Left of the Dial
Many moons ago, I got on Howard Dean for President’s mailing list.
I was younger and brand new in town. I likely would have done anything
to help Dean on his path. That I never heard word one back from The Dean
Camp is a better explanation of why he imploded than any post-Caucus
scream.
In any case, at a National level, Dean knew he had a movement and his mailing list and organization became Democracy For America, a progressive voice that can take credit for electing Ned Lamont and Al Franken.
To get a feel for DFA, in 2016, the groups online poll supported Bernie Sanders with an overwhelming 88% of the vote.
So what to take from the 2020 poll? I doubt much, but perhaps a real clue where those on the Left have their hearts. Since I get way too interested, here are results of the DFA Iowa poll
Sanders 43.7%
Buttigieg 10.2%
Warren 9.9%
Gravel 7.6%
Biden 6.3%
Yang, Harris , Gabbard 3.3%
O’Rourke, Booker 2.3%
Klobuchar 1.3
Inslee, Williamson, Delaney <1%,>.5%
Though this is a group within a group, there are a couple of thoughts I have. First, who is Bernie’s heir?
There are those who have bona fides by endorsing him in 2016- Tulsi Gabbard and Jeff Merkley. Elizabeth Warren is an obvious choice but of course the political landscape may be very different in 4 or 8 years.
In any case, it is worth noting that 56% of those polled picked someone who will be aged 80+ in 2024. There’s not much change in the numbers when comparing national DFA results, but an amateur pundit might see strong enough showings to suggest Yang, Beto or the undeclared Stacey Abrams could be the future of the Party.
More importantly, with Biden entering, what happens if it is a fierce battle and Biden wins. Numbers seem to encourage this likelihood. Will Sanders supporters vote for Biden, or would they see the nomination as stolen, and stay at home or vote against Biden.
I see that as a distinct possibility. Now, is it the same case if the primaries go to Warren, Buttigieg, Booker or Harris? I don’t think so. But I do have a concern that a Biden nomination will tick the Berners off.
Speaking of numbers, I could probably feature a poll about every week, but the fantastic IowaStartingLine’s poll is one that I took notice of.
As we go into June, here is where we stand:
Biden, Sanders 24%
Buttigieg 14%
Warren 12%
Harris 10%
O’Rourke 5%
Klobuchar, Yang 2%
Booker, Abrams, Inslee 1%
ISL provides better insight than I could including the fact Warren has the highest favorable rating (78%) and Harris third (70%. Sanders was second). Warren was the candidate Dems were most excited about (54% followed by Biden and Harris) so these two women look to have high ceilings and true contenders to the two men tied for first.
Warren and Harris were 1-2 when it came to being described as the smartest and again when it came to being the toughest. Warren was seen as most honest.
They also suggest Buttigieg still has opportunities as many people haven’t formed a strong opinion of him yet. They also pointed out that while Booker seems to be lost in the field, he does well across categories.
This being a caucus, I am always interested in the aggregate of 1st and 2nd pick choices. This being an instance of 24 candidates, it would seem this might make a better bellwether as well if someone drops out (Please, someone, anyone, please drop out!)
Adding 1s and 2s to give a total of 200%, it looks like this:
Biden 40%
Sanders 38%
Warren 31%
Harris, Buttigieg 25%
O’Rourke 12%
Klobuchar 6%
Gabbard 4%
Booker, Yang 3%
Abrams 2%
Gillibrand, Castro, Delaney, Swalwell, Bullock, Ryan 1%
It is interesting to see some names rise up that otherwise have been written off (Klobuchar gets zero press but is a ways ahead of better covered candidates. What does Gabbard’s numbers mean?).
It also should be noted that at a similar time, John Edwards looked to be the leader with Hillary a strong second (though Obama was a strong third, often 5% from the leader). Richardson and Biden could never ever find a way to break up over around 13% in a five person race. With enough tea leaves, you could probably make a case for any of the top 5 candidates, but after that, it might take a leap of faith.
Lastly, I noticed the poll indicated an audience that seems to identify as Liberal and Progressive, strongly anti-Trump, pro-impeachment and strongly on the side of Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez.
Of note and to bring this full circle 10% of the Dems polled didn’t vote for Hillary. 4% didn’t vote. 3% voted for Gary Johnson 2% voted for Trump and 1% voted for Jill Stein. A repeat of 2016 with 10% of Dems not voting for the nominee will lead to similar results.
