fivethirtyeight--2020-02-19--Will The Nevada Debate Be All About Bloomberg?

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight ’ s weekly politics chat .
The transcript below has been lightly edited .
sarahf ( Sarah Frostenson , politics editor ) : Let ’ s not bury the lede : Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is joining his first debate of the cycle tomorrow night in Nevada , even though he ’ s largely skipped competing in the first four states .
He ’ ll be joined by five other candidates : former Vice President Joe Biden ; former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg ; Sen. Amy Klobuchar ; Sen. Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things are sure to get heated fast .
Sanders is currently the polling leader in Nevada and favored to win the state , according to our forecast , but Bloomberg is catching up and is now at 16.1 percent in our national polling average , essentially tied with Biden .
So what should we expect tonight ?
Attacks on Sanders ’ s newly minted front-runner status ?
Or will the country ’ s first look at Bloomberg overshadow everything else ?
natesilver ( Nate Silver , editor in chief ) : I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to talk about Michael Bloomberg since no one else is paying attention to him .
sarahf : Haha , fair .
There ’ s nothing the media loves more than making a non-story a story .
nrakich ( Nathaniel Rakich , elections analyst ) : The safest bet is that Bloomberg will bear the brunt of most attacks , right ?
That ’ s how it has played out in the media this week , between allegations he created a hostile workplace for women and renewed focus on the racial dimension of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supported as mayor .
natesilver : It seems like a safe-ish bet , especially since NOBODY SEEMS TO HAVE NOTICED THAT BERNIE SANDERS IS IN FIRST PLACE IN NATIONAL POLLS AND IS IN PRETTY GOOD POSITION TO WIN THE NOMINATION .
nrakich : Yeah , it ’ s a pretty sweet deal for Sanders that he has largely been spared attacks even though he ’ s the primary front-runner after winning New Hampshire ( and , arguably , Iowa ) .
He looks on track to win Nevada , too !
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to the other candidates .
ameliatd ( Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux , senior writer ) : Honestly , I think Sanders is really lucky that Bloomberg made it into this debate — since it ’ s Bloomberg ’ s first debate , it seems like a safe bet that everyone is going to go after him .
sarahf : BUT at this point … shouldn ’ t we be paying attention to Bloomberg ?
He ’ s tied with Biden in our national polling average !
!
[ Our Latest Forecast : Who Will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natesilver : Of course people should be paying attention to Bloomberg , Sarah !
But these things are also self-fulfilling prophecies to some extent .
The fact that he ’ s gotten so much more attention than , say , Buttigieg or Klobuchar or Warren is something that media critics should think about .
If you take off that media critic hat , he ’ s obviously a real contender for the nomination now .
ameliatd : I wonder if the attention on Bloomberg will make it harder or easier for the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for instance , could really use a strong performance a la Klobuchar in New Hampshire .
I could see it going a couple of ways — maybe being able to attack Bloomberg on stage gives her a little viral moment .
Or maybe the fact that everyone will likely be going after Bloomberg makes it harder for her to steal the spotlight .
kaleigh ( Kaleigh Rogers , FiveThirtyEight contributor ) : That ’ s true , especially when people are eager for the field to start winnowing .
Adding a new face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could certainly be distracting .
natesilver : It wouldn ’ t necessarily surprise me if Bloomberg goes after Sanders in a big way , by the way .
His team has certainly been escalating conflict with Sanders .
And it plays into his message that he ’ s the first train leaving the station if you want an alternative to Bernie .
What Bloomberg DOESN ’ T want is Buttigieg or Klobuchar to surge .
He wants to keep things a bit muddled .
Nor does he want a Biden comeback narrative to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make news by attacking Sanders or otherwise giving a memorable performance , that probably works for him .
It ’ s not unlike Trump in 2016. sarahf : And maybe this is less likely , but Sanders could go after Bloomberg .
It ’ s probably too good of an opportunity for him not to at least try and land something .
There will literally be a billionaire on stage who has spent a lot of money to buy access for his bid for the presidency .
( In fact , Bloomberg has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of any other presidential candidate … ever ?
!
?
! )
But OK , wait wait .
What ’ s the basis for the idea that we ’ re NOT paying enough attention to Sanders ?
natesilver : That he ’ s first in national polls and that he ’ s actually , y ’ know , had people vote for him and won states , which is what these election things are supposed to be about .
Nobody in the mainstream media has the right to complain about paying too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though .
Because so far , the Bloomberg thing is entirely based on the polls when there are other candidates who have demonstrated actual support .
kaleigh : But it ’ s not as if Sanders ’ s success hasn ’ t been covered .
Certainly there ’ s room to talk about more than just the front-runners ?
There ’ s also the fact that the vast majority of Democrats have not yet voted .
There ’ s still a race here .
natesilver : I mean , in some narrow but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( he has the most pledged delegates ) and yet , he isn ’ t getting a ton of coverage .
sarahf : Kaleigh makes a good point , though .
Sanders ’ s successes have been covered .
What ’ s difficult , though , is they haven ’ t been portrayed as decisive victories .
But I kind of get that .
Sanders and Buttigieg both “ won ” Iowa — we ’ ll see if the recanvassing efforts change that .
And he didn ’ t win the New Hampshire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 1.3 points ) .
So there ’ s this other narrative emerging around the field being divided and no one candidate having a firm grasp on things — our own forecast puts Sanders ’ s chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates at roughly the same odds as no one winning a majority — so maybe this is the year every political journalist ’ s dream comes true … a cOnteSTEd convention … uh , the troll cap is too much work .
nrakich : Sarah , I think some Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well in the first two contests but hasn ’ t dominated , and as you point out , Sarah , our model doesn ’ t think he has a mortal lock on the nomination .
On the other hand , I think the tone of the coverage of Sanders ’ s win ( covered as if it were a loss ) and Klobuchar ’ s third-place finish ( covered as if it were a win ) was topsy-turvy .
sarahf : That ’ s fair , but Klobuchar did manage to double her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 10 percent in our polling average to winning 20 percent of the vote .
That ’ s pretty impressive .
natesilver : With Klobuchar , I have mixed feelings .
On the one hand , I ’ m just not sure that a fifth-place finish followed by a third-place finish should get you all that much attention .
On the other hand , she fits the traditional credentials of a party nominee ( not too old or too young , not “ too ” far to the left or too centrist , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the remaining candidates do .
And people seem more inclined to chase shiny objects .
sarahf : But to step back for a moment , the New Hampshire debate was one of the more consequential debates of the cycle , yeah ?
Probably means Nevada will be a nothingburger , but I am intrigued to see what happens there as Nevada is so weird to poll .
ameliatd : One big question for me is how many Nevadans will actually tune into the debate , too .
In general , they tend to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Iowa voters .
So that could dampen the impact .
natesilver : I guess I think that might make the debate more impactful , in some ways ?
If people are less tuned in , they may not be as far along in their decision-making process , which could make the debate more likely to sway their opinion .
ameliatd : It ’ s also worth noting that thousands of Nevadans will already have “ caucused ” by the time the debate starts .
Early voting started on Saturday and ended on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevadans voted in the first two days alone .
nrakich : I do think the debate will have more of an impact nationally than it will in Nevada , to Amelia ’ s points .
Think about how the New Hampshire debate turned into a discussion of South Carolina issues !
And Bloomberg isn ’ t contesting Nevada , so obviously his debate performance will only affect his numbers in other states .
sarahf : So how confident are we about the situation in Nevada ?
Our Nevada forecast gives Sanders about a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden is the second most likely winner with a 1 in 7 chance , but Warren is close on Biden ’ s coattails .
Buttigieg and Klobuchar aren ’ t too far off either .
nrakich : Personally , I ’ m not confident .
The Nevada polls are all over the place .
sarahf : Could a strong second-place finish by someone in Nevada overshadow a Sanders win ?
Similar to what we saw in Iowa and New Hampshire ?
nrakich : Yes , I think if someone surprising finishes second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will be New Hampshire all over again , where that person gets more favorable coverage than the outright winner ( assuming it ’ s Sanders ) .
natesilver : I mean … it ’ s another state where media expectations ( BERNIE CERTAIN TO WIN ) seem a little out of line with the reality ( probably Bernie , but high uncertainty ) .
If I were a Sanders voter , I ’ d be annoyed at how Sanders always seems to be the victim of the expectations game .
ameliatd : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that this is the first state with a significant population of voters of color .
So it ’ s the first real chance to see if candidates like Buttigieg and Klobuchar can do well among Latino/black/Asian voters — if they do , that would obviously be a big deal .
sarahf : That ’ s right .
And at this point , the crosstabs suggest that only Sanders and Biden have a lead there , right ?
ameliatd : Well , like Nathaniel said , the polls are kind of all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among Latinos at least , Sanders and Biden tend to do best .
natesilver : Keep in mind that the Latino population is pretty young , and that Sanders obviously does well with young voters .
nrakich : Yeah , I wonder if Buttigieg will bust out some Spanish during the debate .
He recently released a Spanish-language TV ad that he himself narrated .
kaleigh : He ’ s been running a fair amount of Spanish-language Facebook ads , too .
nrakich : That said , when Beto O ’ Rourke , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the first debate , some people saw it as a stunt .
A YouGov poll in June found that 37 percent of Hispanic Americans found it respectful when a presidential candidate spoke Spanish in a debate , and 27 percent thought it was pandering .
White Americans ( who as of 2016 were still a majority of Nevada Democratic caucusgoers ) thought it was pandering by a nearly two-to-one ratio .
And Equis Labs , a polling firm that specializes in polling Hispanic Americans , told me that only 29 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is their preferred language .
ameliatd : I know we ’ ve heard quite a bit about health care in these debates , but I bet it ’ ll come up again tonight , since Sanders is being attacked by the state ’ s biggest labor union over Medicare for All — and other candidates , like Klobuchar and Steyer , have been jumping on that bandwagon recently .
sarahf : OK , let ’ s talk candidate strategy for a moment .
Bloomberg is a bit of a curve ball .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his strategy is to … stop a debate surge from happening and somehow make a plea for voters to consider him , not in South Carolina ( which votes next ) , but hold out for Super Tuesday instead ?
But what does this mean for the other moderate candidates , especially Biden ?
Biden at this point still leads Klobuchar and Buttigieg in national polls — does he need to nip Bloomberg ’ s momentum in the bud ?
And then what does this mean for Sanders ?
Does he just hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let the moderates duke it out ?
I guess what I ’ m really asking is … is Biden toast ?
Or does this debate have the biggest stakes for him ?
natesilver : Why would Biden be toast ?
He ’ s tied with Bloomberg in national polls .
And he has an opportunity to get a boost with a win in South Carolina or , less likely , Nevada .
If he loses in South Carolina , he might be toast .
sarahf : What if he finishes in fourth or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Meh , who cares ?
South Carolina is coming in a week .
Biden ’ s media narrative is awful as can be now and it probably doesn ’ t get any worse if he finishes fourth or fifth in Nevada .
nrakich : It might be good for Biden that Steyer didn ’ t make today ’ s debate ?
Not that Steyer has turned in super compelling debate performances , but Steyer might be Biden ’ s most direct competition in South Carolina .
sarahf : There has to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders , right ?
Buttigieg , Klobuchar , Bloomberg and Biden can ’ t all stay in and actually mount a credible campaign against Sanders , can they ?
nrakich : They can if they all have visions of emerging as the nominee after a contested convention !
natesilver : Or candidates might think “ Sanders v. Bloomberg could go very nuclear , so I need to stick around as the least radioactive option.
” That seems … quite plausible ?
We probably have to assume that Bloomberg will drop a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
nrakich : He should probably do so sooner rather than later .
There are lots of delegates up for grabs on Super Tuesday , and Sanders is currently riding high .
ameliatd : Biden has to be hoping that Bloomberg takes a beating in the debate , though , right ?
natesilver : Sure , I think that ’ s right , Amelia .
But Biden also doesn ’ t want one of Buttigieg or Klobuchar to surge .
kaleigh : Sarah , if we ’ re assuming Sanders lands the role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean you think Warren is DOA ?
sarahf : That ’ s an interesting question , Kaleigh .
She ’ s currently in third in our polling average in the state .
sarahf : And the labor union there didn ’ t criticize her health care plan as directly as it did Sanders ’ s .
nrakich : I think Warren needs to show a pulse in Nevada .
She ’ s already basically conceded South Carolina , canceling a bunch of her TV ad reservations there .
sarahf : So I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren comeback maybe ?
She definitely was pitching that after her disappointing finish in New Hampshire , but as Amelia mentioned earlier , at this point only Sanders and Biden have demonstrated that they can build more diverse bases .
ameliatd : Warren ’ s argument has basically been that she ’ s going to make a comeback on Super Tuesday .
But if she has another disappointing finish in Nevada , that could definitely slow her down even further .
natesilver : I dunno .
Warren is not THAT far behind since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a win or a strong second-place finish in Nevada could reverse the narrative about her , though .
kaleigh : So who has the most to gain ( or most to lose ) in tonight ’ s debate ?
Biden ?
Warren ?
natesilver : The debate is about Bloomberg , like it or not .
It just is .
The media is fucking obsessed with Bloomberg .
And it ’ s his first debate .
He ’ s 90 percent likely to be the headline , positive or negative .
sarahf : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be this chat ’ s headline .
natesilver : wE aRe PaRt Of ThE PrOBLeM .
nrakich : I mean , I think that is somewhat justified for this debate specifically .
We ’ ve heard Sanders , Warren , Biden , etc.
, say the same thing a zillion times .
We have no idea how Bloomberg will hold up under pressure .
So he is the one we will likely learn the most about tonight .
kaleigh : But Bloomberg kind of has nothing to lose at this point .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or positive , the focus on him only further legitimizes him as a candidate .
sarahf : I actually think he has a lot to lose .
nrakich : Oh , he definitely has a lot to lose .
He ’ s been pumping his message out to people totally unanswered thanks to his millions of dollars in TV spending !
sarahf : Yeah , that ’ s what I was going to say .
At this point , he ’ s largely gotten to control his brand .
nrakich : Until this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ haven ’ t heard a bad word about him .
And a big known unknown for Bloomberg is how good of a debater he is .
His team is already lowering expectations .
ameliatd : Yeah , I agree with Nathaniel .
Whatever you think of the fact that Bloomberg hasn ’ t appeared in a debate so far , this is his introduction to a debate audience — and maybe more importantly , his rivals ’ first chance to attack him in a debate setting .
Which is crazy , since we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EIGHT MONTHS .
natesilver : I think he has a lot to lose but also expectations ( there ’ s that term again ! )
seem to be fairly low , i.e.
, the media assumes he ’ ll be a mediocre debater .
nrakich : I think there ’ s room for him to be a decent debater but also for this debate to represent the first mass airing of anti-Bloomberg grievances to the American public .
Like , even if Bloomberg has answers for the criticisms levied against him , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will hear those criticisms .
natesilver : Bloomberg is the one candidate that sort of unites all the others against him .
He ’ s trying to elbow out the other candidates in the moderate lane .
And he obviously has beef with Sanders , and the race could easily come down to those two .
kaleigh : That ’ s true .
I just wonder if a debate-long attack from , say , Sanders will make it seem as if Bloomberg is the de facto moderate candidate .
ameliatd : That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe Biden does run the risk of seeming even weaker if the debate is largely between Bloomberg and Sanders .
natesilver : Also , Bloomberg has not been a longstanding and loyal member of the Democratic Party .
He isn ’ t owed any particular favors or deference .
So I ’ d expect a higher aggression level than we ’ ve seen in past debates .
He has been arguably Democrats ’ most important donor in the last few election cycles .
He helped many members of Congress get elected , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could actually be tricky for someone like Klobuchar or Biden , who are establishment-aligned and came up through the big-donor system , to go after him directly .
natesilver : OK then they deserve to lose , to be honest .
nrakich : I mean , sure , maybe .
natesilver : They should also be going after Sanders directly .
nrakich : But I think only Sanders and Warren are capable of really taking the gloves off .
All the other candidates probably are hoping Bloomberg runs super PAC ads on their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Meh , Klobuchar and Buttigieg have both proven they ’ re adept at landing attacks on their opponents/each other .
natesilver : All of the the candidates except Sanders aren ’ t very likely to be the nominee right now so they should probably worry about that first .
But that doesn ’ t mean they won ’ t worry about the other thing .
sarahf : OK , to wrap … The Nevada debate .
Bloomberg ’ s first appearance .
There seems to be some consensus that this debate will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good night or bad night .
Final thoughts , particularly about the stakes ?
kaleigh : I think the stakes are highest for Biden right now , and to a certain extent Warren .
Bloomberg ’ s presence is going to shake things up one way or another , though you ’ ve all convinced me there ’ s a chance it could be to his own detriment .
nrakich : This is a lame answer , but I think the stakes are very high for everyone tonight except Sanders .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ afford a “ bad ” debate — and he ’ s such a consistent debater that even his bad debates are still OK. ameliatd : I ’ m also curious to see how Bloomberg handles the pressure of being on a debate stage , and how effectively the other candidates are able to attack him .
This is their first chance to really land punches on him — better make it count !
natesilver : This is a lame answer , but I think the stakes are very high for everyone tonight including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even lamer answer than my lame answer !
natesilver : The line separating “ Sanders as clear front-runner with huge momentum !
” and “ Sanders underperforming in his strongest states ” is QUITE thin .
In New Hampshire , it was about 3,800 votes thin .

Will The Nevada Debate Be All About Bloomberg?
Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.
sarahf (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): Let’s not bury the lede: Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is joining his first debate of the cycle tomorrow night in Nevada, even though he’s largely skipped competing in the first four states. He’ll be joined by five other candidates: former Vice President Joe Biden; former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg; Sen. Amy Klobuchar; Sen. Bernie Sanders; and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
And things are sure to get heated fast. Sanders is currently the polling leader in Nevada and favored to win the state, according to our forecast, but Bloomberg is catching up and is now at 16.1 percent in our national polling average, essentially tied with Biden.
