A Study Last Week Claimed to Prove That Bernie Is Unelectable. It Turns Out the Study Is Bunk.

[DanTex]

There's an interesting meta-lesson here about the media and how studies are used. As we shall see shortly, a bunch of people are going reply to this OP saying things like "Jacobin lol", and not even bother to read the study and the article.

But anyone who reads both will come away realizing that Jacobin is right. It's not even particularly complicated, the error is basic. One reason an error like this appeared in the study is because it was a pre-print, meaning it hasn't been peer reviewed yet. But it was still featured in Vox. Because of that, during a crucial 10 days or so of the campaign, readers of Vox will have come away with the false impression that Bernie's electability argument rested on the assumption of an 11% increase in youth turnout, even though the data in the paper implies nothing of the sort.

Moreover, in the actual paper, when they weighted according to 2016 turnout rather than projected 2020 turnout, Bernie still beat Trump by a larger margin than Biden, something that for some unknowable reason, they didn't think to mention in the Vox article.

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/03/young-voters-bernie-electablility

On edit: see the bold. I called it!

[W_HAMILTON]

1. Yes, I'm sure the experts of, uhh, jacobinmag have it all figured out.

We don't need studies when we have elections going on now.

If you think Sanders wouldn't have a hard time in the general, just look at how he was decimated in Virginia. Biden won Virginia by more than Sanders won his home state -- let that sink in.

We also will have Florida coming up soon as another test case.

[DanTex]

2. Illustrating my point...

[Gothmog]

32. sanders campaign is falling apart and sanders has given up on African American voters

Link to tweet

[George II]

5. I don't even use snopes anymore, I go straight to Jacobin.

[W_HAMILTON]

8. LOL

[George II]

9. Biden won Virginia by more than Sanders won California AND Colorado combined.

[DownriverDem]

3. Bernie's ceiling

is in the 30s. He did nothing to increase his base support. And no matter if this is wrong to say, Bernie is not a true Dem. His supporters just attack and seem to be working against the Democratic Party.

[Recursion]

4. Sanders's problem right now is turnout in the primaries

Until he can get that (which was the same thing he couldn't get in 2016) it's all academic. He's underperforming 4 years ago. Now, we'll see in the next two weeks if that continues in less-populous race.

[onetexan]

6. Who was the study done by? A buncha Bernie Bros?

[left-of-center2012]

7. Jacobin - 'Medias Bias Fact Check' says ...

"We rate Jacobin Magazine,
Left Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the Democratic Socialist Left."

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

[LaurenOlimina]

29. Wow a media source ACTUALLY on the left.

[brooklynite]

10. I read the article and it misses the fundamental point...

the pro-Bernie analysis of the "anti-Bernie" analysis is irrelevant, because of the FACTS:

Sanders ISN'T turning out significant youth votes (the results to date continue to show a higher proportion of older voters who in turn are supporting Biden and the moderate wing of the Party).

Sanders has ACKNOWLEDGED that he's not turning out adequate youth vote (making vague promises that everything will be better in the GE)

Sanders continues to UNDER-PERFORM his 2016 voting results, even as the pool of alternative candidates (the go-to excuse of Sanders supporters) has declined.

[NCProgressive]

12. Also

"New voters" didn't materialize

"All the energy is with the Sanders campaign" turned out to be false. There was more energy for Biden on super Tuesday.

"Sanders increases turnout" was proven to be false. Turnout for Sanders was lower.

[DanTex]

13. Apparently you didn't read the article.

Because the whole point is that he doesn't need to increase youth turnout, he only needs to get more youth votes than Biden, which he has clearly done. In fact, even without the differential youth turnout assumption, using 2016 turnout as a model, Bernie still polls better than Biden against Trump.

[brooklynite]

14. But the 2016 turnout model doesn't apply...

...because Sanders is generating FEWER voters than in 2016

[DanTex]

15. In the primary, which of course is not the same as a GE, particularly in a crowded field.

The authors of the paper made an error, but it wasn't an error as severe as trying to compare 2016 and 2020 primary numbers while ignoring the number of candidates running, and also trying to generalize those primary turnout numbers to GE turnout.

