Iowa survey: name recognition is key and four other takeaways

by



[ad_1]

Here are five points to remember from our survey in Iowa.

1. Name recognition plays an important role in these early figures

The only two candidates who exceed the two figures are also the only two candidates for whom 90% of the electorate can form an opinion. The third-best-known candidate (Senator Elizabeth Warren) is also the third-place candidate with 9%. Each candidate who obtains more than 1% of the votes has at least 59% name recognition.

Now, this is not all name recognition. Biden and Sanders are also well known, but Biden leads Sanders by 2 points. The same 67% of voters can form an opinion of Senators Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, though Harris gets more than double the support of Booker (7% vs. 3%).

Overall, on a scale of -1 to +1, the correlation is +0.83 between the recognition of the name and the percentage of the first choice.

2. It's good to be loved, not just loved, in a crowded lot

The best predictor of the position of a candidate in CNN polls is the percentage of voters who have a very favorable opinion of him. The first seven places in our survey are perfectly predicted by the very favorable rating of the candidate. The correlation for all candidates is +0.95.

Very favorable scores are much more important for understanding the candidate's status than the favorable overall score, which combines very good and somewhat favorable scores. The distinction between the very favorable and the rather favorable can be perceived as "loving" as opposed to simply "loving" a candidate. In an area that will have more than a dozen candidates, voters will have the choice of scope.

A candidate that will please many people, but only a few, will probably not be ranked at the top of the primary in 2020. Similarly, a candidate who is polarized (with people who love or hate him) ), like Donald Trump at the Republican primary in 2016, will have a Democratic advantage this time around. Remember that Trump had a relatively low overall favorable rating, but also a very favorable high rating. This dynamic might work well for someone who is at the ideological limit of the party, like Sanders.

3. The Democratic Party is on the left, but perhaps not on the left

I've noticed many times that the Democratic electorate was moving to the left. Our survey mainly confirms this. A majority of Democrats identified themselves as liberals. A plurality of members support the complete Medicare system for all and the Green New Deal. A majority will even be especially pleased with a candidate who thinks the country should be more socialist.
All these statistics seem good for Sanders. There is however an important alarm signal. A giant of 44% of Democratic voters says that Sanders is too liberal. That's almost double the 23% who say the same thing about Warren. This makes sense since Sanders is more left than Warren. Interestingly, however, this 44% is much more than the roughly 25% who said that Sanders 'positions were too liberal during the 2016 primary season. This may suggest that voters are paying more attention to Sanders' policies. that in 2016.

The main final winner in 2020 is probably someone who is able to calm the party party movement to the left without being perceived as being out of the mainstream.

4. Under the hood, the numbers are better for Harris

Unlike other US states, Harris did not see his support in Iowa increase significantly compared to before she applied. Its 7% is about the same as its 5% recorded in December. Obviously, this is not a good sign for her.

His favorable ratings, however, have seen a clear increase. His favorable total score climbed 9 points from 49% to 58%. No other candidate has seen such an increase in its favorable rating. Importantly, its very favorable rating, which is correlated with support for horse racing, went from 19% to 23%. The highest increase among the other candidates, with their very favorable rating, is only 1 point. All the other candidates who obtained more than 1% of the vote (Biden, Booker, Amy Klobuchar, former representative of the United States, Beto O. Rourke, Sanders and Warren) actually saw their very favorable rating decrease.

If the trend line for very favorable scores among the candidates continues, Harris will likely get a result. Of course, there is no guarantee that Harris will be able to continue.

5. These results mean something, but there is a lot to be determined

It's easy to see those numbers and say "we're 11 months before caucuses." There is something in this line of thought. In competitive Iowa caucuses for Democrats and Republicans since 1980, the returning officer has in fact lost more Iowa caucuses (8 times) than won (6 times). The Iowa caucus leader at this stage won the nomination 7 times out of 14.

In a general election, knowing that poll leaders won 50% of the time would not be useful information. In multi-candidate areas, it is useful to know that the returning officer often wins. By way of comparison, according to the betting markets, no candidate currently holds more than 20% of Democratic nomination candidates. (Odds on the betting market make sense as Biden and Sanders probe more than many poll leaders at this point who won.)

The bottom line: There is a lot of time to these numbers to change. Do not be surprised, however, they remain relatively stable.

[ad_2]

Source link