So what should we expect tonight? Attacks on Sanders’s newly minted front-runner status? Or will the country’s first look at Bloomberg overshadow everything else?
natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): I’m glad that we finally have an opportunity to talk about Michael Bloomberg since no one else is paying attention to him.
sarahf: Haha, fair. There’s nothing the media loves more than making a non-story a story.
nrakich (Nathaniel Rakich, elections analyst): The safest bet is that Bloomberg will bear the brunt of most attacks, right? That’s how it has played out in the media this week, between allegations he created a hostile workplace for women and renewed focus on the racial dimension of the stop-and-frisk policing strategy, which Bloomberg supported as mayor.
natesilver: It seems like a safe-ish bet, especially since NOBODY SEEMS TO HAVE NOTICED THAT BERNIE SANDERS IS IN FIRST PLACE IN NATIONAL POLLS AND IS IN PRETTY GOOD POSITION TO WIN THE NOMINATION.
nrakich: Yeah, it’s a pretty sweet deal for Sanders that he has largely been spared attacks even though he’s the primary front-runner after winning New Hampshire (and, arguably, Iowa). He looks on track to win Nevada, too! He’s a more imminent threat than Bloomberg is to the other candidates.
ameliatd (Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, senior writer): Honestly, I think Sanders is really lucky that Bloomberg made it into this debate — since it’s Bloomberg’s first debate, it seems like a safe bet that everyone is going to go after him.
sarahf: BUT at this point … shouldn’t we be paying attention to Bloomberg?
He’s tied with Biden in our national polling average!!
[Our Latest Forecast: Who Will Win The 2020 Democratic Primary?]
natesilver: Of course people should be paying attention to Bloomberg, Sarah! But these things are also self-fulfilling prophecies to some extent. The fact that he’s gotten so much more attention than, say, Buttigieg or Klobuchar or Warren is something that media critics should think about. If you take off that media critic hat, he’s obviously a real contender for the nomination now.
ameliatd: I wonder if the attention on Bloomberg will make it harder or easier for the other candidates to stand out. Warren, for instance, could really use a strong performance a la Klobuchar in New Hampshire. I could see it going a couple of ways — maybe being able to attack Bloomberg on stage gives her a little viral moment. Or maybe the fact that everyone will likely be going after Bloomberg makes it harder for her to steal the spotlight.
kaleigh (Kaleigh Rogers, FiveThirtyEight contributor): That’s true, especially when people are eager for the field to start winnowing. Adding a new face might feel like going backwards, and could certainly be distracting.
natesilver: It wouldn’t necessarily surprise me if Bloomberg goes after Sanders in a big way, by the way. His team has certainly been escalating conflict with Sanders. And it plays into his message that he’s the first train leaving the station if you want an alternative to Bernie.
What Bloomberg DOESN’T want is Buttigieg or Klobuchar to surge. He wants to keep things a bit muddled.
Nor does he want a Biden comeback narrative to start brewing. So if he can make news by attacking Sanders or otherwise giving a memorable performance, that probably works for him. It’s not unlike Trump in 2016.
sarahf: And maybe this is less likely, but Sanders could go after Bloomberg. It’s probably too good of an opportunity for him not to at least try and land something. There will literally be a billionaire on stage who has spent a lot of money to buy access for his bid for the presidency. (In fact, Bloomberg has probably spent the most on his campaign out of any other presidential candidate … ever?!?!)
But OK, wait wait. What’s the basis for the idea that we’re NOT paying enough attention to Sanders?
natesilver: That he’s first in national polls and that he’s actually, y’know, had people vote for him and won states, which is what these election things are supposed to be about.
Nobody in the mainstream media has the right to complain about paying too much attention to the polls now, though. Because so far, the Bloomberg thing is entirely based on the polls when there are other candidates who have demonstrated actual support.
kaleigh: But it’s not as if Sanders’s success hasn’t been covered. Certainly there’s room to talk about more than just the front-runners?
There’s also the fact that the vast majority of Democrats have not yet voted. There’s still a race here.
natesilver: I mean, in some narrow but valid sense, Buttigieg is the front-runner (he has the most pledged delegates) and yet, he isn’t getting a ton of coverage.
sarahf: Kaleigh makes a good point, though. Sanders’s successes have been covered. What’s difficult, though, is they haven’t been portrayed as decisive victories. But I kind of get that. Sanders and Buttigieg both “won” Iowa — we’ll see if the recanvassing efforts change that. And he didn’t win the New Hampshire primary by that large of a margin (1.3 points).
So there’s this other narrative emerging around the field being divided and no one candidate having a firm grasp on things — our own forecast puts Sanders’s chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates at roughly the same odds as no one winning a majority — so maybe this is the year every political journalist’s dream comes true … a cOnteSTEd convention … uh, the troll cap is too much work.
nrakich: Sarah, I think some Sanders skepticism is warranted. He has done well in the first two contests but hasn’t dominated, and as you point out, Sarah, our model doesn’t think he has a mortal lock on the nomination.
On the other hand, I think the tone of the coverage of Sanders’s win (covered as if it were a loss) and Klobuchar’s third-place finish (covered as if it were a win) was topsy-turvy.
sarahf: That’s fair, but Klobuchar did manage to double her support in New Hampshire, going from about 10 percent in our polling average to winning 20 percent of the vote. That’s pretty impressive.
natesilver: With Klobuchar, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m just not sure that a fifth-place finish followed by a third-place finish should get you all that much attention. On the other hand, she fits the traditional credentials of a party nominee (not too old or too young, not “too” far to the left or too centrist, experienced) more so than most of the remaining candidates do. And people seem more inclined to chase shiny objects.
sarahf: But to step back for a moment, the New Hampshire debate was one of the more consequential debates of the cycle, yeah?
Probably means Nevada will be a nothingburger, but I am intrigued to see what happens there as Nevada is so weird to poll.
ameliatd: One big question for me is how many Nevadans will actually tune into the debate, too. In general, they tend to be less politically engaged than New Hampshire or Iowa voters. So that could dampen the impact.
natesilver: I guess I think that might make the debate more impactful, in some ways? If people are less tuned in, they may not be as far along in their decision-making process, which could make the debate more likely to sway their opinion.
ameliatd: It’s also worth noting that thousands of Nevadans will already have “caucused” by the time the debate starts. Early voting started on Saturday and ended on Tuesday.
kaleigh: More than 26,000 Nevadans voted in the first two days alone.
nrakich: I do think the debate will have more of an impact nationally than it will in Nevada, to Amelia’s points. Think about how the New Hampshire debate turned into a discussion of South Carolina issues!
And Bloomberg isn’t contesting Nevada, so obviously his debate performance will only affect his numbers in other states.
sarahf: So how confident are we about the situation in Nevada? Our Nevada forecast gives Sanders about a 7 in 10 chance of winning there. Biden is the second most likely winner with a 1 in 7 chance, but Warren is close on Biden’s coattails. Buttigieg and Klobuchar aren’t too far off either.
nrakich: Personally, I’m not confident. The Nevada polls are all over the place.
sarahf: Could a strong second-place finish by someone in Nevada overshadow a Sanders win? Similar to what we saw in Iowa and New Hampshire?
nrakich: Yes, I think if someone surprising finishes second (Warren? Steyer?), it will be New Hampshire all over again, where that person gets more favorable coverage than the outright winner (assuming it’s Sanders).
natesilver: I mean … it’s another state where media expectations (BERNIE CERTAIN TO WIN) seem a little out of line with the reality (probably Bernie, but high uncertainty). If I were a Sanders voter, I’d be annoyed at how Sanders always seems to be the victim of the expectations game.
ameliatd: We also haven’t talked about the fact that this is the first state with a significant population of voters of color. So it’s the first real chance to see if candidates like Buttigieg and Klobuchar can do well among Latino/black/Asian voters — if they do, that would obviously be a big deal.
sarahf: That’s right. And at this point, the crosstabs suggest that only Sanders and Biden have a lead there, right?
ameliatd: Well, like Nathaniel said, the polls are kind of all over the place — but yes, among Latinos at least, Sanders and Biden tend to do best.
natesilver: Keep in mind that the Latino population is pretty young, and that Sanders obviously does well with young voters.
nrakich: Yeah, I wonder if Buttigieg will bust out some Spanish during the debate. He recently released a Spanish-language TV ad that he himself narrated.
kaleigh: He’s been running a fair amount of Spanish-language Facebook ads, too.
nrakich: That said, when Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker and Julián Castro spoke Spanish in the first debate, some people saw it as a stunt. A YouGov poll in June found that 37 percent of Hispanic Americans found it respectful when a presidential candidate spoke Spanish in a debate, and 27 percent thought it was pandering. White Americans (who as of 2016 were still a majority of Nevada Democratic caucusgoers) thought it was pandering by a nearly two-to-one ratio. And Equis Labs, a polling firm that specializes in polling Hispanic Americans, told me that only 29 percent of Hispanic registered Democrats in Nevada say Spanish is their preferred language.
ameliatd: I know we’ve heard quite a bit about health care in these debates, but I bet it’ll come up again tonight, since Sanders is being attacked by the state’s biggest labor union over Medicare for All — and other candidates, like Klobuchar and Steyer, have been jumping on that bandwagon recently.
sarahf: OK, let’s talk candidate strategy for a moment. Bloomberg is a bit of a curve ball.
He isn’t contesting Nevada, so his strategy is to … stop a debate surge from happening and somehow make a plea for voters to consider him, not in South Carolina (which votes next), but hold out for Super Tuesday instead?
But what does this mean for the other moderate candidates, especially Biden? Biden at this point still leads Klobuchar and Buttigieg in national polls — does he need to nip Bloomberg’s momentum in the bud?
And then what does this mean for Sanders? Does he just hope that no one attacks him directly and let the moderates duke it out?
I guess what I’m really asking is … is Biden toast?
Or does this debate have the biggest stakes for him?
natesilver: Why would Biden be toast? He’s tied with Bloomberg in national polls. And he has an opportunity to get a boost with a win in South Carolina or, less likely, Nevada.
