Not really paying attention to the polls right now. Remember when Dean was crushing everyone?

[Quixote1818]

Most people don't make up their minds until a few days before they begin voting. About half or more of folks will at that point start taking a closer look and you will see certain candidates with momentum and some losing ground quickly at that point. How things go in Iowa, NH and SC will have a big impact on things too. Not to mention the influence of campaign ads in those states.

It's anyone's guess who will start taking off as voting starts. I predict a lot of voters will look at who they think is the safest bet to beat Trump and vote on those instincts.

[Voltaire2]

1. Many primaries are not winner take all.

At the moment nobody is going to have a majority of delegates if delegates reflect the actual vote count. Could be interesting.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

2. Yes.

I also recall that me and my brother were rooting for Dean, and then he let out that scream after losing the Iowa caucuses. We immediately agreed that he was finished.

I look back on it now, and when I consider all of the FAR more embarrassing revelations of GOP candidates like Trump, it's pretty obvious that the "standards" of me and my brother are much higher than the typical right-wing voter.

The right-wing media wasn't much different back then. We knew that the slightest "slip up" among the Democrats would be ridiculed again and again.

[not_the_one]

8. sorry you fell for the MSM's knock out effort to sideline Dean...

Cokie Roberts admitted that they used a mic that deleted the crowd noise, when he was responding to the HUGE response he was receiving.

They did everything they could to ruin his campaign.

Thanks to gullible watchers, they succeeded.

He would have been a great president. The democratic party has a lot to thank him for, with his 50 state strategy...

[Buckeye_Democrat]

16. We still supported Dean, so..

... I'm not sure what you mean about how we "fell" for it.

Moscow Mitch's turkey-wattle neck and Trump's orange skin result in their defeat if they were Democrats.

It's an uphill battle for Democrats on the national stage.

[emmaverybo]

3. Yeah. All it took to knock him out was one YIPEE. Could happen to anyone. Keep the faith. But

Biden, who happens to be polling well, is still the most qualified, knowledgeable, and experienced
candidate by far.

And for foreign policy and relations expertise, as well as stature on the world stage, he can’t be beat. Wish he were prez now because he understands the geopolitical situation with India and Pakistan over Kashmir.

We are getting closer to seeing the real possibility of a nuclear war.

[YOHABLO]

4. Just remember that Obama was virtually unknown and had little experience.

He won!

[emmaverybo]

5. Yeah, and he had Biden guidance and possessed a rare intellect which, true also of Bill Clinton,

could fathom many areas. Economists said talking to Clinton was like talking to another expert in economics.

Biden’s stature on the world stage, his reputation as trustworthy, close association with Obama,
enables him to bring a highly suspicious Iran back to the table. Similarly, he is in the best position to repair our relations with our allies.

Some time ago, his commentary on India and Pakistan reflected a grasp of the dicey geo-political situation involved that I do not see from other candidates. His op-Ed on the problems which result in migrants fleeing Central American countries reflected this geo-political understanding as well as an in-depth knowledge of policy history.

It is Biden who dedicated a talk on foreign policy before any other candidate had a word to say on the subject.

We are in a more perilous time in terms of the possibility of a first nuclear conflict than during Obama’s tenure. NK, Russia, China (with a stake in Kashmir), Iran, India and Pakistan present only
a handful of potential threats to American and global security, even survival in the long run.

Climate change is not the only existential threat we face.

On the job learning and some good advisors will not bring the next president up to the challenge of “this moment we are in” on the nuclear clock.

[SouthernProgressive]

10. I think Bill Clinton got around 3 percent in Iowa. NT

[JI7]

17. 1992 Iowa was not in play becsuse Tom Harkin was running

[Jose Garcia]

9. The 'Dean Scream' was AFTER he came in third place in Iowa

[TwilightZone]

12. He was already in trouble before the Dean Scream.

The speech he was giving at the time was meant to rally the troops after a poor showing in Iowa. Context is often lost when recounting the circumstances.

[emmaverybo]

14. Oh, ok. Actually, makes me feel better. I obviously never had the context down. NT

[highplainsdem]

6. Not comparable. Dean was the front-runner for only a few months. Biden's been the front-runner

for 7 months already, since early January (the earliest the RCP averages go back to):

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.htm


On January 9, Biden was at 29% and Sanders was at 17.7%.

Today their numbers are 31% and 15.8%.

They've been in 1st and 2nd place for 7 months, with the exception of a few times when Warren's polling average was slighhtly higher than Sanders's.

[Kaleva]

11. What is comparable is that in both primaries, a large number are open to supporting other candidate.

[emmaverybo]

13. Wow. Now that you put it that way... nt

[brooklynite]

7. Dean didn't go from leading in the polls to losing...polls display trends over time

[GulfCoast66]

15. There is nothing comparable with that year.

First, that was during the primaries.

But that is not the main difference. Most Democratic voters, if not DU members are concerned about one thing above all others.

Not age, not the best healthcare policy, not the best Assault weapons policy nor any other policy. Those take second place. And important second place. To win a candidate must have legit, if not perfect, positions on all.

The one thing driving most Democratic Voters is who is most likely to defeat Trump. I think only Biden fully understands that. He is certainly the only one running his campaign that way.

In this one man’s opinion anyway.

[susanna]

18. I find myself in a quandary.

I like to hear what everyone has to say. It is why I remain undecided.

I have a huge list of why I would support each of our candidates; still trying to work out which one speaks to me the most. Do not worry, though; Blue all the way.

P.S. Good mention re: Dean; good man. Ridiculous end to his candidacy. But it truly is that fast when it happens and the MSM jumps on it. They are not our friends.

[TSIAS]

19. The dynamic was different

One thing was a few days after the AL Gore endorsement, President Saddam Hussein was captured. People began to believe Dean opposing the war was a mistake.

Secondly, many Establishment candidates ganged up against him. Gephardt went hard negative, driving both their numbers down. Even without the scream, finishing with only 18 % in Iowa would have killed his campaign.

I supported Dean back then. Over the years he's turned out to be quite the Establishment apologist. He had views that today would be mainstream, but back then being for universal health care and civil unions made him a radical. Today he's pretty much a centrist Democrat.

[bigtree]

20. remember Joementum?

In October 2003, as Democrats were jockeying for the opportunity to face George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election, The Post and our polling partners at ABC News surveyed Democratic voters to gauge their preferences for a nominee. At the time, former Vermont governor Howard Dean had a slight lead. The candidate who the most respondents saw as most electable, though, was Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.

Well, given the margins of error, Lieberman, Dean and two other candidates were all sort of mushed together as most supported and most electable. That’s one key pattern here: The candidates that are seen as most electable are generally also those who have the most support.

So the eventual nominee, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, was in fifth on both metrics. Not much support, not generally seen as electable...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/02/other-electability-problem-voters-arent-great-determining-electability/?utm_term=.5dac8c1c187f