Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball: Sanders in the General Swings Electoral College to Trump

[wyldwolf]

— If Democrats nominated Bernie Sanders, they would, initially, start off with somewhat of a penalty in our Electoral College ratings.

— Sanders’ policy prescriptions and rhetoric may complicate Democratic prospects in the Sun Belt, where the party’s recent growth has been driven by highly-educated suburbanites.

— Given the composition of the 2020 Senate map, which features more Sun Belt states, Sanders’ relative strength in the Rust Belt — assuming that even ends up being the case — nonetheless doesn’t help Democrats much in the race for the Senate.







The differences between Maps 1 and 2 are as follows: Arizona and the single electoral vote in Nebraska’s Omaha-based Second Congressional District move from Toss-up to Leans Republican; Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas move from Leans Republican to Likely Republican; and Virginia moves from Likely Democratic to Leans Democratic.

Arguably we could or should move Iowa, ME-2, and Ohio into Likely Republican, too, but we’ll give Sanders a little bit of a benefit of the doubt initially as he tries to claw back some working-class white support... realistically, these electoral votes (Iowa, ME-2, and Ohio) could shift further toward Trump too.

we do think we know enough about the potential weaknesses of Sanders that our reaction to his nomination, if it happens, would be to shift some of the Electoral College against him and also to look at Trump as a small favorite for November.

http://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-sanders-tax/

[Sloumeau]

1. wyldwolf, thanks for posting this! :)

Voting for Senator Bernie Sanders is a mistake.

[OliverQ]

2. This prediction is dumb

All Dems are polling +2 in Wisconsin over Trump. Why would Bernie be more likely to lose it than anyone else?

Bernie is currently polling ahead in PA.

Bernie is currently beating Trump by +5 in North Carolina.

Bernie is only 2 points behind Trump in Texas, and due to the massive increase in young and Latino voters there, he might actually have a shot.

This prediction is not based on reality. It's amazing how much Bernie bashing is allowed on this forum, but say anything even slightly critical of Biden and you get reported.

This forum skews much older than the general Democratic base. DU is not a good representation of the view of the population.

[TwilightZone]

3. WI and PA don't change. They're toss-ups in both scenarios.

They're not even mentioned in the text, so I'm not sure where you're getting the impression there's a switch for either.

"Bernie is only 2 points behind Trump in Texas, and due to the massive increase in young and Latino voters there, he might actually have a shot. "

There is no massive increase. Texas has a serious, fundamental, long-term issue with Democratic turnout, especially among Latinos. We're working on it, but there is basically no chance of Sanders winning Texas in 2020.

" DU is not a good representation of the view of the population."

Nor has it ever been. It's a niche website with a very specific audience, as it has always been.

[OliverQ]

4. Texas has registered over 1 million new voters

since 2018, most of whom are younger Dems. We can thank Beto for that. We have no idea what's going to happen in Texas with record turnout. The Texas primary early voting is already showing record breaking turnout.

And if Wisconsin and PA are toss-ups for all candidates, how is Bernie more likely to lose than Biden? If Biden loses Wisconsin and PA, Dems lose.

[TwilightZone]

8. "most of whom are younger Dems. "

No, both sides have made significant gains. Republicans have been making serious efforts to get voters registered as well, because they're trying to keep the state legislature.

"record turnout"

Higher, not record. Probably on pace to beat 2016. Early turnout in a primary doesn't matter in a discussion about a general election, however. Overall turnout in November does. That's where the problems have been.

"And if Wisconsin and PA are toss-ups for all candidates, how is Bernie more likely to lose than Biden? "

Because neither of those states is being given to either side because they're toss-ups. The reasons Sanders is more likely to lose are clearly noted in the text, which I suggest you read since it would have answered your question.

"Sanders’ policy prescriptions and rhetoric may complicate Democratic prospects in the Sun Belt, where the party’s recent growth has been driven by highly-educated suburbanites."

"The differences between Maps 1 and 2 are as follows: Arizona and the single electoral vote in Nebraska’s Omaha-based Second Congressional District move from Toss-up to Leans Republican; Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas move from Leans Republican to Likely Republican; and Virginia moves from Likely Democratic to Leans Democratic.

