Tracker Update: Looking at Tiers after First Quarter 2019
Now that campaign finances have been incorporated into this Primary Tracker model, we have a more complete picture of where the candidates stand after the initial quarter of serious campaigning. Along with some minor updates including the Washington Post's latest power rankings, today's Tracker offers a chance to reassess how the candidates currently sort into tiers. I last offered some thoughts on tiers back on the first of this month, when I was in more of a splitter mood and grouped the candidates into 5 groups. Let's see how they shake out now. First, the graph:
I think the fundraising numbers have helped shift the candidates into some clear groups of contenders and pretenders, at least at this early stage. In Tier 1 you have the clear Frontrunners - Biden and Sanders. It's true that a good portion of their status is still driven by high name recognition, but we can't ignore Biden's consistently high poll numbers in both national and early state polls, nor Sander's strong lead in the funding race. I'm calling Tier 2 the Serious Contenders, and including Harris, Buttigieg, O'Rourke, and Warren. Harris has been trending consistently above the others in this group, but she's far below the Frontrunners, and at this early stage I see her having more common with the Tier 2 group than with Biden/Sanders. Warren jumps into this group late by virtue of her solid, if not overwhelming, fundraising.
Tier 3 I'll call the Tenuous Contenders (has a nice ring to it): Booker, Klobuchar, and Gillibrand. They're solidly in the race, but not a serious threat for frontrunner status at the moment. Like Warren, Gillibrand clawed her way up to this tier with some decent fundraising that sets her apart from the remaining folks. And that leads to Tier 4 - the Herd, or the rest of the candidates we're tracking. These candidates may vary in how seriously we might take their campaigns, but none of them have managed to make much noise so far.
Once again I'll emphasize it's very early. Most voters haven't yet tuned in to the race to the extent that they can form opinions about many of these candidates. So the tiers are far from set in stone. But they give us a nice snapshot of the race at this point.
Now let's look the table, and briefly consider each candidate's relative strengths and weaknesses from a data perspective:
Joe Biden
Strengths: polling. Yes it's influenced by name recognition, but it's also clear that Biden has broad appeal with moderate, working class Democrats.
Weaknesses: money and endorsements. Both will likely be addressed rapidly once Biden officially enters, but the longer he waits, the more the funding lag could potentially be a factor.
Bernie Sanders
Strengths: polling and money. For now Sanders' polling is solid and confirms he was not a one-hit wonder in 2016. That together with his lead in fundraising shows his base of supporters is still there.
Weaknesses: can polling be both a strength and weakness? Sanders' poll numbers are considerably lower than he achieved in 2016. Obviously the crowded field, including multiple candidates who espouse much of his platform, is taking a toll. The longer they stay in the race, the tougher sledding for Sanders.
Kamala Harris
Strengths: polling, endorsements. Harris' polling is considerably lower than Biden or Sanders, but she also has much lower name recognition at this point.
Weaknesses: none really. She's more or less a solid 3rd or 4th in every category.
Pete Buttigieg
Strengths: early state polling, perceived momentum. Mayor Pete is one of the few candidates whose polling in early states is notably higher than national polling. That's a very good sign for an unknown candidate. And his high pundit rankings and betting market price reflect race-watchers' perception of his surge and potentially high ceiling.
Weaknesses: endorsements. Buttitgieg is still largely unknown and new to the national political landscape, so it remains unclear whether he will be embraced by the Democratic establishment and a large swath of rank-and-file voters.
Beto O'Rourke
Strengths: national polls. Like Harris, Beto is getting solid national polling for a newcomer, likely a holdover from his near rockstar status among Democrats after the 2018 midterms.
Weaknesses: early state polls. Beto's polls in the states that are already taking a serious look at the candidates lag his national numbers. Indeed it appears he has been somewhat replaced by Buttigieg as the flavor of the moment. There's plenty of time to address that, but he needs a solid message going forward.
Elizabeth Warren
Strengths: early state polls, money. Like Buttigieg, Warren has higher poll numbers in early states than nationally. Perhaps her smorgasbord of solid policy proposals is appealing to early voters. She also raised the second largest money total behind Sanders.
Weaknesses: national polls. Warren is on Biden/Sanders levels of name recognition, but that is not helping her in the polls nationally.
From there I'll just add a few notable strengths and weaknesses of the remaining candidates. Booker and Klobuchar both have a strong list of endorsements so far, reflecting their mainstream status and possible appeal with party elites. Gillibrand had the fourth-highest fundraising total. Yang remains a betting market darling, and Gabbard had impressive fundraising for a candidate of her status. Abrams has raised eyebrows in a few polls, but won't outrun the herd unless she officially announces and starts raising money in earnest.
