As Mark Twain might have said, the reports of Joe Biden’s
demise have been greatly exaggerated.
One might think Biden was practically a goner based on the spate of
headlines following the second night of the Democratic debates, when Kamala
Harris eviscerated Biden on busing. Some
typical headlines: “Biden Fades, Harris
Gains with Voters after Debates”; “Joe Biden Tumbles 10 Points After First
Debate”; “Joe Biden’s Lead Plummets in Post-Debate Poll.” We have our own interpretation of the polls –
all the polls, not just a single poll
here and there that might have been the impetus for those headlines. But first, let’s set the Democratic field.
THE FIELD
Wait a minute, wasn’t the field already set, with the 23
candidates we identified last month?
Not so fast. We’re
now at 24 candidates, with three changes to report. Eric Swalwell has officially dropped his bid,
having rather logically concluded that his candidacy was not catching fire, and
deciding to focus instead on getting reelected to his California House seat.
But that did not result in a narrowed field. Indeed, despite that bit of common sense, the field actually expanded in the month.
But that did not result in a narrowed field. Indeed, despite that bit of common sense, the field actually expanded in the month.
Another Californian,
billionaire Tom Steyer (he is referred to as “billionaire Tom Steyer” so often
that “billionaire” seems to be his first name) has entered the race. Steyer is the ex-hedge fund mogul who has
spent millions on “impeach Trump” ads, after having made his initial mark in
politics by devoting his post-hedge fund time and ample resources to
environmental issues. (In the interest
of full disclosure, Steyer was a business school classmate of mine.)
And former Pennsylvania Representative Joe Sestak threw his hat in the ring as well. Sestak has
been a figure in swing district elections in the past (winning and losing
Pennsylvania’s 7th district and losing a bid for the Senate in
2010), and although he has not held office for almost a decade, he is a
credible candidate.
So we now have 24 Democrats in the field, as follows,
ranked by the average of the national polls over the last month.
Candidates
|
Age
|
Announcement Date
|
Credentials
|
Latest National Polls (May 16 to Jun 15, 2019)
|
|
Joe Biden
|
76
|
4/25/2019
|
Ex-VP and Ex-Senator, Delaware
|
29%
|
|
Bernie Sanders
|
77
|
2/19/2019
|
Senator, Vermont
|
15%
|
|
Kamala Harris
|
54
|
1/18/2019
|
Senator, California
|
15%
|
|
Elizabeth Warren
|
69
|
12/31/2018
|
Senator, Massachusetts
|
13%
|
|
Pete Buttigeig
|
36
|
1/22/2019
|
Mayor, South Bend, Indiana
|
4%
|
|
Beto O'Rourke
|
46
|
3/14/2019
|
Ex-Representative, Texas
|
3%
|
|
Cory Booker
|
49
|
2/1/2019
|
Senator, New Jersey
|
2%
|
|
Amy Klobuchar
|
58
|
2/10/2019
|
Senator, Minnesota
|
1%
|
|
Kirsten Gillibrand
|
51
|
1/15/2019
|
Senator, New York
|
1%
|
|
Julian Castro
|
44
|
1/10/2019
|
Ex-Secretary, HUD
|
1%
|
|
Andrew Yang
|
43
|
11/6/2017
|
Entrepreneur
|
1%
|
|
Michael Bennet
|
54
|
5/2/2019
|
Senator, Colorado
|
1%
|
|
Jay Inslee
|
67
|
3/1/2019
|
Governor, Washington
|
1%
|
|
Tulsi Gabbard
|
37
|
1/11/2019
|
Representative, Hawaii
|
1%
|
|
Steve Bullock
|
52
|
5/14/2019
|
Governor, Montana
|
1%
|
|
John Hickenlooper
|
66
|
3/4/2019
|
Ex-Governor, Colorado
|
0%
|
|
Tim Ryan
|
45
|
4/4/2019
|
Representative, Ohio
|
0%
|
|
John Delaney
|
55
|
7/28/2017
|
Representative, Maryland
|
0%
|
|
Marianne Williamson
|
66
|
1/28/2019
|
Self-help author
|
0%
|
|
Wayne Messam
|
44
|
3/28/2019
|
Mayor, Miramar, Florida
|
0%
|
|
Seth Moulton
|
40
|
4/22/2019
|
Representative, Massachusetts
|
0%
|
|
Bill de Blasio
|
58
|
5/14/2019
|
Mayor, New York City
|
0%
|
|
Joe Sestak
|
67
|
6/23/2019
|
Ex-Representative, Pennsylvania
|
n/a
|
|
Tom Steyer
|
62
|
7/9/2019
|
Billionaire hedge fund manager
|
n/a
|
THE MONTH
The campaign news of the past month – from June 15 to July
15 – was almost entirely dominated by the first round of debates – and their
aftermath -- that were held in Miami on consecutive nights in late June. The debates were limited to only 20 of the 23
candidates, apparently on the grounds that a maximum of 20 serious nominees could
be accommodated. This ignored two
obvious alternatives: having three
debates over three night, or, going the other way, limiting the debates to only
those who had made any sort of inroads in their campaigns. Instead, three contenders were lopped off,
leaving 13 others who were polling at 2% or less, most at 1% or 0%.
