Tuesday, July 2, 2019

2020 Democratic Primary Polling Analysis 2.0

Image result for Democratic Primary Polling Analysis

All right, everyone it's time to analyze some more polling within the Democratic primaries. I mean on the Republican side, because it's an incumbent election as opposed to the last one. We only have to do half as much poll analysis. It really doesn't matter what the Republican primaries say: cuz Trump is the nominee I mean he will be running unless he has like a massive heart attack or something like that and dies or or actually gets removed from office, which won't happen at this point. Calls for impeachment have really fallen off the edge of the earth too. So that's no real. It longer really a problem. We'Ve got to look at three polls here. We'Ve got a pair of polls from respectively I'll do I do have this tab, open Emerson and The Economist from before the debates we have one poll so far after the debates. That is its period as the twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth right afterwards. This is from Politico. Now Politico does not have a great track record for accuracy. I don't know whether these numbers are accurate. It shows a little bit of a shift, but not not a monumental earth-shattering amount, and some of the results, I would assume, would be a little bit odd, like like. Like a shift downwards for war and for example, I would consider odd after the first row of debates or or maybe a you know, significant rise for some candidate. But let me go through this and look at these. First and foremost. Biden is still on top again for the first time we finally had one polling period that the new polling period, where one of Biden's low numbers, is smaller than someone else's biggest number, which is Sanders being supposedly at 27. In the Emerson poll, the problem with the Emerson poll is, it is a complete. Statistical. Outlier has in ten points ahead of any of the other polls. Recently, 27 verses 19 and the Politico poll is the second-largest some of them, the others all have them. In the mid teens, 13, 14 and 15 respectively from the Hillmon mouth and the economists 27 is probably an outlier. I don't know if you can trust this poll anyway. It also shows Biden to 34, which is you know, kind of in line with the hill poll. But there are some wonky numbers there and I'm not sure. I think it's under estimating the fact that there's a small amount of support for the smaller candidates and I'm not sure what they ask people about all the candidates - maybe they compacted it more so maybe Sanders is just a strong second choice: candidate, like people who support Some of the left-wing individuals on the bottom they're like well it'll, be I support. You know Gabbard, but if she's knocked out I would support Bernie Sanders or something like that. It'S possible that was their methodology. If we look, though, just at the newest post-debate poll again keeping in mind, aggregated numbers are accurate, or at least more accurate, that they're kind of accurate single polls are rarely fully accurate. Some of these numbers are almost invariably going to be wrong. This puts Biden on 33, which is that's roughly in line with the aggregate. It shows him about stable, which that's I can imagine will be the case. I think his debate performance was good enough to keep him where he is, but not good enough to sort of seal. The deal which is natural Biden, is not naturally a good, debater or speaker he's more of the stable sane center-left. You know acceptable Democrat for the business Dems and some of the so-called centrists within the Democratic Party. Now the Democratic Party is highly schismatic, so you've got like a third of the parties really far left. Think Sanders is too far right. Another third of business Dems they're getting tired of that and then you've got the neoliberal stuck in the middle. With all the corporate money and they're trying to hold things together. Biden loses his biggest fundraising apparatus. The Sanders campaign is hemorrhaging money right now they sent out a circular, an email to people. Apparently yesterday they're, like oh, the average donation in the last campaign was at $ 27. This time around, it's only 13 or something like that. It'S like! Basically, they don't have enough money, like the grassroots style of campaign, does have its limits. The problem for Sanders, I'm going to tell you this. The one thing that could really Sanders up is the fact that he's perceived of by a lot of his former core fans. As a sellout because of the 2016 election, they wanted him to stand on principle and not endorse Hillary Clinton. They wanted him to stand aside and say: I'm not going to make an endorsement because the revolution continues and she doesn't represent the kind of ideological values. I have the problem: is he intended to run again and if he had done that it would have been political suicide? The Democrats would have come around him like a Mountain. Rolling down a hill in would have crushed him completely. He he and his fans cannot stand against. That kind of thing would have been a free-for-all. Then we have Sanders on 19. This again is roughly in line with the aggregate. It shows Warren at 12. Now this is also it's funny, because the economist Paul had her at 19 that it showed a rise like in line with the rise. The political poll shows her stabilizing at 12, which is sort of the aggregated number 12 point 6 Harris at 12, which shows her having a significant rise of about 5 points that I can imagine, I'm not sure that I would believe that it would be that much Though, and anyway of be temporary, the fact is that, unless, unless the rise puts you up towards the top one or two slots, it tends to be temporary. We saw this again in 2016 with all of these different Republican candidates. They rise up somewhere and they in the high teens the low twenties. Then they go back down or they rise up