In any case, at a National level, Dean knew he had a movement and his mailing list and organization became Democracy For America, a progressive voice that can take credit for electing Ned Lamont and Al Franken.
To get a feel for DFA, in 2016, the groups online poll supported Bernie Sanders with an overwhelming 88% of the vote.
So what to take from the 2020 poll? I doubt much, but perhaps a real clue where those on the Left have their hearts. Since I get way too interested, here are results of the DFA Iowa poll
Sanders 43.7%
Buttigieg 10.2%
Warren 9.9%
Gravel 7.6%
Biden 6.3%
Yang, Harris , Gabbard 3.3%
O’Rourke, Booker 2.3%
Klobuchar 1.3
Inslee, Williamson, Delaney <1%,>.5%
Though this is a group within a group, there are a couple of thoughts I have. First, who is Bernie’s heir?
There are those who have bona fides by endorsing him in 2016- Tulsi Gabbard and Jeff Merkley. Elizabeth Warren is an obvious choice but of course the political landscape may be very different in 4 or 8 years.
In any case, it is worth noting that 56% of those polled picked someone who will be aged 80+ in 2024. There’s not much change in the numbers when comparing national DFA results, but an amateur pundit might see strong enough showings to suggest Yang, Beto or the undeclared Stacey Abrams could be the future of the Party.
More importantly, with Biden entering, what happens if it is a fierce battle and Biden wins. Numbers seem to encourage this likelihood. Will Sanders supporters vote for Biden, or would they see the nomination as stolen, and stay at home or vote against Biden.
I see that as a distinct possibility. Now, is it the same case if the primaries go to Warren, Buttigieg, Booker or Harris? I don’t think so. But I do have a concern that a Biden nomination will tick the Berners off.
Speaking of numbers, I could probably feature a poll about every week, but the fantastic IowaStartingLine’s poll is one that I took notice of.
As we go into June, here is where we stand:
Biden, Sanders 24%
Buttigieg 14%
Warren 12%
Harris 10%
O’Rourke 5%
Klobuchar, Yang 2%
Booker, Abrams, Inslee 1%
ISL provides better insight than I could including the fact Warren has the highest favorable rating (78%) and Harris third (70%. Sanders was second). Warren was the candidate Dems were most excited about (54% followed by Biden and Harris) so these two women look to have high ceilings and true contenders to the two men tied for first.
Warren and Harris were 1-2 when it came to being described as the smartest and again when it came to being the toughest. Warren was seen as most honest.
They also suggest Buttigieg still has opportunities as many people haven’t formed a strong opinion of him yet. They also pointed out that while Booker seems to be lost in the field, he does well across categories.
This being a caucus, I am always interested in the aggregate of 1st and 2nd pick choices. This being an instance of 24 candidates, it would seem this might make a better bellwether as well if someone drops out (Please, someone, anyone, please drop out!)
Adding 1s and 2s to give a total of 200%, it looks like this:
Biden 40%
Sanders 38%
Warren 31%
Harris, Buttigieg 25%
O’Rourke 12%
Klobuchar 6%
Gabbard 4%
Booker, Yang 3%
Abrams 2%
Gillibrand, Castro, Delaney, Swalwell, Bullock, Ryan 1%
It is interesting to see some names rise up that otherwise have been written off (Klobuchar gets zero press but is a ways ahead of better covered candidates. What does Gabbard’s numbers mean?).
It also should be noted that at a similar time, John Edwards looked to be the leader with Hillary a strong second (though Obama was a strong third, often 5% from the leader). Richardson and Biden could never ever find a way to break up over around 13% in a five person race. With enough tea leaves, you could probably make a case for any of the top 5 candidates, but after that, it might take a leap of faith.
Lastly, I noticed the poll indicated an audience that seems to identify as Liberal and Progressive, strongly anti-Trump, pro-impeachment and strongly on the side of Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez.
Of note and to bring this full circle 10% of the Dems polled didn’t vote for Hillary. 4% didn’t vote. 3% voted for Gary Johnson 2% voted for Trump and 1% voted for Jill Stein. A repeat of 2016 with 10% of Dems not voting for the nominee will lead to similar results.
Comments
Post a Comment
Contact us