Those results would pretty bad for Bernie? If he's going to get viability at 30%, he really wants to split it with one viable candidate, not two. He'd net like 20-25 of the state-level delegates over Biden with that result.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 3| "I think he's learned his lesson" says The Concerned Immoderate Darling Collins.
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
Those results would pretty bad for Bernie? If he's going to get viability at 30%, he really wants to split it with one viable candidate, not two. He'd net like 20-25 of the state-level delegates over Biden with that result.
I think part of it was that a very large number of reputable polls dramatically understated Biden's AA support, and these polls consistently did the same thing across the south with Obama in 08 and Clinton in 16.
Whatever the issue is hasn't been fixed and SC may have exposed it again.
They say this, but the reality is if Warren gets blown out on Tuesday - including losing MA - they won't have the money to continue on another 3-4 months.
Yeah, I imagine the money will dry up real quick and nothing she does from that point on will do more than a slight blip. It's quickly going to become a Biden vs Bernie race especially if Biden does fairly well in ST.
The only reason to hold on would be to force Biden to maybe make her his VP or have him make very public statements basically mimicking her own policies and the latter isn't really worth it.
I don't think the "she is Bernie's VP choics" makes sense anymore. They've had a very public spats, he needs a POC demographic wise and if this goes to the convention I still maintain he'll be forced to take a moderate VP to get the delegates he needs.
Last edited:
Only 56% of democratic voters? I expected higher, tbh. Curious about independent voters.
I'm going to state the obvious here but Biden isn't remotely close to Clinton. He hasn't been able to fundraise and was struggling to raise money until yesterday. Biden is essentially praying that his name recognition, and a massive Bloomberg drop carries him. It was mentioned yesterday on MSNBC but Biden has one field office in CA. That's how he's been running his campaign so far. Like absolute trash, and is hoping black voters in the south can propel him like Hillary. The problem with that strategy is that she was also beating him in other states which made it impossible for Sanders to close the gap.
This could be the case for the southern states that Hillary ran up the score in, but we are talking about TX here.
I predict it goes like the West Wing contested election. He sends his folks in to just tell them to figure it out.
Black voters are 22% of the Democratic party in Texas.
If polls are understating Biden's support with that demographic as they did with SC, and with the entire south for Hillary in 16 and the entire south with Obama in 08, that is definitely significant.
nope.
2020 Democratic Primary: Who will win the Texas primary?
FiveThirtyEight's Texas polls and forecast for the 2020 Democratic presidential primary election.projects.fivethirtyeight.com
538 has Biden and Sanders essentially tied there- 28% of the vote to Biden's 27%. And that's largely because Bloomberg is projected to take 18% of the vote and 16 delegates there. I'm not confident at all that Bloomberg's polling holds up after the run biden has had in the past week or so leading up to ST.
edit: had to edit because the projection literally changed between the time I copied and pasted.
Those are projections, I'm referring to polls, where bernie in aggregate is +9 from 538. I am sure Biden will make it closer though, like I said.
Not quite
Bill finished second in NH after going through some shit and people thinking he might drop out but he spun the second place finish as a victory and then went from there
Biden's numbers so far outside of SC and a distant second in NV have been completely dreadful. For as much as he's over performed in SC he's drastically underperformed his polling with white voters. With Bloomberg getting in he's just going to have another person blocking off moderate/suburban white voters that he's had issues with.
Joementum needs to pick up quickly elsewhere for it to be remotely the same
SC polls are always wrong. Are TX polls always wrong as well?
The projections are based on the polls. The projection based on all polling is that sanders and Biden take a near identical share of the popular vote.
And that result depends a lot on Bloomberg's numbers holding up, which is really questionable right now.
I think it's very plausible that Biden wins TX. Bloomberg underperforming + late deciders going to Biden.
See this is where this argument falls apart:
You are assuming that "political lanes" are rigid. The split on second choice voters of Bloomberg supporters. Nearly the same amount defect to Biden and Bernie. A lot of second choice support from other "moderates" also goes to Bernie. Voters are not rigid in any lane like you are portraying. You cannot combine the "moderate" and "progressive" lane as easily as you do here.
Yes I understand that, just clarifying in my initial statement I was referring to the polls themselves. We'll see if the projection holds close.
It wasn't just SC. The black vote across the entire south had double digit misses in 08 and 16. SC appears to be repeating that pattern.
Is the African American vote in TX significantly different than in the black belt? Can't say, I'm on the road, but my guess is probably not.
According to pew latinx make up 37% of the Democratic party in TX. In the poll that showed Biden down 4 he was leading the black vote with 52%. Even if that jumps up to 90% he's still going to have problems due to Sanders strong support with latinx voters. The point you are making works for most of the other states, but I don't believe it applies to Texas.
