An important dynamic as we head toward the ABC Democratic Debate on Thursday, the race is becoming more and more relegated to a battle between Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. CBS News, in partnership with YouGov, their polling partner, released a slew of new data across several early primary and caucus states to try and give a detailed view of the Democratic primary race. Some of the state-level polling shows a toss-up in New Hampshire, while the data also points to Biden’s strong foundation of South Carolina as a firewall.

The real lesson to take from this polling is that Biden has continued to hold anywhere from 25 to 40 percent of the field, but Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are beginning to catch up and sometimes surpass.

At the moment, at least according to this data, Iowa looks shaky for Biden, while Warren squeaks by in New Hampshire, then Biden takes South Carolina, and Bernie has a shot in Nevada:

State by state in vote preference, New Hampshire now sees Warren just slightly up over Biden and Sanders in first-choice preference there, effectively making the primary there a three-way contest. Biden holds onto a small edge over Sanders in first-choice preference in Iowa to go with that still-sizable advantage in South Carolina. Meanwhile, Sanders has a narrow edge over Biden in Nevada.

Here’s a look at the numbers from YouGov state-by-state, which only include candidates that rank higher than 2% polling support:

Biden 29%, Sanders 26%, Warren 17%, Buttigieg 7%, Harris 6%

New Hampshire
Warren 27%, Biden 26%, Sanders 25%, Buttigieg 8%, Harris 7%

Sanders 29%, Biden 27%, Warren 18%, Harris 6%, Buttigieg 4%, O’Rourke 3%

South Carolina
Biden 43%, Sanders 18%, Warren 14%, Harris 7%, Buttigieg 4%

Those numbers reflect a very top-heavy race right now with three main contenders controlling roughly 80 to 90 percent of the entire Democratic primary electorate, depending on the state. The CBS News analysis calls this good news for Warren rather than painting it as bad news for Biden. Their reasoning for that logic is because while the numbers show Warren improving, they don’t necessarily show Biden declining.

That is .. one way to put a shine on these numbers. Biden is doing well in South Carolina, though he’s not hitting 50% yet in these numbers which means there is a lot of room for improvement by Sanders and Warren. He’s also still holding down Iowa but is close to or within the margin of error with Sanders. Nevada is a toss-up as is New Hampshire.

None of this is to say that the other candidates on stage this Thursday will be irrelevant. Sen. Kamala Harris is still picking up support, as is South Bend Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg. However, their support is minimal right now when stacked up against the trifecta of Bernie/Biden/Warren. Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke still has some life in Nevada, perhaps his last, best hope of keeping a campaign alive past the October Democratic debate which he has already qualified for on account of his September debate qualification.

The entire CBS/YouGov Battleground polling data is extensive, and I’d encourage you to give it a look and glance over the delegate projections based on polls of early primary states that vote up to and including Super Tuesday, on March 3, 2020.

At the moment, Biden still edges out the competition, but not by much. The race is feeling more wide open than it ever was, and perhaps that is a testament to Biden’s weakness as a front runner and the desire by Democratic voters to avoid a similar calamity to 2016. Minds are still being made up, and candidates are still being considered, the Fall debates will be critical.

The September Democratic debate takes place this Thursday at 8 pm ET on ABC. Look for more details in the coming days or visit the 2020 Democratic Debate schedule for everything you need to know right now.


  1. Two Crazy Old Uncles and a squaw are fighting it out for the first three primaries. Insanity runs amok in the Democratic party.

  2. Biden announced that he did not need to win Iowa or New Hampshire, so if you are in one of those States feel free to cast your vote for somebody who actually wants it.

    • biden does not need to do crap.. the fix is in.. he’s got all the superdelegates.. a 7million+ vote (700+ delegates who other than superdelegates represent districts of 10,000 voters each) head start in any primary. DNC split the field so sanders would not get enough votes to limit use of superdelegates in deciding the nominee. I can already tell you DNC/cia/MSM has chosen biden.. and what anyone else wants is shit. your vote does not count.. money does.

      • And that’s how we ended up with Trump. Seems like the DNC would rather have a repeat of 2016 then allow the people’s voice to be heard.

  3. biden.. one of the bush clinton obama cartel.. author of the pateriot act.. the dem establishment (wall street, fed reserve bank, insurance lobbists) choice. the fix is in.. looks like i vote for trump again. DNC if you don’t offer change.. i choose trump. biden is more of what has been wrong with this country for hte last 30 years.

    • No Democrat has ever been more loyal to and dependent on Wall Street than Trump. So if you really cared about this issue, you would never vote for any Republican. But of course, we both know you don’t actually care about Wall Street.

      • Seriously!!! Do you really think Biden, or any of the others, aren’t beholden to Wall Street? Seriously??? Are you really that out of touch?

        • No, and I never said they weren’t. I said with Trump the problem is orders of magnitude worse, so if you have a problem with Wall Street you’d never use that as an excuse to vote Republican.

          You should really learn to read, buddy.

