Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 17, 2019, 07:43:16 am
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election
  2020 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls (Moderators: Likely Voter, Speaker YE, Senator ON Progressive)
  IA-Emerson: Warren/Biden 23, Buttigieg 16, Sanders 13
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: IA-Emerson: Warren/Biden 23, Buttigieg 16, Sanders 13  (Read 852 times)
Skye
yeah_93
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,377
Venezuela


Political Matrix
E: 3.29, S: -1.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 17, 2019, 11:23:33 am »

Image Link

https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/iowa-2020-dead-heat-with-biden-and-warren-mayor-pete-continues-to-build-and-sanders-slides
Logged
marty
boshembechle
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,419


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2019, 11:23:40 am »

Image Link


https://t.co/CIjFwBESSE?amp=1
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2019, 11:32:10 am »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.
Logged
Tintrlvr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,710
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2019, 11:34:09 am »
« Edited: October 17, 2019, 11:38:09 am by Tintrlvr »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere (e.g., right before the 2008 Iowa caucuses, Richardson was polling around 6%, Biden around 4% and Dodd around 2% in Iowa, but Richardson ended up with 2%, Biden with less than 1% and Dodd with only a single delegate (out of 2,500) to the state convention).
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2019, 11:35:53 am »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere.

One thing to note is that Iowa will be providing raw vote totals for the first time in order to prevent some of the complaints from 2016.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2019, 11:40:53 am »

GOP #s:
Trump 93%
Weld 4%
Walsh 2%
Sanford 1%
Logged
Tintrlvr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,710
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2019, 11:43:08 am »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere.

One thing to note is that Iowa will be providing raw vote totals for the first time in order to prevent some of the complaints from 2016.

Didn't know that. I don't think it changes much (depends on how the media reports the results, I suppose), although I also don't know why anyone would have been complaining in 2016 since there were only two real candidates anyway (unless the complainant was O'Malley?), so the effects of suppressing the results of weaker candidates/amplifying those of stronger candidates shouldn't have been particularly meaningful.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2019, 11:44:55 am »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere.

One thing to note is that Iowa will be providing raw vote totals for the first time in order to prevent some of the complaints from 2016.

In fact, when Ann Selzer was on the fivethirtyeight podcast a couple of months ago, she said that they'll release three sets of numbers:

1) The raw total of initial voter preferences
2) The total of final voter preferences after supporters of unviable candidates have reallocated themselves
3) The "state delegate equivalent" numbers that determine delegate allocation (of course, this will likely track pretty closely with #2)

Previously, only #3 was actually tabulated and released.  So who is the media going to crown the "winner" if there's a split decision between the different tabulations?
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2019, 11:46:46 am »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere.

One thing to note is that Iowa will be providing raw vote totals for the first time in order to prevent some of the complaints from 2016.

Didn't know that. I don't think it changes much (depends on how the media reports the results, I suppose), although I also don't know why anyone would have been complaining in 2016 since there were only two real candidates anyway (unless the complainant was O'Malley?), so the effects of suppressing the results of weaker candidates/amplifying those of stronger candidates shouldn't have been particularly meaningful.

The Sanders camp argued last time around that they received more raw votes statewide in 2016, but received less delegates due to where those voters were geographically concentrated.
Logged
Queen Liz <3
20RP12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,475
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2019, 11:48:02 am »

Weird that they chose to do this in the middle of the debate instead of right after it.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2019, 11:49:51 am »

Weird that they chose to do this in the middle of the debate instead of right after it.

Memerson
Logged
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42,858
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2019, 12:41:09 pm »

Bullock at 4%... sure...
Logged
President Johnson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,377
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2019, 01:17:31 pm »

It's Emerson, but not bad. I hope Mayor Pete surpasses Saint Bernard in the end. My dream result would be him in second place after Joe Biden.
Logged
Progressive Icon Bill de Blasio
Randall
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 449
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2019, 01:28:57 pm »

How's that Iowa strategy coming along, Kamala?
Logged
(CT) The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,439
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2019, 01:42:30 pm »


Incredible how much she's fallen. Her campaign had a lot of potential but when she got put in the spotlight in the summer, it never seemed like she knew enough about what she was talking about (medicare for all in particular) and she floundered. She'll be good for a headline grabbing soundbite, but I think her lack of depth on a lot of issues was really disappointing and frankly disqualifying.
Logged
History505
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,645
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 17, 2019, 01:45:45 pm »


Incredible how much she's fallen. Her campaign had a lot of potential but when she got put in the spotlight in the summer, it never seemed like she knew enough about what she was talking about (medicare for all in particular) and she floundered. She'll be good for a headline grabbing soundbite, but I think her lack of depth on a lot of issues was really disappointing and frankly disqualifying.
It's just like Fiorina rising in the polls after the Sept 2015 GOP debate only to fall back down.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 50,697
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 17, 2019, 02:22:42 pm »

Pete on the move ...

Would be kinda funny if he wins there.
Logged
UWS
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,940


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 17, 2019, 02:29:52 pm »

It's Emerson, but not bad. I hope Mayor Pete surpasses Saint Bernard in the end. My dream result would be him in second place after Joe Biden.

And so that Warren gets third place, which would aweaken her, right? Because Iowa is definitely a must win for all the 2020 Democrats as the winner of the Iowa Dem caucuses eventually won the nomination since Al Gore in 2000, a few like South Carolina makes Republican nominees since 1980, except Gingrich in 2012.
Logged
President Johnson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,377
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 17, 2019, 02:38:23 pm »

It's Emerson, but not bad. I hope Mayor Pete surpasses Saint Bernard in the end. My dream result would be him in second place after Joe Biden.

And so that Warren gets third place, which would aweaken her, right? Because Iowa is definitely a must win for all the 2020 Democrats as the winner of the Iowa Dem caucuses eventually won the nomination since Al Gore in 2000, a few like South Carolina makes Republican nominees since 1980, except Gingrich in 2012.

I think it's a must win for Liz, Biden has still a reasonable path if he doesn't win. However, I think he needs to win at least one February state other than South Carolina. I hope he wins Iowa outright, gains so much momentum that carries him over the top in either New Hampshire or Nevada as well. If this happens, he'll be unstopable. But it will be a fight.

I'm really stunned how Kamala has dropped.
Logged
SN2903
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.35, S: 2.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 17, 2019, 04:14:57 pm »

Nice poll for Yang. If some of the other candidates drop out he could get double digits in Iowa with good organization.
Logged
wbrocks67
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,049
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 18, 2019, 05:54:17 am »

Anyone taking this poll seriously...
Logged
Cory Booker
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28,770
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 18, 2019, 05:57:59 am »

Warren gonna win IA and NH, the undecideds will go to Warren, by the fact, that his donations, are very low compared to Warren's.  Biden should be well ahead of Warren and he is struggling
Logged
АverroŽs 🦉
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,159


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 18, 2019, 08:28:01 am »

It'll be interesting to see whether Buttigieg's firmware upgrade has brought him any closer to Biden's less-attached supporters. Or maybe the idea is to target the ~20% who aren't supporting one of the top four yet? The latter group is more heterogeneous, but there might be more for him there.
Logged
АverroŽs 🦉
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,159


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 18, 2019, 08:29:42 am »

Anyone taking this poll seriously...

It's Iowa. The corn kernel "poll" at the state fair generated nine pages of discussion and remains the top thread on this polling board.
Logged
SInNYC
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 252


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 18, 2019, 09:33:41 am »

This poll is interesting. In the primaries Bernie is clearly dropping.

But in the general election, Bernie beats Trump 51-49, while Biden and Warren lose to Trump 49-51, for a 4 point edge (they don't seem to have done Buttigieg).
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC