Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumSome perspective on early leads in the polls
From the 2007 Democratic Primary campaigns:
Rasmussen Reports Poll
June 2528, 2007
Hillary Clinton 39%, Barack Obama 26%, John Edwards 13%, Bill Richardson 5%, Joe Biden 3%, Dennis Kucinich 3%, Chris Dodd 1%, Mike Gravel 0%, Undecided 9%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
President Obama did not lead in any national poll until Feb 1-3 2008.
To date, in 2019 no candidate has broken away from the field. The 2020 nomination remains wide open.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
bluewater
(5,376 posts)One just did in the post following yours.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Just for the record, Gore led in 2000 at this time. Clinton led in 2016 at this time. If memory serves, Mondale led most of the way in '84. That doesn't mean Biden has a lock, but what happened in 2008 doesn't mean he doesn't.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)That's what is unusual. Biden started out the gate so far ahead of ALL the others....and stayed far ahead. He goes up, he goes down, his lead has lessened quite a bit. But he has remained fairly well ahead consistently for months. Not once has anyone caught up w/him.
Of course, he's going down. When you're at the top, there's only one way to go.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
bluewater
(5,376 posts)You are just wrong when you say this:
"Clinton was NEVER the runaway leader, like Biden has been this year.
Lets look at the facts:
The RCP Poll polling average lead for Biden is +14.3, and that includes a lot of pre-debate polling
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
Here are the polls for the same time period as now back in 2007:
Clinton +13 June 2528, 2007
Hillary Clinton 39%, Barack Obama 26%, John Edwards 13%, Bill Richardson 5%, Joe Biden 3%, Dennis Kucinich 3%, Chris Dodd 1%, Mike Gravel 0%, Undecided 9%
Clinton +23 June 2627, 2007
Hillary Clinton 42%, Barack Obama 19%, Al Gore 14%, John Edwards 10%, Dennis Kucinich 2%, Joe Biden 1%, Chris Dodd 1%, Mike Gravel 1%, Bill Richardson 1%, Unsure 6%, Wouldn't vote (vol.) 3%
Clinton +26 June 2627, 2007
Hillary Clinton 47%, Barack Obama 21%, John Edwards 13%, Bill Richardson 3%, Joe Biden 2%, Dennis Kucinich 2%, Chris Dodd 1%, Mike Gravel 1%, Other (vol.) 1%, Unsure 7%, Wouldn't vote (vol.) 3%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
So, not to be disagreeable, but I did provide a link to all the polls showing this in the OP.
You are just wrong, Clinton was much more of a "runaway" leader than Biden has been.
Facts are stubborn things.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
StevieM
(10,500 posts)of the race.
It wasn't given to her on a silver platter--she earned it.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
bluewater
(5,376 posts)This link shows national poll results in 2007:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
In every poll listed from January 2007 to Feb 2008, Hillary Clinton is leading.
This makes the point that an early lead in the polls does not guarantee who the eventual nominee will be.
That is the point I am making about 2019.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
StevieM
(10,500 posts)My point is about not understating how impressive a candidate she was at various points in that race.
And that highlights your point even more. HRC had a modest lead, she built it up into a much bigger lead, and she still lost.
Biden has a smaller lead at this point, so in a sense he is even more vulnerable to slipping. On the other hand, he won't have the media relentlessly trying to destroy him the way that they did to Hillary in both 2008 and 2016.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
bluewater
(5,376 posts)We all know she was robbed.
And you are absolutely right:
"My point is about not understating how impressive a candidate she was at various points in that race."
She proved how impressive she is by winning the popular vote by 3,000,000 votes in 2016.
And I am not saying that Joe Biden isn't an impressive candidate in his own right now.
I am just pointing out that an early lead in the polls does not guarantee who the nominee will be, and that Biden's current lead isn't any greater than Clinton's was at this point in time.
Thank you for making your points about Hillary Clinton. I totally agree with them.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
StevieM
(10,500 posts)I agree that the Democratic race is wide open. I am still trying to decide between a few candidates, namely Harris, O'Rourke and Warren.
I tend not to think too much about the 2016 popular vote win. I worry that it lets James Comey off the hook and leads Democrats to underestimate how much damage he did. Without his repeated illegitimate actions we would have destroyed Trump.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Clinton never had that much of a lead. Her high point was a 28% lead, I think. Somewhere in that range. It didn't last long, either.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
bluewater
(5,376 posts)Never?
His highest polling result was in the 41-42% range, that was not a 40% lead. Are you claiming all his opponents only had 1% in some poll?
Please provide the link for your claim.
And as for your accusation of CHERRY PICKING, well, I have provide this link to an extensive list of national polls over and over again:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
Sorry that the facts continue to disagree with you. Biden's lead now was no larger at all then Clinton's was in 2007.
Facts are stubborn things.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
bluewater
(5,376 posts)But you are still wrong:
"Cherry picking numbers. Biden is DOWN to a 14% lead. He was at 30% lead.
Clinton never had that much of a lead. Her high point was a 28% lead, I think. Somewhere in that range. It didn't last long, either."
[This made more sense when you mistakenly had Biden having a 40% lead, a 30% to 28% comparison seems like a quibble, but let's examine that in any case.]
Clinton's biggest lead according to that RCP link was 27.8%, which you claim is smaller than Biden's lead of 30% which lasted longer.
once again, this is simply wrong.
Biden's BIGGEST lead lasted from May 10th to May 12th and was 26.8%
People can see this CLEARLY for themselves at the RCP trendline linked below:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
Look, I am starting to feel bad pointing out that you are wrong, but you are wrong.
Biden is not more of a "runaway" leader in 2019, than Clinton was in 2007.
An early lead in the polls is no guarantee who the 2020 nominee will be. The field remains wide open.
Facts are stubborn things.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)It does seem however, that those making that argument are willing to deny it when the polls validate their own choices (or when their narratives drive a poll).
I'm pretty sure though, the "polls ares meaningless this far out" meme will be immediately distributed to consumers again as soon as the polls invalidating choices are posted.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)1. They're a snapshot of what the electorate is currently feeling
2. They're drivers to make lagging candidates change their strategy.
Early polling is quite consequential. They don't often predict the last person standing, but they have. Of course, that isn't what they're for.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden