Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

So, you are excited that the chance Bernie is assassinated has gone up?!

LOL... I'll wait to decide how excited I am for the assassination once he names a running mate. Wouldn't want to get ahead of myself.

[B-Fly]

Yes, the Emerson polling is great for Sanders, while also being terrible for the Democrats overall. We'll see whether this marks a trend in the polling or an outlier as more polling comes through. I worry very much about every candidate versus Trump (including the names that get tossed around as wild card late entries).

There was also a troubling but interesting set of Wisconsin polls from yesterday that had Trump defeating Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg and Klobuchar in head-to-head polling but losing to … Booker. Based on the debate performance and some increase in positive press/attention, I think Booker is the one thus-far floundering candidate that may still have a moment coming. If Biden truly stumbles, Warren and Sanders can't separate from one another, and Buttigieg can't crack even a smidgen of support from Black voters, I think Booker is well-positioned to pick up support. His attack on Biden's opposition to the decriminalization of marijuana (an issue where Biden falls to the right of even most Republicans) was particularly effective. Booker is, IMO, the strongest candidate in the field on criminal justice reform, which could pay huge dividends for him with Black voters if Biden continues to flag.

[Teenwolf]

Yes, the Emerson polling is great for Sanders, while also being terrible for the Democrats overall. We'll see whether this marks a trend in the polling or an outlier as more polling comes through. I worry very much about every candidate versus Trump (including the names that get tossed around as wild card late entries).

There was also a troubling but interesting set of Wisconsin polls from yesterday that had Trump defeating Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg and Klobuchar in head-to-head polling but losing to … Booker. Based on the debate performance and some increase in positive press/attention, I think Booker is the one thus-far floundering candidate that may still have a moment coming. If Biden truly stumbles, Warren and Sanders can't separate from one another, and Buttigieg can't crack even a smidgen of support from Black voters, I think Booker is well-positioned to pick up support. His attack on Biden's opposition to the decriminalization of marijuana (an issue where Biden falls to the right of even most Republicans) was particularly effective. Booker is, IMO, the strongest candidate in the field on criminal justice reform, which could pay huge dividends for him with Black voters if Biden continues to flag.

Booker was better because he had nothing to lose. He was highly unlikely to qualify for the December debate going into this one, having not hit 4% in any poll since August, needing 5 of those to qualify. So he did what he had to do. I didn't like his delivery of the Biden hit though. He could have brought up the "gateway drug" comment, which would have been a lot more specific and targeted attack. Booker never gets specific enough, it's all political pablum. That's why he hasn't had his moment, he hasn't represented anything tangible. His stump line about "we can channel our common pain into a common purpose" is so cringey, and yet he still trots it out there because its poll tested as safe. So I disagree that he will see enough of a bump to both stay in the race and become a serious contender, but out of the 6 pretenders remaining, you might be right that he's the least problematic. I think he would need to find a defining issue to truly break out, but he's playing for a cabinet seat, so it's more likely he plays nice... although if he's willing to be an attack dog on Biden if he makes the December stage, with his eye on a cabinet spot under Sanders, I'd be all for that. Interesting, you've got me spinning on Booker a bit.

Now, you're right about the voters in the middle, floating around. First they boosted Kamala, then Tulsi took her knees out... then they moved to Warren, and she got squishy on M4A and started to fall off at the expense of Buttigieg. These voters are still clearly movable. Sanders' voters have polled as the most enthusiastic and most decided by large margins. Looking at their respective bases to this point, Sanders/Biden occupy the working class fighter lane, and Warren/Buttigieg/Booker represent higher education, higher wages, and white paper style political reformists. They're drastically different. Some progressive voters had bought into the calculation that Warren was "almost the same as Bernie, but younger and a woman" mentality that buoyed her support. I think if the moderators had let it be known, or if they ever do, that Warren significantly backpedaled away from M4A, they would immediately move to Sanders. On the other hand, he also stands the best likelihood of picking up Biden safety blanket voters who haven't yet realized what a walking trainwreck Biden is at this point. So he has 2 sources to pick up voters at this point, from what I can see. Looks very positive.

[revo]

New Emerson national poll is huge for Sanders! Not the highest number polled, with a 4.5% margin of error on polling, but nearly twice as many as the last NH poll that showed Buttigieg leading. Head to head is under 3% margin of error.

Sanders 27%
Biden 27%
Warren 20%
Buttigieg 7%
Yang 4%
Harris 3%
Gabbard 2%
Steyer 2%
Klobuchar 1%
Booker 1%
Bloomberg 1%

Sanders 51
Trump 49

Warren 50
Trump 50

Biden 49
Trump 51

Buttigieg 48
Trump 52

Hmm, electability is disappearing for Biden. I like it.

So this poll you're OK with, LOL??

Another poll released the same day (YouGov) shows Biden at 30% and Bernie at 12%.....but we don't want to see that one, correct? Or you're going to punch holes in that one?

[Teenwolf]

So this poll you're OK with, LOL??

Another poll released the same day (YouGov) shows Biden at 30% and Bernie at 12%.....but we don't want to see that one, correct? Or you're going to punch holes in that one?

So you're happy to promote the NH poll with a 6% margin of error, less than 300 polled, showing Buttigieg up 10 pts. Yet you take issue with the poll that I cite, where twice as many responded to candidate choice, and 4 times as many responded to Trump matchups.... okay...

I already talked about my preferred polls. I prefer Morning Consult because they have the lowest margin of error at 1% and they poll weekly for a great tracking metric. I watch all of the polls through poll trackers on YouTube. I've heard that YouGov polling is incredibly unreliable. They've had massive issues in the UK with wildly fluctuating polls. Now, this could be wrong or biased, I don't know. I don't have any particular affinity for Emerson polling, but I like to see candidates move within polling from the same outlet. This is why Sanders' rise is exciting to me, I base it off previous polling from the same company.