If he loses in South Carolina, he might be toast.
sarahf: What if he finishes in fourth or fifth in Nevada, though?
natesilver: Meh, who cares? South Carolina is coming in a week.
Biden’s media narrative is awful as can be now and it probably doesn’t get any worse if he finishes fourth or fifth in Nevada.
nrakich: It might be good for Biden that Steyer didn’t make today’s debate? Not that Steyer has turned in super compelling debate performances, but Steyer might be Biden’s most direct competition in South Carolina.
sarahf: There has to be some consolidation around a moderate alternative to Sanders, right? Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Bloomberg and Biden can’t all stay in and actually mount a credible campaign against Sanders, can they?
nrakich: They can if they all have visions of emerging as the nominee after a contested convention!
natesilver: Or candidates might think “Sanders v. Bloomberg could go very nuclear, so I need to stick around as the least radioactive option.”
That seems … quite plausible? We probably have to assume that Bloomberg will drop a lot of negative ads on Sanders at some point?
nrakich: He should probably do so sooner rather than later. There are lots of delegates up for grabs on Super Tuesday, and Sanders is currently riding high.
ameliatd: Biden has to be hoping that Bloomberg takes a beating in the debate, though, right?
natesilver: Sure, I think that’s right, Amelia.
But Biden also doesn’t want one of Buttigieg or Klobuchar to surge.
kaleigh: Sarah, if we’re assuming Sanders lands the role of the progressive candidate, does that mean you think Warren is DOA?
sarahf: That’s an interesting question, Kaleigh. She’s currently in third in our polling average in the state.
sarahf: And the labor union there didn’t criticize her health care plan as directly as it did Sanders’s.
nrakich: I think Warren needs to show a pulse in Nevada. She’s already basically conceded South Carolina, canceling a bunch of her TV ad reservations there.
sarahf: So I think there’s still room for a Warren comeback maybe? She definitely was pitching that after her disappointing finish in New Hampshire, but as Amelia mentioned earlier, at this point only Sanders and Biden have demonstrated that they can build more diverse bases.
ameliatd: Warren’s argument has basically been that she’s going to make a comeback on Super Tuesday. But if she has another disappointing finish in Nevada, that could definitely slow her down even further.
natesilver: I dunno. Warren is not THAT far behind since nobody is THAT far ahead. Obviously a win or a strong second-place finish in Nevada could reverse the narrative about her, though.
kaleigh: So who has the most to gain (or most to lose) in tonight’s debate? Biden? Warren?
natesilver: The debate is about Bloomberg, like it or not. It just is. The media is fucking obsessed with Bloomberg. And it’s his first debate. He’s 90 percent likely to be the headline, positive or negative.
sarahf: Yeah, he’s likely to be this chat’s headline.
natesilver: wE aRe PaRt Of ThE PrOBLeM.
nrakich: I mean, I think that is somewhat justified for this debate specifically.
We’ve heard Sanders, Warren, Biden, etc., say the same thing a zillion times. We have no idea how Bloomberg will hold up under pressure. So he is the one we will likely learn the most about tonight.
kaleigh: But Bloomberg kind of has nothing to lose at this point. He’s skipping Nevada, and negative or positive, the focus on him only further legitimizes him as a candidate.
sarahf: I actually think he has a lot to lose.
nrakich: Oh, he definitely has a lot to lose. He’s been pumping his message out to people totally unanswered thanks to his millions of dollars in TV spending!
sarahf: Yeah, that’s what I was going to say. At this point, he’s largely gotten to control his brand.
nrakich: Until this week’s bad headlines, people haven’t heard a bad word about him.
And a big known unknown for Bloomberg is how good of a debater he is. His team is already lowering expectations.
ameliatd: Yeah, I agree with Nathaniel. Whatever you think of the fact that Bloomberg hasn’t appeared in a debate so far, this is his introduction to a debate audience — and maybe more importantly, his rivals’ first chance to attack him in a debate setting. Which is crazy, since we’ve been covering these things for EIGHT MONTHS.
natesilver: I think he has a lot to lose but also expectations (there’s that term again!) seem to be fairly low, i.e., the media assumes he’ll be a mediocre debater.
nrakich: I think there’s room for him to be a decent debater but also for this debate to represent the first mass airing of anti-Bloomberg grievances to the American public.
Like, even if Bloomberg has answers for the criticisms levied against him, it’s the first time many Americans will hear those criticisms.
natesilver: Bloomberg is the one candidate that sort of unites all the others against him. He’s trying to elbow out the other candidates in the moderate lane. And he obviously has beef with Sanders, and the race could easily come down to those two.
kaleigh: That’s true. I just wonder if a debate-long attack from, say, Sanders will make it seem as if Bloomberg is the de facto moderate candidate.
ameliatd: That’s an interesting point, Kaleigh — maybe Biden does run the risk of seeming even weaker if the debate is largely between Bloomberg and Sanders.
natesilver: Also, Bloomberg has not been a longstanding and loyal member of the Democratic Party. He isn’t owed any particular favors or deference. So I’d expect a higher aggression level than we’ve seen in past debates.
nrakich: Oh, I disagree there, Nate.
He has been arguably Democrats’ most important donor in the last few election cycles.
He helped many members of Congress get elected, for instance.
I would argue that it could actually be tricky for someone like Klobuchar or Biden, who are establishment-aligned and came up through the big-donor system, to go after him directly.
natesilver: OK then they deserve to lose, to be honest.
nrakich: I mean, sure, maybe.
natesilver: They should also be going after Sanders directly.
nrakich: But I think only Sanders and Warren are capable of really taking the gloves off.
All the other candidates probably are hoping Bloomberg runs super PAC ads on their behalf in the general.
kaleigh: 😂
sarahf: Meh, Klobuchar and Buttigieg have both proven they’re adept at landing attacks on their opponents/each other.
natesilver: All of the the candidates except Sanders aren’t very likely to be the nominee right now so they should probably worry about that first.
nrakich: I mean, I agree.
But that doesn’t mean they won’t worry about the other thing.
sarahf: OK, to wrap … The Nevada debate. Bloomberg’s first appearance. There seems to be some consensus that this debate will be about Bloomberg, whether he has a good night or bad night. Final thoughts, particularly about the stakes?
kaleigh: I think the stakes are highest for Biden right now, and to a certain extent Warren. Bloomberg’s presence is going to shake things up one way or another, though you’ve all convinced me there’s a chance it could be to his own detriment.
nrakich: This is a lame answer, but I think the stakes are very high for everyone tonight except Sanders.
He’s the only one who can really afford a “bad” debate — and he’s such a consistent debater that even his bad debates are still OK.
ameliatd: I’m also curious to see how Bloomberg handles the pressure of being on a debate stage, and how effectively the other candidates are able to attack him. This is their first chance to really land punches on him — better make it count!
natesilver: This is a lame answer, but I think the stakes are very high for everyone tonight including Sanders.
nrakich: That is an even lamer answer than my lame answer!
I’ll allow it.
natesilver: The line separating “Sanders as clear front-runner with huge momentum!” and “Sanders underperforming in his strongest states” is QUITE thin.
In New Hampshire, it was about 3,800 votes thin.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-20--Politics Podcast: Just How Bad Was That Debate For Bloomberg?

In a late night installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew assesses the candidates ’ performances in the @ @ @ @ @ were more adversarial than in past debates and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg struggled @ @ @ @ @ Elizabeth Warren .
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “ play ” @ @ @ @ @ above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN App or your favorite podcast @ @ @ @ @ new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays @ @ @ @ @ listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes .
Have @ @ @ @ @ suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get in touch by email @ @ @ @ @ the comments .

In a late-night installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew assesses the candidates’ performances in the Nevada debate. The candidates were more adversarial than in past debates, and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg struggled while fielding attacks from Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast: Bloomberg stumbles in feisty debate
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-20--Sanders Has An Edge Among Latino Voters In Nevada. Will It Hold?

After two early state contests with overwhelmingly white electorates , the Nevada caucuses are the Democratic candidates ’ first big test among nonwhite voters .
And with Latinos making up nearly 30 percent of the state ’ s population , they could play a big role in determining the winner .
But which candidates will connect with Latino voters — and whether they can persuade them to turn out in high numbers — remains to be seen .
In 2016 , Latinos made up 19 percent of the Democratic electorate , which was four percentage points higher than in 2008 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters was contested .
[ Our Latest Forecast : Who Will Win The 2020 Democratic Primary ? ]
This year , Sen. Bernie Sanders has a clear edge in Nevada overall , according to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast .
He has a 3 in 4 ( 76 percent ) chance of winning the most votes , and the model expects him to finish with 37 percent of the post-realignment vote , on average .
And strong support among Latinos is probably a big part of that : Sanders consistently polls well among Latino @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outreach in Nevada , which experts told us is key for ensuring that his supporters show up to the caucuses .
There ’ s still room for other candidates to perform well among Latino voters in Nevada , though — even if Sanders wins overall .
For instance , even though Biden ’ s odds of winning the most votes in Nevada are only 1 in 9 ( 11 percent ) , a significant chunk of Latino voters still support Biden , according to recent polls .
He ’ ll need to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to avoid another fourth- or fifth-place finish and to bolster his claim that he can bring together a broad coalition of Democratic voters .
Additionally , the state of play in Nevada among Latinos could be more fluid than it looks .
Nevada is a weird state to poll and Latino voters can be difficult to survey accurately because of low response rates and language barriers .