But regardless of the merits, the 20 went at it over the
two nights, gamely battling for air time (faithfully recorded by media outlets,
as if “time talking” was actually a valuable barometer of anything). The main highlight (of course) was Kamala
Harris taking on frontrunner Joe Biden midway through Night Two, with a far
left jab with which Harris managed to both personalize the busing issue (“that
little girl was me”) and demonize Biden, who was left blustering over context
and the role of local government in busing decision-making.
This was universally viewed as a major event in the race,
one that exposed the worst of Biden – his long track record full of compromises,
his lack of agility and basic campaigning skill, his age – and elevated Harris,
who has alternately shined and wobbled on the campaign trail. Harris took full advantage of this first
major testing ground, performing well in her other sound bites apart from the
Biden blow, and she easily “won” Night Two.
The pundits generally gave Night One cleanly to Elizabeth
Warren, with her tightly argued policy riffs neatly interwoven with her
personal story. She dominated the
“undercard” (she was the only “tier one” contender present on Night One). Other strong performers, according to most
pundits, included Julian Castro, Bill de Blasio, Pete Buttigieg and Cory
Booker, while only a few of the also-rans were dissed, John Delaney, in
particular, with Marianne Williamson, the self-proclaimed “love candidate,”
making her own surreal mark.
In the aftermath, Joe Biden puffed out his chest and
defended his civil rights record to mixed reviews, before he finally found his
Uncle Joe persona again. This came in
the form of a direct apology for any inference that he was an admirer of
long-ago segregationists (and Senate colleagues of the
once-upon-a-time-we-worked-across-the-aisle young Joe Biden) James O. Eastland
and Herman Talmadge. Biden showed the
nimbleness of a true, um, 76-year old in taking three weeks, rather than three
minutes, hours or even days to realize this was the only logical course to take
if he wanted to retain the African American support he has earned over the
years, and desperately needs to maintain.
The only other truly consequential news outside of the
debates for the month was the real-time drama of Mayor Pete Buttigieg in the not-quite-so-idyllic
mid-America South Bend, Indiana turnaround story he has been touting. For years Mayor Pete has been more or less persona
non grata with the African American community in South Bend, ever since he
fired the black police chief of the town just three months into his term. In addition, there is a strong sense among
that community that they have not equally shared in the boomlet the town has
enjoyed under Pete’s reign.
But these resentments burst into public view with the death
of an African-American man at the hands of a white police officer who happened
to have turned off his body cam before the killing. Buttigieg did a credible job handling the issue
in both the debate and a town hall in South Bend, effectively walking the tightrope
that Biden fell off, by both establishing his credible efforts to improve race
relations in South Bend and conceding that those efforts have thus far fallen
short of success. Pete is half Biden’s
age but a hundred times more deft.
Having said that, it is extraordinarily difficult – near impossible – to
win the Democratic nomination without the support of the African American
community, and Pete has a mountain to climb there.
THE NUMBERS
What is the verdict on the debate, and all that Sturm und Drang among the leaders? Below is a chart summarizing presidential
preference polling in bellwether Iowa (on the left) and national numbers (on the
right). Look at the column headings
carefully – in Iowa they are basically single poll results (except where
noted), and must be interpreted with care, as comparisons are harder due to
polling technique differences, and consequently trends are more difficult to
establish. The national polls are more
robust, with anywhere from nine to fifteen polls represented in each column;
note that the last two columns separate the past month into “pre-“ and
“post-debate” periods.