Clinton actually ran a good campaign. Biden has been almost completely absent outside of South Carolina and broke to boot. Meanwhile Bernie was pouring tens millions of dollars into Super Tuesday states (especially Texas and California) and building the biggest grassroots majority hispanic/latinx campaign in west coast history for the better part of a year.
It's not that hard to understand. Most the country now has no memory of the cold war era, Bernie is the first guy talking to a lot of these neglected hispanic communities, Mexico just elected a social democrat of their own and nationwide hispanics are FAR younger than almost all other races in this country. It's like demographic clay atm and Bernie is clearly taking advantage of that.
The issue isn't just percentage, but turnout. borrowing numbers from earlier in the thread:
Iowa, NH, and Nevada had moderate increases in turnout, and Nevada's increase could be chalked up to the implementation of early voting, since 70k early voted out of that 101k.
South Carolina's voter participation increased by 160,000 people over 2016, which is damned near 2008 numbers. Nobody saw Biden clocking up those kinds of numbers. edit: 2008 was 532,468 so biden was pretty much there.
polling missing this could be significant for TX if Biden's AA support is understated across the board and it's not just a South Carolina thing. It's a possibility, but not a certainty.
Last edited:
The Dems seemingly targeting the US House, State Senate, and State House and leaving the state-wide or local races to get uplifted or not seems to be their plan(?) I could see it when they have to expect not to have Beto-Mania sweeping the state again (seriously, has ANY of the Senate candidates gotten up on ONE countertop, been in at least 100 counties, or cramped a single pair of calves?!?!)
Loving receiving welfare state largess, hate those who would bring it is a pillar of the modern GOP.
People have differing and interesting views on what socialism and capitalism means, and I think those type of questions reflects that, mostly.
And at the very least, I think one should not assume that the responds' definition of those terms are uniform.
Then you would have to assume turnout increases in a big way for black voters, and doesn't for latinx voters in TX. The increase in turnout for latinx voters in TX wouldn't have to be as large to overcome a 90-10 split for Biden. In the poll that had Biden up 4 Sanders led the latinx vote at 42%.
Here's the rub for Biden he essentially used all his resources in SC. Up until last week he has run one of the worst campaigns I have ever seen. There's no Clyburn in TX that can save his ass from the horrendous campaign he's run up until this point. He had no money up until yesterday, and essentially no ground game.
Likely yeah but you can't really continue to garner support running for President if you outwardly then say you're not running for President. Similar to Bernie in 2016.
New case of coronavirus in Rhode Island. The markets are going to tank again this week.
This. And adding the word "democratic" before it makes no difference to voters.
Good stuff if NC is like this then Georgia is probably within a point or two either way.
And this is why Bernie cannot win a general election. 8 months of direct attacks on him is going to demolish any chances with this crowd.
I'm intrigued by the SC turnout. If IA was a bit stale because people felt overwhelmed by so many candidates and just wanted to get on with the campaign for beating Trump, SC might have stopped to think "hey, wait, this really matters right now with this timing." The stupidity of the process was there in 2016 to turn people away, and of course it was even worse this time.
Texas feels like a total tossup, between weird polling and possible Biden momentum. Biden's job is to stay viable in as many CA congressional districts as possible, while Sanders needs to do the same in the southern states. No idea how the crap Bloomberg is going to fit in. The need for his presence he'd convinced himself existed feels like it's been substantially reduced in the past couple weeks.
We've known this for ages. These are the two groups that matter most this year. This + the horrid black support are why a GE would be ridiculously hard for him, and the main reason on merit why I can't support him.
Texas feels like a total tossup, between weird polling and possible Biden momentum. Biden's job is to stay viable in as many CA congressional districts as possible, while Sanders needs to do the same in the southern states. No idea how the crap Bloomberg is going to fit in. The need for his presence he'd convinced himself existed feels like it's been substantially reduced in the past couple weeks.
We've known this for ages. These are the two groups that matter most this year. This + the horrid black support are why a GE would be ridiculously hard for him, and the main reason on merit why I can't support him.
Here's another way to think of this.
Biden is running one of the worst campaigns in recent memory.
He's coming off of significant losses in the first three contests.
He was also running against Steyer in SC, who had invested $20 million in south carolina alone and had camped out there for months.
Biden (edit: came close to breaking) Hillary's 2016 SC vote total, and no one saw it coming. Why?
Last edited:
Yeah, it could wind up being like Warren's stellar debate performance not being enough to overcome the early votes in Nevada. Had the debate been a week earlier she might have come close to or beaten Biden for second place. There just isn't enough time to poll. I wonder what the polls will say just after ST, though. We might be in for some really wild swings within a single week if things turn out great for Bernie.
Next week's debate is going to be a clusterfuck lol.
Last edited:
You can see the skip in the middle, and the video ends as he starts to say, "I just did Chuck Todd" to explain his calling Wallace the wrong name.
- Status