Arguably we could or should move Iowa, ME-2, and Ohio into Likely Republican, too, but we’ll give Sanders a little bit of a benefit of the doubt initially as he tries to claw back some working-class white support... realistically, these electoral votes (Iowa, ME-2, and Ohio) could shift further toward Trump too.

we do think we know enough about the potential weaknesses of Sanders that our reaction to his nomination, if it happens, would be to shift some of the Electoral College against him and also to look at Trump as a small favorite for November."

[rockfordfile]

28. Texas is a fossil fuel state.

[honest.abe]

5. Sabato is a very smart guy and a straight shooter.

I trust his analysis over yours.

[OliverQ]

6. Doesn't mean he can't be wrong.

[LanternWaste]

17. No one is arguing otherwise.

No one is arguing infallibility... simply a greater faith in his evidence-based analysis than your unsupported prophecies.

[Tweedy]

9. He does seem to lean right

In his predictions

Polls are not skewed. They are a mess-- cell phones, lack of response

Still believe we could beat this unindicted co-conspirator with a potted plant so long as we stay united.

Continue to be amazed by the sheer breadth of folks coming out of the woodwork to condemn this president.

The idea that folks who see this president as the unindicted co-conspirator that he is will vote for him anyway is bonkers.

[honest.abe]

10. A bit but he is mostly impartial.

I have been reading his predictions for years. He's good.

[Tweedy]

11. Certainly Mr. Sabato thinks he is impartial

Last edited Thu Feb 27, 2020, 09:24 PM - Edit history (1)

And, no doubt, he is not Rasmussen

Yet, his crystal ball 🔮 does not see as clearly as he thinks it does.

I have followed his predictions, too. He is missing the forest for a few trees.

We have a crook for president.

We don't like crooks in office, or anywhere else.

This president is hellbent on ensuring everyone knows he is a crook.

We can beat him with a potted plant if we stay united.

Admit should Senator Sanders secure the nomination, he needs to cease attacking democrats (other than folks like Blagovich) so that he does not become the primary impediment to that unity.

[W_HAMILTON]

21. You should educate yourself on how polling actually works.

How do you think "cell phones" impacts polling? I take it you don't know how most reputable pollsters actually conduct their polling or else you wouldn't list "cell phones" as some sort of deterrent to accurate polling.

[Tweedy]

23. the prevalence of cell phones and the decrease in landlines has impacted polling

Cell phones have replaced landlines for many of us, yes?

People don't answer unknown calls on their cellphones, yes?

If people with cellphones don't answer polling calls, & most of us have cellphones, polling data just might be off.

I did not make this up. Pollsters have been trying to weight for it for sometime now.

Another example of how polls go wrong is the tendency of many of us to not respond to pollsters when we are feeling funky. So, right after most of the GOP senators voted to enable the unindicted co-conspirator in our White House, maga types rushed to answer that phone, whereas many democrats didn't. That caused an artificial bump in this president's polling numbers.

Polls can push you toward an answer (push poll). I got one of those calls the other day. Polls can also be very misleading about what we, the people, value with simple word choice.

I am not a fan of polls, or 🔮. I am a fan of the wisdom of the American people which has kept our union together for quite sometime, mostly without the aid of polls.

The reporting of polling data changes the opinions of the electorate imho. That is not American wisdom. That is one poll.

Gaming polling data has, and is, occurring too. I do believe the GOP 🤡 🚗 holds such manipulation as sacred. This president certainly relies heavily on gaming polls.

Nonetheless, you are right. I am not a pollster.

[W_HAMILTON]

24. Most reputable pollsters use random digit dialing...

...which means they randomly generate phone numbers to call to conduct their polls. Whether someone has a cell phone or landline has no impact on the likelihood of having their phone number generated. There is a noted issue about people not picking up calls from unknown phone numbers, but many landlines have caller ID as well nowadays and therefore that wouldn't impact polling landlines vs cell phones much one way or the other.

And most of the reputable pollsters carefully word their poll questions so as not to bias the results in the way you mention.

Yes, there are downsides to polling, but when it comes to reputable pollsters, they are usually trustworthy and account as best they can for many of the complaints people are bringing up with polling.

[Tweedy]

25. Not mine

Polls do not reflect the wisdom of the American people.

They do reflect the horse race.

The horse race gives us little useful information. Issues are ignored, problems buried and the bar is so low for this president it is nearly nonexistent.

I do agree that there are trustworthy pollsters, utter junk and everything in between.

[Celerity]

32. really?

