Guest post by Adrian Beaumont, who joins us from time to time to provide commentary on elections internationally. Adrian is an honorary associate at the University of Melbourne. His work on electoral matters for The Conversation can be found here, and his own website is here.
Six days before the US February 3 Iowa Democratic caucus, the RealClearPolitics poll average has Bernie Sanders narrowly leading with 25.0%, followed by Joe Biden on 22.0%, Pete Buttigieg 17.0% and Elizabeth Warren 13.5%. Nationally, it’s 28.4% Biden, 23.0% Sanders, 14.9% Warren, 8.0% Michael Bloomberg and 6.9% Buttigieg. In the last two weeks, Biden and particularly Sanders have gained, mostly at Warren’s expense.
Iowa is important because it helps to winnow the field of candidates, and candidates who exceed expectations often get a surge in their national voting intentions. Three more contests are scheduled in February: New Hampshire (February 11), Nevada (February 22) and South Carolina (February 29).
The early states are important mainly to demonstrate strength; on “Super Tuesday” March 3, 36% of all pledged delegates will be awarded, and this could be decisive. Delegates are allocated proportional to vote share in each state and Congressional District (CD), but with a high threshold of 15%. That threshold applies to CDs, so any candidate who fails to break 15% in a CD gets zero delegates from that CD.
Biden has polled strongly with black voters, but not so well with whites. Iowa is a virtually all-white state. If, as some polls suggest, Biden nevertheless won Iowa, he would likely be the Democratic nominee to face Donald Trump in November. If he fails to win Iowa, Biden is still well-placed when the contest turns to more diverse states.
You can see my Conversation articles for more on the US elections. The strong US economy is Trump’s best asset.
Is Brexit over on January 31? No
After the Conservative landslide at the December 12 election, Boris Johnson easily passed his Brexit deal through the Commons, and Britain will Leave the European Union on January 31.
However, there will be no major changes until at least December 31, when the transition period expires. The transition period could be extended, but Johnson has ruled it out by legislation. The transition period is time to negotiate a UK/EU trade deal, and pass it through parliament.
While the Conservatives hold 365 of the 650 Commons seats, 118 Conservative MPs rejected Theresa May’s deal when first put to a vote in January last year, and 75 in March. Johnson would easily lose Commons divisions if those defections were repeated.
If Johnson agrees a soft trade deal with the EU, he is likely to anger hard Leave Conservative MPs. If no deal were agreed, there would be a “no deal” Brexit on December 31. With Brexit assured, there would be little incentive for hard Leavers to hold their noses and vote for a soft Brexit.
Also in Britain, there is a Labour leadership contest. This will be decided by a preferential postal vote among Labour members, with the result announced in early April. The main contenders appear to be the pro-Remain Keir Starmer and the pro-Corbyn Rebecca Long-Bailey. A mid-January YouGov poll of Labour members gave Starmer a 63-37 lead over Long-Bailey, from first preferences of Starmer 46%, Long-Bailey 32%.
A Starmer victory is unlikely to help Labour in Leave-voting regions. According to a YouGov post-election poll, the Conservatives won lower-income voters by a greater margin than higher-income voters. They won those with the lowest education level by 58-25.
Irish election: February 8
The Irish election will be held on a Saturday. Previous Irish elections have been held on weekdays, so this Saturday election may boost turnout. The 160 lower house seats are elected in 39 electorates that each have three to five members. Ireland uses Tasmania’s Hare-Clark system, so a quota for election is 25% in three-member electorates, 20% with four, and 16.7% with five.
Irish politics has been dominated by two conservative parties: Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Currently there is a minority Fine Gael government. Polls suggest Fianna Fáil will narrowly win the most seats, but there will be a large increase for the far-left Sinn Féin and the Greens.
Spain’s Socialists win confidence vote after election
I wrote for my personal website on January 8 that the left-wing Spanish government won its investiture vote by just two votes, 167 to 165. Also covered: the left won the Croatian presidential election, a conservative/green government was formed in Austria, and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu easily won a primary for leadership of his Likud party.
But the Greems Trots have no shame in astroturfing the kids:
https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/
So, instead of looming Brexit deadlines that keep getting extended, we now have a transition period that’s exactly the same with a looming deadline that can be extended.* Yay, progress!
* Yes, I did read the bit about legislation ruling an extension out, but legislation can be repealed or amended
I submitted this to WB on Monday, but it got lost, and didn’t appear until today. I’ve altered the first paragraph about the Iowa and national Dem polling for the current RCP averages as at Wednesday morning AEDT. Results will be next Tuesday afternoon AEDT.
I can’t amend the excerpt thing, otherwise I’d put something like Sanders has a narrow lead over Biden in Iowa.
I’m growing in confidence that Bernie Sanders will win Iowa. While poll averages are still close, the trend certainly appears to be his friend. I also believe he will win New Hampshire. My concern as a Sanders supporter is, as in 2016, that he will struggle in the south, where he was hammered by Clinton.
On the Brexit situation, should the transition period end in no agreement, and an extension not happen, would that mean the agreement on Northern Ireland would also fall over? I certainly hope so, but am not clear where that would leave this.
Matt, no, the NI agreement is done. That means the EU is likely to be less willing to compromise as they won’t be concerned about a rise in sectarian violence in NI if a no-deal occurred.
Matt31
“My concern as a Sanders supporter is, as in 2016, that he will struggle in the south, where he was hammered by Clinton. ”
My concern as someone wants to see Trump lose, is that Sanders could win the nomination. He’s a dud, just as Corbyn was a dud.
Kakuru @ #6 Wednesday, January 29th, 2020 – 11:43 am
Exactly how is Sanders a dud, it’s so easy to throw a juvenile comment like that out there. How about you have a go at explaining exactly how he is a dud, especially against the likes of bought-and-paid-for establishment figures like Biden and an utterly corrupt pig like Trump.
If the Irish polls are correct the formation of government should be interesting
Last I saw was: FG 23 FF26 SF 19 Lab 4 Green 8 Independent 15
The present arrangement of a FG/Ind government with FF confidence and supply is unlikely to be repeated which means either a grand coalition or SF taking part in the coalition negotiations.
FG and FF both say that this will not happen because SF TDs are controlled by the Party Conference (like the ALP I guess). The more florid commentators have said this means the TDs are actually controlled by the IRA High Command!
SF for its part has said a border poll within 5 years is the first point in any coalition deal.
While all southern politicians will put their hand on their hearts and say unification is a top priority I think it is the last thing they will want:
1. Northern Ireland is a rust bucket compared to the recovering Celtic Tiger
2. Unification will result in 1 Million disaffected Unionists coming under Southern Control
3. SF would be the biggest party in any combined Dail
( these problems could be addresses with a federal structure – but that has only rarely been considered)
Bellwether
“Exactly how is Sanders a dud,”
How long have you got?
Seriously, Sanders’ brand of hard-left politics just won’t cut it in middle America. This is something that many Sanders fans just can’t grasp. You/they believe that if a political candidate is authentic enough, and his progressive policies are fair and just, everything else will just fall into place. US politics doesn’t work like that.
As for this “establishment” thing… whatevs.
Done.
“US politics doesn’t work like that.”
***
It’s changing. Combine the numbers that Sanders and Warren are getting and it ends up being a big chunk of the Dems. There are a lot of Americans who support their policies. When push comes to shove and a moderate right wing/Biden/establishment Dem has to make a choice between Sanders or Trump, you can bet London to a brick they’re going to go with Sanders. Why? Not because they’re voting for Bernie, but because they’re voting against Trump. Don’t underestimate how eager many Americans are to get rid of Donald.
If its between Biden and Trump, you may as well just toss a coin. No meaningful difference. At least with Trump you’re less likely to get as much military intervention in the ME.
Kakuru @ #9 Wednesday, January 29th, 2020 – 2:13 pm
Thankfully you are no expert. If Sanders is hard left so is probably the entirety of Scandinavia and half of Europe. You really haven’t attempted to explain why he is a dud, only that you believe middle America won’t accept him while you accuse him of being authentic and having fair and just policies! So in your opinion a candidate should be inauthentic and have unfair and unjust policies? Maybe middle America have had just about a gutful of that sort of thing with Trump? Anyway, time will tell and hopefully you have it completely wrong.
I think Trump has proved pretty comprehensively that centre-right ‘middle of the road’ candidates are done in the US.
What American voters want nowadays is highly partisan, with elections largely decided by a significant group of disenchanted ‘a pox on both their houses’ voters willing to vote for anyone who promises to break the place.
The only voters Biden appeals to are establishment Democrats, and the only arguments establishment Democrats can find in his favour are exactly the same ones that worked so well for Hillary.
bellwether
” If Sanders is hard left so is probably the entirety of Scandinavia and half of Europe.”
Yeah, probably. By American standards, Sanders is hard left. He’s even perceived as a socialist. (I know and you know he isn’t a socialist, but that’s what a great many Americans think.) Sanders is running for president in the USA, not Scandinavia.
If Sanders becomes the Dem nominee, the Trump campaign will eat him alive. His socialist “baggage” is electoral poison. THAT’s why he’s a dud.
The European Parliament has ratified the terms of the Brexit agreement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51287430
Firefox
“It’s changing”
Nope, it ain’t. You’ve come up with a ‘just-so’ story about how Bernie is the best candidate because America wants change because blah blah blah… But there’s no evidence that the majority of Americans actually do want much change, if at all.
“Combine the numbers that Sanders and Warren are getting and it ends up being a big chunk of the Dems. ”
A big chunk of the Democratic Party BASE. Honestly, do you know what a primary or caucus actually is? It’s not a general election. Sanders may fire up the Dem base, but BFD. Corbyn fired up the Labour base – look at all those people at his rallies! Wow, this is a thing! Corbyn is sure to turn out the vote!
Tell me, what happened to Corbyn?
Firefox
“There are a lot of Americans who support their policies”
What does that actually mean?
In a country where approximately half the population show up, you had better have a fired up base or you aren’t going real far against an incumbent President! Evidence suggests Trump hasn’t lost a shred of his base, and they’ll be there for him in November. The idea that defeating Trump alone is going to fire up enough of a turn out to defeat him is no truer now than many including myself tried to point out it was in 2016. If the candidate is Biden, as many centrists would like, many especially younger voters will sleep it out. I personally don’t agree with the proposition that there’s no difference between Biden and Trump, especially on climate change, and were I an American I would have no hesitation in voting for Biden if he were the nominee on that issue alone. But I support Sanders not only because I like his agenda, but because I actually believe he is the only one who can turn out the sort of voters needed to defeat Trump.
On Corbyn comparisons and how they relate to these elections, I would argue they are completely irrelevant. I should point out that I’m no huge fan of Corbyn and not here to defend him. But to try and make the recent UK election result all about Corbyn’s left wing agenda, and to extend that to why Sanders would suffer a similar fate, makes the mistake of ignoring the dominant issue of that election, Brexit and the way it was successfully used by the Conservatives to wedge Corbyn and Labour. I don’t buy for one second that those working class, leave voting areas deserted Labour because of Corbyn’s agenda; otherwise, why did they strongly support him and Labour in 2017? They abandoned Labour because they had voted out of the EU, Boris Johnson promised to deliver on that, where as Corbyn’s promise of more negotiations and a second referendum was the last thing those voters wanted. To ignore Brexit and put the UK election result down to Corbyn’s left agenda I think completely missed what happened in the UK.
“Nope, it ain’t. You’ve come up with a ‘just-so’ story about how Bernie is the best candidate because America wants change because blah blah blah… But there’s no evidence that the majority of Americans actually do want much change, if at all.”
***
Yeah, except I didn’t say that, did I. I said there are many Americans who support Sanders’ policies. That is undeniable.
Sanders doesn’t need the majority of Americans to want change in order for him to win. Trump didn’t.
***
“A big chunk of the Democratic Party BASE. Honestly, do you know what a primary or caucus actually is? It’s not a general election. Sanders may fire up the Dem base, but BFD. Corbyn fired up the Labour base – look at all those people at his rallies! Wow, this is a thing! Corbyn is sure to turn out the vote!”
