IA-NYT/Siena: Sanders 25, Buttigieg 18, Biden 17, Warren 15, Klob 8

[ElectionsGuy]

Let’s all hope Klobuchar is not viable in the caucus and her supporters move to the Pete corners of the room ...

She won't be viable in most precincts, making her get 2-4% at most in statewide delegates, but the top 4 only part of the poll already shows nobody gets a super disproportionate gain. So Pete will need luck on his side.

[Podgy the Bear]

That's better than I would've imagined. +7 in Iowa, +12 in New Hampshire, I think we can say he is finally in a position to win.

To win what?  A nomination that will be as meaningless as 1972 or 1964?  This country won't stand for his Socialist policies, and he shows no indication that he will be flexible or will accommodate other views.  

Be careful, Donald Trump was supposed to be Barry Goldwater 2.0. There is a yearning for populist FDR style politics in the left-leaning working class but most people who just assume he's unelectable because SOCIALISM!!! do not understand the appeal and vastly underestimate his abilities. I mean, why did he poll better than Hillary in 2016 and pretty much on par with Biden now in GE matchups.

I'm not even saying he will win, and I'm not speaking as a Sanders supporter, but if you want to repeat the same strategy that lost the election for Democrats in 2016, run Joe Biden, and hope that some circumstances will be different this time to put him over the top. Or, choose Sanders, and play by a whole new rulebook and maybe you might just win. Maybe, the DC consultant/strategist way of thinking about electability is totally wrong! But we won't know if the Dems keep nominating the same old establishment duds.

Trump is NOT Goldwater 2.0.  He knows very well which way the winds blow, and he plays it well.
I despise the man and his morals, but his political skills cannot be underestimated.  Goldwater had conservative principles, stuck with them, was inflexible, and the Republicans were crushed in 1964.

Rightly or wrongly, George McGovern was targeted to be an extreme left winger.  He wasn't, but the damage was done early in the 1972 campaign.  The Nixon forces finished him off early.  A terrible campaign didn't help either.

Sanders shows every indication to be a Barry Goldwater.  I would visualize an acceptance speech in the realm of "Extremism in the defense of liberty..."  We know how that turned out.

[ON Progressive]

That's better than I would've imagined. +7 in Iowa, +12 in New Hampshire, I think we can say he is finally in a position to win.

To win what?  A nomination that will be as meaningless as 1972 or 1964?  This country won't stand for his Socialist policies, and he shows no indication that he will be flexible or will accommodate other views.  

Be careful, Donald Trump was supposed to be Barry Goldwater 2.0. There is a yearning for populist FDR style politics in the left-leaning working class but most people who just assume he's unelectable because SOCIALISM!!! do not understand the appeal and vastly underestimate his abilities. I mean, why did he poll better than Hillary in 2016 and pretty much on par with Biden now in GE matchups.

I'm not even saying he will win, and I'm not speaking as a Sanders supporter, but if you want to repeat the same strategy that lost the election for Democrats in 2016, run Joe Biden, and hope that some circumstances will be different this time to put him over the top. Or, choose Sanders, and play by a whole new rulebook and maybe you might just win. Maybe, the DC consultant/strategist way of thinking about electability is totally wrong! But we won't know if the Dems keep nominating the same old establishment duds.

Trump is NOT Goldwater 2.0.  He knows very well which way the winds blow, and he plays it well.
I despise the man and his morals, but his political skills cannot be underestimated.  Goldwater had conservative principles, stuck with them, was inflexible, and the Republicans were crushed in 1964.

Rightly or wrongly, George McGovern was targeted to be an extreme left winger.  He wasn't, but the damage was done early in the 1972 campaign.  The Nixon forces finished him off early.  A terrible campaign didn't help either.

Sanders shows every indication to be a Barry Goldwater.  I would visualize an acceptance speech in the realm of "Extremism in the defense of liberty..."  We know how that turned out.

Maybe, just maybe, Nixon won the 1972 election because he was a very popular incumbent at the time.

[Brittain33]

Oh [Inks]. Let’s hope he hits a ceiling and we can rally around a better candidate in later states.

[Podgy the Bear]

That's better than I would've imagined. +7 in Iowa, +12 in New Hampshire, I think we can say he is finally in a position to win.

To win what?  A nomination that will be as meaningless as 1972 or 1964?  This country won't stand for his Socialist policies, and he shows no indication that he will be flexible or will accommodate other views.  

Be careful, Donald Trump was supposed to be Barry Goldwater 2.0. There is a yearning for populist FDR style politics in the left-leaning working class but most people who just assume he's unelectable because SOCIALISM!!! do not understand the appeal and vastly underestimate his abilities. I mean, why did he poll better than Hillary in 2016 and pretty much on par with Biden now in GE matchups.

I'm not even saying he will win, and I'm not speaking as a Sanders supporter, but if you want to repeat the same strategy that lost the election for Democrats in 2016, run Joe Biden, and hope that some circumstances will be different this time to put him over the top. Or, choose Sanders, and play by a whole new rulebook and maybe you might just win. Maybe, the DC consultant/strategist way of thinking about electability is totally wrong! But we won't know if the Dems keep nominating the same old establishment duds.

Trump is NOT Goldwater 2.0.  He knows very well which way the winds blow, and he plays it well.
I despise the man and his morals, but his political skills cannot be underestimated.  Goldwater had conservative principles, stuck with them, was inflexible, and the Republicans were crushed in 1964.

Rightly or wrongly, George McGovern was targeted to be an extreme left winger.  He wasn't, but the damage was done early in the 1972 campaign.  The Nixon forces finished him off early.  A terrible campaign didn't help either.

Sanders shows every indication to be a Barry Goldwater.  I would visualize an acceptance speech in the realm of "Extremism in the defense of liberty..."  We know how that turned out.

Maybe, just maybe, Nixon won the 1972 election because he was a very popular incumbent at the time.

He wasn't that popular for McGovern to pick up only 37% of the national vote.  

[Queen Isuelt]

Let’s all hope Klobuchar is not viable in the caucus and her supporters move to the Pete corners of the room ...

Not happening because precinct captains have been told to go to Warren. No benefit to boost Pete when he’s the one stopping a Biden-Klobuchar debate. Petes campaign needs to end and Amy’s supporters know it.

Pete, Warren and Biden won’t hit viability in most precincts if on threshold.

We get three votes counts on Iowa caucus night - raw votes - 1st votes. Re-allocation - 2nd votes. Delegate total - 3rd vote.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Hopefully when the voters see Bernie crushing Biden, the South will have a second opinion about Bernie. It's not the blacks in the South, it's the black representatives other than Clyburn and Ben Jealous.  Clyburn said he was shocked Booker and Harris weren't winning SC

[Queen Isuelt]

Let’s all hope Klobuchar is not viable in the caucus and her supporters move to the Pete corners of the room ...

The poll shows Klobuchar voter's move to Biden and Warren.

Correct. They did a caucus training run couple of weeks ago and the message was very simple - do not give votes to Pete Buttigieg or Bernie Sanders.

If you look at the map someone on twitter allocates the votes and yellow was Klobuchar so shes doing well in rural northern Iowa. She has vote counts in every county and this Siena poll is polling 1-2 people per county that are democrats so it’s pot luck who is surveyed. I think she will reach viability in rural areas.

40% are still undecided

[Mr. Smith]

That's better than I would've imagined. +7 in Iowa, +12 in New Hampshire, I think we can say he is finally in a position to win.

To win what?  A nomination that will be as meaningless as 1972 or 1964?  This country won't stand for his Socialist policies, and he shows no indication that he will be flexible or will accommodate other views. 

Ah, so you'd prefer another 1984 or 2004 or 1988 instead? How about where the party plays the game of electing a stand-for-nothing moderate, and ultimately loses despite all the hype.

Also, 2008 was a blowout and the country was quite happy with the "socialist policies" of the auto bailouts, ending Iraq, and instituting the Republicans healthcare plan. 1932 and 1936 were also some d%^n good years too on that account.

Also, surely 2016, 1980, and 2000 were meaningless years too, yes? Surely the country had no appetite for supply side stupidity and cutting Social Security, surely the country had no desire for racism or homophobia or insert-ism-here? ....Oh, wait.

[Queen Isuelt]

Let’s all hope Klobuchar is not viable in the caucus and her supporters move to the Pete corners of the room ...

She won't be viable in most precincts, making her get 2-4% at most in statewide delegates, but the top 4 only part of the poll already shows nobody gets a super disproportionate gain. So Pete will need luck on his side.

Raw votes will be counted and declared on election night.

[They not like us]

Let’s all hope Klobuchar is not viable in the caucus and her supporters move to the Pete corners of the room ...

God, give it a rest already.

Anyway, the guy nobody likes continues to overperform. He’ll obviously get 0% on caucus day, this is just an over sampling of internet users and Russians! (/s)

[Pollster]

Another Iowa poll showing that Klobuchar supporters’ second choices will likely decide this race.

[Podgy the Bear]

That's better than I would've imagined. +7 in Iowa, +12 in New Hampshire, I think we can say he is finally in a position to win.

To win what?  A nomination that will be as meaningless as 1972 or 1964?  This country won't stand for his Socialist policies, and he shows no indication that he will be flexible or will accommodate other views.  

Ah, so you'd prefer another 1984 or 2004 or 1988 instead? How about where the party plays the game of electing a stand-for-nothing moderate, and ultimately loses despite all the hype.

Also, 2008 was a blowout and the country was quite happy with the "socialist policies" of the auto bailouts, ending Iraq, and instituting the Republicans healthcare plan. 1932 and 1936 were also some d%^n good years too on that account.

Also, surely 2016, 1980, and 2000 were meaningless years too, yes? Surely the country had no appetite for supply side stupidity and cutting Social Security, surely the country had no desire for racism or homophobia or insert-ism-here? ....Oh, wait.

Do you want to win in 2020?  Then get real and begin to deal with the political fallout with the growing expectation of a Sanders nomination.

