Who's going to qualify for the Democratic debates?

[Gass3268]

CBS and YouGov will have a "Battleground Tracker" poll coming out on Sunday, which polls Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina:

https://mailchi.mp/cbsnews/cbs-news-will-debut-its-2020-battleground-tracker-on-face-the-nation-sunday-547733

There will be separate results for each of the three aforementioned early states.  I assume this then counts as three separate polls?  If so, then this could be a big chance for candidates to get new polls to qualify for the July debate.

This would be pretty funny if Bullock gets 1 or 2% in some of these, right after the June debate cutoff closed. This is important to note, however:

https://twitter.com/ZachMontellaro/status/1139552842824527872

Fox and NBC/WSJ will also be coming out with new polls soon.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D9Bi-PrXoAE1LbV.jpg:large

So that's like... 5 polls on Sunday? Big day.

Yeah the DNC has been: online polls = bad, CBS = good

I wonder how they will square those.

[Tender Branson]

They should have released this stuff last weekend ...

[The Other Castro]

As Mr. Morden mentioned in the CBS polling thread, Delaney picked up a 2% poll, which likely secures his spot for July, assuming the poll is eligible. In addition, Bullock, Gravel, and Messam picked up a 1% result, bringing it to Bullock 3, Messam 2, and Gravel 1. These numbers will likely change over the next month, I’ll post an updated chart later on, but tiebreakers will very likely have to be used.

A note on Gravel, him making the July debate isn’t out of the realm of possibility. Remember, Williamson had that perfect sequence of events where she broke 65K donors and then got two more 1% polls to double qualify. Gravel is probably around 50K donors by now, and most of the eligible pollsters are now including him.

[Mr. Morden]

Post-Fox and post-CBS/Yougov polls, here’s the update on where things stand for the July debate: I guess I’d assume that the CBS/Yougov polls count, though there’s a chance that the DNC won’t count them, because of how they’re being reported as something like subsamples of a larger poll.  If they *don’t* count, then the only change from my last post is that Delaney now has 6 polls at 1% (though only from 3 distinct pollsters):

Biden 10
Booker 10
Buttigieg 10
Harris 10
Klobuchar 10
O’Rourke 10
Sanders 10
Warren 10
Yang 10
Castro 8
Ryan 7
Gabbard 6
Gillibrand 6
Hickenlooper 5
Inslee 5
Williamson 4 (in good shape on tiebreakers because of donor count)
de Blasio 3 (6)
Delaney 3 (6)
Bennet 3 (4)
Swalwell 3 (3)
———qualification line———
Bullock 2
Messam 1

bold = in bad shape on tiebreakers
For the candidates with polls from 3 pollsters, I included the number of individual polls they have, even if they're from the same pollster.  (Just in case that's how the DNC breaks ties.)

If the CBS/Yougov polls *do* count, then I think we have Bullock now passing the qualification threshold, and the 20th spot having to be decided by tiebreakers:

Biden 13
Booker 13
Buttigieg 13
Harris 13
Klobuchar 13
O’Rourke 13
Sanders 13
Warren 13
Yang 12
Gillibrand 9
Castro 8
Ryan 8
Gabbard 7
Hickenlooper 6
Inslee 6
Delaney 4 (in good shape on tiebreakers because of a >1% polling average)
Williamson 4 (in good shape on tiebreakers because of donor count)
de Blasio 3 (6)
Bennet 3 (4)
Bullock 3 (3)
Swalwell 3 (3)
———qualification line———
Messam 2
Gravel 1

bold = in bad shape on tiebreakers
For the candidates with polls from 3 pollsters, I included the number of individual polls they have, even if they're from the same pollster.  (Just in case that's how the DNC breaks ties.)

So, if we got no new polls and no new donor info in the next four weeks, who would qualify?  Here are the scenarios, depending on how the DNC interprets its rules:

1) The Yougov polls don’t count: Then, as things stand right now, the exact same 20 people would qualify for the July debate who qualified for the June debate.  Meaning that Bullock doesn’t make it.

2) The Yougov polls *do* count, and tie breakers count the number of different polls a candidate is at 1% in, even if many of them come from the same pollsters: Then Bullock and Swalwell are tied for the 20th spot in the debate, with one making it in and the other not.  How the DNC breaks *that* tie is unclear, but might be by who has the most donors.

3) The Yougov polls *do* count, and the tie breakers count the number of *distinct pollsters* in which a candidate hits 1%, so repeat polls from the same pollster don’t count: Then Bennet, Bullock, de Blasio, and Swalwell are in a 4-way tie for the last 3 debate spots, and again, it’s unclear how the DNC decides which of the 4 to exclude, but might be based on which of them has the fewest donors.

[beesley]

I hope Messam qualifies for the second debate. It'd be nice to find out who he actually is.

[eric82oslo]

I hope Messam qualifies for the second debate. It'd be nice to find out who he actually is.

Then Trump can throw insults at him since his parents are from the sh*thole country of Haiti lol.

[Mr. Morden]

The DNC confirms that the CBS/YouGov polls all count as separate polls:

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-score/2019/06/18/bullock-qualifies-for-july-debate-658525

The Democratic National Committee confirmed to Score Monday that the individual polls in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina will count toward debate qualification. The rolled-up polling that includes all of the 18 battleground states will not (as always, the DNC does not comment on the individual qualifications for candidates; POLITICO is saying Bullock has qualified based off publicly available polling).

Therefore, as things stand right now in qualification for the July debate, Bullock is either tied with Swalwell for the final debate slot, or else in a 4-way tie with Swalwell, de Blasio, and Bennet for the last 3 slots.

Also, Moulton is still at zero qualifying polls at 1%, behind even Gravel.

[Former Crackhead Mike Lindell]

I hope Messam qualifies for the second debate. It'd be nice to find out who he actually is.

The fact that a man who only got his own wikipedia page back in February is this close to qualifying is pretty impressive

[beesley]

I hope Messam qualifies for the second debate. It'd be nice to find out who he actually is.

The fact that a man who only got his own wikipedia page back in February is this close to qualifying is pretty impressive

He's a far better candidate then one would think - he just seems to be defined by one stock image the media rollout when they want to reference him. It'd be nice for him to qualify and show his stuff, rather than someone we all know about (Swalwell or Ryan)

[Tender Branson]

https://mobile.twitter.com/GovernorBullock/status/1140990927336423424

Qualified in terms of having 3 polls, but it’s not certain that he also has a debate slot ...

[The Other Castro]

Today's USAT/Suffolk poll is possibly another disaster waiting to happen for the July debate. It had Bullock, Ryan, and Yang at a rounded 1% (between 0.5 and 1), but the USAT article only specified candidates above true 1% (ex: Hickenlooper at 1.04%) as being "over 1%".

The important takeaway here is that, although Bullock has a rounded 1%, which would count in most other polls toward the debates, in this poll it may not. The main Politico reporter covering the debate polls thinks it does not count, and has reached out to the DNC for clarification on this subject, so we may get more information on this soon. But, this would be the difference between Bullock tying for last place, and Bullock taking the lead over another qualified candidate in # of polls (regardless of total polls vs unique polls counting method).

[The Other Castro]

Currently, I'm going to play it safe and not count the USAT poll for Bullock until there is a rule clarification. Here's my chart for July:



This is my chart for the September debates, based on fundraising numbers and likelihood to meet the polling requirements (since no polls count for this one until after the June debate):

[PaperKooper]

https://twitter.com/AmiHorowitz/status/1139601502912356352

Ami Horowitz has no shot at actually making the debates, but he's got far more donations than I would have imagined. 

[The Other Castro]

https://twitter.com/AmiHorowitz/status/1139601502912356352

Ami Horowitz has no shot at actually making the debates, but he's got far more donations than I would have imagined. 

Ami’s whole shtick is manipulation to try and make people look stupid, and now he’s running a grift on people who think donations can actually help him qualify for the debates, which is impossible at this stage without qualifying polls (and pollsters aren’t going to include a Republican troll in a Democratic poll)

[The Other Castro]

What about the August debates?

There are no August debates. The schedule is:

1A/1B - June 26/27
2A/2B - July 30/31
3 - September 12 (3B on September 13 if somehow 11 candidates qualify)
4 - October

[The Other Castro]

Yang has 122,500 donors as of 6/18.

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1141830601013714944

[Mr. Morden]

I’ve been slow in updating this, but here is post-Monmouth, and post-USA Today/Suffolk:

Biden 14
Booker 14
Buttigieg 14
Harris 14
O’Rourke 14
Sanders 14
Warren 14
Klobuchar 13
Yang 12 or 13
Gillibrand 9
Castro 9
Ryan 8 or 9
Gabbard 7
Hickenlooper 7
Inslee 7
Delaney 4 (in good shape on tiebreakers because of a >1% polling average)
Williamson 4 (in good shape on tiebreakers because of donor count)
Bullock 3 or 4 (3 or 4)
de Blasio 3 (7)
Bennet 3 (4)
Swalwell 3 (3)
———qualification line———
Messam 2
Gravel 1

bold = in bad shape on tiebreakers
For the candidates with polls from 3 pollsters, I included the number of individual polls they have, even if they're from the same pollster.  (Just in case that's how the DNC breaks ties.)

No idea what they’re going to do with the USA Today / Suffolk poll, re: the candidates who were under 1% but round to 1%.  So there’s uncertainty on Yang, Ryan, and Bullock because of that (though Bullock’s the only one of those for whom it’s likely to matter).

Here are the scenarios right now, if we were to get no more polls from now until the deadline:

1) Rounding up in the Suffolk poll counts, and tie breakers count the number of different polls a candidate is at 1% in, even if many of them come from the same pollsters: Bullock, de Blasio, and Bennet are all in, and Swalwell doesn’t qualify.

2) Rounding up in the Suffolk poll counts, and tie breakers count the number of *distinct pollsters* in which a candidate hits 1%, so repeat polls from the same pollster don’t count: Bullock’s in, while Bennet, de Blasio, and Swalwell are in a 3-way tie for the last 2 debate spots.  How the DNC breaks *that* tie is unclear, but might be by who has the most donors.

3) Rounding up in the Suffolk poll doesn’t count, and tie breakers count the number of different polls a candidate is at 1% in, even if many of them come from the same pollsters: Bennet and de Blasio are in, and Bullock and Swalwell tie for the final debate spot, and again, it’s unclear how the DNC decides which of the 2 to exclude, but might be based on which of them has the fewest donors.

4) Rounding up in the Suffolk poll doesn’t count, and tie breakers count the number of *distinct pollsters* in which a candidate hits 1%, so repeat polls from the same pollster don’t count: de Blasio, Bennet, Bullock, and Swalwell are all in a 4-way tie for the final 3 debate spots, and again, it’s unclear how the DNC decides which of the 2 to exclude, but might be based on which of them has the fewest donors.

So no matter which interpretation the DNC uses, among those who’ve nominally qualified, Swalwell is either alone in last place and will be eliminated, or he’s tied for last place, and will go to an additional tiebreaker (maybe based on donors) with some combination of de Blasio, Bennet, and Bullock.

Also note that we are three days away (June 28th) from the first day on which we get polls that determine who qualifies for the *September* debate.

[Mr. Morden]

This is my chart for the September debates, based on fundraising numbers and likelihood to meet the polling requirements (since no polls count for this one until after the June debate):

I just took a look at all the polling for the month of June (not just the polls that qualify, but all of the polls, and I'm assuming that the future qualifying polls will be similar to what we've been getting recently).  And it really looks like Klobuchar's polling has taken a turn for the worse.  She's getting just 1% in virtually every poll now (and sometimes 0%).  Unless tomorrow's debate gives her a bounce in the polls, or maybe unless we get an unexpectedly large number of qualifying polls from Iowa, I don't see her qualifying for the September debate.  It might only be Biden, Buttigieg, Sanders, Warren, Harris, O'Rourke, Booker, and that's it (and even Booker might not make it, because it's not totally clear he'll hit the donor number).  Yang is probably the next most likely after that, probably more likely than Klobuchar at this point, IMHO.

Though again, it depends on how the polls change after this week's debates.

[Blue3]

With Sestak randomly running, does anyone here think he’ll make it to a debate?

[Former Crackhead Mike Lindell]

With Sestak randomly running, does anyone here think he’ll make it to a debate?

Lol no

[The Other Castro]

I just took a look at all the polling for the month of June (not just the polls that qualify, but all of the polls, and I'm assuming that the future qualifying polls will be similar to what we've been getting recently).  And it really looks like Klobuchar's polling has taken a turn for the worse.  She's getting just 1% in virtually every poll now (and sometimes 0%).  Unless tomorrow's debate gives her a bounce in the polls, or maybe unless we get an unexpectedly large number of qualifying polls from Iowa, I don't see her qualifying for the September debate.  It might only be Biden, Buttigieg, Sanders, Warren, Harris, O'Rourke, Booker, and that's it (and even Booker might not make it, because it's not totally clear he'll hit the donor number).  Yang is probably the next most likely after that, probably more likely than Klobuchar at this point, IMHO.

Though again, it depends on how the polls change after this week's debates.

