fivethirtyeight--2020-02-24--With 7 Candidates Debating In South Carolina, The Stage Is, Umm, Getting Larger ?

We ’ re at the point in the election cycle — after three states have voted — that the debate stage is supposed to shrink , not grow .
But apparently the 2020 Democratic field didn ’ t get the memo .
After six candidates debated in Nevada last week , seven have now qualified for this Tuesday ’ s showdown in South Carolina .
The debate will reunite the six debaters from last week ’ s heated fracas and also welcome philanthropist Tom Steyer back to the stage .
The Democratic National Committee ’ s rules to qualify for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same as they were for the Nevada debate .
Candidates could qualify in any of three ways : They could receive 10 percent support or more in at least four national or South Carolina polls conducted by a DNC-approved pollster ; they could receive 12 percent support or more in at least two such South Carolina polls ; or they could receive at least one pledged delegate from Iowa , New Hampshire or Nevada , the three states that have voted so far .
To count toward qualification , polls must have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There was not much suspense about who would make the debate , especially among the top candidates .
Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden met all three criteria ; Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg met two ( the four-poll threshold and the delegate threshold ) .
Sen. Amy Klobuchar will almost certainly fail to meet either polling criterion , but her spot on stage was secure when she won delegates in Iowa and New Hampshire .
And former New York City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in six out of the six qualifying national surveys to be released during the short polling window .
Steyer was the only question mark , as his easiest path to the debate stage was getting at least 12 percent in two polls of South Carolina , where he has strong numbers .
But state polls have been few and far between lately — in fact , unluckily for Steyer , only one was released during the entire qualifying period for the previous debate , making it impossible to make last week ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alone .
However , this time around , two DNC-approved South Carolina polls were released between Feb. 4 and today , and Steyer got 15 percent in one and 18 percent in the other .
That leaves Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as the only “ major ” candidate ( by FiveThirtyEight ’ s definition ) who will not participate in Tuesday ’ s debate .
Although the deadline to qualify is technically not until 11:59 p.m. Eastern tonight , Gabbard has gotten none of the qualifying polls she needs ( or , for that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so it ’ s next to impossible for her to qualify .
Still , seven candidates debating at this stage in the campaign is a very high number .
Despite much higher polling thresholds , the same number of candidates will debate on Feb. 25 as debated on Dec. 19 .
Meanwhile , the Republican presidential debate on Feb. 25 , 2016 , featured just five candidates , and the Democratic presidential debate on Feb. 26 , 2008 , was just between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama .
And with Steyer likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegates in South Carolina , and Bloomberg likely to do the same on Super Tuesday , seven candidates may soon meet the delegate threshold automatically , making the polling threshold obsolete .
If the DNC wants to shrink the debate stage further for the March 15 debate or beyond , either the delegate threshold will have to get stricter , or candidates must start to drop out of their own accord .

We’re at the point in the election cycle — after three states have voted — that the debate stage is supposed to shrink, not grow. But apparently the 2020 Democratic field didn’t get the memo. After six candidates debated in Nevada last week, seven have now qualified for this Tuesday’s showdown in South Carolina. The debate will reunite the six debaters from last week’s heated fracas and also welcome philanthropist Tom Steyer back to the stage.
Seven candidates have made the South Carolina debate Democratic presidential candidates by whether and how they’ve qualified for the South Carolina debate, as of Feb. 24 at 10 a.m. Eastern QUALIFYING POLLS MET THRESHOLD FOR … CANDIDATE National, SC ≥10% SC ≥12% POLLS 1+ IA/NH/NV DELEGATES QUALIFIED Biden 8 2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Sanders 8 2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Warren 7 1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Buttigieg 5 0 ✓ ✓ ✓ Bloomberg 6 0 ✓ ✓ Steyer 2 2 ✓ ✓ Klobuchar 0 0 ✓ ✓ Gabbard 0 0 To qualify for the South Carolina debate, a candidate must reach 10 percent support in at least four national or South Carolina polls or 12 percent support in at least two South Carolina polls from qualifying polling organizations. Separately, candidates can also qualify if they won at least one national delegate via the Iowa caucuses, the New Hampshire primary or the Nevada caucuses. Sources: Polls, ABC News
The Democratic National Committee’s rules to qualify for the South Carolina debate were functionally the same as they were for the Nevada debate. Candidates could qualify in any of three ways: They could receive 10 percent support or more in at least four national or South Carolina polls conducted by a DNC-approved pollster ; they could receive 12 percent support or more in at least two such South Carolina polls ; or they could receive at least one pledged delegate from Iowa, New Hampshire or Nevada, the three states that have voted so far. To count toward qualification, polls must have been released between Feb. 4 and Feb. 24.
[Our Latest Forecast: Who Will Win The 2020 Democratic Primary?]
There was not much suspense about who would make the debate, especially among the top candidates. Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden met all three criteria; Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg met two (the four-poll threshold and the delegate threshold). Sen. Amy Klobuchar will almost certainly fail to meet either polling criterion, but her spot on stage was secure when she won delegates in Iowa and New Hampshire. And former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg impressively surpassed 10 percent in six out of the six qualifying national surveys to be released during the short polling window.
Steyer was the only question mark, as his easiest path to the debate stage was getting at least 12 percent in two polls of South Carolina, where he has strong numbers. But state polls have been few and far between lately — in fact, unluckily for Steyer, only one was released during the entire qualifying period for the previous debate, making it impossible to make last week’s stage on the basis of state polls alone. However, this time around, two DNC-approved South Carolina polls were released between Feb. 4 and today, and Steyer got 15 percent in one and 18 percent in the other.
That leaves Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as the only “major” candidate (by FiveThirtyEight’s definition) who will not participate in Tuesday’s debate. Although the deadline to qualify is technically not until 11:59 p.m. Eastern tonight, Gabbard has gotten none of the qualifying polls she needs (or, for that matter, gotten any pledged delegates), so it’s next to impossible for her to qualify.
Still, seven candidates debating at this stage in the campaign is a very high number. Despite much higher polling thresholds, the same number of candidates will debate on Feb. 25 as debated on Dec. 19. Meanwhile, the Republican presidential debate on Feb. 25, 2016, featured just five candidates, and the Democratic presidential debate on Feb. 26, 2008, was just between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
And with Steyer likely to pick up at least some pledged delegates in South Carolina, and Bloomberg likely to do the same on Super Tuesday, seven candidates may soon meet the delegate threshold automatically, making the polling threshold obsolete. If the DNC wants to shrink the debate stage further for the March 15 debate or beyond, either the delegate threshold will have to get stricter, or candidates must start to drop out of their own accord.
Geoffrey Skelley contributed research.
Is our primary system democratic?


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-24--Politics Podcast: What Sanders’s Big Nevada Win Means For The Rest Of The Race

Sen. Bernie Sanders won a decisive victory in the Nevada caucuses over the weekend .
In this installment of the @ @ @ @ @ Ralston , editor of The Nevada Independent , joins Nate Silver and Galen Druke to @ @ @ @ @ that helped Sanders win and what they mean going forward .
You can listen to @ @ @ @ @ “ play ” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes @ @ @ @ @ your favorite podcast platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to @ @ @ @ @ podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us @ @ @ @ @ iTunes .
Have a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad @ @ @ @ @ touch by email , on Twitter or in the comments .

Sen. Bernie Sanders won a decisive victory in the Nevada caucuses over the weekend. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Jon Ralston, editor of The Nevada Independent, joins Nate Silver and Galen Druke to break down the voting patterns that helped Sanders win and what they mean going forward.
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--2020-02-28--Black South Carolinians To Candidates: Quit Pandering

Most of the Democratic candidates spoke at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church , a predominantly black church in North Charleston @ @ @ @ @ Feb. 26 .
Before the event , FiveThirtyEight ’ s Galen Druke talked to some @ @ @ @ @ refrain : Quit pandering .

Most of the Democratic candidates spoke at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church, a predominantly black church in North Charleston, South Carolina, on Feb. 26.
Before the event, FiveThirtyEight’s Galen Druke talked to some attendees and heard a common refrain: Quit pandering.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-28--Will South Carolina Be Biden’s Firewall After All?

