bluewater
bluewater's JournalBiden leads Trump by just a hair in new survey from St. Pete Polls
Joe Biden leads Donald Trump by just a hair in new survey from St. Pete Polls
Biden leads Trump by just half a point here in Florida.
By Ryan Nicol June 19, 2019
A new survey from St. Pete Polls shows Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden with a 0.5 percentage point lead in Florida in a hypothetical 2020 matchup against President Donald Trump.
Biden has led the field so far in polling during the early portion of the Democratic primary. He’s been pegged by some election watchers as one of the Democrats’ best bets to defeat Trump in Rust Belt states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Trump won all those states on the way to a victory in 2016.
But the results from St. Pete Polls show a tight contest between the two here in Florida. Biden edged Trump, earning 47.3 percent in the survey to Trump’s 46.8 percent. The remaining 5.9 percent of voters were undecided.
That’s in stark contrast to a Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday, which had Biden ahead of Trump by a whopping 9 percentage points in the Sunshine State.
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/299121-biden-edges-trump-st-pete-polls
But we all know St Pete Polls is correct and Quinnipiac is wrong because another St Pete Poll showed Biden with a huge lead in the state primary.
Still, I hope this St Pete Poll is wrong somehow, but I won't try to "unskew " this poll result. It is what it is.
Biden lead shrinks to +7 in latest Emerson Poll
June National Poll: All Eyes on the Democratic Debates; Biden, Sanders and Warren Separate from the Field
A new national poll finds the Democratic field coming into focus as the candidates prepare for this week’s first debates.
Joe Biden continues to hold his announcement bounce, and has gained a point since May – now holding 34% of the vote, followed by Senator Bernie Sanders who moved up 2 points to 27%.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has broken away from the rest of those running, into 3rd place – improving from 10% of the vote up to 14%.
Senator Kamala Harris comes in fourth with 7%, Mayor Pete Buttigieg is in fifth with 6%, and Senator Cory Booker follows in sixth with 3% of the vote. All other candidates poll at 1% or lower. The data was collected June 21-24, and has a margin of error of +/-4.5% for the Democratic primary.
http://emersonpolling.com/2019/06/24/june-national-poll-all-eyes-on-the-democratic-debates-biden-sanders-and-warren-separate-from-the-field/
Biden continues to fall back to the field as a leading tier of challengers emerges.
Warren gains 2% in MorningConsult Poll
Biden, Sanders, O'Rourke, Buttigieg, Harris all stayed level with no change from last week.
Check out the interactive trendline for yourself, it's fun!
You can select which candidates you wish to display and compare and scroll along any of their trendlines to see the week by week numbers.
The trendline for Senator Warren shows she has been the only "top tier" candidate showing appreciable gains over the last month.
https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/
The Media Will Pick the Democratic Presidential Candidate
The real campaign plays out in Manhattan and Washington television studios
by John Ellis
[snip]
Enter the polls. Polls are the MRIs of “electability” and provide pseudo-scientific precision to forecasting future outcomes. They enable TV talking heads to winnow candidates out and, to paraphrase the late Senator Fred Harris, “winnow candidates in.”
[snip]
The problem, for the moment anyway, is that electability isn’t thinning the field. Sanders and Warren are beating Trump in most hypothetical matchups in national and key state polls, and sometimes by margins outside the margin for error. And in some battleground states, the second-tier Democratic candidates are beating Trump as well. It’s hard to make the case that Sanders and Warren and Harris are unelectable if the polling data say that each would win.
[snip]
The real campaign plays out in Manhattan and Washington television studios. Cable news outlets (especially) make every effort to push the “campaign” into television studios and away from “the campaign trail.”
Because of budget concerns, the pressure to anoint a winner increases as the early March Super Tuesday primaries near. We saw this in 2016. Hillary Clinton was declared the winner long before she actually won the nomination. This time, California will be deemed decisive. Whoever wins there, it will be said, wins the nomination.
[snip]
The finalists will be chosen by Iowa and New Hampshire. The finals will play out against the backdrop of electability. If surveys show that Warren is just as likely to beat Trump as, say, Biden, she’ll win Super Tuesday and, in all likelihood, be the nominee.
Which brings us to one last point about the Democratic primary and caucus electorate. They want the nomination process over quickly. Preferably, they’d like a nominee by mid-March. Whether it’s Biden or Warren or Buttigieg or Sanders, at some level, doesn’t matter. They just want to drop the gloves and start the brawl, with or without an agenda.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/06/24/how-media-will-pick-next-democratic-presidential-candidate
Warren: HUD Hired Someone Known for Racist Blog Posts
Elizabeth Warren Wants to Know Why HUD Hired Someone Known for Racist Blog Posts
“His troubling views suggest that he will be unable to fulfill core parts of HUD’s mission.”
by
Nathalie Baptiste
On Monday, Democratic presidential candidate and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Ben Carson criticizing the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s decision to hire Eric Blankenstein, a former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau official with a history of writing racist blog posts.
“I am gravely concerned that Mr. Blankenstein has been hired as a Special Counsel in HUD’s Office of General Counsel,” Warren’s letter stated. “His troubling views suggest that he will be unable to fulfill core parts of HUD’s mission.” Last week, Politico reported that Blankenstein, who served as Policy Associate Director at the CFPB from February 2018 until his resignation last month and was responsible for enforcing fair lending laws, would be joining HUD as special counsel focusing on a mortgage program that disproportionately affects black and brown Americans.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/06/elizabeth-warren-wants-to-know-why-hud-hired-someone-known-for-racist-blog-posts/
Should Pete Buttigieg attend this Thursday's debate?
The burden of being a mayor, that is being on the frontline of governance, has impacted Buttigieg heavily this past week.
He has responded sincerely and is doing everything in his power to address the fatal shooting of a South Bend black man by police.
But has enough time passed for him to go to this Thursday's debate? Personally, it would be a hard decision for me to make if I were in his position.
Attending the debate would provide an opportunity to discuss fatal shootings of minorities by the police. But some might view it as not being focused enough on the shooting and it's aftermath.
Very hard call.
What Sanders and Warren see in Caban
If you were paying close attention to presidential politics last week, you may have noticed something unusual. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, in the midst of tweeting about reproductive health, ending forever wars and celebrating Juneteenth, also tweeted out an endorsement. It wasn’t an endorsement in a race for governor, or Congress, or even mayor of a city in the key primary state of Iowa. Instead, Warren endorsed Tiffany Cabán, a 31-year-old public defender running for district attorney in Queens, New York, on a progressive platform that includes decriminalizing sex work, declining to prosecute recreational drug use, eliminating cash bail, and opposing the construction of new jails. That same day, Sen. Bernie Sanders also endorsed Cabán.
Why are these presidential candidates wading into a local election for district attorney? Cynics will say Warren and Sanders are merely making an appeal to the most progressive elements of the Democratic base. But this jaded analysis misses something far more fundamental about how we should think about criminal justice reform: A president alone cannot end mass incarceration. Indeed, dramatically reducing America’s jail and prison populations and curtailing the power of the prison-industrial complex requires far more of a bottom-up effort, starting with local reformers at the county, city and state levels.
The problem of mass incarceration is well known. Since the 1980s, the number of incarcerated Americans has grown fivefold. The United States has 5% of the world’s population, and 25% of its prison population. We now spend $50 billion per year on state prisons alone. These are facts that Americans are becoming increasingly familiar with, thanks in part to the work of filmmaker Ava DuVernay, author and legal scholar Michelle Alexander, and countless activists. Even Kim Kardashian has used her platform and celebrity to raise awareness of and advance criminal justice reform efforts.
Less well known is local prosecutors’ outsized role in this system. Only one in 10 criminal cases are prosecuted at the federal level. Federal prisons and jails hold approximately 221,000 people, a figure dwarfed by the more than 1.9 million people held in state prisons and jails. And the rise of mass incarceration has been fueled primarily by local prosecutors, who have immense discretion to pursue criminal charges. Fordham University law professor John Pfaff’s research proves it: From 1994 to 2008, the crime rate and total number of arrests fell, yet prison admissions grew by 35%. Why? Pfaff found that something else grew by 35%: felony charges filed by prosecutors. Pfaff also found that half of this increase occurred in cases where misdemeanors were charged as felonies.
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-20190624-2spqie5yrvdpjczczl3f2xbhoq-story.html
Warren Channels the Real New Deal
In many ways, the economic debate in the U.S. has been stuck for quite a while. Progressives want higher taxes on the rich, more spending on the poor and more government health care; conservatives and libertarians want less. The 2016 election brought some innovation, with Donald Trump’s protectionism and the socialist revival sparked by Bernie Sanders. But the biggest breath of fresh air is coming from Democratic presidential candidate and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Just since the start of this year, Warren has released no fewer than 19 detailed economic policy proposals. This outpouring of ideas has been so dramatic that it has spawned Twitter hashtags such as #shehasaplan. Warren’s ideas are neither the cautious, technocratic tweaks that tend to emerge from centrist think tanks, nor the bold but vague promises often issued by the socialist left. Nor are they merely a laundry list of campaign promises. Instead, they represent a coherent, unified program for transforming the U.S. economy.
[snip]
These four ideas, which are the most unique and original among Warren’s impressive oeuvre, give a picture of the senator’s economic philosophy. A good term for it might be “progressive industrialism.” Though Warren wants to rebalance the economic power of labor and capital, and use government to assist the needy, she also wants to harness private industry to create growth. Her plans for technology regulation and her export promotion would boost small businesses, while her housing plan would leverage the power of private development and her co-determination plan would more closely align the interests of labor and capital. The strategy is reminiscent of the New Deal, in which President Franklin D. Roosevelt strove to integrate private industry with government spending in order to advance both growth and equality. It also bears some resemblance to the strategies used by Germany and Japan to recover from World War II.
Warren’s ideas are also notable for their specificity. In their recent book “Concrete Economics,” economist Brad DeLong and historian Stephen S. Cohen argued that successful policy programs should have concrete goal instead of leaving the future up to the vagaries of the market. Warren seems intent on doing exactly that -- under her industrialist program, Americans would get more housing, more opportunity to start their own businesses and more respect and power at work. They would also get more child care, cancellation of student debt, assistance with addiction, and a number of other tangible benefits. A health care plan is surely also forthcoming.
https://news.yahoo.com/elizabeth-warren-channels-real-deal-123006364.html
Edited to be 4 paragraphs. Thank you blm and crazytown for your assistance!
Sexist media continues to be a disadvantage for Warren
Elizabeth Warren’s coverage proves the media learned nothing from 2016
By Annalisa Merelli
Democratic US presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren is qualified, capable, running an effective campaign, and has a plan for everything. So why is it that the conversation about Warren appears wrapped in a layer of doubt, or somewhat incredulous amazement at her success?
No one in the race is gaining grounds as significantly as she is. According to polls collected by FiveThirtyEight, three of the Democratic frontrunners have grown in popularity since March: Joe Biden, who is leading the race and has gained 2 points to become the favorite among 31% of likely Democratic voters, up from 29% in March; Pete Buttigieg, who with a 7.7% share is polling on average 5.1 points higher in June than he was in March; and Warren, whose support has grown an impressive 6.4 points, advancing her as the top pick for more than 12% of voters versus 5.7% in March.
[snip]
If anything, despite the great progress made in female representation in recent US elections, it seems being a woman continues to be a disadvantage for Warren, at least when it comes to media coverage. Meg Heckman, an assistant professor at Northeastern University’s School of Journalism in Boston, has found that two-thirds of national stories about the 2020 presidential race were written by men. Is it any wonder that politics for so long has been seen as a man’s world in which women are treated as odd intruders, whether by men who have written the articles or women who have absorbed their framing?
Warren recalls being subject to overtly sexist coverage when she ran as a US senator (it was “about what I’m wearing, it’s about my hair, it’s about my voice, it’s about whether or not I smile enough—I didn’t,” she remembers). Recent articles about her presidential campaign betray a more subtle sexism, expressed through doubts about her chances to win, questions about her qualifications, or the ever-present comparisons drawn between her and Hillary Clinton.
https://qz.com/1649134/democratic-primaries-elizabeth-warren-hillary-clinton-and-sexist-media-coverage/
PCCC's campaign to identify voters who switch to Warren
A progressive group is launching a campaign Monday to identify and highlight primary voters who were previously undecided or backed other candidates who then threw their support behind Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) White House bid.
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), the first national group to endorse Warren, launched the Switch to Warren campaign Monday, just days before the Massachusetts Democrat will appear center stage for the first Democratic primary debate.
“As voters see Elizabeth Warren connect her bold transformational plans to her personal story of struggle growing up poor in Oklahoma and as a single mom in Texas, they are inspired to support her,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the PCCC.
“The debates represent the biggest opportunity yet for voters to compare candidates and switch to Warren as they realize she’d crush Trump on the campaign trail and would be the best president for America. We’re launching the SwitchToWarren.com campaign to showcase this very real dynamic.”
Warren has recently gained traction in national and statewide polls as voters and the media take note of her “I have a plan for that” playbook packed with detailed policy proposals to tackle economic and racial inequities.
Long a favorite of the party’s left flank, Warren finds herself in a pitched battle with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for the progressive mantle in the 24-candidate primary field. Trying to recover from a slow campaign rollout, Warren earlier this month leapfrogged Sanders to land in second place in a handful of national polls and a Monmouth University survey of likely Democratic caucus goers in Nevada.
However, the PCCC is looking to pull in most of its defectors from voters who are undecided or back former Vice President Joe Biden, the current primary front-runner.
“Bernie supporters are pretty hardcore and are not the cornerstone of any Warren strategy. Biden voters and undecided voters are the biggest honey pots for Elizabeth Warren because they are disproportionately pundit voters who prioritize electability,” Green told The Hill.
“As these pundit voters see Warren connect on a gut level on the debate stage — tying her plans to her personal story of struggle growing up poor in Oklahoma and being a single mom in Texas — they increasingly will see her as the best candidate to defeat Trump and will move to her side.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/449851-progressive-group-launches-campaign-to-identify-voters-who-switch-to-warren
A more detailed article on the PCCC's position. Enjoy!
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Jun 7, 2019, 03:43 PMNumber of posts: 5,376
