Thursday, August 15, 2019

"Electability" & Its Discontents

Maybe it's too early to be writing this. Though the 2020 presidential race is already into its "shadow primary," it's still the better part of six months before a single vote will be cast in the first primary/caucus contest. Maybe it's too late; the poll I'm going to examine is a month old. But I'm seeing a trend creeping into the polling on the race  that seems worthy of some mention.

It's a trend I noticed and about which I wrote in 2016. At the time, Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders were locked in a struggle for the Democratic nomination and Clinton had her surrogates using the "electability" argument against Sanders--the idea that Sanders' progressive views put him too far outside the mainstream and that her more conservative views made her more electable. Pollsters would ask who was more likely to win the general election; respondents would pick Clinton. But at the same time, when the same respondents in the same polls were asked if there was one between the two candidates whom they wouldn't support under any circumstances, Clinton always drew more negative numbers. In short, these polls were showing that people believed Clinton was more electable but that Sanders was actually more electable.

Something like this is happening again.

This time, former Vice President Joe Biden and his surrogates are deploying the "electability" argument, insisting Biden's Clinton-clone campaign is the one to beat Trump and throwing the same shade on Bernie Sanders' chances, and on those of any progressive. Last month, the University of New Hampshire released its latest Granite State Poll of adults in that state. Here are some of the findings:

--67% of New Hampshire Democrats say they have a favorable view of both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren--a tie for first place. This compares to only 57% for 3rd-placed Biden.

--14% of Dems said they wouldn't support Joe Biden "under any circumstances"--the most negative response of any of the many Democrats. Only 6% said the same of Sanders. Further, Biden's negative number on this question has increased with every new Granite State poll for months--it has more than quadrupled since February (which only 3% said they'd never vote for him). Sanders' negative number has dropped over that same period (it was 8% in February).

--When asked what issue is most important to their primary votes, the largest number--20%--chose healthcare. The 2nd-largest number--14%--chose climate change policy/the environment. Respondent were then asked which candidate was best able to handle these issues. On healthcare--something Bernie Sanders has made a cornerstone of his campaign--the single largest chunk--34%--picked Sanders as best; only 16% chose Biden, putting him in 3rd place behind Warren. On climate policy/the environment, the story is the same: 30% chose Sanders, while Biden finishes in 3rd place with only 13%.

Sounds like great news for Bernie Sanders, right?

Except when asked to name the candidate for whom they would vote if the New Hampshire primary were held now, the largest portion--24%--said they would vote for Biden. Sanders and Warren are tied for 2nd place with 19%.

Notably more New Hampshire Dems have a favorable opinion of Sanders than of Biden--a 10% advantage for the former--but when asked which candidate is "more likeable"--a question which leads respondents to speculate on who they think everyone else will like more--Biden ties with Sanders at 20%.

Sanders is more liked than Biden, voters think he's better on their top issues than Biden and more than twice as many respondents said they would never vote for Biden as Sanders, yet Biden leads the race and when asked which candidate they think has the best chance to win the 2020 general election, the biggest portion of respondents--45%--chose Joe Biden. Only 16% chose Sanders. Sanders' numbers on this question have collapsed dramatically in recent months; in April, the same pollster had 30% of New Hampshirites--the largest portion of respondents--identifying Sanders as the candidate with the best chance to win the general. This isn't an organic development; it's something that's being intentionally pumped into the public mind.


This isn't a national poll, so it doesn't make the same case as those 2016 polls, and it's a single poll, which may prove to be anomalous, but to the extent that it accurately reflects what's happening, it does show that New Hampshirites are choosing, for the moment, to get behind a candidate they, themselves, consider inferior on all of the big metrics measured by the poll. When this poll asked about specific issues, Biden does score better than Sanders on who would best handle "gun policy" and "jobs/the economy," but those issues were only listed as top priorities by, respectively, 1% and 5%of respondents. On guns, Biden finished in 2nd place behind Elizabeth Warren (though Warren, Biden and 3rd placed Sanders were all within the poll's margin of error on that issue). Biden isn't preferred on anything else here, yet respondents think Americans will find him more likeable and think he has a better chance of beating Trump.

This isn't just a case of respondents in a state believing Americans are more pro-Biden than themselves--people are often bad at judging the views of their fellow Americans. It's also the result of a conscious effort by the Biden campaign, its supporters, pro-Clintonite-right media, etc. to drive into people's minds the idea idea that Clintonite-right candidates and Biden in particular are more "electable" than progressives and Sanders in particular. When asked which candidate they believed was more progressive, 45%--by far the largest portion--chose Sanders, while Biden finished in a distant 4th place with only 4%. This particular notion of "electability" falls apart under any more than cursory examination--Biden is by far the weakest of the major Democratic campaigns, and the extensive issues polling to which Americans are subjected makes clear the public is overwhelmingly progressive--but many are buying into it. Many bought the same story in 2016 with disastrous consequences.

Progressives and the campaigns they support would be wise to begin devoting a lot of attention to countering this.

--j.

No comments:

Post a Comment