Sanders leading in new Iowa poll

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

 

[Pop Music 20,540]

he is such an icon 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Wow, Biden in 4th... we love to see it  

CNN is a mess for posting this poll with the headline "its a tight four way race!" instead of anything like "Sanders, Warren move to top of polls and Joe Biden falls"  When you have to fight against reality because of your own political interests... It's transparent.

If Bernie has a good or even decent debate performance, (hell maybe even if not), I suspect he'll win Iowa. We know that even in these polls where he is winning beyond the Margin of Error, about 50% of them oversample older voters, and his appeal is mostly to young voters who have not voted before or that tend to sit out elections, and if he manages to get That group of people to vote, he will probably win somewhat handedly.

Can't wait for "Joe Biden wins a respectable 15% of Iowa!" for a Headline after that   

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

Imagine if Warren withdraws, he'd have the nomination in the bag...

[REALITY 80,170]

I hope to god that he wins the nomination! I mean, I'll vote for whoever gets it, but we really need Bernie. He can go toe-to-toe with Trump in a way that no other candidate can. 

[Brainiac 11,171]

LET'S GO BERNIE, LET'S GO!

I'm so excited y'all. If he sweeps Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada I think it's a done deal! And with 24 days till the Iowa Caucuses, his momentum is only continuing to grow!

[MJHolland 12,725]

31 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Wow, Biden in 4th... we love to see it  

CNN is a mess for posting this poll with the headline "its a tight four way race!" instead of anything like "Sanders, Warren move to top of polls and Joe Biden falls"  When you have to fight against reality because of your own political interests... It's transparent.

If Bernie has a good or even decent debate performance, (hell maybe even if not), I suspect he'll win Iowa. We know that even in these polls where he is winning beyond the Margin of Error, about 50% of them oversample older voters, and his appeal is mostly to young voters who have not voted before or that tend to sit out elections, and if he manages to get That group of people to vote, he will probably win somewhat handedly.

Can't wait for "Joe Biden wins a respectable 15% of Iowa!" for a Headline after that   

they're literally all within the margin of error what the heck are you talking about love?

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

13 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

they're literally all within the margin of error what the heck are you talking about love?

They literally aren't, the MoE is 3.7% amongst "likely" voters, and 1.8% amongst simply "Registered" voters.... Bernie is at 20% and Biden is at 15%. Even if you want to argue that 20 and 17% are within the MoE, that would mean that Bernie and Warren are in a statistical tie for first, but it still places at least Biden in a tie for second, and possibly Buttigieg depending on how even that "16%" is.

But that isn't actually important to my point, which is one about framing.

CNN has taken similar "margin of error" polls that have put Buttigieg, Warren, and Joe in first, second, third, and even fourth, and had headlines that just say "X is in first place" or even the most iconic "a strong fourth place for Buttigieg" but the second Bernie is in first close to Iowa, its a "tight race." Let's not act like we don't know how media bias affects our beliefs and assumptions  

In fact, many people have made little image compilations throughout the last year of CNN's incredibly lax framing of polling data compared to independent (and even other partisan) sources. 

 

 

[PoshLife 17,019]

Funny, I never see polls posted here that show Biden in the lead, like yesterday's polls of Nevada and South Carolina. Selection bias, mayhaps?  

Anyway, comparing today's poll to the most recent poll from the same pollster (from back in early November) finds that in that timeframe, Buttigieg has fallen WAY down and Sanders has moved up several points, while Biden and Warren are basically exactly where they were. (If you're comparing this poll to any other recent poll from a different pollster, you're ignoring house effect.)

I certainly don't expect Biden to win in Iowa, given it's a caucus state and caucuses tend to favor the most passionate people who can afford to spend hours of their time caucusing. Things will continue changing particularly as there's a debate coming up in Iowa later this month, but if this poll ends up being the result, all four of them will get delegates (you have to reach 15% of the vote). FiveThirtyEight wrote recently that Biden can most afford to lose Iowa compared to the other frontrunners and still end up with the most  total delegates: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/biden-is-the-front-runner-but-there-is-no-clear-favorite/

It's an interesting poll, but it's just one data point. Put it with the others.

[PoshLife 17,019]

6 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

They literally aren't, the MoE is 3.7% amongst "likely" voters, and 1.8% amongst simply "Registered" voters.... Bernie is at 20% and Biden is at 15%. Even if you want to argue that 20 and 17% are within the MoE, that would mean that Bernie and Warren are in a statistical tie for first, but it still places at least Biden in a tie for second, and possibly Buttigieg depending on how even that "16%" is.

But that isn't actually important to my point, which is one about framing.

CNN has taken similar "margin of error" polls that have put Buttigieg, Warren, and Joe in first, second, third, and fourth, and had headlines that just say "X is in first place" or even the most iconic "a strong fourth place for Buttigieg" but the second Bernie is in first close to Iowa, its a "tight race." Let's not act like we don't know how media bias affects our beliefs and assumptions  

 

 

The race does not have to be within the margin of error to be a close race. If CNN said it was a tie, they'd be wrong. But they didn't, so they're not.

I agree with you that headlines prime people to think about issues in a particular way, but I think it's completely fair to describe this poll as showing a close race. Especially given the fluidity of the polling we've seen out of Iowa in the past month or two - one literally showed a three-way tie - there's absolutely no clear frontrunner in the state and this poll doesn't change that.

You may prefer this other headline from CNN, which you can find directly under the first one: "Democrats Slept on Bernie Sanders. Now He's Surging as Iowa Approaches."  https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/09/politics/bernie-sanders-iowa-2020/index.html

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

1 minute ago, PoshLife said:

The race does not have to be within the margin of error to be a close race. If CNN said it was a tie, they'd be wrong. But they didn't, so they're not.

I agree with you that headlines prime people to think about issues in a particular way, but I think it's completely fair to describe this poll as showing a close race. Especially given the fluidity of the polling we've seen out of Iowa in the past month or two - one literally showed a three-way tie - there's absolutely no clear frontrunner in the state and this poll doesn't change that.

You may prefer this other headline from CNN, which you can find directly under the first one: "Democrats Slept on Bernie Sanders. Now He's Surging as Iowa Approaches."  https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/09/politics/bernie-sanders-iowa-2020/index.html

...Again, the point is not that it is factually inaccurate or unfair to say that its a tight race, its that they tend to do so whenever its politically expedient to support someone centrist like Biden or Buttigieg, usually at the expense of someone like Sanders, and that they have had no such qualms about labeling someone like Biden or Buttigieg "winners" or "in the lead" even when things have been in the MoE in the past. They have even factually misrepresented polling and selectively interpreted polling to push that narrative  

Also, yes, mainstream media in the last week is starting to wake up to the fact that they have undersold and dismissed Bernie in the last year. That is what progressives have been predicting. They ultimately operate on news cycles and when one major article is written, or two, it becomes harder to ignore. Also, if Bernie wins Iowa/NH, it would look bad for CNN to have "failed to see it coming" and for pollsters to once again be deemed "unreliable" so its best for them to get ahead of the story in case he does win, just from a business/marketing standpoint.

[PoshLife 17,019]

1 hour ago, Chickens in Malibu said:

Imagine if Warren withdraws, he'd have the nomination in the bag...

She'd be crazy to withdraw. It was just a few months ago that she was up nationally in a big way and I'm sure she feels that she can  capture that again.

She's going into voting season decently positioned, too: the race is very fluid right now, she just got the Castro endorsement that could help her in Hispanic-heavy states (like delegate-rich Texas!!), and she's obviously going to get delegates from the first two voting states (she may even come in second in one of them). So she'll start the actual voting process well-positioned. Then she'll get a bunch more on Super Tuesday when she wins Massachusetts and potentially California, and presumably breaks 15% in several more states. Between that and at least four more debate opportunities to stand out, it's not impossible to believe she could change her trajectory and make a comeback.

I don't think think she wants to be seen as the person who blocked Sanders from beating Biden,  but I don't think she has any reason to concede right now, nor do I think she'll consider it until it's clearly impossible for her to win. This is all about delegate math, after all.

PS back in October where was everyone saying Sanders should withdraw so Warren can win? Seems like it only ever goes one way.

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

27 minutes ago, PoshLife said:

Funny, I never see polls posted here that show Biden in the lead, like yesterday's polls of Nevada and South Carolina. Selection bias, perhaps?  

Funny, you must have missed them because they have been posted in the past. Trying to point out selection bias that isn’t there, perhaps? 

[PoshLife 17,019]

11 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

...Again, the point is not that it is factually inaccurate or unfair to say that its a tight race, its that they tend to do so whenever its politically expedient to support someone centrist like Biden or Buttigieg, usually at the expense of someone like Sanders, and that they have had no such qualms about labeling someone like Biden or Buttigieg "winners" or "in the lead" even when things have been in the MoE in the past. They have even factually misrepresented polling and selectively interpreted polling to push that narrative  

Also, yes, mainstream media in the last week is starting to wake up to the fact that they have undersold and dismissed Bernie in the last year. That is what progressives have been predicting. They ultimately operate on news cycles and when one major article is written, or two, it becomes harder to ignore. Also, if Bernie wins Iowa/NH, it would look bad for CNN to have "failed to see it coming" and for pollsters to once again be deemed "unreliable" so its best for them to get ahead of the story in case he does win, just from a business/marketing standpoint.

I don't think it's to prop up a centrist (despite whatever people like Ryan Grim may have written on the topic); factually speaking, Bernie Sanders was just as hyped by mostly-young people back in 2016 and wasn't able to turn that into a nomination either, so until the polls show Bernie with a real lead, what reason would any journalist have to posit that he's in the lead? They can't write their polling coverage based on who gets the most applause at a debate or who draws the  biggest crowd at a rally.

[PartySick 172,546]

1 hour ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Wow, Biden in 4th... we love to see it

Word for word exactly what I was going to say

Keep it up Bern  still pulling for Warren but this is still nice to see