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight ’ s weekly politics chat .
The transcript below has been lightly edited .
sarahf ( Sarah Frostenson , politics editor ) : With just one day before the South Carolina primary on Saturday , former Vice President Joe Biden has a 14 in 15 shot at winning the most votes in South Carolina , according to our forecast .
He is a heavy favorite and is expected to win 39 percent of the vote , on average .
But a lot of Biden ’ s gains in South Carolina , both in our forecast and our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last several days as polls following Nevada and Tuesday night ’ s debate have started to trickle in .
Prior to this week , things had looked pretty close in South Carolina , and the model even had Sanders in the lead there prior to the Nevada caucuses .
So Galen , you ’ re actually on the ground in South Carolina .
What are you seeing and hearing ?
galen ( Galen Druke , podcast producer and reporter ) : For now , it looks like Biden has managed to reverse the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Bernie Sanders and billionaire Tom Steyer gaining support — in particular black support — here in South Carolina .
A Monmouth poll just came out today showing Biden up by 20 points and winning black voters by almost 30 points .
But to give you some on-the-ground color for what it ’ s like : I spent yesterday morning at the National Action Network ’ s Ministers ’ Breakfast at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church , a large black church in North Charleston , and what I observed in both speaking with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reaction was that Biden was far and away the favorite of the candidates that spoke .
In the afternoon , I went to a Sanders rally in North Charleston that — while more diverse than his New Hampshire rallies — was still very white for a state where 60 percent of the Democratic electorate is black .
geoffrey.skelley ( Geoffrey Skelley , elections analyst ) : Yeah , Galen , that lines up with some of what I found going through South Carolina polls after my visit to the state a week and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led Biden among white voters in the polls , but Biden leads among black voters , which is very important .
The margins for each candidate could decide whether the race is close or not , though .
While I was there , it seemed like Biden might be in trouble , yet some recent polls show him with a more comfortable lead .
That might come from Steyer fading after Nevada , though it ’ s unclear .
sarahf : Galen is right that that Monmouth poll is a really strong point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I guess I ’ ve been kind of surprised by how much overall support Biden ’ s lost since Iowa .
Granted , this is from an average of national polls , but the fact that the gap between Biden and Sanders ’ s support among black Americans has closed so dramatically in recent weeks makes me wonder how overwhelming the support will be for Biden on Saturday .
clare.malone ( Clare Malone , senior political writer ) : Voters love a winner !
2016 taught us that .
His weaker showings have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s true , but I have to imagine the storyline to watch on Saturday will be how Biden does with black voters .
And I ’ m curious how this plays out across age , given Biden ’ s downturn since Iowa ( although maybe last-minute surge now ) .
Because one thing that has divided voter choice overall — including black voters — is age .
Do we think we ’ ll see that kind of age split in South Carolina ?
Or because it ’ s a more conservative southern state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say , a state like California ?
galen : Yeah , Sarah , when it comes to the generational divide , you ’ re right .
In 2016 , Sanders pulled even with Clinton among black voters under the age of 30 , even though she won almost 80 percent of the black vote overall .
One thing to keep in mind , though , is that young people don ’ t vote at the same rates as older voters , especially in primaries , and that will probably be true here in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right , Galen .
A plus for Biden is that most voters will be older .
In South Carolina ’ s 2016 Democratic primary , 65 percent of voters were 45 years or older , according to the exit poll .
So even if Sanders can gin up younger voter turnout some — and it ’ s unclear whether he ’ s really been doing that so far — the electorate will likely lean toward older voters .
sarahf : On the point of Biden ’ s mediocre performances so far , how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Galen ?
I know Geoffrey heard a lot from folks earlier this month who said what happened in the first two states didn ’ t matter to them .
galen : I haven ’ t heard a lot of people express doubt about Biden based on poor performances in Iowa and New Hampshire .
After all , a lot of the support Biden has is based on years of his presence in the state and his association with the country ’ s first black president .
That can ’ t really be erased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also had a good — or not so bad — week in the news cycle .
He came in second in Nevada , he performed fine in the debate , and he got the coveted endorsement of House Majority Whip James Clyburn on Wednesday .
By the way , I spoke to Clyburn about why he decided to endorse Biden , and he expressed the same skepticism about Sanders ’ s candidacy that I ’ ve heard from other older black voters as well .
clare.malone : Yes , Galen .
I wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden around for a couple months , including in South Carolina .
There ’ s a lot of history and effort that black voters feel Biden has put in , and they ’ re quite attuned to candidates who might be just dropping in and pandering to them .
geoffrey.skelley : Like quoting Martin Luther King , Jr. in your first response to a debate question , Clare ?
galen : Clare , I have talked to a number of voters who have complained about pandering .
Voters here are VERY attuned to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sarahf : So I think both Clare and Galen are right — despite his national slump among black voters — Biden ’ s support in South Carolina is pretty sticky .
But at the same time … how do you explain Steyer in third in our state average there ?
!
?
Is it noise ?
Or has Steyer maybe made serious inroads there aside from all the ad buys ?
clare.malone : Steyer ’ s ads are interesting , since he frames himself not as much as the IMPEACH guy , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more moderate imagery , and the black electorate in the Democratic Party tends to skew moderate .
So he ’ s doing something smart !
But I ’ m not sure if that ’ s actually going to translate into like , a third place win .
But never say die .
galen : I mean he looks like he ’ ll come in third , so I take those polls seriously .
But I don ’ t think what happens here for Steyer in South Carolina says much about the rest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s more than just ad spending , though .
I saw Steyer ’ s organization first-hand , and it seemed pretty impressive .
They ’ ve made huge investments in attracting African American support , not just with typical election pitches but also community engagement .
The campaign has held a bunch of block parties , for example .
And the campaign seemed to be everywhere .
I even talked to one Sanders volunteer at Sanders ’ s headquarters in Columbia who said he ’ d knocked on some rural doors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d seen at those places was from Steyer ’ s campaign .
galen : Steyer ’ s performance in South Carolina , where former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg isn ’ t on the ballot , could be a little test run for Bloomberg ’ s approach , though .
If Steyer ’ s support in polls is reflective of his support on Election Day , that could bode decently for Bloomberg .
If he underperforms his polls , though that may suggest that support “ purchased ” through massive ad/campaign spending may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right , and we saw how well that worked for Steyer in Nevada .
He invested heavily and still finished in fifth place .
geoffrey.skelley : It ’ s worth noting that Steyer got 9 percent of the initial preference vote in Nevada , and he was at 10 percent in our polling average before the caucuses .
So I ’ m not sure that he really underperformed there .
clare.malone : Though I will say , Bloomberg has perhaps purchased his support slightly differently .
It ’ s ads , sure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive philanthropic network that local and state officials might have benefitted from and therefore will endorse or campaign for him .
That ’ s probably a little more effective than Steyer ’ s ad blitz .
galen : Well , Steyer has gotten some notable endorsements in South Carolina , but he ’ s actually been accused of buying the backing of South Carolinians , which is similar to criticisms that have been lobbed at Bloomberg .
But the big question regarding Steyer in South Carolina , I think , is whether he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get delegates , cutting into Biden or Sanders ’ s totals .
sarahf : Editor-in-chief Nate Silver had a piece on Thursday where he gamed out three scenarios for how the South Carolina primary could go : 1 ) Large Biden win ( by 10 percentage points or more ) ; 2 ) Modest Biden win ( by less than 10 points ) ; and then 3 ) a Sanders win ( no margin specified ) .
Essentially , what I took away from that piece is the margin on Saturday really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : A big win for Biden resets the media narrative just a few days before Super Tuesday — and that could be big .
It might pull back some moderate voters who had been testing out Bloomberg into Biden ’ s camp .
galen : Yeah , I think the media is ready to tell the Biden comeback story so if it is born out in the actual election results , well , all the better from a narrative perspective .
Also , the Democratic Party apparatus is not super excited about Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if Biden were to win big , they could start to rally around him in a more concrete way if he wins decisively .
clare.malone : And as the Biden people will tell you , they ’ ve always put a big focus on the trove of Southern states that the March contests will bring .
They think they have a lot of strength there and that they can mine a whole lot of votes .
geoffrey.skelley : Yes , basically if Biden is able to get a large enough win and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you might see a rallying effect for Biden as the Sanders alternative .
I ’ ve been keeping track of the endorsement picture in 2020 vs. the 2016 GOP race , and what you saw then was a bunch of GOP Congress members and governors made endorsements after South Carolina and Nevada .
That hasn ’ t happened in the Democratic race post-Nevada , so maybe they ’ re waiting for South Carolina and Super Tuesday .
clare.malone : That ’ s fair .
I think we ’ re going to see the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ honest .
South Carolina is the shot , Super Tuesday is the chaser .
We ’ ll see what the Wednesday morning after scene is like .
sarahf : So … this is DEFINITELY a broken-record type question at this point , but where does this leave the other candidates in South Carolina ?
What ’ s a good scenario for Buttigieg , Warren or Klobuchar in South Carolina moving forward into Super Tuesday ?
Is there one ?
galen : A good scenario for those candidates coming out of South Carolina is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wins the race , it ’ s basically over .
But if Biden does well , that could also weaken Sanders in Minnesota and Massachusetts , states that Klobuchar and Warren hope to win , respectively .
Now , I don ’ t think that means they will win the majority of delegates or the nomination , but I think they ’ d be doing their part for the party establishment to block Sanders by winning those two states , because otherwise he would probably win them .
geoffrey.skelley : I mean , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable goal for Buttigieg or Klobuchar ?
They ’ re at 7 and 4 percent , respectively , in our South Carolina polling average .
Warren is at 8 percent , so her too , I guess .
galen : I just don ’ t see it happening for Buttigieg and Klobuchar , but hey I ’ ve been wrong before .
geoffrey.skelley : Buttigieg and Klobuchar might benefit if more white moderates vote in the Democratic primary .
South Carolina uses an open primary , so keep an eye on that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ little skeptical of Trump in places like suburban Charleston and who helped flip the South Carolina 1st to Democratic Rep. Joe Cunningham in 2018 — that ’ s a district President Trump carried by 13 points in 2016 .
Not to mention , we saw both Klobuchar and Buttigieg do well among white moderates in New Hampshire , for instance , so it wouldn ’ t be too crazy to think they might replicate that success here .
galen : To Geoff ’ s point , I went to a diner in North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter who called himself an independent and told me he really likes Buttigieg .
However , he told me he would be out of town and didn ’ t plan on voting .
He said he didn ’ t realize until he heard on the radio the other day that he could vote in the Democratic primary .
clare.malone : What a recommendation for the radio !
galen : I also spoke to an elderly man wearing a MAGA hat at the diner .
A reminder that President Trump is holding a rally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there isn ’ t a Republican primary here .
You might call that … trolling ?
sarahf : It would be interesting if Biden does well among black Democrats in South Carolina but not as well among white Democrats ( and independents , etc . )
, and we see a kinda a repeat of what happened in New Hampshire .
Does that undermine Biden ’ s electability argument at all if he continues to not win over white moderate support ?
galen : Well , if the Monmouth poll is any indicator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black and white moderates here .
geoffrey.skelley : If South Carolina does work out that way , Super Tuesday will end up answering that question .
Is there a notable increase in Biden ’ s support among white moderates ?
Or does he continue to split them with Buttigieg , Klobuchar and , of course , Bloomberg , who debuts that day ?
galen : The big question to me is how likely it looks like this is all headed to a contested convention .
If it looks that way after Super Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a reason to stay in .
But if Biden looks like he can win a majority or strong plurality , I think the party will be like PLEASE GTFO of this race .
And considering that Buttigieg and Klobuchar want to be in good standing with the party , they will probably oblige .
I have no idea about Bloomberg , though .
geoffrey.skelley : It was so clear that Clinton was going to win easily in South Carolina in 2016 that I don ’ t recall people making much of the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Carolina from Super Tuesday last time around .
She was the favorite for the nomination and was going to win the Palmetto State in a walk .
This time , though , the favorite for the nomination — Sanders — is behind in South Carolina , and as Nate wrote , a big Biden win could alter the race ’ s trajectory to some extent .
But once again , there are just three days between these events , so how South Carolina affects things is more uncertain .
sarahf : So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carolina for the rest of the race ?
To me , it feels like the stakes are higher than in the first three states , because it really is a question now of whether Biden ’ s campaign remains viable , right ?
galen : So , I think South Carolina will help shape the narrative of the race going forward , but like Iowa and New Hampshire , South Carolina is actually not very representative of the Democratic party demographically .
There are only five states in the country where the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being one of them .
( Nationally , black voters make up about 20 to 25 percent of the Democratic electorate . )
Also , South Carolina is an overwhelmingly Republican state — 17 points more Republican , according to FiveThirtyEight ’ s partisan lean metric .
So , in some ways , if Biden does well there , that doesn ’ t necessarily mean he can do well across the rest of the country .
geoffrey.skelley : It seems like Biden will most likely win South Carolina , but if it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be a sign of weakness that doesn ’ t convince voters who are still considering Bloomberg or Buttigieg or Klobuchar to jump ship and come over to him on Super Tuesday .
If Biden does win by a big margin , though , that could make his campaign far more viable in the long run by winning over some of those voters looking at other moderate alternatives .
As Galen said , South Carolina may not be that representative of the Democratic Party , but it ’ s certainly pretty important for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the leading Sanders alternative .
clare.malone : South Carolina will prime the tank for Super Tuesday , so it ’ s a really important set-up .
If Warren , for instance , finishes low again , perhaps even lower than Klobuchar , and then performs spottily on Super Tuesday , I really wonder if her campaign is over .
A sad political story of steady rise and precipitous fall .
Especially if he has a particularly strong showing , I think Biden could potentially set the table for a comeback of sorts ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ no one wins ” ) .
But as we ’ ve said and written before , this whole thing is Sanders ’ s race to lose .

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.
sarahf (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): With just one day before the South Carolina primary on Saturday, former Vice President Joe Biden has a 14 in 15 shot at winning the most votes in South Carolina, according to our forecast. He is a heavy favorite and is expected to win 39 percent of the vote, on average.
But a lot of Biden’s gains in South Carolina, both in our forecast and our polling average, have come in the last several days as polls following Nevada and Tuesday night’s debate have started to trickle in. Prior to this week, things had looked pretty close in South Carolina, and the model even had Sanders in the lead there prior to the Nevada caucuses.
So Galen, you’re actually on the ground in South Carolina. What are you seeing and hearing?
galen (Galen Druke, podcast producer and reporter): For now, it looks like Biden has managed to reverse the trends of the past couple weeks of Sen. Bernie Sanders and billionaire Tom Steyer gaining support — in particular black support — here in South Carolina. A Monmouth poll just came out today showing Biden up by 20 points and winning black voters by almost 30 points.
But to give you some on-the-ground color for what it’s like: I spent yesterday morning at the National Action Network’s Ministers’ Breakfast at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church, a large black church in North Charleston, and what I observed in both speaking with attendees and observing the crowd’s reaction was that Biden was far and away the favorite of the candidates that spoke.
In the afternoon, I went to a Sanders rally in North Charleston that — while more diverse than his New Hampshire rallies — was still very white for a state where 60 percent of the Democratic electorate is black.
geoffrey.skelley (Geoffrey Skelley, elections analyst): Yeah, Galen, that lines up with some of what I found going through South Carolina polls after my visit to the state a week and a half ago. Sanders has often led Biden among white voters in the polls, but Biden leads among black voters, which is very important. The margins for each candidate could decide whether the race is close or not, though.
While I was there, it seemed like Biden might be in trouble, yet some recent polls show him with a more comfortable lead. That might come from Steyer fading after Nevada, though it’s unclear.
sarahf: Galen is right that that Monmouth poll is a really strong point in Biden’s favor, but I guess I’ve been kind of surprised by how much overall support Biden’s lost since Iowa. Granted, this is from an average of national polls, but the fact that the gap between Biden and Sanders’s support among black Americans has closed so dramatically in recent weeks makes me wonder how overwhelming the support will be for Biden on Saturday.
clare.malone (Clare Malone, senior political writer): Voters love a winner! 2016 taught us that. His weaker showings have redounding effects.
sarahf: That’s true, but I have to imagine the storyline to watch on Saturday will be how Biden does with black voters. And I’m curious how this plays out across age, given Biden’s downturn since Iowa (although maybe last-minute surge now). Because one thing that has divided voter choice overall — including black voters — is age.
Do we think we’ll see that kind of age split in South Carolina? Or because it’s a more conservative southern state, maybe not as much as, say, a state like California?
galen: Yeah, Sarah, when it comes to the generational divide, you’re right. In 2016, Sanders pulled even with Clinton among black voters under the age of 30, even though she won almost 80 percent of the black vote overall.
One thing to keep in mind, though, is that young people don’t vote at the same rates as older voters, especially in primaries, and that will probably be true here in South Carolina as well.
geoffrey.skelley: Right, Galen. A plus for Biden is that most voters will be older. In South Carolina’s 2016 Democratic primary, 65 percent of voters were 45 years or older, according to the exit poll. So even if Sanders can gin up younger voter turnout some — and it’s unclear whether he’s really been doing that so far — the electorate will likely lean toward older voters.
sarahf: On the point of Biden’s mediocre performances so far, how have folks been grappling with it, Galen? I know Geoffrey heard a lot from folks earlier this month who said what happened in the first two states didn’t matter to them.
galen: I haven’t heard a lot of people express doubt about Biden based on poor performances in Iowa and New Hampshire. After all, a lot of the support Biden has is based on years of his presence in the state and his association with the country’s first black president. That can’t really be erased in a couple weeks.
Biden has also had a good — or not so bad — week in the news cycle. He came in second in Nevada, he performed fine in the debate, and he got the coveted endorsement of House Majority Whip James Clyburn on Wednesday. By the way, I spoke to Clyburn about why he decided to endorse Biden, and he expressed the same skepticism about Sanders’s candidacy that I’ve heard from other older black voters as well.
How Rep. James Clyburn settled on endorsing Joe Biden for president
clare.malone: Yes, Galen. I wrote about that this fall when I followed Biden around for a couple months, including in South Carolina. There’s a lot of history and effort that black voters feel Biden has put in, and they’re quite attuned to candidates who might be just dropping in and pandering to them.
geoffrey.skelley: Like quoting Martin Luther King, Jr. in your first response to a debate question, Clare?
galen: Clare, I have talked to a number of voters who have complained about pandering. Voters here are VERY attuned to it and it is SO transparent.
Black South Carolinians to candidates: Quit pandering
sarahf: So I think both Clare and Galen are right — despite his national slump among black voters — Biden’s support in South Carolina is pretty sticky. But at the same time … how do you explain Steyer in third in our state average there?!?
Is it noise? Or has Steyer maybe made serious inroads there aside from all the ad buys?
galen: MONEY $$$$$
clare.malone: Steyer’s ads are interesting, since he frames himself not as much as the IMPEACH guy, but as a businessman. That’s more moderate imagery, and the black electorate in the Democratic Party tends to skew moderate. So he’s doing something smart!
But I’m not sure if that’s actually going to translate into like, a third place win. But never say die.
galen: I mean he looks like he’ll come in third, so I take those polls seriously. But I don’t think what happens here for Steyer in South Carolina says much about the rest of the race nationally.
geoffrey.skelley: It’s more than just ad spending, though. I saw Steyer’s organization first-hand, and it seemed pretty impressive. They’ve made huge investments in attracting African American support, not just with typical election pitches but also community engagement. The campaign has held a bunch of block parties, for example. And the campaign seemed to be everywhere. I even talked to one Sanders volunteer at Sanders’s headquarters in Columbia who said he’d knocked on some rural doors, and the only other literature he’d seen at those places was from Steyer’s campaign.
galen: Steyer’s performance in South Carolina, where former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg isn’t on the ballot, could be a little test run for Bloomberg’s approach, though. If Steyer’s support in polls is reflective of his support on Election Day, that could bode decently for Bloomberg. If he underperforms his polls, though that may suggest that support “purchased” through massive ad/campaign spending may not be that sticky.
sarahf: Right, and we saw how well that worked for Steyer in Nevada. He invested heavily and still finished in fifth place.
geoffrey.skelley: It’s worth noting that Steyer got 9 percent of the initial preference vote in Nevada, and he was at 10 percent in our polling average before the caucuses. So I’m not sure that he really underperformed there.
clare.malone: Though I will say, Bloomberg has perhaps purchased his support slightly differently. It’s ads, sure, but he’s also got a massive philanthropic network that local and state officials might have benefitted from and therefore will endorse or campaign for him. That’s probably a little more effective than Steyer’s ad blitz.
galen: Well, Steyer has gotten some notable endorsements in South Carolina, but he’s actually been accused of buying the backing of South Carolinians, which is similar to criticisms that have been lobbed at Bloomberg.