Looking over the last two month polling period (April 19 - June 19), and using the DNC rules of one poll per pollster (per region), here's what I found for number of 2%+ polls by candidate:

Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Harris, O'Rourke - 13
Booker - 12
Klobuchar - 8
Yang - 4
Castro - 2
Gabbard, Ryan, Hickenlooper, Delaney - 1
All others - 0

So, I should probably adjust my chart somewhat, but in this 2 month period among qualified pollsters at least, Klobuchar seems to be doing fine. I guess she's just lucky that she's doing better in the polls that count towards the debate. As it stands now, the Big 6 + Booker, Klobuchar, and Yang are the only 9 that have shown an ability to earn 4 qualifying 2% polls over a 2 month period.

[Mr. Morden]

Looking over the last two month polling period (April 19 - June 19), and using the DNC rules of one poll per pollster (per region), here's what I found for number of 2%+ polls by candidate:

Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Harris, O'Rourke - 13
Booker - 12
Klobuchar - 8
Yang - 4
Castro - 2
Gabbard, Ryan, Hickenlooper, Delaney - 1
All others - 0

So, I should probably adjust my chart somewhat, but in this 2 month period among qualified pollsters at least, Klobuchar seems to be doing fine. I guess she's just lucky that she's doing better in the polls that count towards the debate. As it stands now, the Big 6 + Booker, Klobuchar, and Yang are the only 9 that have shown an ability to earn 4 qualifying 2% polls over a 2 month period.

But most of those polls are from April/May.  By going all the way back to April, it looks like she's doing fine.  But if you just look at polls from June, it's not good for her.  I see 20 national polls in Wikipedia's list for the month of June, and Klobuchar only reached 2% in 2 of them (Yang got 2% in 3 polls from that period).  Of course, most of those don't count towards qualifying for the debate, but I don't think there's any systematic difference between those that qualify and those that don't for Klobuchar.  Among the 5 DNC-approved national polls from the same period, looks like she's at 2% in just 1 of them.  (2 for Yang.)

So I think as of June, she's dropped enough that she's not going to qualify if this keeps up.  OTOH, she has kept getting 2% in Iowa, so if we have a few qualifying polls from Iowa, then that could be enough.

[The Other Castro]

Looking over the last two month polling period (April 19 - June 19), and using the DNC rules of one poll per pollster (per region), here's what I found for number of 2%+ polls by candidate:

Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Harris, O'Rourke - 13
Booker - 12
Klobuchar - 8
Yang - 4
Castro - 2
Gabbard, Ryan, Hickenlooper, Delaney - 1
All others - 0

So, I should probably adjust my chart somewhat, but in this 2 month period among qualified pollsters at least, Klobuchar seems to be doing fine. I guess she's just lucky that she's doing better in the polls that count towards the debate. As it stands now, the Big 6 + Booker, Klobuchar, and Yang are the only 9 that have shown an ability to earn 4 qualifying 2% polls over a 2 month period.

But most of those polls are from April/May.  By going all the way back to April, it looks like she's doing fine.  But if you just look at polls from June, it's not good for her.  I see 20 national polls in Wikipedia's list for the month of June, and Klobuchar only reached 2% in 2 of them (Yang got 2% in 3 polls from that period).  Of course, most of those don't count towards qualifying for the debate, but I don't think there's any systematic difference between those that qualify and those that don't for Klobuchar.  Among the 5 DNC-approved national polls from the same period, looks like she's at 2% in just 1 of them.  (2 for Yang.)

So I think as of June, she's dropped enough that she's not going to qualify if this keeps up.  OTOH, she has kept getting 2% in Iowa, so if we have a few qualifying polls from Iowa, then that could be enough.

OK yeah you do make some good points on looking at June alone for trajectory, and I'm not sure if I have my dates wrong (I'm going by poll publish date), but I see four 2%+'s for Klobuchar in June (CNN, FOX, Monmouth IA, CBS IA), and three 2%+'s for Yang in June (Monmouth, Fox, Monmouth NV). Luckily for her an Iowa poll is just as good as a National poll, though I agree Yang is doing better than her among recent National polls, and she may end up needing these Iowa polls to save her skin. I'd guess there will be at least two Iowa polls in the eligible polling period, which, based on past Iowa results (she looks to be over 1% in all of them), should get Klobuchar half of the way there.

(Yang is also very close to 130K donors and it's unclear how close Klobuchar is to that right now)

[Mr. Morden]

Re: Qualification for the September debate:

Booker campaign now claims to be somewhere around 100,000 donors, with 4000 new donors contributing on Thursday, the day after his debate performance:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/28/politics/cory-booker-surge-online-fundraising/index.html

Gabbard campaign says 85,219 donors for her, as of this Instagram post:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BzPJ1pPhs4u/

[eric82oslo]

Plus Yang reached 130,000 today: https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1144790711264514048