          • They are all beholden to Wall Street. There is almost no difference. Example: Biden recently met with Energy executives to get funds. Well, those funds will come with strings.

            Trump comes right out and tells everyone he’s really rich. He tells people he’ll meet with oil executives.

            The others just say they are anti energy or whatever.. They are all in bed with the various groups.

            • No, my reason for voting for Trump was that he was going to improve the economy.

              Anybody could work with ones friends. However, it takes a leader to work with ones enemies without giving them anything.

            • In that case, you must be terribly disappointed with your pick, seeing as he has only followed the trajectory set by Obama, who you thought did a terrible job, and he also ran up a massive deficit in yhe process. I can only assume you will definitely not vote for Trump in 2020, if you’re telling the truth (which I don’t think you are).

            • Time Out before you make an assumption which isn’t true.

              The Obama and the Trump economy are totally different. Obama was dealt a horrible hand by Bush. Bush, in my opinion, was a terrible president.

              Having said that Obama wanted the job. So he doesn’t get a pass from me. Maybe others, because they are partisan, but not me.

              Obama had the economy moving in the right direction. But it was moving so slowly. He just wouldn’t remove the regulations so that businesses would really improve.

              Trump removed the regulations and the economy took off.

            • It’s obvious you haven’t paid attention to the stock market or the unemployment numbers. The Trump unemployment numbers iare especially good for African Americans/Hispanics.

              Obama’s economy barely moved along. Trump’s economy continues to advance upwards.

              Huge difference between the Obama and Trump economy.

            • I wish your link opened up.

              I can only tell you to check the market figures.

              Bush left his buddy Obama a terrible mess. But Obama wanted the job.

              Trump improved on Obama’s economy.

            • I can’t really judge the market results. Why? Trump has been in office for 3 years. So I wonder how the market looked under Obama after 3 years?

              My brother is deeply involved in the market. I’ll ask him.

            • You have stated many times that the economy is doing much better under Trump than under Obama. Now, faced with evidence that the opposite is true, suddenly you don’t think we have enough data to determine this issue. Thanks for admitting that you were making things up!

            • For your information I was talking to Gothe. Why because he’s intelligent. Informative.

              You’re a different kettle of fish.

              You lie like fake news

              The only evidence Gothe presented was that big businesses did well. I’m more concerned with small businesses.

              Small businesses did much better under Trump than Obama. Get it clue.

              But you’re a kid and I understand.

            • Think!!! The “percentages” are greater when starting at a low point (Obama) than at higher point (Trump).

              In other words Obama should be given credit for starting the ball rolling. However, it’s much harder to keep that ball (the economy) rolling and increase it as Trump did.

              Translation: You can’t compare the two economies.

            • Obama had the big drop during his presidency, right in the beginning. He didn’t start at the low point, but rather was saddled with having to dig out of the hole just to get to zero. So, you’re incorrect there.

              Then he “kept the ball rolling” for the remainder of his presidency. Trump has managed to also keep it rolling, albeit significantly slower than his predecessor.

              Now, how about you provide that evidence you promised?

            • Coincidentally, our Mackinaw Center for Public Policy just released a study of the economy nationally, and in Michigan, comparing Obama and Trump, not in their first three years, in which Obama would have the edge, since the economy was in the toilet when he started. Instead, they compared the LAST 30 months of Obama with the FIRST 30 months of Trump, to see if there was a change in direction.

              The non-profit describes itself thusly: “The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is a nonprofit research and educational institute that advances the principles of free markets and limited government.”

              Here’s what they found:

              Jobs added;
              Obama 205,000
              Trump 111,300

              Michigan added:
              Obama 36,000
              Trump 17,000

              Unemployment drop:
              Obama 2.1%
              Trump 0.6%

              Unemployment rate:
              Obama to 4.9%
              Trump to 4.3%

              Weekly wage increase:
              Obama 7.6%
              Trump 3.4%

              HOWEVER, the thing to remember is that the boom-bust cycle is built into the capitalist model, so the longer a boom lasts, the harder it is to keep it going, so it would be expected that Trump would not have as good numbers.

            • Sure. The idea that the current economy is always 100% dependent on the current president is obviously ridiculous. It’s just so strange that Republicans have chosen to run with this moronic argument despite the economy doing so much better under Obama.

            • S&P500 +20.8% under Trump as of June 2019. Under Obama, same time period, +61.5%.

              And this is despite Trump having a massive head start, having been left an excellent economy by Obama, whereas Obama inherited a huge plunge and had to turn it around before making actual progress.

              I’m sure your brother will find a way to explain away the facts.

            • Have you calculated in how small businesses did? No you haven’t. Why? because you don’t have a clue. You could care less about small businesses. You aren’t concerned with the average person. Trump is.

              You forgot about the little guy didn’t you. Lol. I guess you forgot that Democrats are supposed to care about the small guy. Lol.

              You and the kid (AOC) have a problem. Lol. Jokes on you.