significantly above because they have a good debate performance. They make a good speech. They have a good interview on TV, they gain. Several points goes back down within a couple of weeks. I would expect, generally speaking, the numbers that you see will remain stable unless something significant happens, that's just the tendency. If they do deviate, it's usually temporary and they regress back to that mean if that is in fact the case, the only thing that can stop Biden is, he loses in Iowa and Sanders comes out of. Nowhere wins that in New Hampshire and looks a more electable and suddenly gained steam or like Warren, grabs, Nevada and sweeps Super Tuesday, or something like that, but Agia shows at exactly his. His numbers have been so remarkably stable for so long. It literally 666 there with Emerson economists and political, that's probably because we've got a good aggregate there, because all the numbers pretty much agree with each other, even though all the other numbers can be wonky. I would say his support is know between 5 and 7 percent somewhere within that general region. Sort of rounding out the top 5 betos nowhere to be seen in the latest round of polling he's respectively got a 1 a 3 and a 2 cory. Booker is about the same Booker's gon na overtake beto at some point and he sort of will round out the viable candidates, the top six in such a packed field. Technically, although I would say the top four, they like butter, gigs still has a little bit of work to do it. If Harris really has picked up that steam, it makes it harder, for, I think, P, but a geek to actually break through into the top four and and sort of become viable. You'Ve got to realize after a few more debates and they'll go on to the voting. Next year it's possible some people drop out before then. If their campaign war chest is completely empty. Like let's say Hickenlooper is completely broke. You can't self fund. Some of these people are not capable of self funding. Their campaigns rely on a traditional fundraising apparatus. If that's the case and they fall flat and they can no longer fundraise, they have to drop out. They don't want debt Bayona, that the idea is you drop out, and then you, you know basically embezzle that money politicians manage to do that through various means. All the time yang got no boost Klobuchar, as predicted when she first got in, has disappeared off the face of the earth. Gabbard didn't get a boost according to the political poll now again and and some people called uh tried to call me out they're like why didn't you put Gabbard in your top five candidates? Gabbard would be a close number six, but I had to make a decision here and the thing is Gabbard did well, she became more visible, but did she do well enough become visible enough to extend herself into electability in the minds of voters? I said no, it looks like I'm probably right. I think I am she is. She would be a strong candidate if you fielded her against Trump she'd, actually have a chance, she'd be like if you put buddy gig in front of Trump these. These two, particularly Julian Castro, pissed away his chance, so did Gillibrand they're they're out to Julian Castro, with his pandering Gillibrand, with her attempts to be a firebrand that completely fell flat, because you know Harris happened to be on the stage it didn't exactly worked after you Tiger mom candidates up there, one of which is very very white and erudite and the other one of which was trying to expose herself for the first time to a wider audience. Really that wasn't part of her core fan base. The latter she succeeded, Harris did Gillibrand, did not it's funny, then you have, like you know, yang. It'S like he's dead in the water he's tried he and Williamson. It was funny tried to excuse themselves, we're saying MSNBC it tampered with their microphones and stuff like that, and it's like okay, so you've got the two, the two weirdo candidates, literally I one of them, is preaching basically a form of communism which is ubi. I used to be in favor of ubi many years ago until I really thought about the economic impact and I realized oh, this will take the lower middle class and bunch it up with the most poor and even them out and make them more poor. It will take purchasing power from the middle class as well, by raising the cost of goods and services and inflating the currency. The rich aren't gon na care. You know they know $ 1,000 a month or whatever you want to give them doesn't matter to someone who's got billions of dollars. They don't notice the impact. The little people will the bottom 50 % of society get, and so no, I oppose ubi. It'S an attempt to even out the lower rungs of society, it's a form of soft communism for the masses, that's literally what it boils down to so he's got economic voodoo, he's a weirdo and then Williamson was up there. I expected her to take out love, beads and start meditating up on stage. She was arguably the craziest, but she wasn't even the biggest loser who's better O'Rourke of the two debates. The biggest loser was Beto because he was the only one. Who'D had a really truly poor performance that was technically a viable candidate. The rest of these people have viable Gillibrand is not viable shetan, as she never was. She never generated any traction. Klobuchar has never been viable Williamson. I didn't even know she was in the race. Her her name exposure now that's gone out is that you know when she fund raises she's gon na blow it all on LSD. I think there's probably better for the country than the rest of the Democrats. Platforms. Williamson 2020 give me drugs, Williamson, 2020 I'll, go in and preach it and eat more kale meeting Williamson 2020. The weird that I say is less harmful than anyone else on this stage. That'S what should be her campaign slogan. She should just make a mockery. Satire campaign about her own party at this point. She really should because the