538: Joe Biden Has An Iowa Problem, Not An Enthusiasm Problem

[Quixote1818]

Warren is now predicted to win Iowa and NH which will give her a lot of momentum and a lot of Sanders voters switching over to her. What happens after those two states will very interesting.

AUG. 26, 2019, AT 5:46 AM

Joe Biden Has An Iowa Problem, Not An Enthusiasm Problem
By Nate Silver

Filed under 2020 Election

If you’ve been following our coverage of the Democratic primary, you’ll know that I don’t think much of media really understands Joe Biden’s popularity among Democrats. That doesn’t mean that Biden is destined to win the primary. In fact, I’d regard him as an underdog relative to the field — that is, I think he has a less than 50 percent chance of getting the nomination — partly for reasons I’ll outline later on in this column. But there have already been several occasions when despite widespread predictions of Biden’s demise, the former vice president rebounded or held steady in the polls.

Furthermore — not totally unlike Donald Trump four years ago — Biden’s support comes mostly from the type of Democrats who are sometimes relatively invisible in media coverage of the campaigns, such as black Democrats and older Democrats without college degrees. That’s another reason to be skeptical about claims that Biden isn’t as popular as polls seem to imply. They sometimes reflect narratives that are filtered through journalists’ college-educated social environments — or conditioned by conversations on social media — with all the implicit biases those can introduce.

So this article about Biden in The New York Times, which alleged a disconnect between the polls and conditions on the ground In Iowa, was a little dismaying for me. Here’s a representative snippet:

But less than two weeks before Labor Day, when presidential campaigns traditionally kick into high gear, there are signs of a disconnect between his relatively rosy poll numbers and excitement for his campaign on the ground here [in Iowa], in the state that begins the presidential nominating process.

The thing is, I actually think the Times is onto something here! But it’s something you can see in the polls. And it’s something that probably has a lot to do with Iowa, where the article was datelined from — and where there are relatively few voters from among the groups that are most enthusiastic about Biden.

More: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/joe-biden-has-an-iowa-problem-not-an-enthusiasm-problem/

[TwilightZone]

1. "Warren is now predicted to win Iowa and NH "

No, she isn't. Biden is still ahead in Iowa.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

And NH.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html

Warren may be trending up, but Biden is still in the lead in both states. Nowhere in the article you linked does Silver indicate that she's predicted to win. His point is that enthusiasm for Warren is higher than it is for Biden. Enthusiam doesn't automatically equate to votes, however, as Silver also notes.

[Quixote1818]

4. As you can see from past elections, the early frontrunner often doesn't do too well

so polls don't mean much right now historically:

This is a month behind but still relevant:

Exactly twelve years ago, on July 29, 2007, national opinion polls declared the front-runner for the Republican Presidential nomination to be one Rudolph Giuliani, the bombastic former New York City mayor. In second place, seven points back, was a retired Tennessee senator and actor, Fred Thompson. Languishing in third place, another five points behind, was the eventual G.O.P. nominee, John McCain. Over on the Democratic side, on the same date, Hillary Clinton led Barack Obama by nearly thirteen points. Everyone knows how that turned out.

Twenty Democratic candidates are set to debate in Detroit this week, as countless Democratic voters wonder, with knotted stomachs, whether anyone will emerge to defeat Donald Trump, in November, 2020. So what do the early polls tell us? I asked around and found an array of specialists firm in their beliefs that the polls are iffy. “These numbers are fun, but I wouldn’t put money on anything,” Lydia Saad, a senior Gallup research director, told me. “Historically, among Democrats, if you had to bet at this point, you’d do a better job betting against, than for, the front-runner.” Which can’t be good news for Joe Biden, who is ahead but who slipped after his shaky debate performance, last month.


https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/dont-worry-about-the-democratic-presidential-polls-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-donald-trump


Warren is surging and has pulled ahead on all the betting sites now:

Warren is strongly predicted to win Iowa: https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/5241/Who-will-win-the-2020-Iowa-Democratic-caucuses

https://www.gambling.com/us/online-betting/strategy/us-democratic-primary-betting-1817000



Betting Markets See Warren As Likeliest Democratic Nominee for the First Time
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/betting-markets-see-warren-as-likeliest-democratic-nominee.html

[oldsoftie]

8. regardless, Warren is NOT projected to win Iowa

[qazplm135]

31. correct, currently it is Biden just like Rudy and Hillary in 08

were at this point.

