First Horse-Race Poll for 2020 Has Trump Leading Warren

[DonViejo]

By Ed Kilgore

February 15, 2017
1:13 p.m.

Even as the political commentariat continues to argue about what happened and why it happened last November, the first horse-race poll for 2020 has appeared — at Politico, of course.

The 2020 trial heat from Politico’s polling partner Morning Consult is a two-trick pony: It matches Donald Trump against a generic (i.e., unnamed) Democrat, whom he trails 35/43, and against Senator Elizabeth Warren, whom he leads 42/36.

The numbers lead Politico’s Jake Sherman to the doubly dubious conclusion that “Democrats could be in trouble — and Trump could triumph — if they continue their lurch to the left.” This assumes Democrats are currently engaged in some sort of “lurch to the left,” a very Trumpian construction of events, and that Warren is perceived as some sort of crazy lefty. Truth is, Warren is not remotely as well known as is Trump; in a separate question in this poll, we learn that over a third of respondents have no opinion of Warren — 16 percent have never even heard of her. The name-ID gap is almost certainly a better explanation of the preference gap between Trump and Warren than any ideological imputation. It is also not unusual for a generic candidate to do better than a named candidate in this sort of poll; it was a regular feature in polls matching named and unnamed Republicans against Hillary Clinton going into 2016.

So there’s a lot less than meets the eye in this survey, particularly since it did not offer any comparisons to the performance of Democrats that Jake Sherman thinks do not represent some “lurch to the left.” It’s never good for a universally known incumbent to poll so far under 50 percent, but then again, Donald Trump will have a tolerably long time to improve or degrade his position.

more
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/first-horse-race-poll-for-2020-has-trump-leading-warren.html

[TXCritter]

1. Sherman is wrong

The problem isn't the Dems "lurching to the left" the problem is that the Dems are telegraphing their candidates so far in advance the GOP has optimal opportunity to destroy them before they run.

[get the red out]

2. BINGO!

Agree

[lagomorph777]

3. The problem is they have lurched to the right, and right-wingers vote GOP no matter what.

This lame attempt to steer Dems is ridiculous.

[murielm99]

4. She would not make a good candidate.

We need her where she is, anyway.

What would she do, run as an independent, if she did not get the nomination? After all, she used to be a republican.

We need to get on the same page. No more candidates who can divide our party. I like and respect her, but NOT as a Presidential candidate. After they got through vetting her, she would be shredded.

I think too many former so-called Bernie supporters are hoping this happens, to further divide our party. (They were never real Bernie supporters to begin with).

I am trying to say this respectfully, because I really do appreciate her in her current job. Anyway, it is too early for this crap. A month is a long time politically. Aren't we seeing that right now?

[TXCritter]

6. I agree in part

I think she is best off where she is. She brings specialized knowledge to the Senate Dem Caucus and she is needed there. As President in 2020? I think she would actually lose some influence. As VP she would be wasted.

As for the rest... time will tell

[StevieM]

5. This poll has Trump at 49/46 favorable vs. unfavorable. It is not a good sampling.

In other words, Warren is probably doing much better than the poll shows.

It also probably doesn't totally account for all the benefits Warren got from #shepersisted.