Time to Drop Out? Poll Shows 72% of Democratic Voters Think There Are Too Many Candidates Running for President
I’ve always assumed the reason for so many candidates was to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination on the first ballot, and thus rendering all those “superdelegates” useless. But I could be mistaken…
If a long shot candidate manages a memorable debate performance, s/he could rise significantly in the polls and become a factor in the race.
If a long shot middle-of-the-road candidate can last long enough to take advantage of Uncle Joe’s inevitable implosion, they could grab up voters looking for a mainstream (aka corporate sock puppet) choice to replace Biden.
The “never Bernie” d-party establishment crowd (aka corporate sock puppets) isn’t even trying to fake it anymore – clearly they would vote for Trump over Sanders.
You’ve got it backwards. The goal IS to have so many candidates that no one gets a first ballot nomination (especially Bernie), and then the super delegates get to choose the nominee on the second ballot (which has not happened since 1952 for either party - 1948 for the Republicans). Incidentally the party that went to a second ballot lost the general each time! Not a guarantee, but that is what happens 2/3rds of the time a nominee takes more than one ballot to choose.
Actually, that is a misconception. Working through the math, I’ve come to believe that Bernie actually does better with more candidates in the race as long as he can hold together his dedicated group of supporters. Of course I understand the issue about superdelegates in a convention that needs to go to a second ballot - but most people fail to take into account the math of how the actual delegates are distributed during the primaries. In particular, a candidate who fails to get 15% of the vote in a district (or in the state for statewide counts) gets no delegates at all and the percent of the vote they get is redistributed to the candidates who do get over 15%. For example, suppose a candidate has a dedicated group of supporters that make up about 20% of the electorate and there are 23 other candidates who split the vote in a way such that 5 of them get 10%, 3 of them get 5%, and 15 of them get 1%. In that situation, the candidate with 20% of the vote gets 100% of the delegates.
Note - the above pertains mainly to candidates who don’t take votes away from Bernie directly. Elizabeth Warren’s candidacy is different because she clearly draws votes from the same people who would otherwise support Bernie.
From my perspective, it does not matter how many Democrats are running for POTUS in 2020, because Biden has already been selected by the super delegates. I would say the odds favor a Biden/Harris ticket.
What Bernie needs, but what I doubt will happen, is for a significant percentage of Uncle Joe’s current supporters to shift to Sanders in the wake of Biden’s upcoming meltdown.
Bernie doesn’t need all of the formerly pro-Biden crowd, just roughly a quarter of them.
A month ago he had that (in May three polls asking about second choice if your candidate drops out had an average of Bernie getting 30% of Biden supporters). Recent polls have him losing part of his coalition and those number have gone down a good deal - he really needs some positives to come his way.
The reason the Democratic Party is encouraging so many people to run is as cover for their chosen candidate. The Party leader admitted during the last election that the purpose of super-delegates was to prevent grass roots candidates from winning. After that debacle, where they openly stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders to anoint their chosen candidate, Clinton, they agreed that super delegates would not vote – in the first ballot. So the purpose of the many, many candidates this time is to split the votes of the Democratic left, and allow the super delegates to put their candidate over the top on the second ballot. That’s fair, isn’t it???
What the many candidates need to do is get together beforehand, and throw all their votes to one of them on the first ballot. Then, we can have a real candidate, and not a business-as-usual servant of the extremely rich. Again.
Worth a look if you’re so inclined:
Boo Hoo--------to much info I can’t handle it all-----get real----with all the BS crap I see on cable and regular “news” outlets there is plenty of space and time to vet these twenty something candidates. But we don’t see half these people ???
And Sanders has been TOTALLY disrespected by the political media-----Sanders has pushed a dialog on many issues that are now in the minds of many voters----and when Sanders says socialism for the rich but rugged individualism for the poor—this resonates .
sigh—and I suppose that if Bernie gets burned again, I will have to vote Green, if no one from there looks good, I will just skip the president vote.I don’t really trust the Dems though as they don’t want anyone I want. : (
Too many Candidates? Ya Think? Most of them have no experience just like Real Estate, Game Show Loser Donnie. Bernie and Warren at least know what the inside of the White House looks like, along with necessary experience to do the job of a President. A Mayor, to me, does not have the qualifications. Neither does a Governor. I leave Biden out, because he”s already way out somewhere over his rainbow touching things. The rest should do what’s right for the Party and drop out. Bernie is constantly on the road busting his ass, while many others only host local Fundraisers to collect as much $$$ as possible instead of connecting with voters. Like I’ve said before, there should be an Exam every candidate must pass in order Qualify for the job as President. Anyone can now just buy their way in? Unacceptable!
I call crap on this article.
Just days before the debate a call for low polling candidates to drop out?
How about we have the debates. The first one. The second one. Then in September the third one.
Maybe then you all could start calling for candidates to drop out who are only at 1%.
But what the hell is wrong with giving those low polling candidates a chance to make a case in the debates?
Sheesh. We’re still seven months away from the first contests.
“Oh, there’s too many of them. It hurts my brain to try to keep them straight.”
Then don’t try. Support your candidate and see what happens.
I still want to know the real reason so many are running.
As they say: follow the money trail…
Who are the backers and who is funding each campaign? I would love to be a fly on the wall in the room where this strategy was concocted. My conspiracy paranoia.
That’s what I said. Sorry for any confusion that may have been due to clumsy writing on my part.
Thanks for that elucidation of a bewildering (at least to this congenital mathphobe) and arcane set of rules. Of course, if we had ranked-choice voting in primaries, there wouldn’t have to be a second ballot.
True - that would be especially great in the general elections to allow third parties to get a footing. An interesting thing about the Iowa caucuses is that they are actually run on-the-spot in a way that has a similar effect as ranked-choice voting. People voting in advance list their top five candidates in order and they are handled like regular votes at the caucuses. Meanwhile at the caucuses themselves, when a candidate doesn’t get the 15% threshold for viability - their supporters will switch over to their second candidate and that process continues until every candidate remaining meets the 15% threshold.
I have been a Green Party supporter ever since us Nader supporters were told we cost Gore the election; however, in 2020 whatever it takes, we cannot allow Trump a second term and as much as I detest Biden he really is this year, in my view… the lessor evil. Trump will do whatever it takes, even using foreign powers and election corruption to stay in office…we simply cannot allow that to happen!