That sets the stage for the next few months of the campaign, which may be relatively quiet until we hit the first debate in June...
I think the fundraising numbers have helped shift the candidates into some clear groups of contenders and pretenders, at least at this early stage. In Tier 1 you have the clear Frontrunners - Biden and Sanders. It's true that a good portion of their status is still driven by high name recognition, but we can't ignore Biden's consistently high poll numbers in both national and early state polls, nor Sander's strong lead in the funding race. I'm calling Tier 2 the Serious Contenders, and including Harris, Buttigieg, O'Rourke, and Warren. Harris has been trending consistently above the others in this group, but she's far below the Frontrunners, and at this early stage I see her having more common with the Tier 2 group than with Biden/Sanders. Warren jumps into this group late by virtue of her solid, if not overwhelming, fundraising.
Tier 3 I'll call the Tenuous Contenders (has a nice ring to it): Booker, Klobuchar, and Gillibrand. They're solidly in the race, but not a serious threat for frontrunner status at the moment. Like Warren, Gillibrand clawed her way up to this tier with some decent fundraising that sets her apart from the remaining folks. And that leads to Tier 4 - the Herd, or the rest of the candidates we're tracking. These candidates may vary in how seriously we might take their campaigns, but none of them have managed to make much noise so far.
Once again I'll emphasize it's very early. Most voters haven't yet tuned in to the race to the extent that they can form opinions about many of these candidates. So the tiers are far from set in stone. But they give us a nice snapshot of the race at this point.
Now let's look the table, and briefly consider each candidate's relative strengths and weaknesses from a data perspective:
Joe Biden
Strengths: polling. Yes it's influenced by name recognition, but it's also clear that Biden has broad appeal with moderate, working class Democrats.
Weaknesses: money and endorsements. Both will likely be addressed rapidly once Biden officially enters, but the longer he waits, the more the funding lag could potentially be a factor.
Bernie Sanders
Strengths: polling and money. For now Sanders' polling is solid and confirms he was not a one-hit wonder in 2016. That together with his lead in fundraising shows his base of supporters is still there.
Weaknesses: can polling be both a strength and weakness? Sanders' poll numbers are considerably lower than he achieved in 2016. Obviously the crowded field, including multiple candidates who espouse much of his platform, is taking a toll. The longer they stay in the race, the tougher sledding for Sanders.
Kamala Harris
Strengths: polling, endorsements. Harris' polling is considerably lower than Biden or Sanders, but she also has much lower name recognition at this point.
Weaknesses: none really. She's more or less a solid 3rd or 4th in every category.
Pete Buttigieg
Strengths: early state polling, perceived momentum. Mayor Pete is one of the few candidates whose polling in early states is notably higher than national polling. That's a very good sign for an unknown candidate. And his high pundit rankings and betting market price reflect race-watchers' perception of his surge and potentially high ceiling.
Weaknesses: endorsements. Buttitgieg is still largely unknown and new to the national political landscape, so it remains unclear whether he will be embraced by the Democratic establishment and a large swath of rank-and-file voters.
Beto O'Rourke
Strengths: national polls. Like Harris, Beto is getting solid national polling for a newcomer, likely a holdover from his near rockstar status among Democrats after the 2018 midterms.
Weaknesses: early state polls. Beto's polls in the states that are already taking a serious look at the candidates lag his national numbers. Indeed it appears he has been somewhat replaced by Buttigieg as the flavor of the moment. There's plenty of time to address that, but he needs a solid message going forward.
Elizabeth Warren
Strengths: early state polls, money. Like Buttigieg, Warren has higher poll numbers in early states than nationally. Perhaps her smorgasbord of solid policy proposals is appealing to early voters. She also raised the second largest money total behind Sanders.
Weaknesses: national polls. Warren is on Biden/Sanders levels of name recognition, but that is not helping her in the polls nationally.
From there I'll just add a few notable strengths and weaknesses of the remaining candidates. Booker and Klobuchar both have a strong list of endorsements so far, reflecting their mainstream status and possible appeal with party elites. Gillibrand had the fourth-highest fundraising total. Yang remains a betting market darling, and Gabbard had impressive fundraising for a candidate of her status. Abrams has raised eyebrows in a few polls, but won't outrun the herd unless she officially announces and starts raising money in earnest.
That sets the stage for the next few months of the campaign, which may be relatively quiet until we hit the first debate in June...
Comments
Post a Comment