Again, the point is that Bernie's better numbers against Trump don't require excess youth turnout, they just require that he does better with youth voters than Biden does. Which everyone knows he will do, and has been doing.

[brooklynite]

16. We didn't have a crowded field on Tuesday...

What will your excuse be next week?

[DanTex]

17. There were four people in it, rather than two.

Again, these professors who wrote the study made a mistake, but I'm still pretty sure they can compare the numbers 2 and 4 and determine which one is bigger.

[brooklynite]

19. No, there were three...

one of which was clearly not drawing a lot of Bernie's 2016 voters, which is why she's no longer a candidate.

[ehrnst]

21. The point is that the GOP and Russia have not turned their guns on Bernie, because

they want him as Trumps opponent. That will change the minute Sanders were to get the nomination.

No polls taken in a hypothetical GE take that into account...That's an error that all the ignoring in the world won't make go away.

[DanTex]

23. I don't recall the study mentioning any of that...

[ehrnst]

25. I'm talking about what you said in the post I replied to.

Is that clearer?

Attempts to derail or evade doesn't work with me, remember?

[ehrnst]

20. Now there's some acrobatic numerical juggling...

[HarlanPepper]

38. It's not working.

[NCProgressive]

11. Jacobin is trash ... glad you called it

but still chose to post it

[NurseJackie]

18. Jacobin!

[Demsrule86]

22. It is over Dan...you know it.

[DanTex]

24. That doesn't change the fact that Vox published an obviously faulty study which portrayed

Bernie as unelectable.

[Demsrule86]

26. There were other studies and polls that said the same thing...they were not all faulty.

Look I don't believe anything I see online until I check it out and/ or know the source pretty well...I know you do the same. I doubt this affected any voters...I think it was Clyburn's endorsement and the fact that Sanders has not been able to get AA voters on his side. You have to win AA voters if you want to be the nominee. You and I have discussed this ad nauseum.

Anyway, I feel your pain as I was a Deaniac...it is really hard when you pour so much of yourself into supporting someone...I would add that no one saw Super Tuesday coming...I myself thought if Biden ended up 100 to 150 below Sanders, it would be a good night for him.

[ehrnst]

35. +1000.

[TwilightZone]

27. Jacobin has zero objectivity.

As every media bias organization has noted, it *always* favors the socialist left.

If you want to ignore all evidence to the contrary of your preferred assertions, it's pretty easy to get what you want from Jacobin.

[LaurenOlimina]

28. Counterfactuals can screw a scholar up every time.

That is a pretty muddled chart they tear apart.

[ehrnst]

30. Jacobin... They hate the Democratic Party in equal measure to adoring Bernie.

[Gothmog]

31. In the real world that study has been proven accurate

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[FreeState]

33. Not really a valid news source I would trust

"Jacobin is a leading voice of the American left, offering socialist perspectives on politics, economics, and culture. The print magazine is released quarterly and reaches 50,000 subscribers, in addition to a web audience of over 2,000,000 a month."

[SidDithers]

34. He might be electable, but he's not going to win the nomination anyway...

so the point is moot.

Sid

[carlvsam]

36. I don't know about you,

but I would not trust a source named after the group of French revolutionaries that forced the ”Reign of Terror” onto that country’s people near the end of the 17th century ...

[HarlanPepper]

37. That's neat.

In other news: Bernie is still losing.

[Moderateguy]

39. Is this the new BS argument?

That Bernie gets more of the youth vote so he should be handed the nomination if he if soundly defeated in the primary?

[MineralMan]

40. Well, that's really no longer relevant, it seems to me.

Now that we have more real-world results that demonstrate Bernie Sanders' ceiling clearly.

The question of whether he could win in November is soon going to be moot, in any case.

The primary season has moved on. Jacobin might not move on.