[oldsoftie]

35. And they are different people. Meaningless.

[qazplm135]

41. sure, one should never look to past iterations

as prologue to what the future might hold.

[DrFunkenstein]

49. Don't Forget Frontrunner Wes Clark in '04

And Dean lost Iowa and never recovered.

[Thekaspervote]

10. EW polls at 2% with the AA voting blocking... can't win on that

[cannabis_flower]

29. Obviously the first link is from July

The next debate is September 12 in Houston.

[zentrum]

2. I think there's a real

....lack of excitment problem with Joe.

I'm not sure this is the level of energy we need to beat Trump.

[Demsrule86]

27. We need the rustbelt to beat Trump...specifically blue wall states...and EW will not carry those

states in a general...maybe Bernie but it is a longshot...Joe Biden can win those states...thus he should and will be our nominee.

[qazplm135]

32. so basically

you don't think a woman can win.

Which is ridiculous of course.

[redstateblues]

36. I think Harris would have a better chance of taking the rust belt than Warren

I think a Warren nomination runs the risk of another Electoral College debacle. It's not worth the risk.

[qazplm135]

40. zero evidence for that

and no I think that's just...well, if I say what it is, I'll get alerted and banned.

[Cosmocat]

47. Dude ....

come on, that just makes no sense.

Warren is at 22% in Pa, Harris 8 %.
Warren is at 29% and FIRST, Biden 20, Harris 5%
Warren is 14%, Harris 8 in Michigan.

[redstateblues]

48. I just think she would be stronger against Trump

[DrFunkenstein]

50. Warren's Economic Populism Actually Plays Very Well in the Rust Belt

Unlike Trump's empty promises, Warren has actual plans.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. It's important to state that your first paragraph is your opinion...

She is not, in fact, predicted to win either Iowa or New Hampshire based on polling or anything established in the article. At first, I thought it was Nate Silver who said this - it is not.

[still_one]

6. 5 + months before the primary,, and projecting a winner. What nonsense

[qazplm135]

33. isn't that what Biden folks are doing?

I agree, projecting a winner right now is nonsense.

[Thekaspervote]

9. This!

[George II]

5. This enthusiasm thing is a concoction of the media and pundits. Americans don't care.

[DrFunkenstein]

51. Actually, Enthusiasm Translates Into Going Through The Hassle of a Caucus

People have to drag themselves there and stick around for a grueling process. If you are not stoked for your candidate, you are less likely to make the commitment of time and energy.

[yaesu]

7. Nate should patent that crystal ball. nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

11. Don't think Joe will punch a ticket outta Iowa... but, of course, anything is possible.

The Joe-mentum seems to be fading.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!! or
Elizabeth & Bernie 2020!!
Either way, welcome to the revolution!!!

[loyalsister]

12. Joe's appeal is safety

and comfort in not getting one's hopes up. Low expectations means not getting your heartbroken when your candidate doesn't win as in 20116. It wasn't just that Trump lost, but a lot of people were invested in the excitement of potentially making history. Prior to that we got our hopes crushed when Obama had to make compromises we didn't expect. Apparently, the solution is to get the guy who helped us get used to it and not get our hopes up about anything he plans to do because it's a comforting go along to get along back to the old formula campaign. It may be comforting but it's not going to inspire volunteers to knock on doors or or invest in t-shirts and bumperstickers and yard signs.

[Demsrule86]

26. That is wishful thinking on your part...you don't get his appeal so you opine what you think is

his appeal, but you are wrong. Joe Biden is a great guy and will be our nominee...I and other Biden supporters will vote for him regardless of Iowa or New Hamshire in the primry...although if Warren can't take a neigboring state maybe she should drop out.

[RhodeIslandOne]

37. I will vote for whomever the nominee is

And I hope you will too. Including Elizabeth Warren.

[Demsrule86]

44. Of course...but I don't think she can win a general. And we simply can't have Trump for four more

years. Thus I will not support Warren in the primary...MFA alone is political suicide in the general.

[RhodeIslandOne]

53. I think she can win in the general

People need to listen, and stop voting for rich people's interests and against their own.

[madville]

13. Why do two red states and two purple states kick off our primary contest?

It's kind of ridiculous, our candidate has zero chance of winning IA or SC in the general election and yet they carry a ton of weight in the primary?

[JI7]

14. the demographic that votes in the SC Primary is the one that votes for democrats in the highest

numbers.

[qazplm135]

34. my proposal would be

to find the two states each cycles that are most close to the demographic representation of the entire country, and then those two states are the lead-off states.

[RhodeIslandOne]

38. Obama won Iowa twice.

If you're a Biden supporter, that's a terrible take that Iowa can't be won.

People dismissing Iowa as unwinnable are not real good strategists. In a bad year for Republicans and their farm shenanigans, it is as winnable as Minnesota.

[honest.abe]

42. Iowa used to be purple and NV is now considered to be blue.

NH is purple and SC is red. Seems like a good mix to me.

[Green Line]

15. She isn't leading in Iowa or NH

She isn’t even leading in Mass.

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Another nail in the coffin of the inevitability myth nt

[SteveDallas]

17. As it looks right now, she is best positioned to win Iowa.

What people don't take into account in just general polling is how Iowa works, something the pollsters understand, but the general public doesn't. So when they say she is likely to win, but a given poll shows her behind it is because there is more information.

For those who don't know how Iowa works, you don't just go in and vote. You go in to your precinct and basically stand under the sign for your candidate. Then they do a count. If your candidate of choice has less than 15% in that precinct you have 2 choices: Choose another candidate or go home. Most choose another candidate.

This is where Warren has the advantage. She doesn't yet have 100% name recognition, has the highest net favorability rating AND has the largest % of voters CONSIDERING her, which is impressive given less than 100% name recognition.

A loss in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, will crush Biden's campaign. They currently seem to be retracting to the Guiliani campaign tactic of 2008... start by explaining away the early states and claiming that the primary really starts elsewhere (in his case it was Florida, while Biden seems to be betting on South Carolina). While Biden is still campaigning in IA, N.H and NV, they already seem to be preparing for losses.. but his campaign cannot survive that.

His appeal is built on this myth that he can beat Trump, but that will be shattered if he loses early primaries.

Further, I suspect that EITHER Sanders or Warren will drop after South Carolina depending upon who has won and throw support to the other to make sure that the progressive vote isn't split going into Super Tuesday.

Right now I am All in For Warren, but I will be happy to vote for either of them!

[Demsrule86]

24. I doubt it will happen and see nothing in the article that indicates it will happen but even if it

did the days of Iowa determining the nominee are over...a small white state that always votes GOP...not happening...I would expect Biden to win on Primary day.

[Demsrule86]

25. I like Biden and all the polls show he can beat Trump unlike the others...and losing in a state

where Democrats lean super left won't do it for EW...she need AA support and I don't see her getting it.

[SteveDallas]

45. I heard the exact same things about Clinton.

When she lost Iowa in 2008 people said "This small mostly white state will not determine the nominee". But, it did. As for AA support, Biden is lagging BEHIND where Clinton was in both 2008 and 2016.

In October 2008 Clinton had 57% of the AA vote. https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/17/poll.blacks.democrats/

Some polls currently have Biden at UNDER 50%.. his highest is 53%... that is not a good sign for Biden's strength of support.

