Our Post-Iowa Primary Forecast Is Up, And Biden's Chances Are Down

[brooklynite]

FiveThirtyEight

Now that we finally have some clarity on Iowa’s results — with 86 percent of precincts reporting — we’ve turned our primary model back on, including its estimates of the potential fallout from Iowa.

The model shows former Vice President Joe Biden’s chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates being halved — from 43 percent before Iowa to 21 percent now.

Who gains from Biden’s decline? Well, a little bit of everyone. The model thinks Iowa was more good news than bad news for Sen. Bernie Sanders, although it was a somewhat close call. His chances have advanced to 37 percent, from 31 percent before Iowa, making him the most likely person to achieve that majority.

Pete Buttigieg’s chances are also up, to 6 percent from 4 percent before, but even after getting most of the credit for winning Iowa in the model (more about that in a moment), they haven’t improved by as much as you think. That’s because, as I explained in Wednesday night’s post, Buttigieg still has his work cut out for him in building a broader coalition; it’s going to require a big bounce in states and among demographic groups where the former mayor is not currently strong. With that said, Buttigieg is potentially quite competitive in New Hampshire, where our model gives him a 20 percent chance of winning, and that could give him a further boost.

[highplainsdem]

1. I think 538's model is overestimating the impact of the Iowa results.

But we'll see.

[Drunken Irishman]

2. I think we're already seeing the impact it's having...

Biden is collapsing in New Hampshire.

Which often happens when a candidate loses Iowa. There are exceptions, like Clinton's stunning upset win over Obama in 2008 and Bernie trouncing Clinton after a very, very narrow loss in Iowa.

But to be honest, Biden's trajectory is looking a lot like Howard Dean's - lead in Iowa and then, on caucus night, badly place. Dean's lead in NH diminished overnight, too.

[highplainsdem]

4. Well, if Sanders gets the nomination, we can probably forget about beating Trump, and forget about

keeping the House.

So if Biden can't win, less leftwing Dems will have to unite behind Buttigieg, or behind Bloomberg if Buttigieg can't do well in NV and SC, to stop Sanders.

[Drunken Irishman]

6. I think NH is going to be the pivot...

Either Biden bounces back and does better than expected, or he struggles to a distant 4th or 5th place showing, leaving many of his supporters with the difficult decision to keep supporting him or move to another candidate.

[emmaverybo]

7. You know you could as easily and in fairness to process playing out make S.C. the Pivot. However,

Sanders could parlay an NH win into a roll. Who knows? For a Biden supporter, you seem rather eager to set up an early bar he doesn’t get over and call it a day, declare a win for another candidate,

He has strengths, prospects in many other states—until he doesn’t. Meanwhile, Sanders has an uphill battle to fight in many places before we are done. And Warren could come roaring back and take over the progressive movement, ending up in a contest between Biden and Warren if Bloomberg doesn’t catch fire or Amy.

Sorry to see a supporter of the most qualified candidate go pre-emptive surrender before Super Tuesday.

[Drunken Irishman]

8. I see the writing on the wall.

Iowa's poor showing, with his continued slippage in the polls, makes me less optimistic he has a chance. He needs a strong finish in NH or I think he'll lose Nevada and then SC becomes far more dicey, if not an uphill battle. Biden needs momentum between now and Super Tuesday or he's going to fade quickly.

I'm not surrendering anything - but just being realistic. Biden needs to have a good showing in NH or he will struggle to push back against a narrative that he's done.

[emmaverybo]

9. You are a seer then. I'll bide my time. I never thought Biden would prevail in Iowa or NH though.

[Drunken Irishman]

10. It's not that Biden didn't prevail in Iowa...

...or that he won't prevail in NH, it's that he wasn't even competitive in Iowa and the polls suggest he isn't competitive in NH now, either.

That's despite, just a week ago, both states showing him within striking distance.

Like I said, Biden doesn't need to prevail in NH, but if he finishes a distant third, with 12%, he's going to have a very, very tough fight ahead of him.

Right now, Biden is at 12% in the last two NH polls since the Caucus. That's the lowest he's been in any NH poll since he jumped into the race. Sorry, but he's going in the opposite direction of where he needs to be going. Can he turn it around? Absolutely but it will have to start in NH.

