Economist/YouGov Feb. 2-4 NATIONAL poll: Biden 24%, Sanders 19%, Warren 18%,

[highplainsdem]

Buttigieg & Bloomberg 9%, Klobuchar 6%


https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/73jqd6u5mv/econTabReport.pdf



Biden with 43% of the black vote to only 8% for Sanders (14% for Warren, 12% for Bloomberg).

Sanders has a lead with the Hispanic vote, but a much narrower lead, 28% to 23% for Biden (both of them well ahead of the rest of the field).


When they asked respondents the "disappointed if Democratic nominee" question, Sanders was second only to Tulsi Gabbard. 46% would be disappointed if she was the nominee. 28% would be disappointed in Sanders was. (Biden at 21%, Warren at 20%.)


The poll respondents thought Sanders was most likely to win the NH primary (24% to 17% for Biden).

They also thought Biden's most likely to win the nomination, 30% to 15% for Sanders.


64% of Dems think Biden can probably beat Trump.

51% of Dems think Sanders can probably beat him.

47% believe that of Warren and 35% of Buttigieg.


Editing to add that more Democrats said the Iowa results wouldn't be important to them than said the results would be important.

[Pololv]

1. Nice - but NATIONAL polls don't really count.

Have to look at how they're doing at each state level...

And I'm a STRONG Joe supporter...

[highplainsdem]

5. It's important to keep the national numbers in mind while the media & supporters of Biden's rivals

are hyping two VERY unrepresentative states.

[emmaverybo]

14. Yes! Thanks for post hpd.

[emmaverybo]

6. Biden is doing really well in delegate-rich states. Scurrilous posted recent figures from 538.

[Cha]

2. KR!

[emmaverybo]

3. Does not look like Iowa has been a game changer. I doubt NH will be either though good for

campaign morale heading into the next very important states. I am looking for Biden to win in Swing states and the south, picking up the most delegates.

[highplainsdem]

8. You just reminded me of some poll results I forgot to add to the OP.

See the edited OP in a couple of minutes.

[TexasTowelie]

9. I think that a lot of the perceived letdown about Biden is

coming from the betting market and it gets reflected onto sites like 538. The thing is that the betting markets use odds based upon the amount of money being bet rather than counting actual votes. Therefore, the betting markets can be easily manipulated by those willing to dump some of their money to promote their candidates.

[emmaverybo]

13. Thank you for this info. Had no idea!

[squirecam]

4. Forget the national polls

Let’s see state by state polls

[emmaverybo]

7. They are very good for Biden. If the 538 numbers hold, he'd have it.

[squirecam]

10. Nevada polling is from almost a month ago.

Nt

[emmaverybo]

12. Ok. I think, however, many of the states' polls are more recent.

[femmedem]

15. Something that alarmed me:

for almost all of our candidates--all except Yang, I think, based on a quick skim--their unfavorables were higher than their favorable.

[highplainsdem]

16. If you're looking at the total numbers, those include Republicans who have an unfavorable

view of our candidates as threats to Trump.

Check the numbers given by Democrats responding to the poll.

As for Yang -- not only is he relatively unknown, but it's unlikely any of the Republican respondents see him as a threat to Trump.

[femmedem]

17. Understood. But it gives me the general election jitters.

I remember being similarly alarmed by Clinton's favorable vs. unfavorable in 2016. None of our candidates have unfavorable ratings as high as Trumps, but when you eliminate the people with no opinion, the ratio isn't comforting.