Winning both Iowa and New Hampshire would catapult Mayor Pete

[bluewater]

To front runner status.

Despite declining national polls, the publicity Mayor Pete would get by winning both Iowa and New Hampshire would be a tremendous boost for his campaign going forward.

Exceeding expectations in the early voting states more often than not proves decisive in later primaries, with the few exceptions proving the rule.

Some Mayor Pete detractors counter this argument by pointing out that he would probably lose decisively in South Carolina. But those detractors fail to acknowledge that the South Carolina Democratic primary is atypical, with 66% of the voters expected to be African Americans, a considerably higher proportion than in any other state primary.

Mayor Pete is surging, and yes, I mean surging, right now in Iowa and New Hampshire. He has had superb fundraising to fuel a well orchestrated ground game in both states. It is not inconceivable that he could win both states by at least 5%.

Mayor Pete's role as the first openly gay Presidential candidate makes him a truly transformational figure in American politics. Transformational candidates break down societal barriers and Mayor Pete deserves full credit for being one. The energy this all brings to his campaign is perhaps being underestimated by the national polling that often is overly impacted by name recognition among inattentive voters.

Well, if Mayor Pete achieves big wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire, his name recognition will certainly change.



Time will tell.

[still_one]

1. No one will win Iowa and NH. The delegates will be split between 3 maybe 4 candidates

[StevieM]

4. We generally call the person who got the most votes in those states the winner.

Someone will come in first.

[brooklynite]

22. Actually, this will be the first time "the person who got the most votes" will be reported in Iowa

It will be a bigger story than the delegate estimate.

[Demsrule86]

27. It won't matter if they are close...no one will really be the winner.

[SaschaHM]

35. This.

No one is leaving the race after Iowa and New Hampshire. There's not going to be a realignment of built in support. There's no reason to believe that AA primary voters aren't paying attention this cycle and that Pete winning IA/NH is going to make him competitive in our eyes when stacked up next to Joe Biden's resume.

This is the same nonsense that people spouted when Bernie trounced Hillary in New Hampshire. He went on to lose the AA vote 75% to 25%.

Poll after poll have shown that Joe's voters are some of the most decided. A close finish in Iowa isn't going to shake their confidence, especially after the media has spent months foretelling doom and gloom in those two states for him.

[question everything]

29. Unless he comes behing "uncommitted" as Carter did in 1976

but was enough to bring this otherwise unknown to the headlines

[HeartlandProgressive]

2. Thank you for posting this.

Too often on DU, people cannot see past their own candidate preferences and fail to see emerging trends in the election.

[MineralMan]

3. Good luck to him. If Iowa and New Hampshire actually represented

the voting population of the United States, they would be more meaningful, though. Looks like it's going to be pretty even in those two states, though, so other states are bound to matter more. Not too many delegates from both of them combined, really.

Vote for me! I tied with two others in lily white states in the Midwest!

Not a slogan I'd use, I think.

[LeftTurn3623]

15. well seeing that not only

does SC not represent the voting population - SC isn't even a state that a Dem can win in the general.


and that dumb slogan you mention isnt what would happen. If he won those 2 states it doesn't really matter how close the 2nd place person is. It doesnt even matter if Pete wins 2nd place.

The winner will get all the coverage which means more to Pete then any other candidate. Biden, Sanders, EW already have name recognition. Pete needs to win those first 2 states to propel him in the next round of states & on a national level. Its really his only chance. He doesnt win those first 2 states its over. If he wins them it will give him a chance - still Biden will be the favorite

[MineralMan]

17. OK, then. Whatever you say...

[Demsrule86]

28. We don't win in Iowa in the General either.

[question everything]

5. And then will meet a firewall in S.C.

[bluewater]

8. SC is a very atypical state primary.

At an estimated 66%, it will have considerably more back voters, who tend to favor Biden, than any other primary state. That includes even other southern states with large proportions of African Americans voters.

South Carolina, because of this, is not really a bellwether state.

Just as some say Iowa is "too white" for that role, South Carolina seems "too black" to be an accurate indicator also.

[Mr.Bill]

16. So are Iowa and New Hampshire. n/t

[bluewater]

19. Yes, but being first seems to give them outsized importance.

People are trying to also give SC bellwether status this year, mostly, I feel, because Joe Biden is doing very well there.

But its an atypical primary state nonetheless.

[Mr.Bill]

20. Everyone is overlooking the biggest difference

in the primaries this year, and that is California happening in March instead of June. That's the big day. Literally and figuratively.

[Thekaspervote]

24. Links to back up your opinion Yes SC is the bellwether state for the AA vote has been for decades!!

Look at Ntl poll numbers for AA and SC and they are almost identical. It doesn’t matter that the state is “more black.” Accurate polls counter that Ntl and Sc numbers would be different.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/13/poll-biden-continues-to-dominate-among-black-voters-084285. This is Ntl

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/south-carolina/

https://www.theroot.com/sc-bellwether-for-the-black-vote-1790854399#!

Say what you like...it doesn’t change the numbers dear

[LeftTurn3623]

18. SC is no firewall

and Amy firewall is Iowa - she will gone by the time NH is done.

[msongs]

6. republicans will vote for the gay guy in dems primaries as a strategy move IMO nt

[bluewater]

10. Ok, please explain your reasoning for this supposition.

[blm]

21. Sad to agree that this is what Republicans do

when they need to manipulate their base into getting to the polls. They pushed anti-gay issues onto the ballot in swing states in 2004 to counter the lack of excitement for a 2nd Bush term.

[delisen]

7. Are Iowa and NH atypically white? If so how are

you factoring that in when assessing his chances with later, more populous states?

I notice that Bloomberg is not even bothering to compete in Iowa, NH, SC .
I can see however that winning would bring much recognition.

[bluewater]

11. Mostly on historical precedence.

Winners, or even runner ups, that exceed expectations in these two states historically experience a marked improvement in later primaries.

The few exceptions to this trend prove the rule, as they say.

[Demsrule86]

31. Not this year...there are big primaries too close to Iowa and New Hampshire...they will not be that

important and it looks like a statistical tie to me...although I still think Biden could win it it was a primary...but it is a caucus and they pretty much suck. We didn't know it but 16 was the last time Iowa and New Hampshire will really matter and that is a good thing as we need states added that reflect our diversity as a party.

[Hortensis]

14. Yes. IA's 6.something AA and NH I think...2.something.

Similar with other races.

These are our whitest states starting with least diverse.

Maine
Vermont
West Virginia
New Hampshire
Montana
Iowa
North Dakota
Kentucky
Wyoming
South Dakota

[comradebillyboy]

23. Surprised to see former slave state Kentucky on that list. I would have

thought that they would have a larger black population. I think I live in the only state where non-Hispanic whites (locally known as Anglos) are the minority.

[SaschaHM]

33. The black population of most former slave states declined due to the Great Migration.

Even SC went from 58% AA in 1900 to 27% in 2010. It's one of the greatest shames that the U.S. screwed up the post civil war reconstruction. Things would look a lot different politically if the south wasn't allowed to remain a remarkably inhospitable place for African Americans.

[lame54]

9. Doesn't that apply to any of them?

[Hortensis]

12. Very long shot, but the catapult's aimed at SC, where he'd crash.

Buttigieg's latest poll aggregate in SC is down to 4.8%.

Biden's is 38.6%.

Just reality. We could expect Buttigieg to pull up somewhat with wins in the first two little white states, power of suggestion; but there's a limit to how much SC, especially AA voters, is going to be following IA's lead.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/south-carolina/

[LeftTurn3623]

13. This is what I have been saying!

I really hope this happens.

[Demsrule86]

25. Mayor Pete has 0% AA vote...yes 0

All it would do is destroy Warren in particular and maybe Sanders.

[Tiggeroshii]

26. Honestly if any one candidate wins IA and NH, I expect they will be the nominee.

(since they have been the first two) So far no candidate has won both states without winning the nomination.

[Demsrule86]

32. But one candidate didn't win either and won the nomination and the presidentcy...Clinton

These states only have the power that people give them...if people don't believe these state are relevant...it won't matter...very few delegates involved. I think Warren has to win or she will be out on super Tuesday if not before...Sanders has a hardcore following...they will hang with him...Biden has a hardcore following...we don't care about either state...so that is what I think.

[karynnj]

36. There have not been that many open nominations, so the sample size is too small

Clearly, it helps whoever wins both, but he or she could still go no further. In fact, Sanders came very close to that in 2016 and he still would have lost the nomination. Iowa was very close to a tie and he won big in NH . That was likely his highpoint.

[SaschaHM]

30. His newest numbers with AA voters in SC is 3%.

If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, then he just won IA and NH.

That's not a compelling enough reason for AA voters to leave Biden, a man with whom they have history, for someone that they don't know and that's before his actions in regards to the South Bend PD and the AA community actually gets the scrutiny of a frontrunner.

Despite what people want to believe, he's not the next Obama to AA voters. There's no personal stake in history for most of us with him and we don't need to be assured that white people will vote for him. Obama also had better AA numbers in SC prior to his win in Iowa. It wasn't some overnight switch. He was neck and neck w/ Clinton and then started to surpass her.

[LeftTurn3623]

39. But you act like SC is the end all be all?

SC is one state. If Pete wins Iowa & NH then wins Nevada does losing SC mean anything?

Obviously wining those early state Pete's numbers will go up some in SC even if Biden wins in a landslide

Pete would still have all the momentum after SC

Its like all I hear from Biden people is SC like that decides the nomination. Its one bloody state which wont even be a big deal with Biden up as much. It will be a far gone conclusion that Biden is going to win so the attention to the state will mean little.

If after SC Biden has 1 win and Pete has 3 all the attention will be on Pete and that could play major on Super Tuesday because people are begging for anyone other than Biden. Biden just seems safe but nobody is inspired by him.

again Pete needs those first 2 states- Biden does not

[Capt. America]

34. Agreed. Although it is a tall order to win both and, frankly, if he does not win both

he probably won't have a chance with the following states. He may get a boost because people in the following states may take a second look at him.

[PDittie]

37. Both of those states are

pretty Caucasian, which is to say that they don't reflect either the Democratic or the American electorate very well. But you're right in saying that will be the corporate media's spin on the race.

[brooklynite]

38. Fascinating how Sanders' supporters trumpet his "surge" in such unrepresentative States...