscow Mitch and the cowardly Reptilians in the senate. It will be just enough to get tRump reelected.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer-Kissinger
Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired.-Swift

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 14628
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#7 Post by highdesert » Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:24 am

Candidates go up and down in polls, we'll see how it looks January 2020. Yes February is the start, IA and NV caucuses and the NH and SC primaries. Then Super Tuesday March 3rd and the largest chunk of delegates in one night. In CA we start early voting on February 3rd, other states may be the similar.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

VodoundaVinci
Chatty
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Illinois, USA
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#8 Post by VodoundaVinci » Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:01 pm

Anybody else here from Iowa? I'm on the border living in Illinois and working all over Iowa as the company I work for is Iowa based. I work all over central, and Western Iowa and have friends/coworkers in Dubuque, Iowa City, Des Moines, Waterloo, Davenport, Cedar Rapins etc. and my Wife is a Iowa Farm Girl and most of her family and friends are all rural/small town Iowans.

Buttigeig is nowhere to be seen in Iowa. Certainly not #1 with a bullet like the polls say. I am not a poll believer anyway but this is outrageous bullshit. Hate to use the term - Fake News.

Somebody is cooking the books or clueless on how to properly poll. I certainly hope no one is making their choice for Democratic Nominee based on who's hot in the polls but I know that many will vote for who everyone else is voting for based o this kind of thing *remembering* that Iowa is getting very close now and most people who are going to vote have their minds made up.

And it ain't Buttigeig.

VooDoo

User avatar
K9s
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 8326
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Location: LGC Member: Georgia
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#9 Post by K9s » Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:55 pm

Iowa race is popular because of tradition, habit, and preference of media and politicians. It isn't representative of the country. Nevada and South Carolina are more interesting to me.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... the-party/
Iowa holds its caucuses first, and New Hampshire follows with its first-in-the-nation primary. But kicking off the primary season with these two states might not make sense for Democrats. These are two of the whitest states in the country, which makes their populations a poor reflection of the increasingly diverse Democratic Party.
The border between civilization and savagery is porous and patrolled by opportunists. Resist fascism. Vote like your democracy depends on it.

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 14628
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#10 Post by highdesert » Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:51 pm

Morning Consult:
On a daily basis, Morning Consult is surveying over 5,000 registered voters across the United States on the 2020 presidential election. Every week, we’ll update this page with the latest survey data, offering an in-depth guide to how the race for the White House is shaping up.
Our Democratic primary results are reported using 17,213 interviews with registered voters who indicated 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 toward. Results are reported among first choice and those who lean toward a candidate.

The interviews were collected Dec. 30, 2019 through Jan. 5, 2020, and have a margin of error of plus or minus 1 percentage point. The “Early Primary State Voters” demographic consists of 742 voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 points. The “Super Tuesday Voters” demographic consists of 5,746 voters in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Virginia, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 1 point.

In the case of a tie, candidates are ordered alphabetically by last name.
https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

In pdf.
https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/u ... _Jan-7.pdf
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
K9s
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 8326
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Location: LGC Member: Georgia
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#11 Post by K9s » Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:23 am

highdesert wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:51 pm
Morning Consult:
On a daily basis, Morning Consult is surveying over 5,000 registered voters across the United States on the 2020 presidential election. Every week, we’ll update this page with the latest survey data, offering an in-depth guide to how the race for the White House is shaping up.
Our Democratic primary results are reported using 17,213 interviews with registered voters who indicated 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 toward. Results are reported among first choice and those who lean toward a candidate.

The interviews were collected Dec. 30, 2019 through Jan. 5, 2020, and have a margin of error of plus or minus 1 percentage point. The “Early Primary State Voters” demographic consists of 742 voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 points. The “Super Tuesday Voters” demographic consists of 5,746 voters in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Virginia, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 1 point.

In the case of a tie, candidates are ordered alphabetically by last name.
https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

In pdf.
https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/u ... _Jan-7.pdf
Wow! The only candidates with more unfavorable than favorable are Marianne Williamson and, top unfavorable, Tulsi Gabbard.
The border between civilization and savagery is porous and patrolled by opportunists. Resist fascism. Vote like your democracy depends on it.

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 14628
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Polling on some primaries ahead

#12 Post by highdesert » Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:29 am

K9s wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:23 am
highdesert wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:51 pm
Morning Consult:
On a daily basis, Morning Consult is surveying over 5,000 registered voters across the United States on the 2020 presidential election. Every week, we’ll update this page with the latest survey data, offering an in-depth guide to how the race for the White House is shaping up.
Our Democratic primary results are reported using 17,213 interviews with registered voters who indicated 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 toward. Results are reported among first choice and those who lean toward a candidate.

The interviews were collected Dec. 30, 2019 through Jan. 5, 2020, and have a margin of error of plus or minus 1 percentage point. The “Early Primary State Voters” demographic consists of 742 voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 points. The “Super Tuesday Voters” demographic consists of 5,746 voters in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Virginia, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 1 point.

In the case of a tie, candidates are ordered alphabetically by last name.
https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

In pdf.
https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/u ... _Jan-7.pdf
Wow! The only candidates with more unfavorable than favorable are Marianne Williamson and, top unfavorable, Tulsi Gabbard.
Yes, that is just among registered Democratic voters I'd like to see if among all likely voters. IIRC in 2016 Trump and HRC were running fairly close in unfavorable ratings, the spin machines on both sides.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest