Mayor Pete is the new front-runner in Iowa. Kamala is Kaput

Biden is second in Iowa, Warren a close third. Bernie is in fourth, but a bit behind the others.

Buttigieg has really broken out of the pack. In the two previous Monmouth polls, his support level was 8% and 9%. That has risen to 22%. Buttigieg’s gains since the summer have come across the board, with increasing support coming from nearly every demographic group.

The change from the last Monmouth poll:

Buttigieg +14
Sanders +4
Warren -2
Biden -7
Harris -8

The more Iowans see of Pete, the more they like him.

The opposite is true of Kamala Harris, whose approval has plummeted in the state, and who is alive only because she has not yet admitted death. She was beating both Buttigieg and Sanders in the previous Monmouth poll, and despite having gone “all in” on Iowa, is now behind Amy Klobuchar in the battle for fifth place. (In Monmouth’s summer poll, she was beating Klobuchar 11-3.)

I can see why Bloomberg decided to skip this state. Iowa’s Democrats hate the guy. His net favorable rating in the state is minus 31 (17% favorable, 48 unfavorable), as compared to plus 63 for Pete (73% positive, only 10 negative).

————-

Buttigieg is also proving formidable in New Hampshire. In the latest poll, he is only a point behind Warren and is a point higher than Bernie. (MoE is 3.8).

One of the most interesting results in New Hampshire is the polling of voters who consider themselves “somewhat liberal” – it is a 4-way tie. I don’t mean a statistical tie, but rather an exact tie. All four of the leaders are preferred by exactly 21% of those polled. The candidates’ ability to sway this bloc could prove to be the deciding factor in the state, as the conservatives shun Sanders and Warren, while the “very liberal” group is strongly coalescing behind Warren.

Like Iowans, New Hampshire Democrats also dislike Bloomberg. This is obviously not the year for New York mayors to shine.

Kamala Harris is even in a worse position in New Hampshire than her current predicament in Iowa. She’s currently polling at 1% in the Granite State, a particularly distressing result when you factor in that 2% of New Hampshire’s eligibles say they will probably vote for Bloomberg in the primary.

So half of Bloomberg – that’s like 2’6″, right?

2 thoughts on “Mayor Pete is the new front-runner in Iowa. Kamala is Kaput

  1. The reality is that Biden is the frontrunner. White liberals don’t love him, and those are the types of Democratic voters in Iowa and NH. Once he gets past those two states, his fortunes should improve dramatically.

    The collapse of Harris is great news for Biden — she was competing with him for black and moderate votes. Now Biden’s major competition for those votes is Buttigieg, who has limited appeal beyond his white, affluent, socially liberal base.

    Wouldn’t surprise me if we had a Biden/Harris ticket in 2020. Liberals won’t be crazy about it, but they will vote for it.

  2. Honestly, I’m sick of this polling shit. There is a ‘new’ frontrunner or mover every week to create a headline, and based on what? Take a look at the grand methodology used in these polls:

    “The Monmouth University Poll was conducted by telephone from November 7 to 11, 2019 with 451 Iowa voters who are likely to attend the Democratic presidential caucuses in February 2020, out of 966 registered Democrats and unaffiliated voters who were contacted for the poll.”

    Iowa’s population is around 3.1 million. They contacted roughed 0.00032% of the population, by cold calling, in which only half responded. Not only that, but a list of 17 candidates were presented that rotated!

    “If the Democratic caucuses for president were today, would you support – [NAMES WERE ROTATED]? ”

    Tada, welcome to polling!

    I get surveying methodology, but it’s just ridiculous how much this is taken as gospel. You’re already basing the question on a fluid situation. Cold calling an extremely small sample size of the population and giving them a rotating list of names with poor questioning. The answers say more about the people who actually have the time to take out of their day to actually RESPOND rather than the accuracy of the polling.

    The most these polls do is create a confirmation bias among potential voters that they need to drop their voting preference, based on some sensationalist news headline that the candidate has no chance and would be wasting a vote.

Comments are closed.