Jump to content
270soft Forum
Herbert Hoover

Trump Reelection Chance vs. Nominees

Trump Reelection Chance vs. Nominees  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Trump's percentage chance of victory versus Biden

  2. 2. Trump's percentage chance of victory versus Buttigieg

  3. 3. Trump's percentage chance of victory versus Warren



Recommended Posts

No Bernie?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rodja said:

No Bernie?!

I only had 3. I was going to make a few more polls but I went to upgrade my CPU and bent the CPU socket pins on my motherboard :(

RIP my computer, 2015-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point in this poll, it looks like Buttigieg is doing best. The problem with Buttigieg is that he's largely untested, so who knows?

We know much more about Biden. He's run 2 national campaigns (both tanked), been a high-profile Senator, and then VP for 8 years. His national run so far has been one of eroding poll numbers and anemic fundraising (5th in cash on hand as of Oct. 1st). He's starting to look a bit like Fred Thompson, who got into the Republican primaries late in the 2008 cycle with strong poll numbers after some were dissatisfied with what they saw as a weak Republican field, as Biden did in this cycle, only to see his numbers and prominence erode.

We know less about Warren, but she's still fought a state-wide race before, defeating an incumbent Senator (Scott Brown) in MA. She's also starting to get more scrutiny in the primary since rising in the polls, and seems to be handling it well.

Buttigieg is largely a question mark. He's been Mayor of a small city. The only national attention has been starting with the primaries. If he starts to move into the top tier, I think we'll start getting a better idea of how well he can run a national campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When discussing Biden's South Carolina strategy (it looks like he might not win IA, NH, or NV, the first 3 in this cycle), some people mention Giuliani's 2008 bid and his focus on Florida after his poll numbers weren't strong in the early states (in 2008, Florida was 9th, with Iowa voting on Jan. 3rd and Florida's on Jan. 29th) as a cautionary tale. Fair enough.

Yet, a better analogue to Biden's current predicament might be Fred Thompson's in 2008. Thompson got into the race late (like Biden), but was then first or second in most polling from early July of 2007 to mid-November of 2007 (as Biden has been so far). Perceived by many as not showing a strong enough desire to win (like Biden), and making various verbal miscues (somewhat like Biden), his numbers started eroding, at which point he focused on South Carolina (like Biden)! SC was the 5th state to vote, on January 19th. He came 3rd in SC, and shortly after withdrew from the race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin_270 said:

When discussing Biden's South Carolina strategy (it looks like he might not win IA, NH, or NV, the first 3 in this cycle), some people mention Giuliani's 2008 bid and his focus on Florida after his poll numbers weren't strong in the early states (in 2008, Florida was 9th, with Iowa voting on Jan. 3rd and Florida's on Jan. 29th) as a cautionary tale. Fair enough.

Yet, a better analogue to Biden's current predicament might be Fred Thompson's in 2008. Thompson got into the race late (like Biden), but was then first or second in most polling from early July of 2007 to mid-November of 2007 (as Biden has been so far). Perceived by many as not showing a strong enough desire to win (like Biden), and making various verbal miscues (somewhat like Biden), his numbers started eroding, at which point he focused on South Carolina (like Biden)! SC was the 5th state to vote, on January 19th. He came 3rd in SC, and shortly after withdrew from the race.

Three separate case studies.

Giuliani was indeed counting on Florida -- or, more specifically, the endorsement of the Republican Florida Governor Christ (who, interestingly enough, is now a Democrat Representative).  He was counting on a single person, and that single person saw where the tide was going and endorsed McCain instead.

Biden's different -- he's not counting on one person (well, I guess he's counting on Obama...but Obama won't weigh in until the nominee is chosen, so his endorsement appears to be Biden's by default so far).  Rather, it's real support from a voting block (Black voters) who do appear to be solidly behind him in South Carolina so far.  Black voters don't add up to much in Iowa, New Hampshire, or Nevada, but they are the controlling force in South Carolina.  The strategy looks sound to me -- as long as his health holds up, he will win South Carolina and then cross his fingers for Super Tuesday, where he could feasibly take at least 50% of the EVs there.  Then he's set to go the distance...might win, might lose, but in a good place to compete from.

As for Fred Thompson, even less in common.  Fred was best known as a supporting actor in a TV show popular with elders (yes, he had bona fides beyond that, but most people weren't aware of it before he declared).  He looked tired and disinterested in doing what it takes to run.  Biden does not have any of those issues -- he is extremely well known, has the energy, has the passion.  

Biden definitely has flaws, of course.  I began this election campaign expecting him to be my top pick and he's fallen to somewhere like 3rd to 5th for me as I become more worried about those flaws.  But he is neither Giuliani nor Thompson.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Actinguy

Yes, Biden's different, and you make good points highlighting some of those differences.

However, pretty sure most people looking to vote in Republican primaries were aware Thompson was a Senator for 10 years. Otherwise his bid would have had very little traction IMO.

18 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

as long as his health holds up, he will win South Carolina and then cross his fingers for Super Tuesday

That's the key point in question though. The Biden campaign is now looking to that scenario, but that's really not where they want to be ... like Giuliani didn't want to be banking on a Florida strategy, and Thompson didn't want to be banking on a SC strategy. Thompson's strategy for SC was based on support from a specific voting block - southerners like him in the GOP primaries, who at one point seemed to be supporting him. I agree with you that Biden's support among blacks seems fairly strong, and there's a disanalogy there, but it's more analogous than the Giuliani situation.

Thompson was quite well known in Republican circles - again, he was leading or in second in polls for several months. He was effectively drafted into the campaign by people looking for a stronger candidate. No, he wasn't VP for 8 years. Every analogy breaks down at some point. Biden is not another politician, neither is Warren. I'm looking for echoes of past campaigns and mistakes. To be honest, a SC strategy for Biden isn't really a mistake - instead, it might be his only option.

You don't think Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and so on, aren't spending a lot of time and effort figuring out how to peel SC voters away from Biden?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

@Actinguy

Yes, Biden's different, and you make good points highlighting some of those differences.

However, pretty sure most people looking to vote in Republican primaries were aware Thompson was a Senator for 10 years. Otherwise his bid would have had very little traction IMO.

That's the key point in question though. The Biden campaign is now looking to that scenario, but that's really not where they want to be ... like Giuliani didn't want to be banking on a Florida strategy, and Thompson didn't want to be banking on a SC strategy. Thompson's strategy for SC was based on a support from a specific voting block - southerners like him in the GOP primaries, who at one point seemed to be supporting him. I agree with you that Biden's support among blacks seems fairly strong, and there's a disanalogy there, but it's more analogous than the Giuliani situation.

Thompson was quite well known in Republican circles - again, he was leading or in second in polls for several months. He was effectively drafted into the campaign by people looking for a stronger candidate. No, he wasn't VP for 8 years. Every analogy breaks down at some point. Biden is not another politician, neither is Warren. I'm looking for echoes of past campaigns and mistakes. To be honest, a SC strategy for Biden isn't really a mistake - instead, it might be his only option.

You don't think Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and so on, aren't spending a lot of time and effort figuring out how to peel SC voters away from Biden?

I was a Republican voter at the time, and actually didn't know Thompson was a Senator until I learned it during his campaign.  Granted, I was only in my 20s.  Haha.  I remember going into his first debate planning to give him a real chance to win my vote, and then his answers came across like someone who had to give a book report but forgot to read the book.  (Of course, his answers feel pleasantly tame compared to Trump's mess every time he opens his mouth.  On what should have been a victory lap over Al-Baghdadi, he instead managed to embroil himself in an argument with HIMSELF over whether a canine is a dog.)  

The difference, I believe, with the analogies is simple:  Guliani and Thompson never had the votes.  They had a loose plan on how to get them, arguably, but that plan never came together.

Biden is STARTING with them, and Kamala's early sharp attempts to dislodge them failed.  I expect they're with Biden, come hell or high water.

If I was the Sanders/Warren/Buttigieg campaign adviser, I would of course advise to continue looking at ways to best serve black voters just as you should for all voters...but I would not waste a lot of effort or resources in trying to separate Biden from the black vote yet, because I wouldn't expect it to work.  For now, Biden is glued to Obama's legacy, and attempts to undo that could backfire.  Instead, compete for the other voting blocks that are still in play, and hope that Biden fades either due to his health, the Ukraine thing, other verbal stumbles, etc.  Be nice to him while he digs his own hole, and then suck up to him privately for his endorsement.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Biden is STARTING with them, and Kamala's early sharp attempts to dislodge them failed.  I expect they're with Biden, come hell or high water.

Yes, and you might be right that the black vote will be very hard to take from Biden. However, he started at 1st in Iowa (now in 2nd) and 1st in NH (now in 2nd).

His SC Post and Courier numbers have gone from +31 (May) to +11 (October).

It's not so much what a candidate starts with as their trajectory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Yes, and you might be right that the black vote will be very hard to take from Biden. However, he started at 1st in Iowa (now in 2nd) and 1st in NH (now in 2nd).

His SC Post and Courier numbers have gone from +31 (May) to +11 (October).

It's not so much what a candidate starts with as their trajectory.

That's true.  I'd say Iowa and NH (and most states) are largely a reflection of his name recognition -- which is perhaps on par with 2008 Giuliani, true.

But if I were a betting man (and I am!), I'd have money on Biden to win SC by a respectable margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absent a recession:

Biden: 30% (see poll below, from highly rated NYT/Siena)

Warren: 70%

Sanders: >85% (would almost certainly garner a third party challenger like Bloomberg who would split the center-left vote)

Buttigieg: >85% (very likely black turnout/margins drop)

If there is a recession, Trump's odds are close to 0%.

rY5zy5D.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thr33 said:

Absent a recession:

Biden: 30% (see poll below, from highly rated NYT/Siena)

Warren: 70%

Sanders: >85% (would almost certainly garner a third party challenger like Bloomberg who would split the center-left vote)

Buttigieg: >85% (very likely black turnout/margins drop)

If there is a recession, Trump's odds are close to 0%.

rY5zy5D.png

I generally discard general election polls this early, but considering that Warren is as well-known as Biden now and Trump "should" be at low point with impeachment, Democrats would be stupid to ignore the alarms on these swing state results (especially the northern Great Lakes states that used to be a blue wall).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...