Enten, CNN: When a candidate like Biden leads in polls & endorsements they've won 7 of 9 nominations

[highplainsdem]

From CNN analyst Harry Enten yesterday:


https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/05/politics/bernie-sanders-joe-biden-money-endorsements-analysis/index.html

We have less than a month until the primary season, and it's becoming more apparent that former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont are the candidates to beat. It's not just that they are Nos. 1 and 2 in the national polling. It's that each holds a lead on the two most important metrics beyond the polling: fundraising and endorsements.

Sanders reportedly pulled in about $34.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2019, which makes for a total sum of nearly $100 million over the 2020 campaign. No one else is even close. His nearest competitor (former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg) is closer to $75 million for the year, according to self-reports.

Those who lead in fundraising at this point often win. In primaries in which an incumbent is not running in the given primary, 9 of 14 leaders at this point have gone on to win the nomination. Even when a candidate is trailing in the national polls (like Sanders), the leader has won 3 out of 5 times. This includes candidates like Democrat Bill Clinton in 1992 and Republican Mitt Romney in 2012.

Biden's fundraising is not anywhere near as strong as Sanders'. He took in $22.7 million this past quarter and about $60 million in the primary so far.

Biden, though, does significantly better in endorsements. He has 33 endorsements from members of Congress and governors. He scored his latest endorsement from Rep. Abby Finkenauer of Iowa this week, and he's the only candidate to get a congressional or gubernatorial endorsement in the last month. His closest competitor (Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey) has only 13 endorsements. Sanders has a mere six.

Dating back to 1980, endorsement leaders at this point have a strong track record of winning primaries. They've gone on to win the nomination 10 of 14 times. When a candidate like Biden leads in the polls and endorsements, they've won 7 of 9 nominations.

-snip-

Emphasis added.


And from Enten on Twtter, four days ago:

Link to tweet

I'm not sure I'd rather be the candidate with more cash or more endorsements, but I'm pretty sure I'd rather be the guy with more endorsements and better primary polling than the guy with more cash.

[Hortensis]

1. Biden has 33 endorsements from colleagues, Cory Booker's next at 13.

That Booker's next closest is kind of nice to see.

Thanks for the informative article, Highplains.

[msongs]

2. donald trump has loads of cash. if cash is the key, he's the guy lol nt

[Mr.Bill]

8. Trump will probably steal more of that money

than he will spend on the campaign.

[Hortensis]

12. :) The constant coverage he gets for free is priceless.

This story alone would cost him many millions of he had to pay for it.





Starting last Saturday, this came up on the website of the Federal Depository Library Program:
Trump's altered face over a map of the Middle East, launched, missiles and a tribute to Qassim Suleimani.

“Hacked by Iran Cyber Security Group Hackers. This is only small part of Iran’s cyber ability!”

[Thekaspervote]

3. Good article/educated opinion from the experts at 538

[PatSeg]

4. Jeb Bush spent about $150 million in 2016

It didn't seem to give him an edge. I think the support might give Biden an edge over Sanders.

[crazytown]

5. "What Harry Got Wrong In 2016"

(thought the Dem primary contest was over after Super Tuesday)
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-harry-got-wrong-in-2016/

[highplainsdem]

6. None of that has any relevance to Enten's analysis in this new column, which is

simply making comparisons to past primary races.

[Hav]

7. No need to attack the messenger

This wasn't an opinion or a conclusion from a model that could be invalid, it was historical data that could be cited by anyone.
I've followed your other thread about the other (more famous) 538 guy about the 35% chance. That too is based on historical data, although it uses a model. I'd say both numbers (7/9 and 35%) may be useful for the sake of statistics but are pretty useless for forecasting at this point.

[highplainsdem]

9. kick

[Tarheel_Dem]

10. This is very good to know.

[oldsoftie]

11. Money is nice to have, but it NEVER has won a Presidency.

[Gothmog]

13. Enton is correct