538: Who Won the First Democratic Debate? (Spoiler: Harris, Sanders, Warren, Castro)

[HerbChestnut]

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/democratic-debate-poll/

The four candidates who had the most positive change from pre-debate polling support to post-debate support are:

Harris: +8.7%
Sanders: +2.9%
Warren: +1.8%
Castro: +1%

Everyone else either went down or stayed roughly the same. Of course, it's early, so the effects of the debate may play out differently over time, but this is the immediate effect. It also should be noted that Warren's support jumped considerably after the first debate night, but most of those gains went to Harris after the second night.

[hlthe2b]

1. Quite a few did themselves no favors. (and no, BIden hasn't changed signficantly)

[HerbChestnut]

2. I mean, he lost 10% so...

But again, this is just the immediate impact of the debate. Who knows what the polling landscape will look like in a few weeks.

[hlthe2b]

4. Biden Pre- Favorability 76.5% Post Favorability 75.6%

Net favorable PRE Debate = 60.4% Net Favorable Post Debate = 56.5%

So, now, where did he lose 10%?

[HerbChestnut]

6. In the 'Who's changing voters' minds?' section

There's another graphic that shows actual support instead of favorability. He went from 41.5% pre-debate to 31.5% post-debate. I didn't create this thread to dump on Biden, which is why I only posted the candidates who gained a decent amount of support.

[crazytown]

8. I think the voting intentions were the least reliable

.Favorability is likely to be more sustained. My 2c.

[cannabis_flower]

13. However favorability doesn't necessarily translate into support.

I love Bernie. I have a very high favorability toward Bernie but I'm not supporting him.

[Drunken Irishman]

17. No but it makes it easier to justify support.

I think that's what helped push Obama over the line in 2012 - Americans just plain liked him. When faced with Romney, who had high unlikable numbers, Obama's sincerity, personality and charisma probably helped those voters who were undecided. They felt comfortable supporting him given the alternative.

Conversely, I think this is what really hurt Hillary in 2016. She was very unpopular, as was Trump, and voters who spent the entire election on the fence just couldn't justify that support (not that I agree with 'em at all), so, they either sat out the election, voted third party or ... in some instances, held their nose and voted for Trump.

[crazytown]

21. And (un) likability is Trumps greatest weakness.

In the scheme of things, it is extraordinary that, with the economy as strong as it is, Trumps approval is underwater.

[thesquanderer]

14. Voting intentions are a more accurate gauge of their current status.

Someone can have a favorable view of numerous candidates, so the more important question is, if you could vote for only one, who would it be. And Biden did go down from 41.5 to 31.5.

Current figures:
Biden 31.5% (down 10 points compared to before debates)
Sanders 17.3% (up 2.9)
Harris 16.6% (up 8.7)
Warren 14.4% (up 1.8)
Buttigieg 4.8% (down 1.9)
Booker 2.8% (down .2)
O'Rourke 2.2% (down 1.4)
Castro 1.7% (up 1)
Yang 1.2 % (down .1)
Everyone else is under 1%

Down doesn't mean someone didn't do well, it just means they ended up liking someone else better. You can see that especially in people whose numbers went up after they appeared the first night, but went down after other people were seen on the second night.

[onetexan]

18. whoa, i don't see Kobluchar or Gillibrand on that list, but Yang is?

headscratcher

[thesquanderer]

19. I didn't list anyone who was under 1%.

Klobuchar ended up at .5% (which was actually still a big gain for her, from nothing).

Gillibrand ended up at .3% (losing half her support, as she had come in with .6%)

[crazytown]

22. Thankyou for your hard work putting these numbers together.

(Harris aside - of course) it is interesting how closely those numbers correspond with the average national polls. Pete is down a bit, but otherwise those percentages look very familiar.

[hlthe2b]

9. It says only half of those polled actually watched both debates: that's a problem

Notes on the methodology: All the data presented here comes from polling done by Morning Consult for FiveThirtyEight. Morning Consult conducted an online “panel” survey with three rounds of polling (respondents from the first round are reinterviewed in rounds two and three). One round of polling was conducted before the debates began, with follow-up rounds being conducted after each debate. The first wave of the poll was in the field from June 19 to June 26 among 7,150 registered voters who say they are likely to vote in their state’s Democratic primary or caucus. It has a margin of error of +/- 1 percentage point using the 2016 Democratic primary electorate as the true population.

The second wave of the poll was conducted from June 26 to June 27 among 2,041 respondents who previously responded to the first wave; it has a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points. Of those respondents, 1,134 watched the first debate.

---> Just over half watched the first debate

The third wave of the poll was conducted from June 27 to June 28 among 1,399 respondents who previously responded to the first wave, including 428 who responded to both the first and second waves; it has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points. Of those respondents, 97 watched the first debate, 89 watched the second debate and 757 watched both debates.

--> 97/1399 watched first debate (0.69%); 89/1399 watched the second (0.6.3%); 757/1399 watched both debates (54%)

[HerbChestnut]

10. Welcome to American democracy.

Most people will hear about the debates through the news anyway.

[crazytown]

3. 538 Debate Graph

[HerbChestnut]

5. Thanks, crazytown.

I was referencing the graphic below that though. Unfortunately, I don't know how to post it so it will show up here.

[crazytown]

7. I have to rely on screenshots

which I resize and upload to imgur.

[Perseus]

11. Bill de Blasio did great, why are they not considering him?

Voters in USA are so blinded by facial recognition that we cannot sit to evaluate objectively everyone in the debate. I urge everyone to find the video and review it, you will find out that Bill de Blasio was one of the best that day.

He was not being asked much, but he took his opportunities, did not allow the moderators to shut him up, spoke eloquently, made his points very clear and showed that he will intimidate the buffoon, that he will grab both the buffoon and Putin by the neck and won't let go until they cry uncle. He has done well for New York, he is in New York with access to information from the buffoon and his family, I never considered him before, but I think he is what we need.

[HerbChestnut]

12. de Blasio went from 0% to 0.3% support.

He even had 0.9% after the first night but lost most of that after the second night. So he technically tripled his support

[Curky]

15. Tulsi vote share unchanged

Undermining the right wing claim that she won the first debate.

[thesquanderer]

16. My predictions went pretty well.

In my Wednesday Debate predictions I said Warren would come out on top and see her numbers go up... and that's what happened, at least according to this report. Though I did not predict any bump for Castro, and he did get a small one.

In my Thursday Debate predictions I said that Biden would not see any bounce, and that if he actually dipped, Sanders could get a boost, and that's what happened. I also said that Harris was among the few who had the potential to see a significant bounce.

Maybe I can apply to be a pundit.

p.s. -- Warren actually impressed me even more than expected, prompting me to switch my support from Pete to her.

[aikoaiko]

20. And they earned their bumps.

Especially KH.