[revo]

So you're happy to promote the NH poll with a 6% margin of error, less than 300 polled, showing Buttigieg up 10 pts. Yet you take issue with the poll that I cite, where twice as many responded to candidate choice, and 4 times as many responded to Trump matchups.... okay...

I already talked about my preferred polls. I prefer Morning Consult because they have the lowest margin of error at 1% and they poll weekly for a great tracking metric. I watch all of the polls through poll trackers on YouTube. I've heard that YouGov polling is incredibly unreliable. They've had massive issues in the UK with wildly fluctuating polls. Now, this could be wrong or biased, I don't know. I don't have any particular affinity for Emerson polling, but I like to see candidates move within polling from the same outlet. This is why Sanders' rise is exciting to me, I base it off previous polling from the same company.

Huh? So first I'm an unabated Biden-lover, but when I show a poll showing Biden getting mauled by Mayor Pete, now I'm "promoting" that one? Like I haven't posted 50+ other polls over the last 6 months no matter who was in first?

I'm not taking issue, but more that you bash every poll that shows Bernie in his usual 12%-15% range, but when one shows him at 27%, it's "THIS IS HUGE."

[Teenwolf]

Huh? So first I'm an unabated Biden-lover, but when I show a poll showing Biden getting mauled by Mayor Pete, now I'm "promoting" that one? Like I haven't posted 50+ other polls over the last 6 months no matter who was in first?

I'm not taking issue, but more that you bash every poll that shows Bernie in his usual 12%-15% range, but when one shows him at 27%, it's "THIS IS HUGE."

I'm not bashing any polls specifically because they don't show Bernie winning. I've given my reasoning to trust or distrust any polls. My issue is that you dont provide context on any of the polls you post, and when I try to provide context, its labeled as biased. Here's your commentary on the garbage NH poll: "More Mayor Pete news: he's surged to take command in NH -- Bernie & Warren's backyard! Granted, the last four NH polls were all over the place, with 4 different leaders, but dayum". So you didn't bother to check the metrics of the poll, you just assume it's a gamechanger. Tulsi supporters do the same thing you did there, taking one poll and blowing it up to represent more than it does. I try not to do the same with Sanders, but given Biden's consistent 10 pt lead over the field, you're damn right I'm celebrating when my candidate ties for 1st, outlier or not.

This latest Emerson poll vaulted Sanders into 2nd ahead of Warren in the RCP polling average, so it follows the trend of Bernie surpassing Warren. First time Sanders has been 2nd in 2 months. Let me enjoy it, man.

[The Feral Slasher]

Former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has become the 2nd late entrant into the Democratic race, announcing today he’s jumping in.

Good luck to him !

https://twitter.com/AnnieGrayerCNN/status/1197323379323424768?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1197323379323424768&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nakedcapitalism.com%2F2019%2F11%2F200pm-water-cooler-11-22-2019.html

Governor @DevalPatrick was supposed to have an event at Morehouse College tonight. An organizer with the college who planned the event told CNN that Patrick cancelled the event when he arrived and learned that he would not have an audience. (Note, two people came, not pictured)

[madducks]

Good luck to him !

https://twitter.com/AnnieGrayerCNN/status/1197323379323424768?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1197323379323424768&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nakedcapitalism.com%2F2019%2F11%2F200pm-water-cooler-11-22-2019.html

Governor @DevalPatrick was supposed to have an event at Morehouse College tonight. An organizer with the college who planned the event told CNN that Patrick cancelled the event when he arrived and learned that he would not have an audience. (Note, two people came, not pictured)

Mom & dad?

[The Feral Slasher]

No, Deval and the organizer with the college.

which one took the picture ? Maybe there were three ?

[The Feral Slasher]

There's no one in the picture.

Ha, there was only one person there ! The mysterious photographer.

[The Feral Slasher]

Ha, there was only one person there ! The mysterious photographer.

I had two people show up for my "Slasher 2020" campaign, so apparently I am just as likely to be president as Deval.

[The Feral Slasher]

I had two people show up for my "Slasher 2020" campaign, so apparently I am just as likely to be president as Deval.

Actually, this is probably true.

[Teenwolf]

Bloomberg makes massive ad buy

The ad buy comes one day after Bloomberg filed a statement with the Federal Election Commission creating a presidential campaign committee. The former New York City mayor has plans to spend as much as $500 million this election.

Bloomberg is worth $52 billion according to Forbes, making him one of the wealthiest people on earth. Progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have said Bloomberg should spend his money helping other Democrats down-ballot, rather than make a late presidential run.

“Call me radical, but maybe instead of setting ablaze hundreds of millions of dollars on multiple plutocratic, long-shot, very-late presidential bids, we instead invest hundreds of millions into winning majorities of state legislatures across the United States?,” she said on Twitter earlier this month. Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders.

To blunt that criticism, Bloomberg committed this past week to spending $100 million in digital ads aimed just at Trump and another $15 to $20 million to register half a million voters.

[...]

Bloomberg’s team calculates that, due to the size and instability of the Democratic field, no clear frontrunner may emerge after the run of the first four early states that ends with South Carolina voting Feb. 29. That could leave the billionaire in an ideal position to forcefully begin to compete on March 3 when 15 states plus American Samoa vote on Super Tuesday.

How many votes does half a billion dollars buy in the primaries?

[B-Fly]

The Bloomberg-funded attack ads on Trump and investments in voter registration will certainly help the Democrats as a whole. Still withholding judgment on his broader late-breaking campaign. As I've noted, I think he brings a lot of strengths to the table as a candidate, well beyond just his bankroll, but some material weaknesses too.