Here's the reality: No Democrat, since the primary process was adopted, has ever won the nomination after finishing outside the top-two in both Iowa and NH. Biden finished 4th in Iowa and is trending toward 3rd, maybe 4th, in NH.

[emmaverybo]

11. Has his polling changed dramatically for the worse in Nevada, in S.C.? In the swing states, in the

Southern states?

[Garrett78]

13. It will if he finishes 4th in New Hampshire. Or if he finishes 3rd and Buttigieg is 2nd.

Next thing you know he's finishing 3rd in Nevada and struggling to stay on top in South Carolina. Followed by a campaign-ending Super Tuesday collapse.

I'm not saying that's what will happen, but don't think that it can't. Biden needs to have a pretty strong showing in New Hampshire, and it's clear that his campaign realizes that (even if those within the DU bubble claim that Iowa and New Hampshire don't matter).

[emmaverybo]

17. COULD matter, or not. Voter's faith in Biden'a electability could take a hit,

and that translate into a loss in Nevada and S.C., but on the other hand, the competitors you expect it follows would win those states have weak to zero AA support and other limitations.

Voters as easily could go by future prospects, questioning Buttigieg, Sanders’, or Warren’s ability to win the GE. You assume voters would see Biden as a weak prospect for not placing better in two small states, while also assuming, on the same limited basis, that voters suddenly perceive one of the above as the nation’s savior.

The candidates themselves surely are not changed essentially by what occurs in Iowa and N.H., but voters’ perceptions of them are so drastically altered?

Maybe the media starts pumping Biden because, shorn of the aura of inevitable electability, he’ s suddenly interesting, an underdog! You absolutely can not control for all events. Anything can and does happen. I think Biden is too strong a candidate and too widely respected and liked to be vanquished by the outcome in Iowa and NH, much as placing first or second would give him a boost.

[Garrett78]

18. I'm not making any assumptions.

I'm simply pointing out that a bad loss in New Hampshire would likely be very damaging. Based on historical precedent.

The Iowa fiasco helps Biden, as most headlines have to do with what a mess it is, but he can ill afford a distant 3rd or 4th in New Hampshire.

[Drunken Irishman]

16. Very possible it has...

No poll has been done since Iowa but it does reason as his numbers have slipped in NH. If he gets blown out in NH, it seems unlikely those states won't follow suit, unfortunately.

[Garrett78]

12. I can't imagine him finishing 5th, but 4th is possible and would be devastating.

3rd place would be pretty bad for him, too, but the damage would be lessened if he's very close behind the 2nd place finisher. Buttigieg finishing ahead of him would do more harm than Warren finishing ahead of him. If Sanders is 1st, Warren 2nd and Biden a reasonably close 3rd, the dominant narrative might just be that the New Englanders had home field advantage. But Buttigieg finishing ahead of Biden, whether Biden is 3rd or 4th, would not be so easy to dismiss.

[emmaverybo]

5. I think it is chrystal balling and way outsizes Iowa's impact on a much larger picture. I don't know

what factors the model considers, but we don’t even have information to determine factors that might be relevant right now—how voters view the importance of Iowa; any surge in AA support for Sanders and Buttigieg and a correspondingly steep decline in it for Biden; historical trends; impact on donations and endorsements, new polling from all the other states; consideration of any other candidates.


Enough time has not yet passed for information to come in on Iowa’s potential influence on these many factors and others. Dem voters are just processing the results. Any model that says Iowa’s results alone have so radically altered the outcome of a primary just begun is terribly flawed.

However, 538 added to media bias could become self-fulfilling prophecy. That will not prove the model works, just that it, like any fortune-telling can influence people’s minds and behavior.

[HowardZinnfandel]

14. Not enough people care about 538 for it to influence anything

The model in this case is training on scenarios that have happened in the past. So it's not self-fulfilling...it's just looking at what has happened before and how similar that is to where we are now, whenever now is.

538 is basically for the .1% of nerds that care enough about both politics and math to pay attention, and then an even smaller fraction of those realize they don't really know that much more than the rest of us.

[emmaverybo]

3. A model, not polling. And a model based on the results of one state unrepresentative of the

many states Biden has been, based on polls, projected to win.

Does the model predict that because of Iowa the 15 members of the CBC will now throw their support to Sanders?