These charts show a somewhat different story than that
being splayed in the headlines.
·
Kamala
Harris has indeed clearly made strides in both Iowa and
nationally, and the debate performance is just as clearly what propelled
her. The Iowa jump feels real (again
noting that it is based on only two polls, by two separate organizations). The national jump, however, is far less of a
spike than commonly perceived, from 7% to 11% on average, and it still leaves
her in third place
·
But while Joe
Biden’s support is dropping, it is at a much more modest rate than commonly
reported. The data indicate that Biden
has been gradually slipping nationally since his excellent launch, and
essentially is now back to his “pre-launch” level of 30%. And the debate does not seem to have
dramatically altered his standing nationally, with a loss of two points and still
quite a large lead. The single Iowa poll
reveals a somewhat more significant drop, but again, back to the level he had
throughout the spring. So the bottom
line is: while still a poor performance,
Biden did not suffer too much from the debate.
·
For all the praise for her Night One
performance, Elizabeth Warren made no
movement in either direction. She is
still in the 13% range in both Iowa and nationally.
·
Both Bernie
Sanders and Pete Buttigieg appear
to have lost ground in Iowa (again, with due caution on the one poll), while
holding serve in national polls.
Candidates*
|
Iowa Polls
|
Average of National Polls
|
|||||||||
DM Reg/CNN Mar 3-6
|
Mar 16 - Apr 15 (2 polls)
|
DM Reg/CNN Jun 2-5
|
CBS/ YG May 31- Jun 12
|
USA/Su
Jun 28 - Jul 1 (post-deb.)
|
Mar 16 - Apr 15
|
Apr 16 - May 15
|
May 15 - Jun 15
|
Jun 16-25 (pre-deb.)
|
Jun 26-Jul 14 (post-deb.)
|
||
Biden
|
27
|
26
|
24
|
30
|
24
|
31
|
37
|
34
|
32
|
29
|
|
Harris
|
7
|
10
|
7
|
5
|
16
|
9
|
8
|
7
|
7
|
14
|
|
Warren
|
9
|
9
|
15
|
12
|
13
|
6
|
8
|
10
|
13
|
13
|
|
Sanders
|
25
|
20
|
16
|
22
|
9
|
23
|
18
|
17
|
16
|
15
|
|
Buttigieg
|
0
|
11
|
14
|
11
|
6
|
3
|
7
|
7
|
7
|
5
|
|
Booker
|
3
|
6
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
|
Klobuchar
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
O'Rourke
|
5
|
5
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
8
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
|
Gabbard
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
Yang
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
Castro
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
Delaney
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Bennet
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
n/a
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
|
Bullock
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
Gillibrand
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
Inslee
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
Hickenlooper
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Williamson
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Ryan
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
|
Swalwell
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Messam
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Moulton
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
DeBlasio
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Other/NA
|
19
|
9
|
13
|
5
|
22
|
8
|
6
|
14
|
14
|
12
|
|
As for the rest, no second tier candidate broke through in
the debates and vaulted into the top tier, or made any sort of move
whatsoever.
·
For all the Night One talk of Julian Castro’s takedown of fellow Texan
Beto O’Rourke (and his otherwise
solid effort), neither moved an inch nationally. Perhaps Beto was hurt a bit in Iowa, but
Castro made no move, nor did any of the other pundit-rated strong performers.
·
Cory
Booker and Amy Klobuchar,
despite decent debates, appeared to go in the wrong direction in Iowa and made
no move nationally. Both have squandered
the early advantage they had with at least some degree of name recognition
(relative to most of the field), and Klobuchar, in particular, has also missed
an opportunity to bite a chunk from Biden in the “centrist/moderate” lane of
the party.
·
And, having been given a first opportunity to
raise their profiles, none of the other 11 candidates on stage capitalized,
remaining unknown and unloved in both Iowa and in national polls.
·
And the three who were left off the stage, Wayne
Messam, Seth Moulton and Steve Bullock, might have benefited more from the
swirl around their exclusion than if they have been on the stage, though that
is surely conjecture; they did not move either.
