The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,380
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 27, 2020 10:09:44 GMT
To be perfectly blunt I don't know why pollsters are even carrying out general election polls at the moment. They are practically meaningless. I've heard President Dukakis strongly agrees with that view. Though I think RA meant "even more meaningless than usual" in the current context
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Mar 27, 2020 19:42:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by adlai52 on Mar 27, 2020 21:06:38 GMT
First president to win re-election after the US dips into recession six months before polling day? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Honestly, all leaders seem to be getting a Clovis-19 boost (except maybe Bolsonaro?) so maybe it’s not a surprise. But given the tin eared nature of Trump’s response his poll bounce is a surprise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2020 21:28:54 GMT
Over 100k cases, 1500 dead & 250 of those in the last 24 hrs. At some point (you'd assume) the penny will drop .
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Mar 28, 2020 0:39:53 GMT
First president to win re-election after the US dips into recession six months before polling day? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Honestly, all leaders seem to be getting a Clovis-19 boost (except maybe Bolsonaro?) so maybe it’s not a surprise. But given the tin eared nature of Trump’s response his poll bounce is a surprise. These figures, whilst good by Trump standards, are also barely at the level any incumbent has been re-elected. Assuming they don’t rise substantially more before November he’s touching George W Bush 48.4% in 2004 and Barack Obama 49.5% in 2012. The only people polling lower were Jimmy Carter and George HW Bush, both of whom lost their re-election bids and Harry Truman who was re-elected in 1948 with an approval rating at 39.6% but there are massive red flags about the accuracy of polling back then. Realistically he’s got to be within the 54-59% range (Reagan 1984 and Clinton 1996) to be competitive on that metric.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Mar 28, 2020 0:43:47 GMT
First president to win re-election after the US dips into recession six months before polling day? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Honestly, all leaders seem to be getting a Clovis-19 boost (except maybe Bolsonaro?) so maybe it’s not a surprise. But given the tin eared nature of Trump’s response his poll bounce is a surprise. These figures, whilst good by Trump standards, are also barely at the level any incumbent has been re-elected. Assuming they don’t rise substantially more before November he’s touching George W Bush 48.4% in 2004 and Barack Obama 49.5% in 2012. The only people polling lower were Jimmy Carter and George HW Bush, both of whom lost their re-election bids and Harry Truman who was re-elected in 1948 with an approval rating at 39.6% but there are massive red flags about the accuracy of polling back then. Realistically he’s got to be within the 54-59% range (Reagan 1984 and Clinton 1996) to be competitive on that metric. According to the 538 average, he is still not doing as well (in terms of approval) as he did in the earliest few weeks of his presidency, when disapproval was lower (as lots of undecided voters wanted to give him a chance) and approval was higher (presumably, Republicans who thought he'd grow into the office giving him the nod).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2020 9:14:42 GMT
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,380
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 28, 2020 10:01:59 GMT
Trump's boost from this crisis is extremely lukewarm compared to most other comparable leaders.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 28, 2020 10:30:07 GMT
Trump's boost from this crisis is extremely lukewarm compared to most other comparable leaders. I think that's about the level of polarization in the US though, more than anything he has or hasn't said. Those who hate him, hate him, those who love him, love him. His re-election will depend on who votes, and where.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Mar 28, 2020 11:00:31 GMT
Trump's boost from this crisis is extremely lukewarm compared to most other comparable leaders. I think that's about the level of polarization in the US though, more than anything he has or hasn't said. Those who hate him, hate him, those who love him, love him. His re-election will depend on who votes, and where. If, and it’s a big if, he sustains this uptick then the optimistic sign for him is an uptick in support, by around 15%, amongst registered independents who lean Republican - the demographic that have shown themselves willing to vote Democratic in the midterms and other off-year elections. But further to The Bishop point about it being lukewarm it’s a noticeably smaller increase than most Governors were getting in the same poll, and even Congress had narrowed its disapproval rating to -2%, the closest they’ve been to positive territory since the immediate aftermath of 9/11.
|
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by nelson on Mar 28, 2020 13:11:18 GMT
Delaware has also moved its primary to 2 June.
|
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by nelson on Mar 28, 2020 17:38:40 GMT
Gov. Cuomo has said NY is moving their primary to 23 June (the day of its congressional primaries).
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Mar 28, 2020 18:06:49 GMT
Gov. Cuomo has said NY is moving their primary to 23 June (the day of its congressional primaries). What happens if some of these postponed primaries don't take place on the revised date? Biden might win the nomination anyway, but who would contest the congressional seats?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2020 18:30:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Mar 28, 2020 18:52:08 GMT
The 'R' there indicates it's sponsored by a pro-Trump PAC. At best, it's about as reliable as Data for Progress, but it's probably more like Rasmussen. That said, the earlier Universities numbers are an early warning sign for the Democrats whether they run Biden or Sanders. The impact of corona is changing rapidly but if it does have a second peak, that'll probably be in the winter (around election time) so there is probably more value right now in 'Are you likely to vote?' polls than presidential preference questions, but the latter could reflect the effects of changes in turnout through their own likely voter models. Ohio is moving its primary from June to back to April 28 as an entirely vote-by-mail event. The Hawaii party-run primary has been delayed until May 22, which serves as official confirmation that the next primary will be Wisconsin's on April 7.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Mar 28, 2020 19:17:04 GMT
The suspended Warren campaign has announced a new anti-corruption movement/organisation called 'Warren Democrats' (IMO she is manoeuvring to run in 2024). In doing so, it has missed the opportunity to have her followers dubbed Liz Lads.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Mar 28, 2020 20:31:20 GMT
Gov. Cuomo has said NY is moving their primary to 23 June (the day of its congressional primaries). What happens if some of these postponed primaries don't take place on the revised date? Biden might win the nomination anyway, but who would contest the congressional seats? The law would vary from state to state and chances as the state legislatures would amend the law where necessary, although that could lead to legal challenges. In New York you could see something similar to special elections where local party leaders choose the candidates. In reality primaries will likely go ahead even if voting is exclusively by mail.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Mar 28, 2020 20:49:47 GMT
What happens if some of these postponed primaries don't take place on the revised date? Biden might win the nomination anyway, but who would contest the congressional seats? The law would vary from state to state and chances as the state legislatures would amend the law where necessary, although that could lead to legal challenges. In New York you could see something similar to special elections where local party leaders choose the candidates. In reality primaries will likely go ahead even if voting is exclusively by mail. From the Presidential perspective I suppose the DNC will be hoping they can organise enough that are purely vote by mail, and that Biden just breaks even in each of them which further reduces Sanders chances of getting enough delegates to win the nomination, bearing in mind up until Super Tuesday Sanders was vociferously arguing that the person with the most pledged delegates, even if short of 50%, should be the nominee. Indeed talk in the DNC has already switched to how they can do the formal nomination if they can’t hold a Convention.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Mar 30, 2020 16:14:15 GMT
I thought a radical VP (especially one who may be controversial amongst progressives right now) would be a bit of a no-go as I assumed that they'd be unable to enthuse potentially non-voting progressives to vote for Biden and would also alienate moderates (as Biden is old enough for the 'this person could be President' scare tactic to work well). However, he does have an enthusiasm problem in the General Election and it may be worth taking the above risk to deal with that.
I'm curious to see more polls on this; in any case, I think Harris is highly overrated in terms of the electoral capital she'd bring to the ticket, and that there may be (electorally) better progressives than Warren to put on the ticket (Sanders himself comes to mind, though Biden would have to u-turn on the 'woman VP' stance for that to work). Klobuchar at least makes Minnesota a lock, and while the VP effect is dubious at the national level, their home state bump is definitely real.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Mar 30, 2020 19:38:19 GMT
I thought a radical VP (especially one who may be controversial amongst progressives right now) would be a bit of a no-go as I assumed that they'd be unable to enthuse potentially non-voting progressives to vote for Biden and would also alienate moderates (as Biden is old enough for the 'this person could be President' scare tactic to work well). However, he does have an enthusiasm problem in the General Election and it may be worth taking the above risk to deal with that. I'm curious to see more polls on this; in any case, I think Harris is highly overrated in terms of the electoral capital she'd bring to the ticket, and that there may be (electorally) better progressives than Warren to put on the ticket (Sanders himself comes to mind, though Biden would have to u-turn on the 'woman VP' stance for that to work). Klobuchar at least makes Minnesota a lock, and while the VP effect is dubious at the national level, their home state bump is definitely real. You’re clearly not going to get Sanders on the ticket as the combined age would be around 150. I’m dubious about polls such as this as they’re likely the only three women other than Nancy Pelosi who have any kind of name recognition. Often with an experienced top of the ticket the VP is a relative unknown (John Edwards, Dan Quayle, Mike Pence), and it wouldn’t surprise me if Biden does likewise and not worry overly about appealing to the Sanders supporters; one very vocal supporter, who apparently remains close to the family, is Susan Rice, a veteran of the Clinton Administration who was UN Ambassador and National Security Advisor in the Obama Administration. She would tick the box of a potential woman President (being the obvious frontrunner in 2024 if successful), motivate African American turnout, but also have an appeal to those suburban voters who have been flooding to the Democrats in the Trump years. Equally she’s not got any domestic baggage to drag down the white vote in the Midwest who went Obama-Trump in 2016.
|
|