The efforts other candidates have made in recent weeks — through Spanish-language advertisements and on-the-ground outreach — to court Latino voters could still pay off .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ important litmus test for understanding which way Latino voters may be leaning — especially if a sizable number end up breaking for someone other than Sanders .
For instance , former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren have struggled so far to win over voters of color , so even just a robust showing among Latino voters could be game-changing .
Likewise , an overperformance among Latinos could go a long way for philanthropist Tom Steyer , who ’ s made a big bet on Nevada and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways to gauge which candidates might have the strongest support among Latino Democrats in Nevada , but a good starting point is to first look at the polls .
We gathered the crosstabs of six Nevada polls conducted in the last 11 days , and Sanders is the only candidate who has consistently had meaningful support among Hispanic or Latino voters .
( Pollsters varied in how they categorized Latino and Hispanic respondents .
Some treated Hispanic heritage as an ethnicity , which would allow people to identify as both black and Latino @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treated Hispanic as its own race , which may lead respondents who identify as both Hispanic and white , black or another race to self-select out of the Hispanic/Latino group .
Other pollsters simply asked respondents if they identified as Hispanic or Latino , and are not necessarily weighting to get a sample reflective of Nevada ’ s overall Latino population . )
It wasn ’ t just Sanders who appealed to Hispanic or Latino voters .
Biden and Steyer also had strong support among Hispanic or Latino voters in some of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy Klobuchar , on the other hand , are far behind .
But there ’ s still room for a polling surprise or two .
Biden ’ s losses in Iowa and New Hampshire could make some voters more willing to consider other options .
And Sanders has also faced opposition from the state ’ s largest labor union , which represents thousands of Latino workers .
They haven ’ t endorsed a candidate , but they have openly attacked his Medicare for All plan recently , so it ’ s possible this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support .
Other candidates have also stepped up their outreach efforts in the last few weeks , with several trying to speak directly to Nevada ’ s Latino population via Spanish-language TV ads .
According to data from Kantar Media ’ s Campaign Media Analysis Group , from Jan. 1 through Feb. 18 , Steyer has aired 912 Spanish-language TV spots in Nevada-based media markets , nearly double Sanders ’ s 506 .
And Warren has aired the largest share of her total TV advertising in Spanish — 479 of her 2,034 Nevada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other candidates have made nominal Spanish-language ad buys : Buttigieg has aired 97 spots so far this year , and Klobuchar has aired 62 .
Support from Latino voters requires outreach beyond the airwaves , though .
“ It ’ s not just about coming in and running an ad saying you support immigration reform — you need to do outreach through a Latino lens , ” said Matt Barreto , the co-founder of the polling firm Latino Decisions .
“ You have to figure out what the challenges are with health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That takes time and resources.
” And persuading people to attend a caucus adds another layer of difficulty .
The state ’ s population is relatively transient — only 27 percent of Nevada residents were born in the state — which means that voters may not be familiar with how caucuses work .
Caucuses also present a challenge for voters who might not be able to leave their jobs for several hours in the middle of the day to participate .
“ It ’ s a process that really excludes low-income communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevada state director for Mi Familia Vota , a Latino advocacy group .
“ The guy working in landscaping — he can ’ t just leave work on a Saturday for the caucus.
” And for first-time voters and immigrants , Alvarado added , even the experience of attending a caucus can be confusing and alienating .
“ Knowing what to do , where to stand , seeing people going in a bunch of different directions — it ’ s a complex process and if you ’ re not familiar with it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you don ’ t belong there , ” she said .
That means the candidates with the biggest infrastructure , and a longer presence in the state , have an advantage .
This year , the caucuses included an early voting period , which meant that campaigns had more opportunities to persuade Nevadans to participate .
“ Latino turnout really requires a big investment in on-the-ground resources , ” Barreto said .
“ The campaigns need to be doing extensive voter education and mobilization to get people to the caucus sites.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Darr , Buttigieg and Sanders have invested most heavily in their ground game .
They both have the highest number of field offices in Nevada : Buttigieg has 11 and Sanders has 10 , mostly concentrated near Las Vegas .
Having lots of staff and volunteers can make a difference in persuading voters to participate in the caucuses , so a strong network of field offices and volunteers could , in theory , give a candidate like Buttigieg a boost .
It might also help someone like Warren , who has eight field @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s five or Steyer ’ s three .
Ultimately , though , Sanders and Biden ’ s opponents will have to contend with the fact that both candidates are simply more familiar to Nevada voters , and popular with Latino voters in particular .
A Univision poll also found that 70 percent of Hispanic registered voters had a favorable impression of Sanders , and only 3 percent didn ’ t know who he was .
Biden was similarly well-known , and the percentage of registered voters with a favorable opinion was only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Only 38 percent of Hispanic registered voters , by contrast , had a favorable impression of Buttigieg , and nearly one-quarter weren ’ t familiar with him — even though Buttigieg has been ramping up his ground game in Nevada since the fall .
There ’ s also some evidence that Latinos see Sanders — and to a lesser extent , Biden — as the candidate who ’ s most invested in the issues that matter to them : A Mason-Dixon poll of Latinos conducted for Telemundo found that a plurality ( 41 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that Sanders is the presidential candidate who has paid the most attention to issues affecting the Latino community , while about one-quarter ( 24 percent ) pointed to Biden .
None of the other candidates registered above 5 percent .
And that ’ s also why Biden — despite his weakened standing after Iowa and New Hampshire — might still be in the best position to give Sanders a run for his money among Latinos .
It ’ s true that Sanders trounced his competition in Latino-heavy precincts in Iowa , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But Latinos also don ’ t vote as a bloc , and the age composition of this year ’ s electorate could make a big difference — particularly if turnout is high among young people .
The fact that Latino voters tend to be younger is especially helpful to Sanders , who tends to overperform with younger voters overall .
That was reflected in the Telemundo poll , which showed that nearly half ( 43 percent ) of Latinos under the age of 50 were in Sanders ’ s camp .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Latinos : 39 percent of Latinos age 50 and older said they supported Biden , while only 23 percent favored Sanders in that Telemundo poll .
It ’ s also possible that the Latino vote will be divided among the candidates in ways that are hard to anticipate now .
And however it shakes out — whether another candidate does manage to match Sanders ’ s support among Latino voters in Nevada , or Sanders wins even more decisively than the polls suggest — that could be an important bellwether for even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the calendar , like California or Texas , where orders of magnitude more delegates are at stake .

After two early state contests with overwhelmingly white electorates, the Nevada caucuses are the Democratic candidates’ first big test among nonwhite voters. And with Latinos making up nearly 30 percent of the state’s population, they could play a big role in determining the winner.
But which candidates will connect with Latino voters — and whether they can persuade them to turn out in high numbers — remains to be seen. In 2016, Latinos made up 19 percent of the Democratic electorate, which was four percentage points higher than in 2008, but which candidate won among Latino voters was contested.
[Our Latest Forecast: Who Will Win The 2020 Democratic Primary?]
This year, Sen. Bernie Sanders has a clear edge in Nevada overall, according to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast. He has a 3 in 4 (76 percent) chance of winning the most votes, and the model expects him to finish with 37 percent of the post-realignment vote, on average. And strong support among Latinos is probably a big part of that: Sanders consistently polls well among Latino voters and has invested heavily in Latino outreach in Nevada, which experts told us is key for ensuring that his supporters show up to the caucuses.
There’s still room for other candidates to perform well among Latino voters in Nevada, though — even if Sanders wins overall. For instance, even though Biden’s odds of winning the most votes in Nevada are only 1 in 9 (11 percent), a significant chunk of Latino voters still support Biden, according to recent polls. He’ll need to keep them in his corner, too, to avoid another fourth- or fifth-place finish and to bolster his claim that he can bring together a broad coalition of Democratic voters.
Additionally, the state of play in Nevada among Latinos could be more fluid than it looks. Nevada is a weird state to poll and Latino voters can be difficult to survey accurately because of low response rates and language barriers. The efforts other candidates have made in recent weeks — through Spanish-language advertisements and on-the-ground outreach — to court Latino voters could still pay off. And the Nevada caucuses could be an important litmus test for understanding which way Latino voters may be leaning — especially if a sizable number end up breaking for someone other than Sanders. For instance, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren have struggled so far to win over voters of color, so even just a robust showing among Latino voters could be game-changing. Likewise, an overperformance among Latinos could go a long way for philanthropist Tom Steyer, who’s made a big bet on Nevada and South Carolina.
There are a few ways to gauge which candidates might have the strongest support among Latino Democrats in Nevada, but a good starting point is to first look at the polls. We gathered the crosstabs of six Nevada polls conducted in the last 11 days, and Sanders is the only candidate who has consistently had meaningful support among Hispanic or Latino voters. (Pollsters varied in how they categorized Latino and Hispanic respondents. Some treated Hispanic heritage as an ethnicity, which would allow people to identify as both black and Latino, for example, while other pollsters treated Hispanic as its own race, which may lead respondents who identify as both Hispanic and white, black or another race to self-select out of the Hispanic/Latino group. Other pollsters simply asked respondents if they identified as Hispanic or Latino, and are not necessarily weighting to get a sample reflective of Nevada’s overall Latino population.)
Sanders is highly favored by Latino voters in Nevada Top Democratic candidates’ support among poll respondents who identified as Hispanic or Latino (depending on the poll), in six polls conducted since Feb. 9 Pollster Sanders Biden Steyer Warren Buttigieg Klobuchar Data for Progress 66% 7% 8% 5% 4% 7% WPA Intelligence 50 13 9 11 9 0 Beacon Research* 33 16 18 14 7 3 Univision 33 22 12 6 8 1 Mason-Dixon 31 34 3 6 7 5 Point Blank Political 20 8 29 8 12 4 *Internal poll for the Steyer campaign. Source: Polls
It wasn’t just Sanders who appealed to Hispanic or Latino voters. Biden and Steyer also had strong support among Hispanic or Latino voters in some of the polls. Warren, Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, on the other hand, are far behind.
But there’s still room for a polling surprise or two. Biden’s losses in Iowa and New Hampshire could make some voters more willing to consider other options. And Sanders has also faced opposition from the state’s largest labor union, which represents thousands of Latino workers. They haven’t endorsed a candidate, but they have openly attacked his Medicare for All plan recently, so it’s possible this could erode some of Sanders’s support.
Other candidates have also stepped up their outreach efforts in the last few weeks, with several trying to speak directly to Nevada’s Latino population via Spanish-language TV ads. According to data from Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group, from Jan. 1 through Feb. 18, Steyer has aired 912 Spanish-language TV spots in Nevada-based media markets, nearly double Sanders’s 506. And Warren has aired the largest share of her total TV advertising in Spanish — 479 of her 2,034 Nevada spots have been in Spanish. Two other candidates have made nominal Spanish-language ad buys: Buttigieg has aired 97 spots so far this year, and Klobuchar has aired 62.
Several Democrats are airing Spanish ads in Nevada The number of Spanish-language TV spots candidates have aired in Nevada-based media markets, as a share of total advertising in the state Candidate All Airings Spanish-Language Airings Share in Spanish Elizabeth Warren 2,034 479 24% Bernie Sanders 4,015 506 13 Tom Steyer 9,930 912 9 Pete Buttigieg 1,236 97 8 Amy Klobuchar 997 62 6 Joe Biden 1,866 0 0 Michael Bloomberg 69 0 0 Data is from Jan. 1 through Feb. 18, 2020. Source: Kantar/Campaign media analysis group
Support from Latino voters requires outreach beyond the airwaves, though. “It’s not just about coming in and running an ad saying you support immigration reform — you need to do outreach through a Latino lens,” said Matt Barreto, the co-founder of the polling firm Latino Decisions. “You have to figure out what the challenges are with health care or college affordability from a Latino perspective. That takes time and resources.”
And persuading people to attend a caucus adds another layer of difficulty. The state’s population is relatively transient — only 27 percent of Nevada residents were born in the state — which means that voters may not be familiar with how caucuses work. Caucuses also present a challenge for voters who might not be able to leave their jobs for several hours in the middle of the day to participate. “It’s a process that really excludes low-income communities,” said Cecia Alvarado, the Nevada state director for Mi Familia Vota, a Latino advocacy group. “The guy working in landscaping — he can’t just leave work on a Saturday for the caucus.”
And for first-time voters and immigrants, Alvarado added, even the experience of attending a caucus can be confusing and alienating. “Knowing what to do, where to stand, seeing people going in a bunch of different directions — it’s a complex process and if you’re not familiar with it, it’s easy to feel like you don’t belong there,” she said.
That means the candidates with the biggest infrastructure, and a longer presence in the state, have an advantage. This year, the caucuses included an early voting period, which meant that campaigns had more opportunities to persuade Nevadans to participate. “Latino turnout really requires a big investment in on-the-ground resources,” Barreto said. “The campaigns need to be doing extensive voter education and mobilization to get people to the caucus sites.”
And according to research by FiveThirtyEight contributor Joshua Darr, Buttigieg and Sanders have invested most heavily in their ground game. They both have the highest number of field offices in Nevada: Buttigieg has 11 and Sanders has 10, mostly concentrated near Las Vegas. Having lots of staff and volunteers can make a difference in persuading voters to participate in the caucuses, so a strong network of field offices and volunteers could, in theory, give a candidate like Buttigieg a boost. It might also help someone like Warren, who has eight field offices across Nevada — more than Biden’s five or Steyer’s three.
Ultimately, though, Sanders and Biden’s opponents will have to contend with the fact that both candidates are simply more familiar to Nevada voters, and popular with Latino voters in particular. A Univision poll also found that 70 percent of Hispanic registered voters had a favorable impression of Sanders, and only 3 percent didn’t know who he was. Biden was similarly well-known, and the percentage of registered voters with a favorable opinion was only slightly lower, at 65 percent. Only 38 percent of Hispanic registered voters, by contrast, had a favorable impression of Buttigieg, and nearly one-quarter weren’t familiar with him — even though Buttigieg has been ramping up his ground game in Nevada since the fall.
There’s also some evidence that Latinos see Sanders — and to a lesser extent, Biden — as the candidate who’s most invested in the issues that matter to them: A Mason-Dixon poll of Latinos conducted for Telemundo found that a plurality (41 percent) of Hispanic likely Democratic caucusgoers said that Sanders is the presidential candidate who has paid the most attention to issues affecting the Latino community, while about one-quarter (24 percent) pointed to Biden. None of the other candidates registered above 5 percent.
And that’s also why Biden — despite his weakened standing after Iowa and New Hampshire — might still be in the best position to give Sanders a run for his money among Latinos. It’s true that Sanders trounced his competition in Latino-heavy precincts in Iowa, according to an analysis by researchers at UCLA. But Latinos also don’t vote as a bloc, and the age composition of this year’s electorate could make a big difference — particularly if turnout is high among young people. The fact that Latino voters tend to be younger is especially helpful to Sanders, who tends to overperform with younger voters overall. That was reflected in the Telemundo poll, which showed that nearly half (43 percent) of Latinos under the age of 50 were in Sanders’s camp. But Biden still has an advantage among older Latinos: 39 percent of Latinos age 50 and older said they supported Biden, while only 23 percent favored Sanders in that Telemundo poll.
It’s also possible that the Latino vote will be divided among the candidates in ways that are hard to anticipate now. And however it shakes out — whether another candidate does manage to match Sanders’s support among Latino voters in Nevada, or Sanders wins even more decisively than the polls suggest — that could be an important bellwether for even more heavily Latino states rapidly coming up on the calendar, like California or Texas, where orders of magnitude more delegates are at stake.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-20--What Went Down At The Nevada Democratic Debate

Search
No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-19--Election Update: We Got A Flurry Of New National Polls. Sanders Led Them All.

According to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast , the single most likely outcome of the Democratic presidential primary is that no one wins a majority of pledged delegates ( there is a 2 in 5 , or 41 percent , chance of this ) .
However , it is almost equally likely that Sen. Bernie Sanders will bag a majority ( a 2 in 5 chance , or 37 percent ) .
And a recent avalanche of national polls has been particularly good for Sanders .
Sanders leads in 10 out of 10 national polls released since Monday — many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a firmer handle on the race .
He currently sits at 25.3 percent in our national polling average — more than 3 percentage points higher than on Feb. 10 ( the day before the New Hampshire primary ) .
Meanwhile , former Vice President Joe Biden and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg are roughly tied for second place in the polls , but they are heading in opposite directions .
Bloomberg ’ s average is up 3.5 points since Feb. 10 , while Biden ’ s is down 5 points .
[ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The 2020 Democratic Primary ? ]
Here ’ s a snapshot of how the candidates ’ standing in those 10 polls has changed since the previous national primary poll from each pollster .
( Note that the polls we are comparing to all predate the New Hampshire primary , and most predate the Iowa caucuses as well .
The only one older than mid-January is Marist ’ s , which is from December . )
And here ’ s a rundown of those polls , from newest to oldest : • According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back Sanders , 19 percent back Biden , 18 percent back Bloomberg , 12 percent back Sen. Elizabeth Warren , 10 percent back former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and 5 percent back Sen. Amy Klobuchar .
However , the results look different if you account for the pollster ’ s house effects , which our forecast does .
The adjusted top lines that our model digests are Sanders at 23 percent ; Bloomberg , Biden and Warren all at 16 percent ; Buttigieg at 12 percent ; and Klobuchar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economist/YouGov gave Sanders 24 percent , Biden 18 percent , Warren 16 percent , Bloomberg 12 percent , Buttigieg 11 percent and Klobuchar 7 percent .
When adjusted for house effects , the results are similar , per our model : Sanders 24 percent , Biden 18 percent , Bloomberg 14 percent , Warren 13 percent and Klobuchar 7 percent .
• In ABC News/Washington Post ’ s latest survey , Sanders had 32 percent , Biden had 16 percent , Bloomberg had 14 percent , Warren had 12 percent , Buttigieg had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our forecast didn ’ t really adjust these numbers much for house effects , either , so this was an unambiguously great poll for Sanders — and a bad one for Biden .
• In Morning Consult ’ s most recent poll , Sanders got 28 percent , Bloomberg got 20 percent , Biden got 19 percent , Buttigieg got 12 percent , Warren got 10 percent and Klobuchar got 6 percent .
But because Morning Consult often shows good numbers for Sanders , our model treated this poll as somewhat less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effects .
( Our model interpreted this poll as Sanders at 24 percent , Bloomberg at 18 percent and Biden at 15 percent . )
• Emerson College also put Sanders in the lead at 29 percent , with Biden at 22 percent , Bloomberg at 14 percent , Warren at 12 percent , Buttigieg at 8 percent and Klobuchar at 6 percent .
