Why is Sanders under performing?

[ElectionsGuy]

Anybody know why he's doing worse than his leads in poll averages? Why did late deciders break for Klobuchar and Buttigieg in New Hampshire? Sanders has the highest favorability of any candidate running yet he has such a hard time getting people who are undecided. I don't get it.

[Dr. Arch]

This is what makes this primary so interesting to watch. Everything is not like 2016, when we were expecting the opposite.

Everyone was talking about a weak bench, but it seems we have one of the strongest benches in my lifetime. I'm pleasantly surprised.

[Lambsbread]

I think we're either seeing an oversampling of Biden supporters or a lot of people are breaking late from Warren/Biden to Pete/Amy. Bernie only "underperformed" his RCP average in NH by 2-3%, so within the MoE for most polls. It's more that others are overperforming.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Because he's simultaneously become more tied to the post-Obama/Trump-era Democratic Party and pulled a lot of cargo cult bourgeois socialists into or around his campaign. Meanwhile, other candidates have adopted some of his policy proposals and made a joke out of them.

The latter was not as much of an issue in 2016 and the former was even less so; "Bernie's not even a Democrat!" was a plus for him among many voters when he was running against the Clinton machine.

Also, the fact that he's approaching 80 (he literally had a heart attack!) is not going to go away as a concern.

[ElectionsGuy]

This is what makes this primary so interesting to watch. Everything is not like 2016, when we were expecting the opposite.

Everyone was talking about a weak bench, but it seems we have one of the strongest benches in my lifetime. I'm pleasantly surprised.

I agree. I hate watching people make comparisons to 2016. I think Bernie's support this time is far different than in 2016 (and obviously it's going to be far less in a 10 person race). NH might actually be a weaker state than average for Bernie when all said and done this time. Still, I'd be worried about his ability to get decisive larger wins in other states, it looks like this field will not sort itself out very neatly.

[Xing]

Part of it is because he's not doing a good enough job of turning his base out. Another thing is that there are far more #NeverSanders Democrats than I would have imagined, who are not tied to any particular candidate but who are willing to strategically back just about anyone to stop Sanders.

[Queen Isuelt]

Like everyone who runs again after losing...they just run on nolstagia.

Bernies crowd will never understand that many voted for him to stand up to Hillary and his time was 4 years ago not now.

He looks old and he looks tired and lacks energy.

[Gass3268]

Sanders is doing terrible amoung late deciders.

[Matty]

Sanders is doing terrible amoung late deciders.

That is literally the reason he is “underperforming”
Technically, he isn’t even underperforming

He is matching his poll numbers

Others are simply over performing

[Beet]

He's not underperforming, he's doing very well. He has come very close to winning one state and outright won another. And of course he is the national frontrunner. It's just that he's polling very high. The only metric by which he is "underperforming" is if you expect him to BTFO everyone else. I would still rather be him than anyone else.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Bloomberg isnt on the ballot until ST, Bloomberg is gonna be needed to take votes away from Biden, like in Cali, AZ, IL, MI, OH, FL, TX and VA to give the nomination to Bernie

[n1240]

Based on exit poll data, it appears the electorate was significantly older in 2020 compared to 2016. Pollsters seemed to model a younger electorate, similar to, or even younger than the electorate of 2016.

Older voters ultimately seemed to bolster the boost in turnout, which leaves us to speculate whether it's a strong anti-Sanders bloc of voters coming out in attempt to stop him, or maybe they feel warmer towards the other candidates, who aren't viewed as negatively as Hillary Clinton was?

[MT Treasurer]

Different and arguably less appealing coalition than in 2016 (see also PR's post) + less support from Independents + no longer really perceived as a "fresh face", certainly less so than in 2016 + underwhelming base turnout + still perceived as an "agent of change" but less so than four years ago + less support from anti-establishment and rural voters + running against stronger opponents than Clinton ("not Hillary" isn’t really an option this time), etc.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Like everyone who runs again after losing...they just run on nolstagia.

Bernies crowd will never understand that many voted for him to stand up to Hillary and his time was 4 years ago not now.

He looks old and he looks tired and lacks energy.

Again, didn't you quit Atlas?

[Orser67]

My theory is that voters on the left wing of the party are already supporting Sanders (or maybe Warren), meaning that most of the late deciders are more centrist, conservative, or non-ideological, and a lot of these voters are turned off by Sanders's ideology. Exit polls showed that about half of New Hampshire Democratic primary voters thought that Sanders is too far left.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

> Why is the winner underperforming, having leapt into first place in the national polls over the past 2-3 weeks

An amusing question.

However, what this question is really asking is "why isn't Bernie performing according to people's expectations?" The major part of the answer to that is that people's expectations are improperly based on Bernie's 2016 coalition, not his 2020 one. In 2016, Bernie did best among whites, and did well among rural whites. In 2020, his coalition is more racially diverse, in particular including a higher share of Hispanics and Asian American/Other, and also African Americans to a lesser extent.

So while Iowa and NH are states where one would expect Bernie's 2016 coalition to do well, they are not quite so favorable for his 2020 coalition. Since people are basing their expectations of how he "should" do on his 2016 coalition, this leads to unrealistic/overly optimistic expectations for how Sanders should do in states like IA and NH.

In addition to the obvious racial diversity (particularly lack of Hispanics and Asian Americans), the land-use/housing patterns in IA are both significantly less urban than the national average.