All Dems are polling +2 in Wisconsin over Trump. Why would Bernie be more likely to lose it than anyone else?

https://poll.qu.edu/2020-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=3656

[blue-wave]

7. Hmmm Florida goes to Trump if Bernie is in the general?

Well go figure!


I wonder how we will do in the House and Senate?

[bucolic_frolic]

13. The path ahead

the ghosts of Stalin and Hitler must be defeated. Eyes on the prize.

[Nanjeanne]

14. This Larry Sabato?

Our Final 2016 picks
Clinton 322, Trump 216; 50-50 Senate; GOP holds House

Yeah, I think we should definitely listen to what Larry says.

[wyldwolf]

16. Sabato didn't account for 1 out of every 10 Sanders supporters not voting for the Dem nominee

[peggysue2]

19. Nor did he account for Russian interference

And/or the complicit treachery of the Republican Party.

[BlueWI]

27. Just admit you got schooled by the last post.

The pollster you're holding up as an expert in order to bash Sanders wasn't even close in his predictions last time. There were other predictions that were at least closer than Sabato's.

Third party voters/voter turnout are factors in every election - so is vote suppression, whether made in Russia or made in America. It was a poor prediction, plain and simple, and too many of us believed in the fool's gold of polling, based assumptions too much on past cycles and questionable data (ask Robby Mook), and didn't maximize the effort when it counted most.

Elections are won by campaigning and canvassing, not by polling and multi-cycle grudges. Hopefully we all pull it together after the primaries and get a win in the GE, no matter who's on the ticket.

[wyldwolf]

29. The only one schooled here is you

I'm sure during non-primary times you'd admit the impact of James Comey, Russian trolls, and traitorous Sanders supporters couldn't be measure.

[BlueWI]

36. You selectively left factors out.

White voters' susceptibility to racist and nativist rhetoric, which made a clear difference in Florida in particular

Increase in black voter support for the Republican nominee (2% increase over 2012)

Lower enthusiasm for the Democratic ticket among black voters in two key cities: Detroit and Milwaukee

Voter suppression

Another factor that actually helped Clinton: increased support for the Libertarian Party by voters that would likely have voted Republican

There are always multiple factors in predictive science, but when there's so much preference for scapegoating Sanders voters, larger lessons are missed.

Support who you want in the primaries of course, but to misread factors influencing the 2016 vote does not benefit Democrats.

[helpisontheway]

15. Shocker...nt

[Laelth]

18. Nonsense.

Daffy Duck could beat Trump in November if Daffy ran as a Democrat.

This is silly.

-Laelth

[gollygee]

30. I thought that in 2016

but I underestimated how popular Trump is. I live in Michigan and he's very popular here. He will not be easy to beat.

[Laelth]

31. Too many Democrats stayed home in 2016.

We all assumed Hillary would win. I don’t think we will make that mistake again.

-Laelth

[gollygee]

33. I sincerely hope you're right

but part of the problem is that we underestimated Trump's appeal. My sister lives in a rural area that usually has a low voter turnout, and I went to her house on election day that year, and people were parked a mile away from the polling place walking along the street the whole way to vote. We live in our own bubble where people hate trump, but there are lots of people who love him as much as we hate him. The things we hate the most are the things they love the most.

[Laelth]

35. Trump's going to get 60 million votes.

That’s what he got in 2016. I can’t imagine that he could possibly get more votes in 2020. No. I expect that he will get the same number this year. In fact, since GWB in 2000, the Republicans have gotten about 60 million votes in each and every Presidential contest. I expect Trump to do the same this year.

In 2008, Obama beat McCain with 68 million votes. In 2012, Obama beat Romney with 65 million votes. In 2016, due to the workings of the electoral college, Hillary lost with 63 million votes against Trump’s 60 million.

There are more Democratic voters than there are Republican voters. That’s just a fact. If we show up to vote, we win. I do not think that the Democratic voters of this country will repeat the mistake of 2016.

For whatever that’s worth.



-Laelth

[oasis]

20. Certain down ticket doom. On that, no crystal ball needed.

[highplainsdem]

22. No crystal ball needed to see how bad Sanders will be for the Democratic Party if he's the

nominee, not just losing to Trump but costing us the House, and giving the GOP a wider majority in the Senate.

[dumptrump1]

26. founded on polling 11 months away from election day

[Gothmog]

34. Joe Biden is the strongest general election candidate

Link to tweet