However , note that Emerson has typically had very rosy numbers for Sanders , so our model interprets this poll as more like one where Sanders leads Biden by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 21 percent .
• According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey , Sanders had 27 percent , Biden had 15 percent , Bloomberg and Warren each had 14 percent , Buttigieg had 13 percent and Klobuchar had 7 percent .
• A Reuters/Ipsos survey found Sanders at 25 percent , Bloomberg at 17 percent , Biden at 13 percent , Buttigieg at 11 percent , Warren at 9 percent and Klobuchar at 5 percent .
However , once adjusted for house effects , the poll looks even better for Sanders : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders at 26 percent , Bloomberg and Biden tied at 16 percent , Buttigieg at 13 percent , Warren at 12 percent and Klobuchar at 6 percent .
• According to SurveyUSA , Sanders had 29 percent , Bloomberg and Biden each had 18 percent , Buttigieg had 12 percent , Warren had 10 percent and Klobuchar had 4 percent .
And this poll is even worse than it looks for Biden because of SurveyUSA ’ s house effects , which tend to benefit Biden ; his adjusted support is closer to 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist College poll put Sanders at 31 percent , Bloomberg at 19 percent , Biden at 15 percent , Warren at 12 percent , Klobuchar at 9 percent and Buttigieg at 8 percent .
• Finally , Zogby Analytics gave Sanders 24 percent , Bloomberg 20 percent , Biden 18 percent , Warren 10 percent , Buttigieg 9 percent and Klobuchar 5 percent .
However , our model thinks Bloomberg is probably closer to 17 percent support in this poll than 20 percent , thanks to Zogby ’ s Bloomberg-friendly house effects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these polls give Sanders an adjusted lead of anywhere from 2 to 15 percentage points .
There ’ s simply not much ambiguity right now that Sanders is the first choice of a plurality of Democrats nationwide .
Accordingly , if you look at who is most likely to get the most pledged delegates , though not necessarily more than half ( we usually cite the forecast ’ s odds of a candidate getting a majority ) , our model is fairly confident it ’ ll be Sanders who gets a plurality ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or 56 percent , chance of doing so ) .
The big question is whether the other candidates stay competitive enough for long enough to deny him the majority he needs to win the nomination outright .

According to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast, the single most likely outcome of the Democratic presidential primary is that no one wins a majority of pledged delegates (there is a 2 in 5, or 41 percent, chance of this). However, it is almost equally likely that Sen. Bernie Sanders will bag a majority (a 2 in 5 chance, or 37 percent). And a recent avalanche of national polls has been particularly good for Sanders.
Sanders leads in 10 out of 10 national polls released since Monday — many of them from high-quality pollsters — giving him a firmer handle on the race. He currently sits at 25.3 percent in our national polling average — more than 3 percentage points higher than on Feb. 10 (the day before the New Hampshire primary). Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg are roughly tied for second place in the polls, but they are heading in opposite directions. Bloomberg’s average is up 3.5 points since Feb. 10, while Biden’s is down 5 points.
[Our Latest Forecast: Who Will Win The 2020 Democratic Primary?]
Here’s a snapshot of how the candidates’ standing in those 10 polls has changed since the previous national primary poll from each pollster. (Note that the polls we are comparing to all predate the New Hampshire primary, and most predate the Iowa caucuses as well. The only one older than mid-January is Marist’s, which is from December.)
Sanders and Bloomberg up, Biden down in national polls How the top six Democratic presidential candidates’ standing changed compared to each pollster’s last pre-New Hampshire national primary poll Pollster Sanders Biden Bloomb. Warren Buttig. Klobuch. ABC News/Washington Post +9 -16 +6 0 +3 +4 Emerson College +2 -8 +6 -1 +2 +2 Morning Consult +3 -3 +3 -1 +1 +3 NBC News/Wall Street Journal 0 -11 +5 -1 +6 +2 NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist +9 -9 +15 -5 -5 +5 Reuters/Ipsos +5 -4 +2 -2 +3 +2 SurveyUSA +8 -14 +9 -4 +3 +2 The Economist/YouGov +2 0 0 +1 +1 0 The Hill/HarrisX +2 -4 +2 +3 +1 +2 Zogby Analytics 0 -6 +9 -1 +1 +1 Average change +4 -8 +6 -1 +2 +2 Source: Polls
And here’s a rundown of those polls, from newest to oldest:
According to The Hill/HarrisX, 22 percent of voters back Sanders, 19 percent back Biden, 18 percent back Bloomberg, 12 percent back Sen. Elizabeth Warren, 10 percent back former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and 5 percent back Sen. Amy Klobuchar. However, the results look different if you account for the pollster’s house effects, which our forecast does. The adjusted top lines that our model digests are Sanders at 23 percent; Bloomberg, Biden and Warren all at 16 percent; Buttigieg at 12 percent; and Klobuchar still at 5 percent.
The Economist/YouGov gave Sanders 24 percent, Biden 18 percent, Warren 16 percent, Bloomberg 12 percent, Buttigieg 11 percent and Klobuchar 7 percent. When adjusted for house effects, the results are similar, per our model: Sanders 24 percent, Biden 18 percent, Bloomberg 14 percent, Warren 13 percent and Klobuchar 7 percent.
In ABC News/Washington Post’s latest survey, Sanders had 32 percent, Biden had 16 percent, Bloomberg had 14 percent, Warren had 12 percent, Buttigieg had 8 percent and Klobuchar had 7 percent. Our forecast didn’t really adjust these numbers much for house effects, either, so this was an unambiguously great poll for Sanders — and a bad one for Biden.
In Morning Consult’s most recent poll, Sanders got 28 percent, Bloomberg got 20 percent, Biden got 19 percent, Buttigieg got 12 percent, Warren got 10 percent and Klobuchar got 6 percent. But because Morning Consult often shows good numbers for Sanders, our model treated this poll as somewhat less strong for him after accounting for house effects. (Our model interpreted this poll as Sanders at 24 percent, Bloomberg at 18 percent and Biden at 15 percent.)
Emerson College also put Sanders in the lead at 29 percent, with Biden at 22 percent, Bloomberg at 14 percent, Warren at 12 percent, Buttigieg at 8 percent and Klobuchar at 6 percent. However, note that Emerson has typically had very rosy numbers for Sanders, so our model interprets this poll as more like one where Sanders leads Biden by a much smaller margin — 24 percent to 21 percent.
According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey, Sanders had 27 percent, Biden had 15 percent, Bloomberg and Warren each had 14 percent, Buttigieg had 13 percent and Klobuchar had 7 percent.
A Reuters/Ipsos survey found Sanders at 25 percent, Bloomberg at 17 percent, Biden at 13 percent, Buttigieg at 11 percent, Warren at 9 percent and Klobuchar at 5 percent. However, once adjusted for house effects, the poll looks even better for Sanders: Our model reads it as more like Sanders at 26 percent, Bloomberg and Biden tied at 16 percent, Buttigieg at 13 percent, Warren at 12 percent and Klobuchar at 6 percent.
According to SurveyUSA, Sanders had 29 percent, Bloomberg and Biden each had 18 percent, Buttigieg had 12 percent, Warren had 10 percent and Klobuchar had 4 percent. And this poll is even worse than it looks for Biden because of SurveyUSA’s house effects, which tend to benefit Biden; his adjusted support is closer to 15 percent in our model.
An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist College poll put Sanders at 31 percent, Bloomberg at 19 percent, Biden at 15 percent, Warren at 12 percent, Klobuchar at 9 percent and Buttigieg at 8 percent.
Finally, Zogby Analytics gave Sanders 24 percent, Bloomberg 20 percent, Biden 18 percent, Warren 10 percent, Buttigieg 9 percent and Klobuchar 5 percent. However, our model thinks Bloomberg is probably closer to 17 percent support in this poll than 20 percent, thanks to Zogby’s Bloomberg-friendly house effects.
With house effects factored in, these polls give Sanders an adjusted lead of anywhere from 2 to 15 percentage points. There’s simply not much ambiguity right now that Sanders is the first choice of a plurality of Democrats nationwide. Accordingly, if you look at who is most likely to get the most pledged delegates, though not necessarily more than half (we usually cite the forecast’s odds of a candidate getting a majority), our model is fairly confident it’ll be Sanders who gets a plurality (he has a 3 in 5, or 56 percent, chance of doing so). The big question is whether the other candidates stay competitive enough for long enough to deny him the majority he needs to win the nomination outright.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-19--We Fixed An Issue With How Our Primary Forecast Was Calculating Candidates’ Demographic Strengths

Welp , this is never fun .
We discovered an issue with how our primary model was making state-by-state and district-by-district forecasts .
Specifically , the model was not properly calculating the demographic regressions that we use as a complement to the polls .
The top-line effect of fixing the error was not very large — for instance , Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ s chances of getting a delegate majority fell by around 3 percentage points , while former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s fell by around 1.5 points .
In fact , it mainly helped the chances that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pledged delegates ( those chances rose about 3.5 percentage points ) , at the expense of any one candidate ’ s chances of getting a majority .
The one candidate who did benefit was former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg , whose chances increased from 7 percent to 9 percent ) .
However , the changes are more notable in some individual states .
This problem was introduced into the model ’ s code on Feb. 5 ( just after the Iowa caucuses ) ; these functions had been working properly before then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the forecast we published just after noon on Feb. 19 .
