Thursday, February 13, 2020

should i post about nevada? i have an hour and a half to blow before i turn the pc on, which i turned off early this morning to go to sleep. i have slept most of the day....

i suggested a little earlier that i basically think this "diversity" line is just an excuse and that, notwithstanding the clear reality that southern blacks are neither going to vote for a jew nor a gay male in any kind of substantive numbers, i don't really think that nevada is going to be as different from the first two states as is often surmised.

the polls that exist are ancient, now - early january. but, the trendline is actually more or less the same as we've seen elsewhere - biden & warren are falling, while sanders is stable and buttigieg is climbing, by capitalizing on support wandering from biden & warren. is there some kind of accompanying klobuchar bounce? we'd need fresh polling to conclude that, but, frankly, i'd expect something or other.

the only thing that really looks like it might be different in nevada is that steyer may be polling substantively higher, presumably cutting into the same voter pool as warren, biden, buttigieg & klobuchar. if you start with new hampshire results and you take 2% from each of those candidates and give it to steyer, you end up with:

sanders - 26%
buttigieg - 22%
klobuchar - 18%
steyer - 12%
warren - 7%
biden - 6%

and, if i was to take a guess, a priori, which is a terrible idea, that's probably not far from what you'd end up with - on the first ballot. the only tweak i'd make would be to move some of klobuchar's vote to warren.

sanders - 26%
buttigieg - 22%
klobuchar - 15%
steyer - 12%
warren - 10%
biden - 6%

what that means is that you're probably actually looking at the same three candidates in nevada - maybe. steyer is probably just going to kill off biden, without getting over the threshold, himself. and, klobuchar and warren may destroy each other.

the last thing that i want to take note of is yang, whose suspended campaign doesn't have an obvious beneficiary in nevada but who could potentially help a candidate become viable if they move together. warren is a curious possibility and maybe the best fit, but i don't know if it's enough. yang himself has suggested sanders, but sanders has not responded favourably to yang's proposals, and frankly seems to be a bit of a productionist. on the other hand, if turnout just comes down by a few points, it will have the effect of inflating totals by any candidates right on the bubble.

if we get some polling, great, and i'll change my analysis to react to it. but, maybe this is better read as how i'm expecting any polling to come up.

south carolina may be a very different story. but, i don't actually expect nevada to come in that different than the first two states, which will hopefully undercut this goofy narrative about "diversity" helping biden. his numbers were already falling there; i think he's going to do terribly, and i think warren is going to tank, too.

the real question mark is if klobuchar and steyer can get viable or not.

so, splitting yang's three between warren & sanders, my tentative first ballot hypothesis in nevada is going to be something like:

sanders - 27%
buttigieg - 22%
klobuchar - 15%
steyer - 12%
warren - 12%
biden - 6%
rest - 6%

if klobuchar clears the hurdle, she's going to split support from warren & biden voters.

what about steyer? his selling point appears to be openly supporting reparations, something klobuchar has rejected, sanders has been dismissive about and buttigieg has been most supportive of. i don't know, so let's split it equally.

and, you get something like:

sanders - 27 + 4 (steyer) + 2 (warren) + 2 (rest) = 35%
buttigieg -  22 + 4 (steyer) + 5(waren) + 3 (biden) + 2 (rest) = 36%
klobuchar - 15 + 4 (steyer) + 5 (warren) + 3 (biden) + 2 (rest) = 29%

i understand that i made a mistake in completely redistributing second votes, and that a lot of people just won't vote a second time. so, you should take everybody down 5-6%, probably.

regardless, i'm basically suggesting that the results will be essentially the same as in new hampshire, after the second vote - that sanders & buttigieg will be in a toss-up for first, with klobuchar a ways behind.

...if she's viable.

if she isn't? well, most of that 29% goes to buttigieg, and you could see him pull off his first consolidation of moderate forces, something bernie is going to not want to see happen again.

so, if the other candidates split the moderate vote badly enough that only buttigieg ends up viable, expect massive recombining in the second round, and a potential landslide victory on the order of 55% to 30%.

we simply don't have the polling to make predictions, though. i'm just thinking out loud.

if that result were to happen in a primary state, it would benefit sanders, as all of the unviable centrists would just get crossed out. so, the fact that nevada is a caucus could end up costing him, if the results end up a specific way.

but, if klobuchar is viable more often than not, and the other middle three eek out some district wins, i think you're looking at a tie between the same players as previously, and some hard decisions for warren, particularly.

now, let's hope we get some polling...