***
Uhhh yeah… Firing up the base is kind of important in a primary contest. Anyone with a clue about how the process works would know that. Just look at last time. Trump fired up his rabid base and they got him through the primaries and then the election itself. Having a committed and passionate base of support is absolutely critical. It’s one of the main reasons Trump went on to beat Clinton, who’s base was weak in their enthusiasm for her and lacked the passion that Trump’s did. Sanders has the base to rival Trump’s. Biden, like Clinton before him, lacks the enthusiastic base that both Bernie and Trump have.
***
“Tell me, what happened to Corbyn?”
***
Same thing that happened to Clinton and Shorten, although for very different reasons.
The 2019 “Brexit Election” was very unusual in the sense that it wasn’t really a contest of Left vs Right, it was Leave vs Remain. Corbyn himself is known to support leaving the EU. Labour had terribly unclear messaging surrounding Brexit – the issue of the election. The Tories on the other hand had a clear and simple message that cut through to a population who were desperate to have Brexit resolved one way or another.
I just did a little rough calculation…
Clinton received 65,853,514 votes in 2016, which was a few million more than Trump. America had 230,931,921 eligible voters in 2016. Only 138,846,571 actually voted. This means only around 28.5% of eligible voters voted for Clinton. The guy who won via the electoral collage got even less than her. This clearly demonstrates that a candidate doesn’t need the support of the majority of Americans in order to win the presidency. Not even close.
Stats: http://www.electproject.org/2016g
I suspect Biden would win against Trump. Bernie would probably have less chance, but I wouldnt write him off. At the end of the day the vast majority of American voters vote along party lines no matter what, so as usual the election will be decided by a tiny number of swing voters + turnout.
I would e pect the democratic party machine to fall in behind Bernie if he became the nominee, along with their considerable resourcing and funding. There would likely to be considerable business interest who would also throw their weight behind Bernie, in spite of him being a big bad socialist. My feeling is that Trump has ruffled enough establishment feathers for them to gun for “anyone but Trump”, even if it is a dreaded socialist (who in any case can be neutered by the usual checks and balances inherent in the US system)
“But there’s no evidence that the majority of Americans actually do want much change, if at all”
Obama campaigned successfully on ‘hope and change’. Conversely Hillary’s message was more along the lines of little-no change, vs. Trump’s ‘drain the swamp’. One could conclude that the establishment is deeply disliked and there is an appetite for anything but, which could have something to do with the Dems losing over 1000 seats during the Obama era.
Matt, I honestly dont think democrat voter turnout would be much of a problem with Biden as the nominee. Their fierce hatred of Trump would surely be all the motivation they need. If anything they may well be less complacent than they were in 2016. Biden also seems fairly likable, doesnt bring the divisivness and baggage that Clinton brought with her, nor, dare I say it, is he a woman. Im sorry that has to be mentioned, but it is unquestionably a factor in US politics.
Also yes, I take your point about Biden’s contrast with Trump on climate change
Bonza, Trump’s greatest con was in convincing people he is something other than part of the same elite business establishment that he spends so much time venting against.
Id love to think the American voters will see through that con and punish him this election, byt Im pretty sure thats not going to happen. Just like the British voters were never going to punish Boris for his “get brexit done” lie. Why? Because its all about who these cons are sticking it to, not whether or not they are telling the truth.
Firefox
“Uhhh yeah… Firing up the base is kind of important in a primary contest. Anyone with a clue about how the process works would know that.”
I know that. I’ve seen the process first hand. The Iowa Caucus is a wonder to behold, and all about firing up the (narrow) base. But it doesn’t fire up anyone beyond the base (apart from political pundits).
” Just look at last time. Trump fired up his rabid base and they got him through the primaries and then the election itself”
Okay, I see wheat you’ve done here. Yes, the rabid base got Trump through the primaries. No, the rabid base did not get Trump into the White House. The rabid base helped, but it was Independents and other swing voters in a handful of states (especially in the Mid West) that won Trump the Presidency.
Bonza
“Obama campaigned successfully on ‘hope and change’”
Obama won in a country afflicted by the Great Recession, after 8 years of George W. Bush. The US economy is now buoyant, even booming, and Trump is a first-term President.