But the big question regarding Steyer in South Carolina, I think, is whether he can really clear the 15 percent threshold to get delegates, cutting into Biden or Sanders’s totals.
sarahf: Editor-in-chief Nate Silver had a piece on Thursday where he gamed out three scenarios for how the South Carolina primary could go: 1) Large Biden win (by 10 percentage points or more); 2) Modest Biden win (by less than 10 points); and then 3) a Sanders win (no margin specified). Essentially, what I took away from that piece is the margin on Saturday really matters for Biden going forward.
Is that fair?
geoffrey.skelley: A big win for Biden resets the media narrative just a few days before Super Tuesday — and that could be big. It might pull back some moderate voters who had been testing out Bloomberg into Biden’s camp.
galen: Yeah, I think the media is ready to tell the Biden comeback story so if it is born out in the actual election results, well, all the better from a narrative perspective.
Also, the Democratic Party apparatus is not super excited about Sanders, to say the least, so if Biden were to win big, they could start to rally around him in a more concrete way if he wins decisively.
clare.malone: And as the Biden people will tell you, they’ve always put a big focus on the trove of Southern states that the March contests will bring.
They think they have a lot of strength there and that they can mine a whole lot of votes.
galen: TEXAS BABY
geoffrey.skelley: Yes, basically if Biden is able to get a large enough win and then do fairly well on Super Tuesday, you might see a rallying effect for Biden as the Sanders alternative. I’ve been keeping track of the endorsement picture in 2020 vs. the 2016 GOP race, and what you saw then was a bunch of GOP Congress members and governors made endorsements after South Carolina and Nevada. That hasn’t happened in the Democratic race post-Nevada, so maybe they’re waiting for South Carolina and Super Tuesday.
clare.malone: That’s fair. I think we’re going to see the big reassessment post-Super Tuesday, to be honest.
South Carolina is the shot, Super Tuesday is the chaser. We’ll see what the Wednesday morning after scene is like.
sarahf: So … this is DEFINITELY a broken-record type question at this point, but where does this leave the other candidates in South Carolina? What’s a good scenario for Buttigieg, Warren or Klobuchar in South Carolina moving forward into Super Tuesday?
Is there one?
galen: A good scenario for those candidates coming out of South Carolina is a clear Biden win because if Sanders wins the race, it’s basically over.
But if Biden does well, that could also weaken Sanders in Minnesota and Massachusetts, states that Klobuchar and Warren hope to win, respectively.
Now, I don’t think that means they will win the majority of delegates or the nomination, but I think they’d be doing their part for the party establishment to block Sanders by winning those two states, because otherwise he would probably win them.
geoffrey.skelley: I mean, breaking the double digits might be a reasonable goal for Buttigieg or Klobuchar? They’re at 7 and 4 percent, respectively, in our South Carolina polling average.
Warren is at 8 percent, so her too, I guess.
galen: I just don’t see it happening for Buttigieg and Klobuchar, but hey I’ve been wrong before.
geoffrey.skelley: Buttigieg and Klobuchar might benefit if more white moderates vote in the Democratic primary. South Carolina uses an open primary, so keep an eye on that. There are Republican-leaning voters who are a little skeptical of Trump in places like suburban Charleston and who helped flip the South Carolina 1st to Democratic Rep. Joe Cunningham in 2018 — that’s a district President Trump carried by 13 points in 2016.
Not to mention, we saw both Klobuchar and Buttigieg do well among white moderates in New Hampshire, for instance, so it wouldn’t be too crazy to think they might replicate that success here.
galen: To Geoff’s point, I went to a diner in North Charleston yesterday and spoke with a white voter who called himself an independent and told me he really likes Buttigieg. However, he told me he would be out of town and didn’t plan on voting. He said he didn’t realize until he heard on the radio the other day that he could vote in the Democratic primary.
geoffrey.skelley: Democracy!
clare.malone: What a recommendation for the radio!
galen: I also spoke to an elderly man wearing a MAGA hat at the diner. A reminder that President Trump is holding a rally in North Charleston in Friday even though there isn’t a Republican primary here.
You might call that … trolling?
sarahf: It would be interesting if Biden does well among black Democrats in South Carolina but not as well among white Democrats (and independents, etc.), and we see a kinda a repeat of what happened in New Hampshire.
Does that undermine Biden’s electability argument at all if he continues to not win over white moderate support?
galen: Well, if the Monmouth poll is any indicator, Biden will do fine with both black and white moderates here.
geoffrey.skelley: If South Carolina does work out that way, Super Tuesday will end up answering that question. Is there a notable increase in Biden’s support among white moderates? Or does he continue to split them with Buttigieg, Klobuchar and, of course, Bloomberg, who debuts that day?
galen: The big question to me is how likely it looks like this is all headed to a contested convention. If it looks that way after Super Tuesday, then the other moderates will have a reason to stay in. But if Biden looks like he can win a majority or strong plurality, I think the party will be like PLEASE GTFO of this race.
And considering that Buttigieg and Klobuchar want to be in good standing with the party, they will probably oblige.
I have no idea about Bloomberg, though.
geoffrey.skelley: It was so clear that Clinton was going to win easily in South Carolina in 2016 that I don’t recall people making much of the fact that there were only three days separating South Carolina from Super Tuesday last time around. She was the favorite for the nomination and was going to win the Palmetto State in a walk. This time, though, the favorite for the nomination — Sanders — is behind in South Carolina, and as Nate wrote, a big Biden win could alter the race’s trajectory to some extent. But once again, there are just three days between these events, so how South Carolina affects things is more uncertain.
sarahf: So how important, then, is South Carolina for the rest of the race? To me, it feels like the stakes are higher than in the first three states, because it really is a question now of whether Biden’s campaign remains viable, right?
galen: So, I think South Carolina will help shape the narrative of the race going forward, but like Iowa and New Hampshire, South Carolina is actually not very representative of the Democratic party demographically. There are only five states in the country where the Democratic electorate is majority black — South Carolina being one of them. (Nationally, black voters make up about 20 to 25 percent of the Democratic electorate.)
Also, South Carolina is an overwhelmingly Republican state — 17 points more Republican, according to FiveThirtyEight’s partisan lean metric. So, in some ways, if Biden does well there, that doesn’t necessarily mean he can do well across the rest of the country.
geoffrey.skelley: It seems like Biden will most likely win South Carolina, but if it’s a pretty narrow win, that could be a sign of weakness that doesn’t convince voters who are still considering Bloomberg or Buttigieg or Klobuchar to jump ship and come over to him on Super Tuesday.
If Biden does win by a big margin, though, that could make his campaign far more viable in the long run by winning over some of those voters looking at other moderate alternatives.
As Galen said, South Carolina may not be that representative of the Democratic Party, but it’s certainly pretty important for Biden’s long-term hope of being the leading Sanders alternative.
clare.malone: South Carolina will prime the tank for Super Tuesday, so it’s a really important set-up. If Warren, for instance, finishes low again, perhaps even lower than Klobuchar, and then performs spottily on Super Tuesday, I really wonder if her campaign is over. A sad political story of steady rise and precipitous fall.
Especially if he has a particularly strong showing, I think Biden could potentially set the table for a comeback of sorts (or maybe a campaign to tie or a “no one wins”). But as we’ve said and written before, this whole thing is Sanders’s race to lose.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-28--Young Democrats Have Rejected Biden — And It Could Cost Him The Nomination

Do all younger Democrats have an Uncle Joe that they hate or something ?
Because there ’ s a good chance that Democrats under the age of 45 will prove crucial in preventing former Vice President Joe Biden from winning — or even getting close to winning — the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination .
Younger Democrats , particularly younger white Democrats , are emphatically rejecting his candidacy .
That cohort is a big reason why Biden has struggled in the first three states and fallen from front-runner status .
In fact , age might be the most important fault line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , Biden ’ s weakness among younger Democrats is in part the result of Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ s strength with that group .
But Sanders ’ s appeal doesn ’ t totally explain Biden ’ s struggles .
In Iowa , for example , Biden received just 4 percent of the under-45 vote , according to entrance polls .
That trailed Sanders ( 41 percent ) , but it also lagged behind former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg ( 21 percent ) , Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( 16 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 10 percent ) .
Biden also finished in the single digits among voters under 45 — and behind Buttigieg , Sanders and Warren — in New Hampshire and Nevada .
A recent poll of Democrats in California , a Super Tuesday state , found Biden at 9 percent among voters under 45 .
He ’ s not faring better in other Super Tuesday states , as recent polls have him at 4 percent in Colorado , 11 percent in Texas and 11 percent in Virginia with this group .
If you start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is some variation in how well Biden does , but not a ton .
His numbers are especially bad among the youngest cohort of voters , 17 or 18- to 29-year-olds , but he generally does only slightly better in the 30-to-44 bracket .
And we don ’ t have a lot of data breaking down the views of voters under 45 by race , but national polling and a recent survey in South Carolina suggests Biden is at least in double digits among black Democrats under 45 .
So the results in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surveys make me think that Biden is particularly weak with younger white Democrats .
Not surprisingly , Biden ’ s weakness among these voters has a huge effect on his overall viability .
In the first three states , exit and entrance polls suggest between one-third and 45 percent of Democratic primary voters were under 45 .
In other words , this is a big group .
And it ’ s not like this weakness for the Biden campaign came out of nowhere .
HuffPost did an extensive story on Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At the time it was written , though , the primaries had not actually started , so Biden ’ s lack of appeal among younger voters was just theoretical .
And back then , it looked as if Biden and Sanders ’ s support simply mirrored one another : Sanders seemed as weak with older voters as Biden was with younger ones .
But so far in the actual voting , these problems have not been equivalent : Biden beat Sanders by 2 percentage points among voters over 45 in Nevada , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden by 48 points among voters under 45 .
The natural question is … why ?
Why is Biden struggling so much to win the support of younger people — not only trailing Sanders , but Buttigieg and Warren too ?
Here are the four most obvious explanations : 1 .
Younger Democrats are more liberal and anti-institutional In some ways , 2020 is just a repeat of 2016 : The party establishment and older Democrats embraced more center-left figures — Hillary Clinton in 2016 , and Michael Bloomberg , Buttigieg and Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind the more liberal Sanders .
Clinton lost to Sanders among younger voters by around 50 points in New Hampshire in 2016 — an even larger margin than Biden ’ s deficit this year .
Indeed , the Democratic Party appears to be in the midst of a generational fight that started in 2016 and is continuing now .
For example , the left-leaning but gray-haired commentators on MSNBC have been deeply frustrated by the rise of Sanders .
Conversely , it ’ s hard to find much Biden support on Twitter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people and more liberal Democrats .
Buttigieg and Warren , while not as liberal or as anti-establishment as Sanders , are also to the left of Biden , which in part explains why the ex-vice president isn ’ t the clear second-favorite of younger Democrats either .
The big difference between 2016 and 2020 is that Clinton was dominant among voters over 45 in many states , so she could overcome being the establishment candidate who young people weren ’ t excited about .
In contrast , Biden has not consolidated that older @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Democrats this year are prioritizing a candidate who can defeat President Trump ( a mantel Biden has claimed ) over a candidate who they agree with on major issues .
But that varies by age — older Democrats are more likely to say they prioritize “ electability , ” while those under 45 are much more split on this question .
This data may be a bit circular — perhaps the younger voters who support Warren or Sanders tell pollsters that they don ’ t prioritize electability because that is not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message , and maybe older people who are inclined to support Biden and Buttigieg point to electability because it ’ s been core to both candidates ’ messages .
But I think it ’ s also possible that many voters who are more liberal and interested in seeing systemic change genuinely don ’ t find Biden ’ s electability message that compelling .
In this sense , I wonder if Biden ’ s struggles with young voters were almost inevitable — presenting himself as the party ’ s best hope for the general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democrats ’ younger , more liberal cohort somewhat unsatisfied during the primary .
In 2019 , the former vice president and his team seemed to deeply internalize the conventional wisdom among many establishment and center-left figures : that “ Twitter is not real life ” and that Democrats should not be too “ woke.
” Biden has seemed very frustrated at times with young liberal activists who have confronted him at rallies and argued that he was too conservative on some issues .
He was fairly dismissive of criticisms of his handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touching of women in ways that some of them considered inappropriate .
He suggested the views of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez didn ’ t represent those of many other Democrats .
His campaign aides downplayed the power of “ Pod Save America ” and did little to court the “ black left.
” This all looked fairly savvy ( or at least somewhat harmless ) … until voting started .
And you wonder now whether the Biden campaign could have at least competed for young voters by taking a different approach .
4 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeat the Obama presidency This overlaps a bit with No .
1 , but it ’ s worth mentioning because carrying on Barack Obama ’ s legacy has been such a central part of Biden ’ s message .
( The former president is immensely popular among Democrats . )
But a HuffPost/YouGov survey conducted in April 2019 found that 42 percent of Democrats ages 18-29 want the next Democratic nominee to be more liberal than Obama , while only about a quarter of Democrats 30 and over had that view .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Obama ’ s heir , while probably not costing him voters , may not help him court younger Democrats .
It ’ s still possible that Biden wins the nomination without carrying young Democrats .
If older voters really mobilize behind him , he could defeat Sanders the way Clinton did in 2016 .
Perhaps more voters , old and young , will come to the vice president as the field narrows .
But it ’ s hard to see Biden securing the nomination without improving his appeal among voters under 45 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might lean into strategies to excite younger people .
At this point , I think it ’ s unlikely that younger elected officials in the Democratic Party are going to endorse Biden in meaningful numbers .
But there ’ s nothing stopping Biden from effectively endorsing them .
He could , for example , strongly imply that he would tap Stacey Abrams for vice president if he wins the nomination .
( At 46 , Abrams is not that young herself , but her campaign events during the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my reporting , often packed with young Democrats . )
Or perhaps Biden could shift his message a bit .

Perry Bacon Jr. (perry.bacon@fivethirtyeight.com)

Do all younger Democrats have an Uncle Joe that they hate or something? Because there’s a good chance that Democrats under the age of 45 will prove crucial in preventing former Vice President Joe Biden from winning — or even getting close to winning — the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. Younger Democrats, particularly younger white Democrats, are emphatically rejecting his candidacy. That cohort is a big reason why Biden has struggled in the first three states and fallen from front-runner status.
In fact, age might be the most important fault line in the 2020 Democratic primary.
Of course, Biden’s weakness among younger Democrats is in part the result of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s strength with that group. But Sanders’s appeal doesn’t totally explain Biden’s struggles. In Iowa, for example, Biden received just 4 percent of the under-45 vote, according to entrance polls. That trailed Sanders (41 percent), but it also lagged behind former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg (21 percent), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (16 percent) and tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang (10 percent). Biden also finished in the single digits among voters under 45 — and behind Buttigieg, Sanders and Warren — in New Hampshire and Nevada. A recent poll of Democrats in California, a Super Tuesday state, found Biden at 9 percent among voters under 45. He’s not faring better in other Super Tuesday states, as recent polls have him at 4 percent in Colorado, 11 percent in Texas and 11 percent in Virginia with this group.
Biden has a real problem with young voters Candidate vote shares from entrance polls in Iowa and Nevada and from exit polls in New Hampshire, by age Voters under 45 Over 45 Iowa N.H. Nev. Iowa n.h. Nev. Biden 4% 5% 8% 25% 10% 23% Buttigieg 21 22 13 24 25 16 Klobuchar 5 8 4 19 27 13 Sanders 41 42 56 8 18 21 Warren 16 10 13 17 9 13 Sample size was 1,636 in Iowa, 2,774 in Nevada and 2,932 in New Hampshire Source: Edison Research
If you start breaking down that under-45 group, there is some variation in how well Biden does, but not a ton. His numbers are especially bad among the youngest cohort of voters, 17 or 18- to 29-year-olds, but he generally does only slightly better in the 30-to-44 bracket. And we don’t have a lot of data breaking down the views of voters under 45 by race, but national polling and a recent survey in South Carolina suggests Biden is at least in double digits among black Democrats under 45. So the results in Iowa and New Hampshire and in other surveys make me think that Biden is particularly weak with younger white Democrats.
Not surprisingly, Biden’s weakness among these voters has a huge effect on his overall viability. In the first three states, exit and entrance polls suggest between one-third and 45 percent of Democratic primary voters were under 45. In other words, this is a big group.
And it’s not like this weakness for the Biden campaign came out of nowhere. HuffPost did an extensive story on Biden’s struggles with young voters in December. At the time it was written, though, the primaries had not actually started, so Biden’s lack of appeal among younger voters was just theoretical. And back then, it looked as if Biden and Sanders’s support simply mirrored one another: Sanders seemed as weak with older voters as Biden was with younger ones. But so far in the actual voting, these problems have not been equivalent: Biden beat Sanders by 2 percentage points among voters over 45 in Nevada, according to entrance polls, while Sanders beat Biden by 48 points among voters under 45.
The natural question is … why? Why is Biden struggling so much to win the support of younger people — not only trailing Sanders, but Buttigieg and Warren too? Here are the four most obvious explanations:
1. Younger Democrats are more liberal and anti-institutional
In some ways, 2020 is just a repeat of 2016: The party establishment and older Democrats embraced more center-left figures — Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Michael Bloomberg, Buttigieg and Biden in 2020 — while younger voters got behind the more liberal Sanders. Clinton lost to Sanders among younger voters by around 50 points in New Hampshire in 2016 — an even larger margin than Biden’s deficit this year.
Indeed, the Democratic Party appears to be in the midst of a generational fight that started in 2016 and is continuing now. For example, the left-leaning but gray-haired commentators on MSNBC have been deeply frustrated by the rise of Sanders. Conversely, it’s hard to find much Biden support on Twitter, which tends to be used by younger people and more liberal Democrats. Buttigieg and Warren, while not as liberal or as anti-establishment as Sanders, are also to the left of Biden, which in part explains why the ex-vice president isn’t the clear second-favorite of younger Democrats either.
The big difference between 2016 and 2020 is that Clinton was dominant among voters over 45 in many states, so she could overcome being the establishment candidate who young people weren’t excited about. In contrast, Biden has not consolidated that older bloc.
2. The electability argument doesn’t land
Polling suggests that the majority of Democrats this year are prioritizing a candidate who can defeat President Trump (a mantle Biden has claimed) over a candidate who they agree with on major issues. But that varies by age — older Democrats are more likely to say they prioritize “electability,” while those under 45 are much more split on this question.
This data may be a bit circular — perhaps the younger voters who support Warren or Sanders tell pollsters that they don’t prioritize electability because that is not a big part of either senator’s message, and maybe older people who are inclined to support Biden and Buttigieg point to electability because it’s been core to both candidates’ messages. But I think it’s also possible that many voters who are more liberal and interested in seeing systemic change genuinely don’t find Biden’s electability message that compelling. In this sense, I wonder if Biden’s struggles with young voters were almost inevitable — presenting himself as the party’s best hope for the general election may have required Biden to keep the Democrats’ younger, more liberal cohort somewhat unsatisfied during the primary.
3. Biden isn’t wooing younger voters well
In 2019, the former vice president and his team seemed to deeply internalize the conventional wisdom among many establishment and center-left figures: that “Twitter is not real life” and that Democrats should not be too “woke.” Biden has seemed very frustrated at times with young liberal activists who have confronted him at rallies and argued that he was too conservative on some issues. He was fairly dismissive of criticisms of his handling of the Clarence Thomas hearings and his touching of women in ways that some of them considered inappropriate. He suggested the views of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez didn’t represent those of many other Democrats. His campaign aides downplayed the power of “Pod Save America” and did little to court the “black left.”
This all looked fairly savvy (or at least somewhat harmless) … until voting started. And you wonder now whether the Biden campaign could have at least competed for young voters by taking a different approach.
4. Younger Democrats don’t want to repeat the Obama presidency
This overlaps a bit with No. 1, but it’s worth mentioning because carrying on Barack Obama’s legacy has been such a central part of Biden’s message. (The former president is immensely popular among Democrats.) But a HuffPost/YouGov survey conducted in April 2019 found that 42 percent of Democrats ages 18-29 want the next Democratic nominee to be more liberal than Obama, while only about a quarter of Democrats 30 and over had that view. So Biden’s strategy of positioning himself as Obama’s heir, while probably not costing him voters, may not help him court younger Democrats.
It’s still possible that Biden wins the nomination without carrying young Democrats. If older voters really mobilize behind him, he could defeat Sanders the way Clinton did in 2016. Perhaps more voters, old and young, will come to the vice president as the field narrows.
But it’s hard to see Biden securing the nomination without improving his appeal among voters under 45. If I were Biden, I might lean into strategies to excite younger people. At this point, I think it’s unlikely that younger elected officials in the Democratic Party are going to endorse Biden in meaningful numbers. But there’s nothing stopping Biden from effectively endorsing them. He could, for example, strongly imply that he would tap Stacey Abrams for vice president if he wins the nomination. (At 46, Abrams is not that young herself, but her campaign events during the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race were, I noticed throughout the course of my reporting, often packed with young Democrats.) Or perhaps Biden could shift his message a bit.
Black South Carolinians to candidates: Quit pandering


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-27--Election Update: Biden Surges In South Carolina

After former Vice President Joe Biden finished second in the Nevada caucuses , someone at his post-election speech shouted out , “ Comeback kid !
” It seemed like an odd claim at the time — Biden finished more than 26 percentage points behind Sen. Bernie Sanders ( going by county delegates ) .
But based on the latest polls , Biden may indeed be experiencing a comeback in South Carolina , which votes on Saturday .
As Nevada went to the polls last Saturday , the FiveThirtyEight forecast considered Sanders the slight front-runner in South Carolina , with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance of winning it .
It gave Biden a 2 in 5 ( 40 percent ) chance .
Since then , in a reminder of how fluid primaries can be , Biden ’ s chances have skyrocketed .
As of Thursday at 5:38 p.m. Eastern ( 😉 ) , Biden has a 14 in 15 ( 94 percent ) chance of winning the Palmetto State , while Sanders ’ s odds are down to 1 in 20 ( 5 percent ) .
The first hint of Biden ’ s comeback came two days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead on Sanders in our South Carolina forecast at the time , but the first survey conducted entirely after Nevada , from Public Policy Polling , showed Biden up 15 points .
At that point , the poll was an outlier .
Well , not anymore .
Since Wednesday , we ’ ve gotten six new polls of South Carolina , most of which have given Biden commanding leads .
• On behalf of the Charleston Post and Courier , Change Research polled the Palmetto State from Feb. 23 to 27 and found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 24 percent , Tom Steyer with 16 percent , Sen. Elizabeth Warren with 12 percent , former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 11 percent , Rep. Tulsi Gabbard with 5 percent and Sen. Amy Klobuchar with 4 percent .
However , Change Research has had big house effects this election cycle — their polls have tended to underestimate Biden and overestimate several other candidates , including Sanders , relative to other polls .
Once adjusted for house effects by our model , this poll is actually more suggestive of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 32 percent , Sanders 20 percent , Steyer 16 percent , Warren 9 percent , Buttigieg 7 percent ) .
• An Emerson College poll dated Feb. 26-27 gave Biden a strong lead over Sanders — and it was an even better poll for Biden considering Emerson ’ s Sanders-friendly house effect .
The poll ’ s raw toplines were Biden 41 percent , Sanders 25 percent , Buttigieg and Steyer 11 percent each , Klobuchar 6 percent , Warren 5 percent and Gabbard 2 percent .
But adjusted for house effects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 40 percent , Sanders 20 percent .
• A Feb. 26 poll by Starboard Communications , a South Carolina political firm , gave Biden a huge lead : He had 40 percent support , Steyer had 12 percent , Sanders had 11 percent , Warren and Buttigieg had 9 percent each , Klobuchar had 6 percent and Gabbard had 2 percent .
Stripping away the poll ’ s house effects only slightly reduces the size of that lead : Biden 38 percent , Sanders 13 percent .
• A Monmouth University poll conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sanders at 16 percent , Steyer at 15 percent , Warren at 8 percent , Buttigieg at 6 percent , Klobuchar at 4 percent and Gabbard at 1 percent .
A top-notch pollster , Monmouth has no significant house effects , so this was a good poll for Biden , pure and simple .
• According to a Clemson University poll from Feb. 17-25 , Biden had 35 percent support , Steyer 17 percent , Sanders 13 percent , Buttigieg and Warren 8 percent each , Klobuchar 4 percent and Gabbard 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to be significantly adjusted for house effects .
• Finally , a Feb. 23-24 survey by East Carolina University yielded the following results , which were mostly unaffected by house effects : Biden 31 percent , Sanders 23 percent , Steyer 20 percent , Warren 8 percent , Buttigieg 6 percent , Gabbard and Klobuchar 2 percent each .
Interestingly , though , this poll wasn ’ t any better for Biden than ECU ’ s South Carolina poll from two weeks ago , which gave him an 8-point lead .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s comeback to his performance in Tuesday ’ s debate or his Wednesday endorsement by Rep. Jim Clyburn , who carries a lot of weight in South Carolina Democratic politics .
But in reality , the polls above were mostly conducted before either of those two events .
Instead , the dividing line seems to be the Nevada caucuses .
In six South Carolina polls conducted between New Hampshire and Nevada , Biden averaged 26 percent and Sanders averaged 22 percent .
In the six polls conducted entirely since Nevada , Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ averaged 20 percent .
It ’ s certainly odd that Biden , and not Sanders , would have gotten a bump out of a state where Sanders won nearly twice as many raw votes , but that ’ s what it looks like .
Perhaps it is the manifestation of establishment backlash against the suddenly-real prospect of Sanders becoming the nominee .
And accordingly , that prospect is now getting less likely again .
As FiveThirtyEight editor-in-chief Nate Silver wrote earlier today , Biden winning South Carolina — especially by a big margin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to win , or at least net many delegates from , the many Southern states that vote just three days later , on Super Tuesday .
That could set the table for a drawn-out nomination fight between Sanders and Biden — one that could even lead to a contested convention .
Indeed , in our overall primary forecast , the chance that no one receives a majority of pledged delegates after all states and territories have voted is up near its all-time high of 1 in 2 ( 49 percent ) !
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retains decent odds to win a delegate majority : 1 in 3 , or 32 percent .
For instance , he ’ s still a better bet than Biden , although the former vice president ’ s chances are up to 1 in 6 ( 16 percent ) .
And increasingly , it is looking like those are the only three realistic outcomes of the 2020 primary calendar : All other candidates , including former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg , have a 2 percent chance or less .
Confidence Interval : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Doing Just Fine ”

After former Vice President Joe Biden finished second in the Nevada caucuses, someone at his post-election speech shouted out, “Comeback kid!” It seemed like an odd claim at the time — Biden finished more than 26 percentage points behind Sen. Bernie Sanders (going by county delegates). But based on the latest polls, Biden may indeed be experiencing a comeback in South Carolina, which votes on Saturday.
As Nevada went to the polls last Saturday, the FiveThirtyEight forecast considered Sanders the slight front-runner in South Carolina, with a 1 in 2 (46 percent) chance of winning it. It gave Biden a 2 in 5 (40 percent) chance. Since then, in a reminder of how fluid primaries can be, Biden’s chances have skyrocketed. As of Thursday at 5:38 p.m. Eastern (😉), Biden has a 14 in 15 (94 percent) chance of winning the Palmetto State, while Sanders’s odds are down to 1 in 20 (5 percent).
How Rep. James Clyburn settled on endorsing Joe Biden for president
The first hint of Biden’s comeback came two days ago: Biden had only a small lead on Sanders in our South Carolina forecast at the time, but the first survey conducted entirely after Nevada, from Public Policy Polling, showed Biden up 15 points. At that point, the poll was an outlier. Well, not anymore. Since Wednesday, we’ve gotten six new polls of South Carolina, most of which have given Biden commanding leads.
On behalf of the Charleston Post and Courier, Change Research polled the Palmetto State from Feb. 23 to 27 and found Biden with 28 percent, Sanders with 24 percent, Tom Steyer with 16 percent, Sen. Elizabeth Warren with 12 percent, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 11 percent, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard with 5 percent and Sen. Amy Klobuchar with 4 percent. However, Change Research has had big house effects this election cycle — their polls have tended to underestimate Biden and overestimate several other candidates, including Sanders, relative to other polls. Once adjusted for house effects by our model, this poll is actually more suggestive of a 12-point Biden lead (specifically, Biden 32 percent, Sanders 20 percent, Steyer 16 percent, Warren 9 percent, Buttigieg 7 percent).
An Emerson College poll dated Feb. 26-27 gave Biden a strong lead over Sanders — and it was an even better poll for Biden considering Emerson’s Sanders-friendly house effect. The poll’s raw toplines were Biden 41 percent, Sanders 25 percent, Buttigieg and Steyer 11 percent each, Klobuchar 6 percent, Warren 5 percent and Gabbard 2 percent. But adjusted for house effects, the poll was more like Biden 40 percent, Sanders 20 percent.
A Feb. 26 poll by Starboard Communications, a South Carolina political firm, gave Biden a huge lead: He had 40 percent support, Steyer had 12 percent, Sanders had 11 percent, Warren and Buttigieg had 9 percent each, Klobuchar had 6 percent and Gabbard had 2 percent. Stripping away the poll’s house effects only slightly reduces the size of that lead: Biden 38 percent, Sanders 13 percent.
A Monmouth University poll conducted Feb. 23-25 put Biden at 36 percent, Sanders at 16 percent, Steyer at 15 percent, Warren at 8 percent, Buttigieg at 6 percent, Klobuchar at 4 percent and Gabbard at 1 percent. A top-notch pollster, Monmouth has no significant house effects, so this was a good poll for Biden, pure and simple.
According to a Clemson University poll from Feb. 17-25, Biden had 35 percent support, Steyer 17 percent, Sanders 13 percent, Buttigieg and Warren 8 percent each, Klobuchar 4 percent and Gabbard 2 percent. This poll also did not need to be significantly adjusted for house effects.
Finally, a Feb. 23-24 survey by East Carolina University yielded the following results, which were mostly unaffected by house effects: Biden 31 percent, Sanders 23 percent, Steyer 20 percent, Warren 8 percent, Buttigieg 6 percent, Gabbard and Klobuchar 2 percent each. Interestingly, though, this poll wasn’t any better for Biden than ECU’s South Carolina poll from two weeks ago, which gave him an 8-point lead.
It’s tempting to chalk up Biden’s comeback to his performance in Tuesday’s debate or his Wednesday endorsement by Rep. Jim Clyburn, who carries a lot of weight in South Carolina Democratic politics. But in reality, the polls above were mostly conducted before either of those two events. Instead, the dividing line seems to be the Nevada caucuses. In six South Carolina polls conducted between New Hampshire and Nevada, Biden averaged 26 percent and Sanders averaged 22 percent. In the six polls conducted entirely since Nevada, Biden has averaged 35 percent and Sanders has averaged 20 percent.
It’s certainly odd that Biden, and not Sanders, would have gotten a bump out of a state where Sanders won nearly twice as many raw votes, but that’s what it looks like. Perhaps it is the manifestation of establishment backlash against the suddenly-real prospect of Sanders becoming the nominee.
And accordingly, that prospect is now getting less likely again. As FiveThirtyEight editor-in-chief Nate Silver wrote earlier today, Biden winning South Carolina — especially by a big margin — would put him in good position to win, or at least net many delegates from, the many Southern states that vote just three days later, on Super Tuesday. That could set the table for a drawn-out nomination fight between Sanders and Biden — one that could even lead to a contested convention.
Indeed, in our overall primary forecast, the chance that no one receives a majority of pledged delegates after all states and territories have voted is up near its all-time high of 1 in 2 (49 percent)! But although his outlook has worsened, Sanders retains decent odds to win a delegate majority: 1 in 3, or 32 percent. For instance, he’s still a better bet than Biden, although the former vice president’s chances are up to 1 in 6 (16 percent).
And increasingly, it is looking like those are the only three realistic outcomes of the 2020 primary calendar: All other candidates, including former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have a 2 percent chance or less.
Black South Carolinians to candidates: Quit pandering


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-27--Bloomberg’s Rise — And Stall — Tells Us A Lot About Democrats And PC Culture

I did not think that Mike Bloomberg would be “ a thing ” in the 2020 Democratic primary .
I ’ m not certain he will still be “ a thing ” when all is said and done , but his name has been on our lips of late .
It helps to have seemingly unlimited funds with which to buy advertisements , of course .
But his plausibility as a presidential candidate is built on something more culturally substantive — a default image of what leadership looks like to Americans — white and male and rich .
Though his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his first debate appearance , the significance of the Bloomberg candidacy goes beyond itself : his rise — and stall — tells us something about what Democratic voters project on to candidates , what they ’ re willing to tolerate from them , and what the limits of their imagination might be when it comes to picturing the next nominee .
A different flavor of acid-tongued billionaire , Bloomberg has pitched himself as uniquely suited to beat President Trump .
Bloomberg ’ s 2020 image — buoyed by TV ads and TV coverage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York City who is equipped to handle Trump ’ s vindictive style of campaigning .
“ I know how to deal with New York bullies , ” Bloomberg said of the president recently .
“ Somebody said that he ’ s taller than me , calls me , ‘ Little Mike.
’ And the answer is , ‘ Donald , where I come from we measure your height from the neck up.
’ ” A mid-February , pre-Nevada debate NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll gives a snapshot of where his strongest support comes from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received 19 percent of support from all Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters , second only to Sanders .
At 24 percent , he was also the second choice of non-college educated white voters and suburban and rural voters , a handy demographic to poll well with come the general election — white people are the majority in 90 percent of America ’ s suburban and small metro counties .
Black voters in the survey preferred Biden and Sanders to Bloomberg , but he still received 16 percent of black support .
But in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shakier for Bloomberg .
In the FiveThirtyEight forecast , Bloomberg currently now has a 2 percent chance of earning a majority of delegates , down from a high of 10 percent .
He ’ s behind Sanders , “ no one ” ( what happens when no candidate wins a majority of pledged delegates ) and Joe Biden .
That he trails Biden is an issue , since Bloomberg entered the race largely to provide a moderate alternative to the former vice president .
His anemic debate performance last week may have had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls .
He was attacked for his history of sexist comments and his long-time support of stop and frisk policing policies .
A Morning Consult poll shows that Bloomberg lost three percentage points after the debate , falling from 20 percent to 17 percent support in their surveys — his net favorability , meanwhile , fell 20 points But what has really stunted his appeal ?
Is it his decidedly un-politically correct past , including the use of non-disclosure agreements to prevent women from talking about their allegations against him ?
Or his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fray of the fast-moving , sharp debates ?
Has Bloomberg ’ s past come back to haunt him or is it that his political abilities can ’ t stand up to the present-day competition ?
In the seven years since Bloomberg left elected office , much has changed .
A feature of the Trump presidency has been national debates over “ PC culture ” — think outrage from certain corners at the practice of kneeling at NFL games to protest police violence or the public ’ s division over whether Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a teenager .
Trump keeps going back to the PC culture well because it ’ s deep ; a 2019 survey found that 48 percent of the American public thought that “ there ’ s too much political correctness in the country today ” as opposed to “ too much prejudice ” — 18 percent of that group were Democrats , and 89 percent were white .
It might be that voters , up until the first debate in which Bloomberg appeared , didn ’ t know all that much about him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a finance billionaire from New York City — and many Americans perhaps ascribe a certain blunt , no-bullshit personality type with that archetype .
The idea that he might say what ’ s on his mind , however inappropriate or however much it goes against the grain of what ’ s polite in well-educated liberal circles — what ’ s politically correct — is perhaps one of the reasons why some Democratic voters like Bloomberg .
Or , at the very least , what makes them think he has what it takes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back some of Trump ’ s voters .
Sanders , too , has a sheen of “ anti-PC culture ” given that his reputation is built on his “ authenticity ” and his I-won ’ t-call-you-on-your-birthday grumpiness .
But are Democrats only willing to tolerate that veneer of anti-PC posturing in their politicians up to a point ?
Did the sexism allegations leveled against Bloomberg during the debate prove too much for Democratic voters to stomach ?
Were the specifics enough to shatter the image voters might have created of him in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell , but on this point , it might be that Bloomberg ’ s candidacy is a test of sorts for the Democratic Party , helping discern whether there is tolerance for not just an anti-PC affect in candidates , but actual actions that go against the spirit of feminist and racial tolerance movements the party has thrown its weight behind .
Regardless of whether Bloomberg ’ s support continues to weaken , his initial rise in the polls as Cory Booker , Julian Castro and Kamala Harris dropped out of the race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think it takes to win in a general election .
All three were candidates of color running progressive , politically correct campaigns .
Voters might just surmise that campaigns that are vocally attuned to promoting a “ politically correct ” agenda won ’ t be palatable to the majority of American voters , or voters in key swing states .
Remember , also , that Elizabeth Warren , once a frontrunner and another “ PC ” candidate , has fallen in the polls as Bloomberg has risen .
That poses another test of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to abide by systemic societal sexism against female candidates .
In other words , anti-PC behavior in and of itself .
Warren has of course been dinged for being too liberal on health care , but many voters who like Sanders don ’ t necessarily like her despite the fact that she and Sanders share a general worldview .
A liberal woman is perhaps more likely to be painted into the “ woke ” corner , which a voter may assume is certain death in a general election .
Democratic voters express @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to accept a female candidate : a late January USA Today/Ipsos poll found that 68 percent of likely Democratic primary voters say the nation is ready to elect a woman as president , which is 7 percentage points lower than six months prior .
Seventy-one percent of Americans said they ’ d be comfortable with a woman president but just 33 percent said their neighbors would feel the same .
Pragmatic Democratic voters focused on “ electability ” might couch their move away from Warren as pragmatism , though it is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ societal lens , reflective of our culture ’ s bias against the leadership prowess of women .
But sexism all the same .
The testing of these “ anti-PC ” boundaries will continue to follow the Democrats well past the presidential election , though the wide array of primary candidates makes for a neat demonstration of the various threads in the knotty concept .
Much of the conversation this primary has been about how liberal the Democratic nominee should be .
Inherent in that is how politically correct the nominee should be in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s record of anti-PC actions might prove to be too much for these voters but it also might be that there ’ s such a thing as too much PC , even for a Democrat .
The balance is delicate and evolving and it ’ s possible that equilibrium won ’ t be reached in 2020 , despite the high stakes .
Confidence Interval : “ I Think The Biden Campaign Is Doing Just Fine ”

