UK Bookmaker now sees Elizabeth Warren as favored to win Democratic Primary

[cannabis_flower]

ELIZABETH WARREN OVERTAKES JOE BIDEN AS FAVORITE TO WIN DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S 2020 PRIMARY: U.K. BOOKMAKER

Elizabeth Warren has overtaken Joe Biden as favorite to win the Democratic Party's 2020 primary, according to a leading British bookmaker. Biden, a former U.S. vice president and senator for Delaware, is leading the polls, but has generated headlines recently for repeated gaffes, a foible of his.

Warren, the current U.S. senator for Massachusetts, is polling around third or fourth place depending on the survey in a wide and diverse field of more than 20 candidates.

The bookmaker Ladbrokes said it now has Warren at 9/4 favorite to win the Democratic nomination in 2020. Biden slipped to 11/4. Joint third are Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent socialist, and the party's California Senator Kamala Harris. Both are on 6/1.



https://www.newsweek.com/elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-favorite-odds-2020-democratic-primary-1454706

[pangaia]

1. Sanders is not, as far as I know a SOCIALIST !!

Maybe he is..

[cannabis_flower]

2. That's absolutely not what the article is about

It's kind of weird how you could read an article about a bookmaker in the UK and his seeing Elizabeth Warren as the favorite and you make it about Bernie Sanders.

[pangaia]

3. I didn; make anything ABOUT bernie sanders.

I didn't even read the article.
I was commenting on how, just in the OP, whomever wrote the article found it necessary to attach the term SOCIALIST with Sander's name, but DID NOT choose to make any kind of such reference with Biden, Harris, or Warren.

This happens all the time..

It's the Pavlovian nature of so many so-called "journalists...."

[iwannaknow]

14. I get your point

[pangaia]

16. thanks...

[yaesu]

12. I'm a socialist

I use public roads, I use public utilities, I've completed public school & hopefully, someday. I will be on social security. Its just a label, hell, wasn't that many years ago we were called communists but the fascists own that title now & for good reason.

[pangaia]

13. None of those things are socialism...

[Buckeye_Democrat]

17. What do you think socialism means?

Look at Sanders' web site for "What Do the Koch Brothers Want?" to understand the socialist programs already in existence.
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/koch-brothers

Socialism is definitely NOT a dirty word to me!

Notice how the Koch brothers never want to repeal the military or police? Those are also programs under government (public) control, as well as courts that enforce contracts related to private ownership. The Koch brothers need "big government" for those services, but not the others that they oppose.

Socialism according to Encyclopedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism

[BooScout]

18. Ummmm, then why does he describe himself as a Democratic SOCIALIST?

Asking for a friend.

[pangaia]

20. not the same thing

[BooScout]

21. Uhhhh actually it is...

You do understand that Democratic Socialism is a type of socialism right?

[Garrett78]

4. Warren's biggest problem is Sanders.

I think it'll come down to Biden and Harris. It's a question of whether or not Harris can do well enough in the early states to make persons of color confident that she can win.

Warren could have a really tough time after New Hampshire, especially if Sanders is still in the race.

[mtnsnake]

6. and vice versa, too.

[Garrett78]

7. Except that Sanders isn't going to be the nominee regardless.

Unless one thinks Sanders is going to somehow do much, much better among POC than he did in 2016, he's done after New Hampshire.

Whereas we don't really know Warren's potential. She isn't nearly as polarizing and we don't have 2016 data for her the way we do for Sanders.

I know many don't like admitting this, but the 2016 race effectively ended on Super Tuesday. Not in May or June, but in early March. Sanders was getting trounced among POC, and that sealed the deal for Clinton. Bernie Math doesn't change that.

[mtnsnake]

10. It's absolutely premature to state that any front runner "isn't going to be the nominee regardless"

All it takes is one significant happening to change everything, and there is certainly enough time for that to occur. For all you know, Michael Bennet could end up winning even though it doesn't seem possible at this early juncture in time.

[Garrett78]

11. There are things we can say with a very high degree of certainty.

Such as saying the nominee won't be someone who does terribly among POC.

[JI7]

15. what if Biden and Harris Split POC vote ? couldn't that help Warren ?

[Garrett78]

19. Maybe help her some, but that's a somewhat complicated question.

Or at least the answer is somewhat complicated. I don't know if POC, in particular Black folks, will coalesce around a certain candidate like what happened in 2008. But even if they don't, the nominee won't be someone who does very poorly among POC (I'm not assuming at this point that Warren will do poorly, but I don't think she'll be the nominee). We aren't going to have a situation where 2 candidates evenly split nearly all of the POC vote, while a 3rd candidate dominates the white vote and wins the nomination. That's just not a realistic scenario for a Democratic primary. Besides, we'll likely still have more than 3 candidates on Super Tuesday and beyond.

[BlueMTexpat]

5. Interesting.

Thanks for posting.

[zentrum]

8. Kick

[highplainsdem]

9. That bookmaker isn't predicting Dems winning in 2020, though. Apparently view it as a tie. Here in

the US, PredictIt.org has Warren ahead of Biden. But it also has her losing to Trump.

Polls aren't perfect, but they're a lot more scientific than bookmakers' odds.