IA-Emerson: Warren/Biden 23, Buttigieg 16, Sanders 13 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:32:14 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  IA-Emerson: Warren/Biden 23, Buttigieg 16, Sanders 13 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: IA-Emerson: Warren/Biden 23, Buttigieg 16, Sanders 13  (Read 1909 times)
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


« on: October 17, 2019, 11:34:09 AM »
« edited: October 17, 2019, 11:38:09 AM by Tintrlvr »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere (e.g., right before the 2008 Iowa caucuses, Richardson was polling around 6%, Biden around 4% and Dodd around 2% in Iowa, but Richardson ended up with 2%, Biden with less than 1% and Dodd with only a single delegate (out of 2,500) to the state convention).
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2019, 11:43:08 AM »

Given how you need 15% in the first round in order to move to the second round, Sanders supporters are going to play a key role here.

Buttigieg, too. Getting 16% statewide would still mean falling below 15% in many individual caucus-sites (and getting 13% statewide would still mean being above 15% in many individual caucus-sites). What the 15% threshold mostly does is amplify the victories of the leading candidates at the expense of the other candidates. Someone polling at 5% or less statewide right before caucus day will end up with near-zero support showing up in the result because they will miss the 15% cutoff almost everywhere.

One thing to note is that Iowa will be providing raw vote totals for the first time in order to prevent some of the complaints from 2016.

Didn't know that. I don't think it changes much (depends on how the media reports the results, I suppose), although I also don't know why anyone would have been complaining in 2016 since there were only two real candidates anyway (unless the complainant was O'Malley?), so the effects of suppressing the results of weaker candidates/amplifying those of stronger candidates shouldn't have been particularly meaningful.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 14 queries.