Democratic Party's falling apart when I look at the people up on stage getting away from polling analysis here from just a second. When I look at this stage, I don't see anyone who stands out the only people that strike me as even electable or people are Biden and but a geek, a Biden because he's already been in the White House he's been a VP he's the dynastic old politician. So he he looks to the role because he's been one step from the role not saying I'd, agree with him politically, I don't not saying I'd vote for him, because you know we don't need another pervert in the White House. We had enough of that with Bill. Clinton, so no I wouldn't vote for by, but he looks the part, especially for the business Dems. I mean that would be an advantage. He has in a fight with Trump is that he can coax some of the business Democrats back or he could potentially compete in a place like Wisconsin or Pennsylvania. How did these losers can and then buddy gig, because he's young well-spoken? He gets his point across in a very erudite manner. The problem for buddy gig is the far left of the party hates him as much as it does Biden he's lower down he's, not the front-runner Kenney, whether that sort of attack it looks like despite his good performance, he got no boost. That'S because a lot of the the people that could support him, they're locked in with Biden if Biden were to collapse right now. I think the buddy gig would be the big winner. I think buddy gig and Sanders would absorb most of his support. Sanders had become the front-runner, but again could be hashing it out with Elizabeth Warren for second place. I think that's what would probably happen Harris might keep rising. I think Harris is a fluke I think Harris will be sort of like the the Ben Carson of the election cycle or something that, if she's gon na rise up here, because she had a good debate - performance, she's, gon na falter back down. This will probably happen at the other debates. I mean it's obvious. He is spoken fairly well as at least for a far left crowd. You got to realize the people who are actually looking at these numbers and saying whether they do or do not approve of these people in most of these polls. These are registered Democrats. That'S who they're trying to pull registered Democrats likely voters that lean left ideologically groups like that? Yes, they're gon na like what Harris said. Oh, she called him Trump, a racist and a sexist. She says she wants. You know health care for all, which is say more taxes, education for all, more taxes, student loan, debt, forgiveness, new green deal, banning guns. So basically it's a laundry list of far left for the things. Well, these people are just trying to out far left each other to be the anti Biden, because my denies everything else sewn up unless he makes a major mistake. The biggest problem for him is he probably well at the next debate or even before he could say something totally stupid and off-the-wall, even though, if you've noticed he's Obama's best friend, I was his VP Obama. Obama Obama. It'S always the talks about when he's on the debate stage. Practically I was Obama's, VP and friend, and Trump is bad, and yet he can't even score Obama's endorsement. If Obama were to endorse Joe Biden, he wins tomorrow he would become the roof of the Democratic nominee. Obama hasn't done. That now has he. He says. Oh, I, like Joe he's a good person poor Joe Biden. Oh my god, yeah didn't be funny. He gets Hillary Clinton's endorsement. He loses five points of support. He probably told her. Please don't endorse me yeah. I know I know I'm crooked and crazy too, and you probably want to but didn't you know hold off, but she was talking to bet. It was funny than better O'Rourke before the debate Erie launches his campaign calls the Clinton campaign probably kiss his ring. He still can't do anything. Beto is done. He needs to drop out. Come on. You lose against Ted Cruz in an election where, where the Democrats throw more money at your particular position, to try to steal Cruz's see than any other election, tens of millions of dollars, you've got high-level a grade. Politicians coming down there daily to stump for you, they've they're, pumping your campaign with every possible legacy, media tabloid steroid. They can and you still lose yeah. That'S not a good sign. He goes into the presidential election. Well, I'm better! Oh my god! Jai rating around, like a evangelical minister, and he still is a loser - he's never going to be in politics again, probably he's pissing away any chance to the eyes of state-level politics. Go back to being widows of the mayor of San Antonio. If they'll have you go back to that, are try for the legislature again when Cruz leaves, which could be a while since he's one of those he's one of the younger senators, it's fine Ted Cruz, one of the youngest people, the Senate, and it shows one of The problems with our legislative body, but yeah so yeah, there's a little bit of poll analysis of just talking. The democratic primaries have become. It is a circus. It'S fun to watch, I'm having a great time. This election is way better than 2016. This is way more unhinged than the Republican debates in 2016. This is way more weird and the Democratic field is so boring time around. Now it's exciting it's exciting, because I can't wait for the next debate. I want to see what weird these people say. I want to see Williamson say that everyone should have to take mescaline. I want to see Cory. Booker talk about more reparations to people who never experienced slavery. I want Sanders to try to read, face idli, explain how he's going to up the taxes on the richest people to 60 % and not raise anyone else's taxes. I want to hear these people explain their positions because their positions are stupid. These people are morons by and large, that's about all PL


Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Definition List