Kakuru @ #17 Thursday, January 30th, 2020 – 9:52 am
Remember how Italy was once controlled by a tyrannical despot? Believe it or not countries do change their political slant and the US is ripe for change. Trump is a fake populist, Sanders a genuine populist. Voters mistakenly felt Trump could ‘drain the swamp’ while he’s actually topped it up. Sanders could in a way be the leader people hoped for when they foolishly backed Trump in 2016.
“I know that. I’ve seen the process first hand. The Iowa Caucus is a wonder to behold, and all about firing up the (narrow) base. But it doesn’t fire up anyone beyond the base (apart from political pundits).”
***
It doesn’t need to. The base is what needs firing up at this point in the cycle.
***
“Okay, I see wheat you’ve done here. Yes, the rabid base got Trump through the primaries. No, the rabid base did not get Trump into the White House. The rabid base helped, but it was Independents and other swing voters in a handful of states (especially in the Mid West) that won Trump the Presidency.”
***
Yeah, I’ve explained to you what happened last time, that’s what I’ve done here. A candidates base is critical, both in the primaries and also later in the election itself. No rabid base of far-right campaigners, no Trump in the White House. I don’t like giving them that credit – not at all – but it is just the reality of the situation. Why do you think Trump was able to win over those handful of independents and swinging voters that he needed? Because his base campaigned relentlessly against Clinton and threw as much dirt as they could at her, a lot of which stuck. They targeted those states in the Mid West. Hillary did not have the passionate base behind her that was required to counter Trump’s.
Bellwether
“Remember how Italy was once controlled by a tyrannical despot?”
Which one? Sulla? Julius Caesar? Pope Innocent III? Benito Mussolini? Silvio Berlusconi?
The US is apparently always “ripe for change”. The revolution is always on the way. But oddly, the revolution never arrives. It’s almost as if the majority of Americans prefer to stick with the status quo. There is no appetite for radical policies like nationalised healthcare.
Firefox
“Yeah, I’ve explained to you what happened last time, that’s what I’ve done here. A candidates base is critical, both in the primaries and also later in the election itself”
No, you’ve provided a ‘just-so’ story. A party base wins primaries, but not presidential elections. You’ve conflated the two. It’s difficult to convey just how narrow and skewed the activist base of a party is.
“Because his base campaigned relentlessly against Clinton and threw as much dirt as they could at her, a lot of which stuck.”
Huh? That wasn’t the base, that was the Trump campaign. All campaigns use vicious attack ads. Trump’s were pretty effective, as it turned out. Comey played a part too.
“Huh? That wasn’t the base, that was the Trump campaign.”
***
The base was a critical part of the Trump campaign. It is a critical part of any campaign. The base does a lot of the actual campaigning themselves. Did you not witness what happened on social media, particularly Facebook, during 2016? Trump’s base – not official campaign members but just the rabid supporters of it – were everywhere spreading their propaganda. Yes, there were bots and paid trolls involved in that too, but you’d be foolish to think that there weren’t millions of real people – truly deplorable people – who were out there campaigning passionately for him. Millions of real people did vote for him.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking that the only campaigning that gets done is by the actual inner campaign team at the very top. Grassroots campaigning carried out by the base is just as important, if not more so.
Fairly consistent polling in Ireland
https://extra.ie/2020/01/26/news/politics/fianna-fail-lead-election-poll
26 January
FF 27 FG 22 SF 20 Lab 6 Green 10 Ind and others 16
Firefox
‘Trump’s base – not official campaign members but just the rabid supporters of it – were everywhere spreading their propaganda”
I though that was the Russians.
“Millions of real people did vote for him. ”
Yeah, and millions voted for Hillary – more than Trump, as it happened. Just in the ‘wrong’ states. Wot woz won it for Trump was disgruntled voters in a few key states, not the base.
“Grassroots campaigning carried out by the base is just as important, if not more so.”
I’m not saying that “grass roots” campaigning (much of which is actually astroturfing) isn’t important. What I’m saying is that, for winning elections, THE BASE IS NOT ENOUGH.
This applies to both sides. A large chunk of the Dem base may adore Sanders. Maybe even a majority of the Dem base. But THE BASE IS NOT ENOUGH.
Joe Biden won`t win the presidency. Hunter Biden is the Hillary Clinton`s emails of 2020. The vast majority of the crucial voters who didn`t vote for Hillary Clinton because of of the emails won`t vote for Joe Biden because of Hunter Biden. Being a leading centerist Democrat with baggage trying to get out the vote mainly with Trump is worse messaging didn`t work for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and won`t work for Joe Biden.
“Wot woz won it for Trump was disgruntled voters in a few key states, not the base.”
***
Don’t you see the hole in that argument? They both contributed to his win! You can’t have one without the other. Without the base, Trump wouldn’t have been in the position to win at all. If they don’t campaign, he doesn’t win over those disgruntled voters in those states. If one candidate’s base isn’t as enthusiastic as the other’s and/or becomes complacent, as was the case in 2016, well that’s what happens. Trump’s base, both online and on the ground, outperformed Clinton’s.
Nobody ever said the base was enough. You’ve been saying it doesn’t win elections though. The base is absolutely vital to winning. Both Sanders and Trump have very enthusiastic bases. Biden does not. Clinton did not. That is the whole point here.
Kakuru @ #29 Thursday, January 30th, 2020 – 12:57 pm
Oh dear, let’s just act as though FDR never existed, or for that matter LBJ, but no doubt you will bombard me with spurious reasons why those two and Sanders cannot be compared.
Firefox — You’ve come up with a plausible narrative on what wins US elections, and you’ve convinced yourself that you’re correct. But you’re confusing the “base” with the official “campaign”. To some degree, the “base” is mobilised by the “campaign”. But it’s not the “base” that wins over swing voters and Independents.
The Trump campaign is relishing Sanders to be its 2020 opponent. All this “centrist” and “establishment” guff you think is a deterrent to voters – it’s just not how most Americans see the world.
The Trump campaign will tar Sanders as a “socialist”, and then it’s all over. Trump will get 4 more years, and you Bernie-or-Bust folks will be gobsmacked. You’ll spend the next 4 years having to search for someone or something to blame for his loss (not Sanders, of course), while you gear up for Sanders 2024.
I’ve gotten nothing against Sanders, personally or ideologically. But he’s not what most American voters want. If he gets the nomination, God I hope I’m wrong.
I like this as the ultimate put-down
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar says Sinn Fein’s manifesto could have been written by Jeremy Corbyn
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/other/leo-varadkar-says-sinn-fein-manifesto-e2-80-98could-have-been-written-by-corbyn-e2-80-99/ar-BBZtPjg
I’ve put a lot more detail about Iowa at The Conversation.
The caucuses begin at 12 noon AEDT Tuesday, and there is an initial division. Supporters of candidates who fail to get 15% on that initial division can be won over by other candidates.
https://theconversation.com/with-four-days-remaining-sanders-leads-narrowly-in-iowa-but-biden-leads-nationally-130593
Adrian
“The caucuses begin at 12 noon AEDT Tuesday, and there is an initial division. Supporters of candidates who fail to get 15% on that initial division can be won over by other candidates.”
As an eyewitness to an Iowa caucus, it could be best be described as ‘organised chaos’ – with an emphasis on ‘chaos’ at the expense of ‘organised’. A bit like herding cats.
The caucus I attended was held after work hours. As the process dragged on, some of the attendees (especially a few soccer moms) were getting quite irate.
If Buttigieg gets more than Biden in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Biden is in serious trouble because it will undercut his vote in other states, not long before Bloomberg also starts eating in to the centrist vote.
This would be for the best. With the campaign the Republicans will unleash if Biden is the nominee, Hunter Biden`s father would be almost certain not to get enough votes to win.
Kakuru @ #38 Friday, January 31st, 2020 – 10:14 am
You really have the knives out for Sanders and you don’t seem to credit Americans with any intelligence whatsoever. Accusations of certain candidates being ‘establishment’ is not guff, it illustrates that they are there at the begging of the corporates which to me is totally unacceptable. I honestly cannot even begin to see the point of any of the other contenders, voters may as well stick with Trump. I’m getting tired of hearing these same old negative arguments, if Trump relishes Sanders as an opponent why is he putting so much effort into trying to take down Biden?
