2020 Democratic Primaries/General Election Thread

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

For me the big questions are how long are both Sanders and Warrren in the race, and when one of thems drops out, where does their support go?

As long as they are #2 and #3, they'll stay in. And that may mean they split the primary votes all the way to the end. The shocking thing is that (according to the latest Morning Consult poll) for 29% of Sanders supporters, Biden is their second choice (the top second choice person)!! 27% of Sanders supporters have Warren as their second choice. Warren has actually risen as a lot more of Bernie supporters had Biden as their second choice earlier on.

24% of Warren supporters have Bernie as their second choice, but even there 21% of Warren supporters have Biden as their second choice (which is #2)!!

27% of Harris and 25% of Buttigieg supporters have Warren as their second choice. But there too, Biden is #2 with 23% of Harris supporters and 21% of Buttigieg supporters saying he's their second choice.

So part of that is name recognition and Biden being Obama's Vice President. But that's a lot of Biden support, even among voters you'd never suspect it.

[JPhillips]

My favorite Biden info is that he leads in both African-American support and among those white Dems with the highest level of racial resentment.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

among those white Dems with the highest level of racial resentment.

Haha, how do they measure that?

Pollster: On a scale of 1-10, how much to you resent minorities?
Polled Dem: 10! 10 I tell ya! Also, go Biden.

Edit: Or do they try to profile Dems and look for characteristics of racial resentment, like, I don't know, where they live or what music they listen to?

[molson]

The gamblers and most of the 538 analysts see Warren as the clear favorite. It's interesting to see the disparity between those numbers and the polls. I guess they're skeptical of Biden being able to grow his base from here, and also Warren is the only candidate who has consistently increased her support through the entire process.

[PilotMan]

Or as the guys on a pod I listened to this week said; "she's offering to give a whole lot of shit away for free!"

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Haha, how do they measure that?

Pollster: On a scale of 1-10, how much to you resent minorities?
Polled Dem: 10! 10 I tell ya! Also, go Biden.

Edit: Or do they try to profile Dems and look for characteristics of racial resentment, like, I don't know, where they live or what music they listen to?

It's a pretty common data point available in a number of polls. There's a whole series of polling questions that get to a number. There are questions as to the accuracy, but for this observation, I don't think accuracy matters a lot.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by molson

The gamblers and most of the 538 analysts see Warren as the clear favorite. It's interesting to see the disparity between those numbers and the polls. I guess they're skeptical of Biden being able to grow his base from here, and also Warren is the only candidate who has consistently increased her support through the entire process.

Not only that, but her ground game here in Nevada (just to give an example I'm familiar with) is insanely strong. Like, to a level where most of the other candidates are lagging far behind. Feels like only Bernie is really close to her here in that department.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by molson

The gamblers and most of the 538 analysts see Warren as the clear favorite. It's interesting to see the disparity between those numbers and the polls. I guess they're skeptical of Biden being able to grow his base from here, and also Warren is the only candidate who has consistently increased her support through the entire process.

I think the slow constant rise in numbers is what the gamblers and stat outfits are looking at. The idea seems to be that Biden and Sanders may have hit their peak support, but Warren's outer bound hasn't been reached yet.

[GrantDawg]

Nate Silver on Twitter: "There's also polling that directly asks Dems to compare their ideology to the candidates'. Those polls find Biden is slightly closer to the median Dem than Warren (close tho) and considerably closer than Bernie. Harris is the closest, actually. https://t.co/B7MwMNkf9f… https://t.co/NQhblgGkJT"

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by molson

The gamblers and most of the 538 analysts see Warren as the clear favorite. It's interesting to see the disparity between those numbers and the polls. I guess they're skeptical of Biden being able to grow his base from here, and also Warren is the only candidate who has consistently increased her support through the entire process.

538 has Biden up by 17 points and he is slightly behind Warren with the Vegas line so not sure what you are seeing.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Galaril

538 has Biden up by 17 points and he is slightly behind Warren with the Vegas line so not sure what you are seeing.

Bovada and Predicit translate to around a 33-35% chance for Warren and a 27%-28% chance for Biden. Not a blowout or anything, but clearly ahead for a while, whereas Biden beats her by double digits in some of the polls. Which is why I mostly look at the gambling numbers at this point for a quick look at where everyone stands (or at least, the perception of where everyone stands based on people who back their projections with money), as the polls are all over the place.

I think if I asked a bunch of people on the street who don't closely follow politics who the most likely Dem nominee is, Biden would win by a lot. (I don't know if there's polling on that kind of thing). So I wonder if Warren has even better chances than the gamblers think, since it looks like she does better as a pick with the people paying the most attention.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

Bovada and Predicit translate to around a 33-35% chance for Warren and a 27%-28% chance for Biden. Not a blowout or anything, but clearly ahead for a while, whereas Biden beats her by double digits in some of the polls. Which is why I mostly look at the gambling numbers at this point for a quick look at where everyone stands (or at least, the perception of where everyone stands based on people who back their projections with money), as the polls are all over the place.

I think if I asked a bunch of people on the street who don't closely follow politics who the most likely Dem nominee is, Biden would win by a lot. (I don't know if there's polling on that kind of thing). So I wonder if Warren has even better chances than the gamblers think, since it looks like she does better as a pick with the people paying the most attention.

Yeah, but the people who pay the most attention haven't been very good lately... idk if it's voter fatigue, people not wanting to pay attention this early, politics turning into a competition and people being loathe to switch from "their guy/girl" or something else but these poll numbers for pretty much everybody seem stickier than anyone thinks they should be this early.

[NobodyHere]

I really wish this debate was in two nights with 5 candidates each. 10 is waaaay too many.

[ISiddiqui]

Nah man, the split prevented Biden, Warren, and Sanders being on the same stage. I'm excited to finally see that.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Nah man, the split prevented Biden, Warren, and Sanders being on the same stage. I'm excited to finally see that.

I personally want to see candidates like Yang get more than 4 minutes of speaking time.

[GrantDawg]

I think maybe doing the tier thing (two nights, one with the top in the polls, then a second night with bottom) just wasn't that bad of an idea. The crowded stages aren't really giving anybody but the top time to speak anyway.

[ISiddiqui]

But the lower tier would then complain they weren't being treated fairly (and it's too early to play Top 5 favorites, etc):


Imagine if Biden, Warren, Bernie, Harris, and Buttigieg were on one stage. Who would watch Booker, Beto, Yang, Castro, and Klobuchar?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

But the lower tier would then complain they weren't being treated fairly (and it's too early to play Top 5 favorites, etc):


Imagine if Biden, Warren, Bernie, Harris, and Buttigieg were on one stage. Who would watch Booker, Beto, Yang, Castro, and Klobuchar?

I would. More, if they have time to actually make some points, the media will talk about it and replay it. They might actually get some attention. On this stage, the top 3-5 are going to suck all the oxygen.

[ISiddiqui]

The media would completely ignore the second tier debate.

Hell, I'm a political junkie and I wouldn't watch the kids table debate.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The media would completely ignore the second tier debate.

Hell, I'm a political junkie and I wouldn't watch the kids table debate.

Carly Fiorina broke out during an under card debate in 2016. The media covered it just fine.

[Edward64]

I'm good with having them all on stage tonight but agree they don't seem to have enough time. Maybe making the debate longer?

I am ready for it to be whittled down to 5-6.

[Jas_lov]

Tonight's debate is 3 hours so they have more time than the first two. I like having all of them on the same stage. But I'm not sure how much these debates matter. Kamala had a breakout performance and is back in single digits. Biden struggles but stays at the top. Maybe having Warren and Biden on the same stage will allow her to draw contrast and pull ahead.

[Jas_lov]

Also, Gabbard and Steyer will likely qualify for next month's debate so then it will be back to 2 nights unfortunately.

[tarcone]

Just gave Yang $10. And entered at a chance to win $1000 a month for a year.

[Jas_lov]

Biden seems a lot sharper tonight.

[tarcone]

Biden is going right down the middle. Is the moderate route the winning route?

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Just gave Yang $10. And entered at a chance to win $1000 a month for a year.

Maybe he can give voters that deal to get him some votes!?;-)

[tarcone]

I dont believe you can go with a plan that offers private or public choice in health care.

The weakens the public option considerably.