1) First of all, Sanders needs to declare himself as a Democrat.  This "Independent" stuff is BS.
2) He will have to do whatever it takes to keep the larger moderate base within the party and not to defect.    He's going to have to deal with the purple districts that elected moderate Democrats in 2018.
3) His progressive base will have to swallow that and understand that every wishful thinking program is not going to happen right away.

I don't see any of this occurring.  But miracles do happen.

[Dr. Arch]

It looks like Bernie is going to handily win IA and NH. If that's the case, NV will likely be in the bag too. With those three contests won, he can keep Biden's margins down in the southern contests, and that would be it.

[Adam Griffin]

[Cinemark]

It looks like Bernie is going to handily win IA and NH. If that's the case, NV will likely be in the bag too. With those three contests won, he can keep Biden's margins down in the southern contests, and that would be it.

Better for everyone if he can wrap this thing up by March.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Do you want to win in 2020?  Then get real and begin to deal with the political fallout with the growing expectation of a Sanders nomination.

1) First of all, Sanders needs to declare himself as a Democrat.  This "Independent" stuff is BS.

Yeah to win the general Sanders needs to make himself less attractive to independent voters. Expert #analysis!

The only people who care about the dumb "not a Democrat" attack line are super partisan straight ticket Democratic voters who will vote for any D nominee.

[Podgy the Bear]

Do you want to win in 2020?  Then get real and begin to deal with the political fallout with the growing expectation of a Sanders nomination.

1) First of all, Sanders needs to declare himself as a Democrat.  This "Independent" stuff is BS.

Yeah to win the general Sanders needs to make himself less attractive to independent voters. Expert #analysis!

The only people who care about the dumb "not a Democrat" attack line are super partisan straight ticket Democratic voters who will vote for any D nominee.

He's perceived as a Socialist by any center-left or centrist here in the United States.   But I do agree with you.  Jeremy Corbyn didn't fool anyone in the UK by using the Labour label over his Socialist stands.

So right--let's take #1 off the table. 

[Pollster]

Another Iowa poll showing that Klobuchar supporters’ second choices will likely decide this race.

They could be important, especially if they skew so heavily toward Biden as the crosstabs here show, but this result shows 25% of voters undecided or in support of candidates below the threshold. Only a third of them support Klobuchar.

Also, with numbers in the high teens, three of the four leading candidates are in danger of missing thresholds unless their support has very little geographic variation. And it wouldn't take much of a last-minute shift to leave even more of them orphaned.

This is an incredibly good point - geographic variation does matter a lot in terms of delegates, and it could wind up saving/sinking some candidates depending on where their areas of strength are. Polls with detailed regional breakdowns would be helpful.

[bilaps]

Buttigieg should be the strongest in Eastern part of state, especially in smaller towns, he's been campaigning there like crazy and it shows in this poll too. Klobuchar should be strongest in northern parts closer to Minnesota, Biden probably in Des Moines area, he also got endorsment from Axne now. Sanders is of course strongest in college areas but he should have support across the board in central and eastern IA and he's going for the western part too, he will be there tomorrow.

[KaiserDave]

The Iowa Race is probably going to come down to Klobuchar voters. I'd say Bernie is a slight favorite, but Biden would still take it.

But I'm skeptical of this polls number for Buttigieg, which contradicts the long term trends we've been seeing.

[Mr. Morden]

Crosstabs:

https://scri.siena.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/IADem0120_4891051654159.pdf

men:
Sanders 34%
Buttigieg 15%
Biden 14%
Warren 10%

women:
Biden 20%
Buttigieg 20%
Warren 19%
Sanders 17%

age 18-29:
Sanders 40%
Buttigieg 16%
Warren 16%
Biden 10%
Klobuchar 6%

age 65+:
Biden 32%
Buttigieg 17%
Klobuchar 13%
Sanders 9%
Warren 8%

Des Moines metro:
Biden 21%
Sanders 19%
Warren 18%
Buttigieg 13%

East:
Buttigieg 31%
Sanders 24%
Biden 15%
Warren 11%

Eastern Cities:
Sanders 31%
Biden 17%
Warren 15%
Buttigieg 13%

West:
Sanders 22%
Buttigieg 18%
Biden 17%
Warren 15%

[Tender Branson]

But I'm skeptical of this polls number for Buttigieg, which contradicts the long term trends we've been seeing.

Yeah, you are right: he’s probably closer to 30% than 18% in reality.

[KaiserDave]

But I'm skeptical of this polls number for Buttigieg, which contradicts the long term trends we've been seeing.

Yeah, you are right: he’s probably closer to 30% than 18% in reality.

Another one for the silly posts thread

#winning

[Mr. Morden]

The Iowa Race is probably going to come down to Klobuchar voters. I'd say Bernie is a slight favorite, but Biden would still take it.

But again, they're also going to be releasing the tally of initial preferences this time.  So on that one, Klobuchar voters will still count towards Klobuchar, and not anyone else.  If the initial preference winner is different from whoever wins the reallocated vote, they'll make a case for claiming victory too.