It’s all about the base say the pro sanders crowd and yet they totally ignore black voters. Such an important part of the base to turn out in both the primary and the general and yet Sanders consistently struggles to gain support. Sorry, attending a March decades ago and then moving to Vermont doesn’t cut it. Neither does trying to only appeal to black voters by talking about economic policy when they suffer from racism in the states.
Right now, the only reason democrats are in the game is because Trump is so highly polarising and all highly disliked. If Trump was a more moderate President with a relatively strong economy, does anyone think that democrats would really be in the game? Moderation counts. Does anyone really believe that a 78 year old socialist who has had a heart attack is the best nominee to one of the most highly stressful jobs there is? To be fair all the nominees are highly flawed but at least the polls seem to show Biden as being more electable. Such a shame he’s 77. Neither one of them would probably be able to run again in 2024.
Things going from bad to worse for the government in Ireland. Sinn Féin now in 2nd place
https://www.thejournal.ie/opinion-poll-9-4988666-Feb2020/
FF 23 SF 21 FG 19 Greens 10 PBP 5 Lab 5 Soc Dem 5 Ind and others 11
The combined total for the Civil War parties is 42%!
Could a radical change in Irish government be underway with a SF lead left coalition?
Probably not, SF notoriously outperforms in the polls. Ireland does not have compulsory voting and supporters of SF have a low turnout. While FG says it is not going to happen a grand coalition is more likely.
Another Irish poll out today has Sinn Fein equal first with Fianna Fail
Europe Elects @EuropeElects
Ireland, Red C poll:
SF-LEFT: 24% (+5)
FF-RE: 24% (-2)
FG-EPP: 21% (-2)
GREEN-G/EFA: 7% (-1)
LAB-S&D: 5% (+1)
SD-S&D: 3%
AONTÚ-*: 2% (+1)
S-PBP-LEFT: 1% (-1)
+/- vs. 16-22 Jan
Fieldwork: 25-30 January 2020
Sample size: 1,000
And in the US, the highly anticipated final Selzer Iowa poll has been cancelled owing to issues with the sample. It appears some respondents were not read Buttigieg’s name!
If I remember correctly, the results from Iowa came through around 4PM eastern Tuesday afternoon in 2016.
As for polls saying Biden is more electable, as someone posted above, no, actually, they don’t. Just as they didn’t say Clinton was more electable in 2016. In fact, Sanders consistently has bigger leads v Trump than any other candidate. I know those numbers don’t suit the only a centrist can win narrative.
Irish elections lokking very interesting. Pretty sure I read that Sinn Fein will use any position of influence to try and force a border poll; of course, any such poll must be agreed to by the UK government. If Sinn Fein did manage to succeed in their push for a border poll and lose, as happened in Scotland, they may in fact set back their own cause.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/iowa-caucuses-2020-latest-updates/2020/01/31/a9ba59f6-439e-11ea-b5fc-eefa848cde99_story.html?itid=hp_hp-top-table-main_iowaliveallticker-910a%3Aprime-time%2Fpromo#link-EXR75TM2VM567ECQKJ3WT53RBE
Sinn Féin have said the first point of any coalition discussion is a border poll in 5 years after appropriate discussions
FG and FF have spent most of the weekend accusing each other of being prepared to deal with SF – they are both clearly worried and with good reason, the support for the civil war parties is half of the level 20 years ago. The demographics of the journal.ie poll show 34% support for SF in the 18-34 age group.
Despite this SF usually underperforms the polls:
1. They do not attract many 2nd preferences from FG and FF
2. Their supporters often don’t turn out
Thomas G.
“It’s all about the base say the pro sanders crowd and yet they totally ignore black voters. Such an important part of the base to turn out in both the primary and the general and yet Sanders consistently struggles to gain support
Finally someone is talking sense!
Sanders may smash the Iowa caucus. Iowa Dems are overwhelmingly white, affluent, and educated. (Those who turn up to caucus also tend to be highly motivated.) Black and Latino voters are thin on the ground – just like New Hampshire. Neither state tells us anything about electability in the US at large.