Do the campaign dirty tricks explain that poll? That is actually the first thing that popped in my head when I saw the poll.

The last one had him at 10%. Even if you give him the 5% that went to trump in that poll, he is still way down from the rest of the pack.

He did lose Iowa in 2016, but won nh. Of course, once super tuesday hit it was a done deal.

He really needs both iowa and nh. His campaign is saying it's a done deal.

Now polls in Iowa are pure crap, and iowa is a pee hole in the snow from a delegate standpoint (especially this year), but they are fun to watch.

to take any of these polls seriously in an age where most people use cell phones and rarely answer calls from people they don't know.

If, however, Bernie isn't doing well in the polls, the negative campaigning could be affecting his numbers.

They aren't showing how many calls they had to make to reach someone in a particular group. Last general, it was in excess of 1000 calls to reach one person.

So I suspect you are right. The people they end up getting are just the ones who were willing to answer the call and take a survey. That will exclude a LOT of people.

It becomes an opt in version of hell where people can play games because they think it's funny to mess with pollsters.

That's incredible and doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence in polls overall.

Yeah, I'm sure a lot of people do play games with pollsters!

5 gay veterans who are registered republicans in indianna, you have to make a lot of calls.. Oh wait, you call pence's campaign. j/k

I'm not sure why they aren't including the stat. It might just be the outfits covering iowa right now.

HRC winning was what everyone expected. Bernie did much better than expected. He then won convincingly in NH. In retrospect, the NH win was likely the high point of Sanders campaign. While it is highly unlikely that Sanders will do anywhere near as well in Iowa and NH compared to how he did in 2016, 2016 itself shows that one who does the best in the combination of Iowa and NH will not automatically do well in more urban areas.

Iowa CAN identify a potential nominee that was not thought likely by the NYC/DC based establishment - such as Jimmy Carter. This year that might be someone like Klobuchar, though at this point that seems unlikely and she gained the establishment NYT endorsement - shared with Warren.

Bernie this election is not unknown and in a 5 way race (which this might now be) even if he narrowly wins both NH and Iowa, he will probably get fewer delegates than he earned in 2016 in those 2 states and will not get the bounce that other winners of both states got.

He won't do that well this time. By super tuesday, he could be down close to 100.

With 4-5 well funded candidates, the potential to break out or make up a deficit is very small. His odds are not good.

I believe that that point was the last and only time he was ahead in pledged delegates in 2016.

By Feb 1 2016, O'Malley, the only other "left" or "progressive" pick had dropped out. Sanders had the whole left field to himself. This time he doesn't because of Warren and Mayor Pete. The early primary states are going to make or break all three of them.

Sanders has a flaw, IMO. His "outsider" status. He loves being indy, and yes in caucus states he can work the room to bring people over. But he's gonna do that directly while Warren or Pete's people are in the room also. In primary voting states? Its probably worse. "Left" dems and party members who ID as "progressive" now get to choose between him and someone like Warren who's always been in the party and paid her dues while sticking to her progressive stances.

This is, why I'm supporting Warren over Bernie. She's progressive as hell, and is a team player. Bernie isn't. Since both are, essentially, equal in policy, I'm going with the team player over the other.

Link to tweet

And jumped over Mayor Pete. A lot of people, women in particular, did not appreciate Warren being disparaged by online Bernie supporters or waved off at the end of the last debate. I suspected Warren would come out for the better. The polls seem to indicate that.

Warren is progressive, but her party bonafides are solid. Bernie jumped ship within months after Trump was sworn in. Democratic Party members know this, and I suspect, many party members have this on mind when considering their progressive options: Bernie, Elizabeth, or Pete.

Two are Dems, and have always been Dems. Bernie is Dem when it suits him. While that might be fine for Democratic voters who are loosely aligned with the party, its not as 'fine' for actual party members, who go to the meetings, who canvass, who donate -- all that stuff.

is that it's all over for BS, but stranger things have happened.

Link to tweet

WTG, Joe!

I can only imagine how many women were angered at the way he treated Warren at the debate. Negative didn’t work for him in 16 ....isn’t working now!!

Go Amy!

t has Biden down one point, it has Warren down 5 points. It has Butigieg up 4 points when most polls show him falling. It has Sanders up 5 points but only at 14, which means their last poll only had him at 9.

I have my doubts about this one.

that is why the changes are so odd.

As a woman, I was deeply offended with Sanders conduct at the debate..calling Warren a liar. I saw her face. She wasn't lying. Now I am not even a Warren supporter so imagine how some of them reacted. She is now my second choice as she showed guts. Now, if Warren failed in a caucus...Sanders was probably a second choice...but I don't know if he is now for Warren supporters and his interview yesterday was awful.

He made it worse for himself, IMHO. And he has gone scorched earth with Biden who is pretty popular...and used a doctored video and decades old stuff which was snipped and twisted also. This is dishonest and makes people question his truthfulness. Now it was his campaign, but no attempt was made to reign in the lies and Sanders basically said the same thing. I think all these factors could hurt Sanders in Iowa and in other states as well.

It could be when the history of this campaign which I believe will fail to achieve the nomination is written, we will discover that hiring Sirota and the Stein folks was his biggest mistake and doomed his campaign.

Though it is very possible that both Warren and Sanders remembered the incident differently, I found her reaction very believable.

I really don't understand why Sanders hired people like Sirota and Turner, but his attacks on fellow Democratic candidates seems to be hurting him more than those he is attacking. I am truly disappointed in him. The ends do not justify the means.

I could have written some of your comments!

I was impressed with your comments!

But of course Nate Silver figures in to his averages no questions asked.

I'd rationalize Bernie's plummeting numbers the same way.

but if it is indicating rural sentiment then it could indicate an upset in favor of Biden.

Not saying it can't happen, but the last Iowa poll had sanders at 10%.

And the common wisdom says that rural voters are generally more conservative than urban voters.

But this may lead to Amy getting some delegates from those areas too.

Iowa comes in at 36% rural according to the 2010 census. No breakout for what percentage is suburban or urban.

I agree that rural voters will trend more conservative, but this poll can't completely discounted. Since there is no contest for the Republican side, there could be more people that will attend the Democratic caucuses this year. That could mean one of the following: a) it might favor a more moderate candidate or b) it might mean that Republicans raid the Democratic caucuses in order to select a more progressive candidate if they believe that candidate will be weaker in the general election.

There also could be a backlash against progressive candidates because of the perceived feud between Sanders and Warren. Another concern is that the progressive candidates are opposed to fossil fuels which could hurt the farmers who want to sell their crops to make ethanol to be used in gasoline. Finally, with a large number of people involved in the insurance business, there could be concern about lost job opportunities by switching to a M4A program. The enthusiasm for progressive policies tends to decline when people realize the additional tax burden they will be required to pay or when they feel that their jobs are threatened.

A

Link to tweet

He is bad juju.

It is not going to help him but hurt him...and of course people know Joe's heart...how Joe talked to the maintenance person at the NYT was a bigger story than who got their endorsement on twitter. He is a good man and will make a great president. Sander who I was willing to give a chance to this year...he was my second choice because I thought he could win Wisconsin...but I don't think that is the case anymore...and he has gone scorched earth which mean no support from in this or any primary. I will vote for him in a general.

The campaigns aren't releasing internal polling. They know better than the pollsters where their candidates stand. They all have a lot of boots canvassing and trying to get their bodies to the polls. They also know who isn't supporting them.

If any didn't agree with the published polls, they would leak what they have. Joe has no reason to, but the other camps do.

It would seem they are all more or less in agreement.,

Must be very new or have a spotty record.

David Binder is one of the premier go to pollsters for Democratic campaigns and interest groups.
I know that at least Harris and Klobuchar used his shop for their polling.

to the trial.

Will Amy or Warren.

It’s the way it is. But not something to celebrate.

was suspect to me based on the terrible quality of the written analysis that went with it. This poll is better though. David Binder Research polls have been pretty good for Biden, but this actually aligns pretty well with the poll from yesterday, so it is kind of interesting.

The biggest thing I saw was at the end, who people would DEFINITELY NOT support after the debate. Warren lead with 12% and Sanders was at 11%. It seems that their fighting played poorly and Sanders has had a chunk of bad polling since then.

It certainly seems that the Warren/Sanders stuff has took the wind out of his sails and hurt him, but at the same time didn't help Warren.

If Sanders supporters posted a non rated poll that favored him with no age group details , they would be laughed off the site.

Polls are all over. I am waiting for the vote.

after the Zephyr Teachout fiasco.

Every snake handler knows to make sure that the snake's head is controlled so it doesn't bite you.