As MANY have pointed out, the AA vote tends to be pragmatic. Right now pragmatic voters tend to lean Biden b/c of the myth of his being able to beat Trump. If Biden loses Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, it shows how weak his support is. Pragmatic voters will jump ship very quickly. Polls showed that Clinton was going to beat Trump in several states where she lost. She was up by 8 points in Wisconsin and wasn't losing in a SINGLE poll (her smallest lead was 6 points, well outside the MOE). She lost because democrats didn't turn out.

President's don't win on "not that person" and that's ALL I see Biden offering. How many times does that lesson have to be taught? 1984 "Not Reagan" = Lose. 1996 "Not Clinton" = Lose. 2004 "Not Bush" = Lose 2012 "Not Obama" = Lose. 2016 "Not Trump" = Lose.

People who win present visions, whether we like them or not, they get people to turn out. 1980 Reagan didn't run "Not Carter", he ran on his vision of America. In 1992 Clinton didn't run on "not Bush".. he ran on a different path, while bush was saying "stay the course". In 2008 Obama didn't run on "Not McCain" or "Not Republican", he ran on a vision. In 2016 while Trump attacked Clinton relentlessly, his central message wasn't "Not Clinton", it was about "draining the swamp" and "building a wall" and other nonsense, but it got people to turn out.

This election SHOULD be a gimmie. It is the democrats' election to lose and the ONLY way to lose it is to depress turnout. Biden depresses turnout. How do you sell Biden to someone? Seriously. The ONLY argument I see is "well, he polls higher than Trump" and the only argument I see for his election is he's "not trump".

[EveHammond13]

18. someone please gently remind Nate that TRUMP RAPED HIS OWN WIFE.

[StarfishSaver]

19. What a ridiculous premise

It's September. The Iowa and NH primaries are in January. Anyone "predicting" a winner today based on polls might as well use tea leaves. They must not be familiar with the concept of "campaigning" - you know where candidates go to a place and talk to voters about why said voters should vote for them. It's an activity that has consistently proven successful in convincing people to vote for a person they hadn't originally planned to vote for. It's quite a remarkable process and one of the reasons we don't select candidates based on polls taken six months before an election.

[thesquanderer]

20. Article says Biden almost leads in Favorables, but neglects the same about Unfavorables

The article is correct that Biden is near the top in polls of favorability (second only to Sanders), which supports their premise... but the article seems to neglect that Biden is similarly near the top in UNfavorable ratings, where the only candidates with higher unfavorables than Biden are Gillibrand and DeBlasio.

The good news for Biden though is that his near universal name recognition means his unfavorables are probably about as high as they will ever be (barring some kind of campaign implosion), whereas other candidates still have a lot of room to increase their unfavorables (as well as their favorables).

[Peacetrain]

21. Well I call BS!.. I live in Iowa.. and we like E. Warren, but she is not going to beat J. Biden..

and that is my opinion as an Iowan..

[honest.abe]

22. Who said "Warren is now predicted to win Iowa and NH" ??

I dont see that anywhere in the article.

[Demsrule86]

23. I doubt it very much Iowa will be split...and hardcore Sanders supporters won't switch...

but let's say she wins better than I think she will...it is a small white state. She can't be the nominee without AA and moderate (including Democrats and independents). support. We will lose the general in a landslide...and she is running on MFA which is not popular...we could even lose the house.

[redstateblues]

39. MFA is political suicide

[Demsrule86]

43. It is political suicide...we could lose the house too.

[Demsrule86]

28. That article does not say Warren is predicted to win Iowa...and you need to edit it to show that.

It misrepresents what Silver said...Biden is still ahead in Iowa.

[LanternWaste]

30. Can you support your own analysis with data? Or is it merely another bumper sticker?

You allege that Warren is now predicted to win Iowa. Can you support that premise with data or evidence?

Or is it merely another bumper sticker?

[treestar]

46. Iowa is not representative

and every state and 7 territories get to weigh in. This kind of spin undervalues the AA vote, too.

[DrFunkenstein]

52. Joe Lieberman and Wes Clark Tried to Skip Iowa

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/us/2-top-democrats-decide-to-bypass-iowa-s-caucuses.html