            • Now that you know the stock market did 3 times better under Obama than under Trump, you should, if you are truly a thinking person, ask yourself the following:

              -Why have you been under the impression that Trump’s economy has been better than Obama’s?

              -Which sources of information have you been depending on, in the media and in your personal life, which have misled you so greatly?

              -Why did you not notice sooner that you were in a massive echo chamber?

              -Why do you think the right wing media has been lying to you? What do they stand to gain from having you falsely believe that Trump is doing better than Obama?

              Let’s see if you have it in you to openly question yourself in light of evidence. My money is on “nope”.

            • Ask yourself why Obama lovers said it is Trump’s economy is really Obama’s economy if Trump wasn’t doing well.

              Also remember Trump’s has had 3 years in office. Obama had 8 years in office. So one can’t compare the two economies.

              I find your comments ignorant. Disgusting. Totally absurd.

              Seriously? You can’t see that when Trump took off the regulations that the economy really took off. All this in really two years.

              The business owners I know have seen a tremendous improvement in the two economies. They hated Obama’s strangling business regulations as their businesses were hurt.

              Ask yourself why the left wing media continues to attack Trump about anything but the economy. Ask yourself why the candidates are avoiding economic issues.

            • I compared Trump’s first 2.5 years with Obama’s first 2.5 years. You’ve just revealed that you didn’t read the link. Oops.

            • Nope. I read it. Intelligence isn’t your strong point.

              The increase in “Percentages” increases when the starting point is lower ( (Obama) than when they are higher (Trump).

              Still don’t get it. Think pee wee football. That should be simple enough for you do understand. If a team wins 1 game 1 year. But 2 (Two) the next year…….. Got it. Weirdo.

            • Thanks.

              I wonder how Trump’s first three year’s market results compares to Obama’s first 3 years? By that I mean Obama’s starting point and Trump’s starting point.

              I’ll ask my brother he’s deep into the market.

            • I can’t refute those numbers. I really don’t want to. I’m glad they just moved forward under Obama. It doesn’t matter to me who is president as long as things improve.

              What the business owners I knew complained most about was Obama’s regulations. That was bothered them the most.

            • The thing to remember is that we were in total free-fall when Obama took office. We seemed to be going into a worldwide depression. So if that could be turned around, of course Obama’s numbers are going to look better.

              (When I first put a little (borrowed) money into the market, the Dow was at 674, by the way.)

            • That what I wanted to say. It’s sort of like a football team losing ever game one year. Then when the new coach wins even a few games he’s greatly improved the team. Not really. Maybe they played completely different team, etc.

              Unfortunately another poster took my of agreement with your link/statement as a time to make obnoxious derogatory comments. Sad. As Rodney King said “Why can’t we all get along.”

            • Hello!! I was talking about world leaders. Obama wanted to work with a dictator like Castro. Trump would like to work with Kim.

            • Remember when Trump complained about the corruption on Wall Street throughout his entire campaign, and then hired several Goldman Sachs execs to run the government once he was elected? You were dumb enough to be duped by this freak show. Have some shame and display some humility in light of the disaster you helped to create.

            • Lol. Did you want Trump to hire a stock boy to run the economy?

              I guess you want me to be ashamed that the economy is doing so well. I guess you want me to be ashamed that the stock market has increased and therefore people’s retirement funds are much higher.

              What else do you want me to be ashamed of?

              It must hurt to be wrong, right?

            • Do you understand the function of wall street?

              Wall Street is there for the economy. It raises money for banks, etc.

              Is it greedy? Oh yes. But it is a function of our way of life.

            • Then why did you pretend as if Wall Street was a bad thing when you could use it as a weapon against Hillary Clinton?

            • Who has said otherwise? Try to stay on topic.

              Why is Wall Street bad when you can use it as a talking point against Hillary Clinton, buy suddenly great when Trump hires Wall Street execs to run the country? Answer the question and stop running away.

            • Imagine if Hillary Clinton had won the election, and upon her inauguration had instantly put a handful of Goldman Sachs execs in her cabinet. Do you HONESTLY expect anyone to believe you would not have complained about her selling out the economy to Wall Street? Honestly?

            • I’m sure many would have but not me. Why? Because too many have relied upon some kid from Harvard or Stanford or a business school. They have Book Knowledge but no real life business experience.

            • Remember when Republicans used to think government officials using a private email account was a huge scandal? Now that the Trumps are doing it, suddenly it’s not a big deal. Weird how that works, huh?

            • Not weird at all. The Dems don’t like it that the Republicans are beating them at their own game.

              Dems have played hardball since the 60ies. Examples: Baby killers, riots, and all. Plus Chicago smoke filled backroom good old boys politics. Now the corrupt DNC.

            • You described it as “not weird at all” that Republicans think using a private email account is bad when Democrats do it but not a problem when Republicans do it. You endorse double standards. Why do you have such immense trouble following a simple conversation?

  4. What happened to the diversity the Democrats are always squawking about? You have two old senile white men and the wannabe Indian who is really a crazy old white woman duking it out.?

Comments are closed.