Here ’ s a look at what went wrong and what changed : First , what is a demographic regression ?
To infer a candidate ’ s standing in all 57 states and territories at any given time , our model calculates a series of demographic regressions based on ( i ) the results of states that have voted so far and ( ii ) the polls in states where we have abundant polling .
For instance , the regressions can figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a large African American populations , and that Sanders is strong in liberal states .
These demographic regressions are then combined with a geographic prior based on candidates ’ home states and regions ( for example , Sanders is assumed to be strong in New England ) .
The result is then used as a substitute for polling in states where there are no polls and as a complement to the polls in states where there isn ’ t much polling .
Nevada and South Carolina , for instance , have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much as the model would like , so the regression gets a small amount of weight in our forecasts .
What was wrong with the regressions ?
Basically , the regressions weren ’ t calculating at all , so the model was just defaulting to the geographic prior .
( If you want to get very technical , when programming in Stata , please remember that local macros aren ’ t stored in the program ’ s memory when you execute another do-file from within the shell of a master do-file . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ just defaulting to the geographic prior rather than also using demographics , the state-by-state forecast distributions were too compressed , or underdispersed .
In other words , they weren ’ t recognizing fairly obvious demographic strengths and weaknesses of each candidate .
While relying solely on the geographic prior isn ’ t a terrible approach , especially for candidates such as former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg who are strong in their home regions , it doesn ’ t capture some of the variations elsewhere in the Democratic electorate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ African Ameircans and moderate white voters in the South as an example .
Because these two demographic groups are so important in that region , Biden is stronger there and weaker elsewhere than you ’ d guess from geography alone .
The same holds true , though to a lesser extent , for Bloomberg .
Conversely , Sanders has more strength in the West than you ’ d guess based on geography alone , because Western electorates tend to be liberal and to have a high number of Hispanic voters , and Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blocs .
As a result , the model was , for instance , underrating Biden ’ s chances in states like South Carolina and Alabama and underrating Sanders ’ s chances in Nevada and California .
Since the demographic regressions are phased out in states with a lot of polling , the effect was larger in states with less polling , like Colorado .
On average , candidates ’ projected vote shares changed by about 1 percentage point ( e.g .
shifted from 18 percentage points to 19 percentage points ) as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was that about district-by-district forecasts ?
The model also uses the demographic regressions to forecast the results in individual districts .
For instance , although Sen. Elizabeth Warren might not be strong in South Carolina overall , she could be poised to do fairly well in a South Carolina district with a lot of college-educated voters .
Without the demographic regression , though , the model defaulted toward using the statewide forecast in each district .
It did still account for random variation between districts — so there might be simulations where , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vote in South Carolina but 17 percent in a particular district , thereby earning delegates there .
( Democratic rules generally require that a candidate receives at least 15 percent of the vote to qualify for delegates in a state or district . )
Still , with the demographic regression not working properly , the model wasn ’ t accounting for enough district-by-district variation .
As a result , it tended to underestimate the number of district delegates that a candidate would expect to earn when they finished with less than 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matters because about two-thirds of Democratic delegates are awarded by district rather than statewide .
The ability of candidates to earn these district delegates makes it slightly harder for front-runners ( e.g .
Sanders ) to accumulate runaway delegate margins , which in turn makes a “ no majority ” scenario more likely .
How can you prevent something like this from happening again ?
I don ’ t know .
We ’ ve gotten our share of forecasts wrong and had models that , in retrospect , we wish we ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a good eye for when code changes or new data creates output that doesn ’ t look right because either the data or the code was incorrect .
I didn ’ t catch it this time , perhaps because the code changes were introduced at the same time that we input initial Iowa results into the model , and Iowa had a much larger impact on the model than the bug we introduced .
But as a note to myself and to other people who program statistical models : It may not always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into your program rather than letting it break .
For instance , our model had a failsafe to default to the geographic adjustment if it couldn ’ t calculate the demographic regressions .
But because the geographic adjustment by itself produces reasonable enough ( but far from ideal ) answers , it became harder to notice the error than it would have been if the program had stopped executing or had produced self-evidently ridiculous forecasts .
So if you see something that looks weird in the forecasts , please let us know !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of small issues ( like polls that were entered incorrectly ) and occasionally helps us to catch some bigger ones , too .
My sincere apologies for not catching this bug sooner .

Welp, this is never fun. We discovered an issue with how our primary model was making state-by-state and district-by-district forecasts. Specifically, the model was not properly calculating the demographic regressions that we use as a complement to the polls.
The top-line effect of fixing the error was not very large — for instance, Sen. Bernie Sanders’s chances of getting a delegate majority fell by around 3 percentage points, while former Vice President Joe Biden’s fell by around 1.5 points. In fact, it mainly helped the chances that no one will get a majority of pledged delegates (those chances rose about 3.5 percentage points), at the expense of any one candidate’s chances of getting a majority. The one candidate who did benefit was former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose chances increased from 7 percent to 9 percent). However, the changes are more notable in some individual states.
This problem was introduced into the model’s code on Feb. 5 (just after the Iowa caucuses); these functions had been working properly before then. The error was fixed as of the forecast we published just after noon on Feb. 19.
Here’s a look at what went wrong and what changed:
First, what is a demographic regression? To infer a candidate’s standing in all 57 states and territories at any given time, our model calculates a series of demographic regressions based on (i) the results of states that have voted so far and (ii) the polls in states where we have abundant polling. For instance, the regressions can figure out that Biden is strong in states with a large African American populations, and that Sanders is strong in liberal states. These demographic regressions are then combined with a geographic prior based on candidates’ home states and regions (for example, Sanders is assumed to be strong in New England). The result is then used as a substitute for polling in states where there are no polls and as a complement to the polls in states where there isn’t much polling. Nevada and South Carolina, for instance, have a fair amount of polling but not as much as the model would like, so the regression gets a small amount of weight in our forecasts.
What was wrong with the regressions? Basically, the regressions weren’t calculating at all, so the model was just defaulting to the geographic prior. (If you want to get very technical, when programming in Stata, please remember that local macros aren’t stored in the program’s memory when you execute another do-file from within the shell of a master do-file.)
What problems was this causing? By just defaulting to the geographic prior rather than also using demographics, the state-by-state forecast distributions were too compressed, or underdispersed. In other words, they weren’t recognizing fairly obvious demographic strengths and weaknesses of each candidate.
While relying solely on the geographic prior isn’t a terrible approach, especially for candidates such as former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg who are strong in their home regions, it doesn’t capture some of the variations elsewhere in the Democratic electorate. Let’s take the presence of African Ameircans and moderate white voters in the South as an example. Because these two demographic groups are so important in that region, Biden is stronger there and weaker elsewhere than you’d guess from geography alone. The same holds true, though to a lesser extent, for Bloomberg. Conversely, Sanders has more strength in the West than you’d guess based on geography alone, because Western electorates tend to be liberal and to have a high number of Hispanic voters, and Sanders does well with both of those voting blocs.
As a result, the model was, for instance, underrating Biden’s chances in states like South Carolina and Alabama and underrating Sanders’s chances in Nevada and California. Since the demographic regressions are phased out in states with a lot of polling, the effect was larger in states with less polling, like Colorado. On average, candidates’ projected vote shares changed by about 1 percentage point (e.g. shifted from 18 percentage points to 19 percentage points) as a result of the bug fix.
What was that about district-by-district forecasts? The model also uses the demographic regressions to forecast the results in individual districts. For instance, although Sen. Elizabeth Warren might not be strong in South Carolina overall, she could be poised to do fairly well in a South Carolina district with a lot of college-educated voters.
Without the demographic regression, though, the model defaulted toward using the statewide forecast in each district. It did still account for random variation between districts — so there might be simulations where, say, Warren got 12 percent of the vote in South Carolina but 17 percent in a particular district, thereby earning delegates there. (Democratic rules generally require that a candidate receives at least 15 percent of the vote to qualify for delegates in a state or district.)
Still, with the demographic regression not working properly, the model wasn’t accounting for enough district-by-district variation. As a result, it tended to underestimate the number of district delegates that a candidate would expect to earn when they finished with less than 15 percent of the vote statewide. This matters because about two-thirds of Democratic delegates are awarded by district rather than statewide. The ability of candidates to earn these district delegates makes it slightly harder for front-runners (e.g. Sanders) to accumulate runaway delegate margins, which in turn makes a “no majority” scenario more likely.
How can you prevent something like this from happening again? I don’t know. We’ve gotten our share of forecasts wrong and had models that, in retrospect, we wish we’d designed differently. But I usually have a good eye for when code changes or new data creates output that doesn’t look right because either the data or the code was incorrect. I didn’t catch it this time, perhaps because the code changes were introduced at the same time that we input initial Iowa results into the model, and Iowa had a much larger impact on the model than the bug we introduced.
But as a note to myself and to other people who program statistical models: It may not always be a good idea to introduce failsafes into your program rather than letting it break. For instance, our model had a failsafe to default to the geographic adjustment if it couldn’t calculate the demographic regressions. But because the geographic adjustment by itself produces reasonable enough (but far from ideal) answers, it became harder to notice the error than it would have been if the program had stopped executing or had produced self-evidently ridiculous forecasts.
So if you see something that looks weird in the forecasts, please let us know! Reader feedback alerts us to a lot of small issues (like polls that were entered incorrectly) and occasionally helps us to catch some bigger ones, too. My sincere apologies for not catching this bug sooner.