I did not think that Mike Bloomberg would be “a thing” in the 2020 Democratic primary. I’m not certain he will still be “a thing” when all is said and done, but his name has been on our lips of late. It helps to have seemingly unlimited funds with which to buy advertisements, of course. But his plausibility as a presidential candidate is built on something more culturally substantive — a default image of what leadership looks like to Americans — white and male and rich. Though his polling numbers appear to have slipped following his first debate appearance, the significance of the Bloomberg candidacy goes beyond itself: his rise — and stall — tells us something about what Democratic voters project on to candidates, what they’re willing to tolerate from them, and what the limits of their imagination might be when it comes to picturing the next nominee.
A different flavor of acid-tongued billionaire, Bloomberg has pitched himself as uniquely suited to beat President Trump. Bloomberg’s 2020 image — buoyed by TV ads and TV coverage — is the get-it-done former mayor of New York City who is equipped to handle Trump’s vindictive style of campaigning. “I know how to deal with New York bullies,” Bloomberg said of the president recently. “Somebody said that he’s taller than me, calls me, ‘Little Mike.’ And the answer is, ‘Donald, where I come from we measure your height from the neck up.’”
A mid-February, pre-Nevada debate NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll gives a snapshot of where his strongest support comes from. In the national poll, Bloomberg received 19 percent of support from all Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, second only to Sanders. At 24 percent, he was also the second choice of non-college educated white voters and suburban and rural voters, a handy demographic to poll well with come the general election — white people are the majority in 90 percent of America’s suburban and small metro counties. Black voters in the survey preferred Biden and Sanders to Bloomberg, but he still received 16 percent of black support.
But in the past two weeks, things have gotten shakier for Bloomberg. In the FiveThirtyEight forecast, Bloomberg currently now has a 2 percent chance of earning a majority of delegates, down from a high of 10 percent. He’s behind Sanders, “no one” (what happens when no candidate wins a majority of pledged delegates) and Joe Biden. That he trails Biden is an issue, since Bloomberg entered the race largely to provide a moderate alternative to the former vice president.
His anemic debate performance last week may have had some effect on his slide in the polls. He was attacked for his history of sexist comments and his long-time support of stop and frisk policing policies. A Morning Consult poll shows that Bloomberg lost three percentage points after the debate, falling from 20 percent to 17 percent support in their surveys — his net favorability, meanwhile, fell 20 points But what has really stunted his appeal? Is it his decidedly un-politically correct past, including the use of non-disclosure agreements to prevent women from talking about their allegations against him? Or his flat affect and inability to get into the fray of the fast-moving, sharp debates? Has Bloomberg’s past come back to haunt him or is it that his political abilities can’t stand up to the present-day competition?
In the seven years since Bloomberg left elected office, much has changed. A feature of the Trump presidency has been national debates over “PC culture” — think outrage from certain corners at the practice of kneeling at NFL games to protest police violence or the public’s division over whether Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh had committed sexual assault as a teenager. Trump keeps going back to the PC culture well because it’s deep; a 2019 survey found that 48 percent of the American public thought that “there’s too much political correctness in the country today” as opposed to “too much prejudice” — 18 percent of that group were Democrats, and 89 percent were white.
It might be that voters, up until the first debate in which Bloomberg appeared, didn’t know all that much about him outside of the fact that he’s a finance billionaire from New York City — and many Americans perhaps ascribe a certain blunt, no-bullshit personality type with that archetype. The idea that he might say what’s on his mind, however inappropriate or however much it goes against the grain of what’s polite in well-educated liberal circles — what’s politically correct — is perhaps one of the reasons why some Democratic voters like Bloomberg. Or, at the very least, what makes them think he has what it takes to compete with Trump and to win back some of Trump’s voters. Sanders, too, has a sheen of “anti-PC culture” given that his reputation is built on his “authenticity” and his I-won’t-call-you-on-your-birthday grumpiness.
But are Democrats only willing to tolerate that veneer of anti-PC posturing in their politicians up to a point? Did the sexism allegations leveled against Bloomberg during the debate prove too much for Democratic voters to stomach? Were the specifics enough to shatter the image voters might have created of him in their heads? It’s difficult to tell, but on this point, it might be that Bloomberg’s candidacy is a test of sorts for the Democratic Party, helping discern whether there is tolerance for not just an anti-PC affect in candidates, but actual actions that go against the spirit of feminist and racial tolerance movements the party has thrown its weight behind.
Regardless of whether Bloomberg’s support continues to weaken, his initial rise in the polls as Cory Booker, Julian Castro and Kamala Harris dropped out of the race might say something about what Democratic voters think it takes to win in a general election. All three were candidates of color running progressive, politically correct campaigns. Voters might just surmise that campaigns that are vocally attuned to promoting a “politically correct” agenda won’t be palatable to the majority of American voters, or voters in key swing states.
Remember, also, that Elizabeth Warren, once a frontrunner and another “PC” candidate, has fallen in the polls as Bloomberg has risen. That poses another test of the Democratic electorate: whether it is willing to abide by systemic societal sexism against female candidates. In other words, anti-PC behavior in and of itself.
Warren has of course been dinged for being too liberal on health care, but many voters who like Sanders don’t necessarily like her despite the fact that she and Sanders share a general worldview. A liberal woman is perhaps more likely to be painted into the “woke” corner, which a voter may assume is certain death in a general election. Democratic voters express pessimism about whether other Americans would be willing to accept a female candidate: a late January USA Today/Ipsos poll found that 68 percent of likely Democratic primary voters say the nation is ready to elect a woman as president, which is 7 percentage points lower than six months prior. Seventy-one percent of Americans said they’d be comfortable with a woman president but just 33 percent said their neighbors would feel the same. Pragmatic Democratic voters focused on “electability” might couch their move away from Warren as pragmatism, though it is also sexism — sexism refracted through a broader societal lens, reflective of our culture’s bias against the leadership prowess of women. But sexism all the same.
The testing of these “anti-PC” boundaries will continue to follow the Democrats well past the presidential election, though the wide array of primary candidates makes for a neat demonstration of the various threads in the knotty concept. Much of the conversation this primary has been about how liberal the Democratic nominee should be. Inherent in that is how politically correct the nominee should be in order to appeal to Democrats. Bloomberg’s record of anti-PC actions might prove to be too much for these voters but it also might be that there’s such a thing as too much PC, even for a Democrat. The balance is delicate and evolving and it’s possible that equilibrium won’t be reached in 2020, despite the high stakes.
Confidence Interval: The Biden campaign is doing just fine