So, we remain with five and only five top tier
candidates. Each of the five merged with
a major question they need to answer:
·
Biden: Can he significantly sharpen his game and
hold the line in the African American community? Though Biden was not as severely damaged as
commonly perceived, he is falling back to the pack and needs to stop the
bleeding. His post-debate performance
has been more encouraging, but, still, he does not inspire any confidence that
he can suddenly turn into a presidential campaigning dynamo.
·
Harris: Can she develop more consistency in both her
policies and her performance? In the
aftermath of the debates, Harris waffled on her own positions on busing
(essentially stating a position that seemed to sound strikingly similar to
Biden’s, that it was a local matter), and also on Medicare For All – she was
one of the “hand raisers” in the debate when the candidates were asked point
blank if they supported it, but was equivocating, or at least dissembling, the
next day. And she needs to demonstrate
that she can maintain the energy and clarity of her debating style in the
months ahead.
·
Warren: Does her upward momentum have a natural
ceiling within the party? Perhaps she was dealt a poor hand by appearing at the
Night One “kiddie table” and thus could not display her policy chops and
overall articulation directly against her major competitors. But it is surprising that her performance did
not translate into a rise in the polls -- perhaps all those far left positions,
so stridently articulated, are indeed scaring off mainstream Dems and
marginalizing her appeal.
·
Sanders: Is Bernie done? The Iowa poll is scary. Single digit support in Iowa cannot be helpful,
and the rise of Warren and Harris appear to have done more harm to Bernie than
to Biden. Bernie needs some sort of
catalyst to re-energize his appeal.
·
Buttigieg: Can he make inroads to the African-American
community and get some votes? The forecast
here is not favorable. Biden can draw on
a long track record, especially his eight years with Barack Obama; Harris can
claim this segment as her own; and Warren and Sanders both espouse appealing
far-left policies to this segment.
Buttigieg is starting in a hole and has no easy way up, apart from the
strength of his natural empathy and poise.
SHOW ME THE MONEY
One thing Pete has going for him: he is a fundraising
superstar. Despite his fifth-place
standing, Pete raised $24 million in the quarter, leading the field. Joe Biden could argue that by raising about
$22 million in just two-plus months (after his launch, when the official
reporting begins), he wins if you extrapolate.
Sanders and Warren both had solid quarters, though Bernie dropped versus
Q1 while Warren gained, neatly mirroring their poll standing. And while Harris slipped a bit, the debate,
which occurred late in the quarter, should help that considerably.
Fundraising ($
Millions)
|
1Q 2019
|
2Q 2019
|
Buttigieg
|
7.0
|
24.8
|
Biden
|
n/a
|
21.5
|
Warren
|
6.0
|
19.1
|
Sanders
|
18.2
|
18.0
|
Harris
|
12.0
|
12.0
|
WHO CAN BEAT TRUMP?
Democrats have indicated in polling that they are more likely
to back the candidate they think is most likely to beat Trump, rather than the
one that best matches their own views, by roughly a 2/1 margin.
There have been two head-to-head post-debate polls pitting
Trump versus each of the top tier Dems, and the results continue to show Biden
at the head of the class versus Trump and the others struggling. This is an ominous sign for those Dems who
want to see fresh faces and/or major progressive ideas at the top of the
ticket.
ABC/WaPo
|
Emerson
|
|
Trump Versus:
|
Jun 28 - Jul 1
|
Jul 6-8
|
Biden
|
Biden
+10
|
Biden
+6
|
Sanders
|
Sanders
+1
|
Sanders
+2
|
Harris
|
Harris
+2
|
Trump
+2
|
Warren
|
Tie
|
Trump
+2
|
Buttigieg
|
Tie
|
Trump
+2
|
To win the nomination, Biden has to reassure the left that
he is squarely on their side on the great issues of our time. But if he fails, and someone else is
nominated, they will have to reassure America that the change they represent is
not too extreme.
And here is one more poll of note, from Public Policy
Polling (PPP), a highly reputable polling group with a sense of humor. And if you don’t know who Megan Rapinoe is,
wake up!
Pres. Preference
|
%
|
Rapinoe
|
42%
|
Trump
|
41%
|
If you would like
to be on the Born To Run The Numbers email list notifying you of each new post,
please write us at borntorunthenumbers@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment