IA-Selzer: Warren 22, Biden 20, Sanders 11, Buttigieg 9, Harris 6

[Comrade Funk]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

[Frenchrepublican]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

Did he campaign in this issue ?

[Comrade Funk]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

Did he campaign in this issue ?

[Xing]

Previous elections for another office are often not a good way to predict how well a candidate will do for a higher office. Plenty of candidates who win Senate races by impressive margins prove to be horrible presidential candidates, House members who win competitive districts by huge margins often crash and burn in Senate races, etc. Warren's non-competitive Senate race in 2018 tells us next to nothing about how she will do nationally in a very different kind of race (and as a different kind of candidate.)

[Frenchrepublican]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

Did he campaign in this issue ?

Well, he didn’t proposed to ban fracking. Right ?

[Frenchrepublican]

Previous elections for another office are often not a good way to predict how well a candidate will do for a higher office. Plenty of candidates who win Senate races by impressive margins prove to be horrible presidential candidates, House members who win competitive districts by huge margins often crash and burn in Senate races, etc. Warren's non-competitive Senate race in 2018 tells us next to nothing about how she will do nationally in a very different kind of race (and as a different kind of candidate.)

Well, obviously you seem very supportive of Warren, so it would be very difficult for me to make you listen my arguments. But let’s be clear, when you are a democratic incumbent senator and that you underperform Clinton by 5 despite a D wave, it’s not a good point in your favour.

And what you say is not really true.
Both Bush and Obama had an impressive electoral record before being elected president (Bush landslide win in 1998, Obama landslide win in 2004)

[Landslide Lyndon]

How can you say this though? Do you have compelling evidence that she'd do poorly among Obama/Trump voters?

He's just saying that because of how Warren makes him feel. I really would like to know how someone who doesn't even live in America knows what American voters want.

Warren at the very least would win back MI/WI/PA. Even if she can't exploit the shifts in the Sun Belt they're coming sooner or later so GOP is screwed there long term regardless.

Well, you don’t even know what Georgians want, so don’t lecture me about this.


And no, Warren would have some difficulties to win back PA, 350.000 jobs depend from the fossil fuel industry in this state, banning natural gas and fracking won’t play well.

Yes, and Iowans knew that they will be hurt by Trump's tariffs. And Texans knew that they will be hurt by Trump's intention to get out of NAFTA. And yet they voted for him.

BTW, nice of you to ignore my points.  

[Xing]

Previous elections for another office are often not a good way to predict how well a candidate will do for a higher office. Plenty of candidates who win Senate races by impressive margins prove to be horrible presidential candidates, House members who win competitive districts by huge margins often crash and burn in Senate races, etc. Warren's non-competitive Senate race in 2018 tells us next to nothing about how she will do nationally in a very different kind of race (and as a different kind of candidate.)

Well, obviously you seem very supportive of Warren, so it would be very difficult for me to make you listen my arguments. But let’s be clear, when you are a democratic incumbent senator and that you underperform Clinton by 5 despite a D wave, it’s not a good point in your favour.

And what you say is not really true.
Both Bush and Obama had an impressive electoral record before being elected president (Bush landslide win in 1998, Obama landslide win in 2004)

Since Warren is obviously one of your least favorites, you're going to make a lot out of data points suggesting she's a bad candidate. Yes, Bush and Obama won by impressive margins, but Clinton's margin in 2006 was also impressive. And Rubio, Kasich, and Walker, all of whom did very well in their elections prior to 2016, ran worse campaigns than Cruz, who only ran even with Romney in 2012. People hyped up Klobuchar as a great candidate based on her margin in Minnesota, but she's been shown to be a pretty weak presidential candidate. People who dislike Warren would find another reason to argue that she's "unelectable" even if she had won by 34 instead of "only" 24.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

4. Most Obama/Trump voters like and/or approve Trump, and with the exception of Biden it’s pretty hard to see even 1/4 of these voters voting D next year at the presidential level.

If Obama-Trump voters like and or approve of the president in large numbers (which I personally doubt, but lets have it your way) the problem clearly isn't that Warren is a weak candidate, it's that Trump is a strong candidate. If they like and approve of him, they'll vote for him no matter if the Dems nominate Warren or Bullock.

The issue of the Democratic candidate's electability only becomes an issue if swing-voters are lukewarm or negative towards Trump but are willing to hold their noose because they view the Democrat as worse.

Anyway, since Obama-Trump voters apparently were able to vote for a too liberal elite law professor in 2012, I fail to see why it'd be impossible in 2020.

[AngryBudgie]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

Did he campaign in this issue ?

Well, he didn’t proposed to ban fracking. Right ?

Banning fracking really isnt an unpopular stance to take. It might hurt Warren with the already very republican energy workers, but thats about it I'd think.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

In 2012, she campaigned hard and beat Scott Brown, that contradicts the unelectable part. She campaigned in IA for Braley, but Branstad was too popular in IA for Braley to win, 2014. Plus Braley made the gaffe

Winning a blowout in MA sen with smallar than usual margins, doesnt mean much in a GE arguement.  But women, underperform in MA, except in 2012. Shanon O'Brien lost to Gov Rommey in 2002 and Coakly lost to Scott Brown in 2010

[MT Treasurer]

Certainly not a bad poll for Warren, but I think it’s a tad too early to write Biden's obituary and crown Warren the inevitable nominee. Winning a 90% white state where Sanders tied Clinton in 2016 by two points doesn’t make her some unbeatable juggernaut, and she’ll definitely need to make inroads in SC/NV in order to beat Biden.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Certainly not a bad poll for Warren, but I think it’s a tad too early to write Biden's obituary and crown Warren the inevitable nominee. Winning a 90% white state where Sanders tied Clinton in 2016 by two points doesn’t make her some unbeatable juggernaut, and she’ll definitely need to make inroads in SC/NV in order to beat Biden.

I agree with this. Iowa/NH aren’t must win states for Biden. But if he does win them, that’s pretty much game over

[KaiserDave]

I really think Warren will do well with all demographic group mentioned. She'll have HRC numbers with Minority groups, which is probably what you're gonna get. Let's not kid ourselves, Obama is the only guy who's gonna get the numbers he got with African Americans. Booker, Biden, or Harris (maybe, but probably not) are the only ones who could approach it. She'll exceed HRC among the WWC, as we can see in her Senate race but also given that HRC was simply toxic with some of these communities. Obviously she'll fire up the base (this is already apparent), and if she can properly contrast herself with Bernie (as less crazy, more tempered), which she is already doing, she can hold Romney/Clinton voters.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

5% in 2 early states seems like a harder requirement. Anyways, all the candidates with 5% in the Iowa poll have 3 polls anyways, so it's useless for them.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

I really think Warren will do well with all demographic group mentioned. She'll have HRC numbers with Minority groups, which is probably what you're gonna get. Let's not kid ourselves, Obama is the only guy who's gonna get the numbers he got with African Americans. Booker, Biden, or Harris (maybe, but probably not) are the only ones who could approach it. She'll exceed HRC among the WWC, as we can see in her Senate race but also given that HRC was simply toxic with some of these communities. Obviously she'll fire up the base (this is already apparent), and if she can properly contrast herself with Bernie (as less crazy, more tempered), which she is already doing, she can hold Romney/Clinton voters.

Much as I like Warren, there is nothing to suggest she can match Clinton’s numbers with minorities. This seems like wishcasting at best

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

In the primary, minorities arent needed for her IA, NH, NV and Cali strategy.

In general election, Beto is a huge hit with Latinos and picking him will be wise, as Veep. Blacks are gonna fall in line when Booker and Harris tells Blacks to unite behind the nominee

[JG]

I really think Warren will do well with all demographic group mentioned. She'll have HRC numbers with Minority groups, which is probably what you're gonna get. Let's not kid ourselves, Obama is the only guy who's gonna get the numbers he got with African Americans. Booker, Biden, or Harris (maybe, but probably not) are the only ones who could approach it. She'll exceed HRC among the WWC, as we can see in her Senate race but also given that HRC was simply toxic with some of these communities. Obviously she'll fire up the base (this is already apparent), and if she can properly contrast herself with Bernie (as less crazy, more tempered), which she is already doing, she can hold Romney/Clinton voters.

Much as I like Warren, there is nothing to suggest she can match Clinton’s numbers with minorities. This seems like wishcasting at best

I assume they were talking about Clinton's numbers with minorities for the general election, not the primaries.

[KaiserDave]

I really think Warren will do well with all demographic group mentioned. She'll have HRC numbers with Minority groups, which is probably what you're gonna get. Let's not kid ourselves, Obama is the only guy who's gonna get the numbers he got with African Americans. Booker, Biden, or Harris (maybe, but probably not) are the only ones who could approach it. She'll exceed HRC among the WWC, as we can see in her Senate race but also given that HRC was simply toxic with some of these communities. Obviously she'll fire up the base (this is already apparent), and if she can properly contrast herself with Bernie (as less crazy, more tempered), which she is already doing, she can hold Romney/Clinton voters.

Much as I like Warren, there is nothing to suggest she can match Clinton’s numbers with minorities. This seems like wishcasting at best

Yeah, sorry. I am discussing the general election.

In the primary, no definitely she is not getting HRC minority numbers.

[Frenchrepublican]

This is what happens when you watch too many White People in Diners segments, and use that to determine what white people are like in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Never mind the fact the 2016 AG election saw an anti-fracking Democrat win with over 51% of the vote. AG Shapiro is doing a fine job going after those shale companies. But 'muh angry WWC'!

