538 2020 commentary megathread

[Mr. Morden]

Here’s their latest:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-will-sexual-misconduct-allegations-reshape-the-2020-election/

Incredibly, Micah and Perry still thinks there’s a slim chance of Franken recovering enough to run for president in 2020(!).

They also mention Sherrod Brown’s domestic abuse problem.

A bit of discussion of Gillibrand throwing Bill Clinton under the bus.  Though they seem to not realize that Gillibrand didn’t go into that interview intending to make those Clinton comments.  She didn’t want to be talking about Bill Clinton, but the interviewer pressed her, she took a long pause, and then made what by all appearances was an impromptu decision to say that Bill should have resigned.

[Mr. Morden]

Nate Silver speaks of “high probability” of a brokered convention:

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/939160679940001792

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/939162977332355074

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think he’s exaggerating by calling it a “high probability” (though I guess it depends on what you call “high”).  But I agree in principle that the DNC’s moves to cut the number of superdelegates + California moving to March + a large field all increase the chances of a contested convention.  Even with all of that, though, I still think the chances of the field winnowing to two pretty quickly remain high.  Not a sure thing though.  If the 2016 GOP race had been fought with the Democrats’ delegate allocation rules, then there would have been a contested convention for sure.

[Mr. Morden]

This week's podcast is all about the 2020 Democratic primary race:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-which-democrats-will-run-in-2020/

[Mr. Morden]

From that discussion, here is their new draft on who is most likely to win the 2020 Dem. presidential nomination.  (h) = picked by Harry, (c) = picked by Clare, (n) = picked by Nate.

1) Harris (h)
2) Gillibrand (c)
3) Sanders (n)
4) Biden (h)
5) Warren (c)
6) Doug Jones (n)
7) Booker (h)
8 ) Landrieu (c)
9) Brown (n)
10) Inslee (h)
11) Castro (c)
12) Clinton (n)
13) Kander (h)
14) Garcetti (c)
15) The Rock (n)

[Mr. Morden]

Here’s the 538 crew on Oprah 2020:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/oprah-2020/

Excerpt:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While I wouldn’t rule out this happening, it seems like neither the 538 crew nor basically anyone in the entire media is aware of the Harvard-Harris poll from last year:

Harvard-Harris national poll for the 2020 Democratic primary, conducted Mar. 14-16:

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/324903-for-democrats-no-clear-leader

Sanders 20%
M. Obama 17%
Warren 15%
Clinton 10%
Booker 4%
Cuomo 4%
Winfrey 3%
Cuban 2%
None Of The Above 25%

Maybe she will go way up in the polls, but the one poll we have so far (which is now rather old, but I doubt all *that* much has changed since March) isn’t that promising.  At least as of last year, she had nearly 100% name recognition, yet only 3% of Dems had her as their first choice for president.  Favorable opinion of someone does not automatically translate into wanting them to be president.

[Mr. Morden]

Well, I don’t remember Trump leading the polls before his campaign announcement, because people just didn’t think it was an actual option at the time. Once Oprah declares, she’ll immediately jump to the front a la Trump.

That's possible, but I don't think it's a given.  I'm not sure why everyone assumes that because it worked that way for Trump, the same will apply to Winfrey.  (Also, as a historical clarification, Trump jumping out to the head of the line in polling actually took a couple of weeks after he announced his candidacy.  The first few polls after he declared mostly still had Bush in the lead.)

Trump had other things going for him, e.g., staking out a maximalist position on immigration, being anti-free trade, etc.  He was filling an ideological niche that wasn't being catered to by the rest of the field.  Winfrey, OTOH, will probably be saying the same things as the rest of the field.  I can very easily imagine her not automatically becoming the first choice of voters who are already hearing the same things from the other candidates.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm *guessing* that many people who are now bullish on Oprah simply don't know that that poll with her at 3% exists, and would be surprised if they saw it.  They just assume that because she's personally popular, that that automatically translates into her being people's #1 choice for president, which is extremely misguided IMHO.

[Mr. Morden]

Another way in which the Trump/Winfrey comparison breaks down is that Trump's favorability #s among Republicans were actually pretty poor at the time that he was in single digits in the polls, so he had a lot of room to grow.  Winfrey both has ~100% name recognition *and* has sky high favorability #s among Dems.  So if that's not already translating into support for president, then it's not a good sign.

[Mr. Morden]

Here’s the result of the latest 2020 Democratic primary draft, discussed here:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-time-for-a-new-2020-democratic-primary-draft/

1) Sanders (c)
2) Harris (n)
3) Baldwin (j)
4) Gillibrand (m)
5) Biden (m)
6) Patrick (j)
7) Warren (n)
8 ) Ryan (c)
9) Schultz (c)
10) Winfrey (n)
11) Kander (j)
12) Klobuchar (m)
13) Bullock (m)
14) Castro (j)
15) Booker (n)
16) Landrieu
17) Holder (c)
18) Clinton (n)
19) Hickenlooper (j)
20) M. Obama (m)
21) Brown (m)
22) Yates (j)
23) Jones (n)
24) Cuban (c)

c = picked by Clare
n = picked by Nate
j = picked by Julia
m = picked by Micah

[Mr. Morden]

Nate's with her! #Kamala2020

But unfortunately, they're right. Harris is going to get a lot of nasty attacks for being a woman of color.

See, I still think it's more likely a net benefit in terms of winning the Democratic nomination in a crowded field.  Harris would not be getting as much presidential attention right now if she were a white male.  The GE is a different story.  In general, the 538 commenters don't tend to do much to distinguish between things that are liabilities for the primary vs. the GE.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

They spent an entire slack chat talking about Tim Ryan's "yoga vote" comment:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-yoga-vote-a-thing/

[Mr. Morden]

Here’s their latest snake draft on who is most likely to be the nominee:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/our-third-ish-2020-democratic-primary-draft-got-weird/

1) Warren (c)
2) Harris (g)
3) Gillibrand (s)
4) Biden (n)
5) Sanders (n)
6) Booker (s)
7) O’Rourke (g)
8 ) Holder (c)
9) Avenatti (c)
10) Klobuchar (g)
11) Merkley (s)
12) Brown (n)
13) Winfrey (n)
14) Hirono (s)
15) Hickenlooper (g)
16) Dwayne Johnson (c)
17) M. Obama (c)
18) Patrick (g)
19) Delaney (s)
20) Garcetti (n)
21) Jones (n)
22) Inslee (s)
23) Gillum (g)
24) Landrieu (c)

c = picked by Clare
g = picked by Geoff
s = picked by Sarah
n = picked by Nate

[Mr. Morden]

Discussion here of the impact of the midterms on who will run for prez:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/will-the-midterms-decide-who-runs-in-2020/

The most sensible comment there was this one:

You must be logged in to read this quote.