[tarcone]

Can you tell who the top 3 are in this debate? Why even invite anyone else. The democratic party has told us who they are backing.

[tarcone]

Biden takes a broadside shot. Biden getting whooped.

[tarcone]

Yang is the every guy candidate.

"I am Asian, so I know a lot of doctors" HAHA

[tarcone]

WHERE IS EVERYBODY?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by "Me:

I'm basically Yang or Libertarian at this point.

fixed

[Lathum]

This "take your guns" rhetoric is going to backfire.

[Atocep]

This has far and away been Beto's best night of the debates.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Atocep

This has far and away been Beto's best night of the debates.

He's said a lot of emotional stuff but I have no idea why I should vote for him.

[tarcone]

One of the biggest lies our government tells us is that we can make tribal countries democracies. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[tarcone]

The board has let me down tonight

[tarcone]

If Biden is the Dem choice our country is screwed.

[Galaril]

Biden has done well tonight . Certainly better than in the past debates. He will be a vast improvement over Trump.

[Lathum]

What were those idiots chanting?

[Atocep]

Biden's had a solid night. I think Booker has really stood out. Harris seems disinterested.

[Galaril]

I think Booker had a moment or two early but think Pete did pretty good overall. I think Warren, Sanders as well as Biden were who we thought they all were.
My wife who has been a public schoool teacher 6 years in a high risk school by choice gets irritated by Warren repeatedly using the I was a school teacher card. She was a school teacher for a year and gave it up to go be a high priced corp lawyer.

[tarcone]

Yang has dominated. Warren was very good. Sanders did very well. I thought Biden continued his stumbling buffoon act. And hos Moderate stance is not what should sell.

We have a very right president or one with crazy ideas. its not a time for moderation. Biden would be a softball for Trump. He would eat Biden for lunch.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Galaril

I think Booker had a moment or two early but think Pete did pretty good overall. I think Warren, Sanders as well as Biden were who we thought they all were.
My wife who has been a public schoool teacher 6 years in a high risk school by choice gets irritated by Warren repeatedly using the I was a school teacher card. She was a school teacher for a year and gave it up to go be a high priced corp lawyer.

I honestly think Harris and Castro are the only 2 that you could say had a bad night.

Warren and Biden performed similarly well. Sanders problem is when you get outside of his primary interest issues he loses steam and tends to try to steer back to those issues.

Beto had his best night, but he would be best served to run for senate again.

Buttigieg was solid throughout and had a fantastic response to the adversity question. He closed strong. He could be an outstanding presidential candidate in the future, but I'm not sure if the timing is ever going to align with his popularity.

Yang isn't winning this, but he belongs in an administration.

Klobuchar has probably surprised me the most. She's had a solid night and stood out to an extent.

EDIT: Booker had a hell of night as well. I honestly have no idea how he isn't polling better.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Yang has dominated. Warren was very good. Sanders did very well. I thought Biden continued his stumbling buffoon act. And hos Moderate stance is not what should sell.

We have a very right president or one with crazy ideas. its not a time for moderation. Biden would be a softball for Trump. He would eat Biden for lunch.

ROFL.

[ISiddiqui]

What in the world was Castro thinking on that over the top attack on Biden? He was wrong as well as mean. Dumb. Harris was meh. Everyone else was ok to good. Biden had his best night. Bernie may have had his worst, but was still decent. I think Beto, Booker, and Buttigieg stood out, but they have to make up a lot of places.

As for who would Trump beat in a debate, have people forgotten he got eviscerated in the Presidential debates in 2016? He'll just bluster and try to bully and his fans will eat him up but no one else will and in the end the debate performances won't matter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Atocep

EDIT: Booker had a hell of night as well. I honestly have no idea how he isn't polling better.

Because even you forgot him in your write-up!

Everyone who listens to him likes him, and it never gains any traction. It's baffling & kind of infuriating to me, but what can I do?

[Ben E Lou]

Joe Biden performed well besides this insane bit where he strongly implied that he believes black people are incapable of raising our children without government help in the midst of the rest of this Palinesque word salad.



I say again: something is wrong with this man.

[Ben E Lou]

Here's the video:

What on earth??? pic.twitter.com/rrvOdujoFh

— Ben Lewis (@benelou) September 13, 2019