Did he campaign in this issue ?

Well, he didn’t proposed to ban fracking. Right ?

Banning fracking really isnt an unpopular stance to take. It might hurt Warren with the already very republican energy workers, but thats about it I'd think.

In PA elections are won or lost on the margins. Winning 40% in Washington county rather than 35% could be the difference between winning and losing the state as whole.

[Landslide Lyndon]

In PA elections are won or lost on the margins. Winning 40% in Washington county rather than 35% could be the difference between winning and losing the state as whole.

LOL, no Democrat is going to take 40% in Washington county even if he comes out with a t-shirt that says I fracking.

[Frenchrepublican]

4. Most Obama/Trump voters like and/or approve Trump, and with the exception of Biden it’s pretty hard to see even 1/4 of these voters voting D next year at the presidential level.

If Obama-Trump voters like and or approve of the president in large numbers (which I personally doubt, but lets have it your way) the problem clearly isn't that Warren is a weak candidate, it's that Trump is a strong candidate. If they like and approve of him, they'll vote for him no matter if the Dems nominate Warren or Bullock.

The issue of the Democratic candidate's electability only becomes an issue if swing-voters are lukewarm or negative towards Trump but are willing to hold their noose because they view the Democrat as worse.

Anyway, since Obama-Trump voters apparently were able to vote for a too liberal elite law professor in 2012, I fail to see why it'd be impossible in 2020.

Most Obama/Trump voters approve Trump (his approval rate is around 70% according to the few studies I red), the good new for democrats is that they don’t need to win back a lot of these voters, but if they can win back 25% of these voters their situation in PA or WI would be far better than if they only win back 10% of these voters. Biden is stronger with this kind of voters than Warren, it’s one of the reason why Biden tends to do 4/5 points better than Warren in polls when he is tested against, Trump.

Concerning Obama in 2012, you have to keep in mind that many voters don’t look at the platforms of the candidates they vote for, they’re not that ideological, a center right dude could vote Obama in 2012 simply because he thought that Obama had done a good job, it doesn’t mean he will vote for Warren. Anyway Warren is to the left of Obama and when she speaks she looks really extreme, while Obama was far more likeable when he spoke and seemed far more moderate (it’s why calling Obama a socialist didn’t really work)

[Frenchrepublican]

In PA elections are won or lost on the margins. Winning 40% in Washington county rather than 35% could be the difference between winning and losing the state as whole.

LOL, no Democrat is going to take 40% in Washington county even if he comes out with a t-shirt that says I fracking.

Before laughing at me and trying to make me look like a fool, you should educate yourself a bit.

Obama won 42.5% (in 2012) in Washington county, Casey won 47.5% (in 2018), Wolf won 48.5% (in 2018), in 2018 the county gave 42% of its vote to democrats. See there are plenty of examples.

Even at the presidential level, a democrat who don’t want to ban fracking and (and to destroy the good paying jobs of gas workers) could probably win between 39 and 41% in this county.

[ON Progressive]

In PA elections are won or lost on the margins. Winning 40% in Washington county rather than 35% could be the difference between winning and losing the state as whole.

LOL, no Democrat is going to take 40% in Washington county even if he comes out with a t-shirt that says I fracking.

Before laughing at me and trying to make me look like a fool, you should educate yourself a bit.

Obama won 42.5% (in 2012) in Washington county, Casey won 47.5% (in 2018), Wolf won 48.5% (in 2018), in 2018 the county gave 42% of its vote to democrats. See there are plenty of examples.

Even at the presidential level, a democrat who don’t want to ban fracking and (and to destroy the good paying jobs of gas workers) could probably win between 39 and 41% in this county.

2018 was also an outright catastrophic year for PA Republicans. Unless the PresiDem is winning PA by 15+, they are not getting Wolf or Casey numbers in Washington County.

[Frenchrepublican]

In PA elections are won or lost on the margins. Winning 40% in Washington county rather than 35% could be the difference between winning and losing the state as whole.

LOL, no Democrat is going to take 40% in Washington county even if he comes out with a t-shirt that says I fracking.

Before laughing at me and trying to make me look like a fool, you should educate yourself a bit.

Obama won 42.5% (in 2012) in Washington county, Casey won 47.5% (in 2018), Wolf won 48.5% (in 2018), in 2018 the county gave 42% of its vote to democrats. See there are plenty of examples.

Even at the presidential level, a democrat who don’t want to ban fracking and (and to destroy the good paying jobs of gas workers) could probably win between 39 and 41% in this county.

2018 was also an outright catastrophic year for PA Republicans. Unless the PresiDem is winning PA by 15+, they are not getting Wolf or Casey numbers in Washington County.

Sure, I have a hard time seeing Washington county giving even 45% to any democratic presidential candidate, but 40% is gettable under the right circumstances and provided democrats don’t run on a fracking ban platform.