While there is no good definition of "suburban" data, here is a rough comparison using 2016 exit polls (general election):


Nationwide:

Urban 34%
Suburban 49%
Rural 17%


IA:

Urban 28%
Suburban 33%
Rural 39%


NH:

Urban 9%
Suburban 53%
Rural 37%


Clearly NH is much more suburban than the national average (relatedly, it is also wealthier/higher income than average). Suburbs are Bernie's 2020 coalition worst housing type, and white suburbs are the core of Buttigieg in particular's support (and also good for Klobuchar). Given Bernie's strong performances in the limited urban areas of NH, it is pretty clear that if NH were more urban than it is, Bernie would have done quite a bit better.

Nevertheless, even in a state like NH which is quite a bit less demographically favorable for Bernie than it was in 2016, he was able to pull off a win. When we get to states like California (which he lost in 2016), we should see him winning as well - and winning by more, because his CA is more demographically favorable for his 2020 coalition than his 2016 one. Likewise in other states like TX, where he was obliterated in 2016 but is likely to do better in 2020.

[SN2903]

Socialism is unpopular. In 2016 a lot of it was a protest vote against the status quo.

[win win]

Anybody know why he's doing worse than his leads in poll averages? Why did late deciders break for Klobuchar and Buttigieg in New Hampshire? Sanders has the highest favorability of any candidate running yet he has such a hard time getting people who are undecided. I don't get it.

Take me for example. I know I don't want Sanders or Warren. But I don't know which of the moderates I want to vote for yet. Biden? Buttigieg? Bloomberg? Or is it now Klobuchar? Depends on who is winning and who has the best shot to win the primary. I suspect most voters in the moderate lane are facing the same dilemma.

[adamevans]

It’s not as simple as saying “Democrats don’t like bernie” or “socialism unpopular.” Pete got mountains of media coverage following his Iowa “victory,” and even though Bernie declared victory, there was not remotely similar coverage regarding his popular vote victory. Pete’s media-driven momentum won him late-deciders, and quite easily so, as a result.

[pikachu]

Going by the RCP average, he got 25 in Iowa compared to 23 in the final average and 26 in New Hampshire compared to 29 in the final average. FiveThirtyEight forecasted him at 28% compared to a 27% final result and a 28% forecast to a 26% final in New Hampshire. It looks like he's very slightly underperforming his polling averages. He's meeting his averages; the perception just looks a lot worse than reality because he did a lot better in 2016 and both states saw other candidates dramatically outperform their numbers. 

[Progressive Pessimist]

Because last time around he was the default and protest choice in a binary primary against a woman who was the presumptive nominee for eight years prior.

He isn't necessarily under-performing though, it's just become evident that his appeal has been lessened by the crowded field. He doesn't have the protest crowd with him this time and those he is winning with are his most devoted, who might just end up being enough though versus that larger field of opponents.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

My theory is that most of the undecideds/late-breaking primary in general are #NeverBernie folks waiting to see who is most viable in their state.  I mean, I'm unusual in that I'm a pretty staunch Buttigieg supporter who actually likes Sanders, but I'd bet money that a good 75% of Pete's supporters would drop him like a bad habit without a second thought if they thought someone else had a better shot of beating Bernie.  Same with Klobachar and her supporters, for that matter.

[Tintrlvr]

Sanders is doing terrible amoung late deciders.

That is literally the reason he is “underperforming”
Technically, he isn’t even underperforming

He is matching his poll numbers

Others are simply over performing

This is something I identified last summer and is still true, although things didn't sort out as much as I thought they would until late January at the earliest.

The largest bloc of voters in this primary election support neither Biden nor Sanders, but have no strong preferences between the various other candidates. They've been drifting with the trends between all of the other candidates: O'Rourke, Harris, Warren, Buttigieg (twice) and Klobuchar have each had their time in the sun with these voters over the course of the campaign. Currently, these voters are divided up among Buttigieg, Klobuchar and Bloomberg (in national polls), with a relatively small rump remaining with Warren and some also with Steyer in select states. It is as-yet not completely clear which candidate these voters will coalesce behind, but as the field winnows down, they can be expected to settle on a single candidate. And that candidate won't be either Sanders or Biden. Given the inability of Buttigieg and Klobuchar to knock each other out of the race, I am increasingly of the opinion that it will be Bloomberg, who has the resources to outlast them, but we'll see. (The one reason this might not happen is that there is clearly a group of voters who will vote for any tolerable woman candidate (by tolerable, I mean not Gabbard), so Klobuchar's support might not completely evaporate.)

[adamevans]

My theory is that most of the undecideds/late-breaking primary in general are #NeverBernie folks waiting to see who is most viable in their state.  I mean, I'm unusual in that I'm a pretty staunch Buttigieg supporter who actually likes Sanders, but I'd bet money that a good 75% of Pete's supporters would drop him like a bad habit without a second thought if they thought someone else had a better shot of beating Bernie.  Same with Klobachar and her supporters, for that matter.

The problem with this analysis implies there's a monolith of centrist voters only voting against Bernie Sanders. There's not.

[Adam Griffin]

His coalition in 2016 was 70-75% white and 60% male: closer in composition to the Republican Party electorate than the Democratic Party electorate.

In 2020, his coalition is roughly 50% non-white, 50% female. That's a radical shift.

Polls thus far in IA/NH had him doing better because of name recognition and past behavior in the lead up to voting, with those persuadable voters breaking last-minute to other candidates for a variety of reasons.

His base isn't disproportionately white and rural this go around, so his performances in disproportionately white and rural states aren't going to be as impressive.