Polling Results May 6 2019

May 6, 2019
 

Polling Report 5-6-2019

 

These are the current results of the Bill James Daily Presidential Poll, from Twitter.    These numbers represent, as best I can measure it, the number of voters per 10,000, among people who follow me on twitter and who vote in the polls, who prefer this candidate.   As a practical matter, their real import is simply where the candidates stand relative to one another, among that group of poll respondents.  The polling method is explained in detail in the article "Introduction to the Polling System", which was also published today. 

 

In my polls, the #1 most-preferred candidate is Pete Buttigieg, but with Buttigieg holding only a narrow lead over Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren.   Buttigieg appears to be the preferred candidate of 1,091 voters out of 10,000—not 10,000 Democrats, but 10,000 respondents of any stripe.  There are 27 candidates listed in my group, but I have not yet polled Michael Bennet, so he is not included in this list.  He is being polled today. 

Thank you all for participating, and I appreciate your interest. 

 

Position

First

Last

Strength

1

Pete

Buttigieg

1091

2

Kamala

Harris

1069

3

Elizabeth

Warren

1052

 

   

 

4

Joe

Biden

935

 

   

 

5

John

Kasich

636

 

   

 

6

Donald

Trump

590

7

Bernie

Sanders

540

8

Beto

O'Rourke

512

 

   

 

9

John

Hickenlooper

470

10

Cory

Booker

428

 

   

 

11

Amy

Klobuchar

384

 

   

 

12

Bill

Weld

258

13

Andrew

Yang

236

14

Howard

Schultz

226

15

Julian

Castro

224

16

Kirsten

Gillibrand

219

17

Tim

Ryan

213

 

   

 

18

Jeff

Flake

192

19

Tulsi

Gabbard

187

20

Jay

Inslee

132

21

Eric

Swallwell

127

 

   

 

22

John

Delaney

71

23

Mike

Gravel

70

24

Seth

Moulton

69

25

Wayne

Messam

36

26

Marrianne

Williamson

33

 

          Obviously John Kasich has shown surprising strength—not just in one poll; he actually has done surprisingly well in all four polls in which he has been included.   But I’ll leave the commenting to you guys.  

 
 

COMMENTS (13 Comments, most recent shown first)

nettles9
I believe there’s a long list of Democrats because there are many that tossed their hat into the field. I don’t think there are many Republicans listed because there are less of them with hats in the field. If anyone has a list of Republicans that are running for president please share them. Thank you.
9:16 AM May 7th
 
CharlesSaeger
How the heck are Buttigieg and Harris NOT cult of personality candidates when O'Rourke, who is incredibly similar to them on his lack of positions, is?
6:25 AM May 7th
 
TudorFever
I suspect that I am not alone in that I lean Republican and checked out of this process very early because it seemed to be just a laundry list of Democrats. Therefore I believe that this poll may be more useful in evaluating Democrats relative to each other than in evaluating Democrats versus Trump.​
10:58 PM May 6th
 
pgaskill
In answer to arnewcs, I knew that two of them were running: Delaney and Moulton. I never heard of the other three, including Williamson.
7:21 PM May 6th
 
agcohen
How did you select this list of candidates? I don't think all of them are currently running for President, and there are several I have never heard of, and I follow politics to some extent. Some of the match-ups you list (and I only see them on the Bill James Online website, I don't use Twitter) seem ridiculous in the "candidates" they include.
5:48 PM May 6th
 
ScottSegrin
myersb - Sorry if I come across as obnoxious. When I say "I have absolutely no doubt that I am right" it means that it is my self-held belief that I am right. It is not meant to proclaim that anyone else should think I'm right. Everyone needs to make up their own mind. I only made the statement because the results of this poll and the relative placement of the candidates from the two political parties, compared to historical election results is evidence that my belief is in fact true. Evidence - not proof.
3:10 PM May 6th
 
chrisbodig
This is fascinating. The fact that Kasich is doing well (with Weld and Schultz doing OK) tells me that, among your Twitter followers, you have quite a lot of independents or "Never Trump" Republicans.

I went through all of your polls and noticed that Trump, in 3 polls, got 27%, 28% and 26%. That's probably a fairly accurate reflection of the percentage of Trump supporters who follow you on Twitter.

One methodology question: does the total number of respondents in each poll factor into the equation somehow (I didn't notice a mention of it in the other article)?

It seems like most of the polls get between 1,000-1,600 voters but there are notable exceptions.

Your first poll (all heavyweights with Trump, Biden, Sanders and Harris) got a total of 2,497 votes, by far the most in your polls. Maybe that was just an initial "wow, Bill James is polling presidential candidates" factor or maybe it was because you had four high profile names that inspired a click.

When you had a poll of all lightweights (Weld, Messam, Gabbard, Williamson), only 615 people voted, making it a poll slightly less popular than the one in which you asked if people could tell the difference between a dove and a pigeon. Weld was the runaway winner (56%) in this poll. That tells me that a lot of Democrats didn't see any names they recognized (and didn't vote) but the "Never Trump" Republicans saw one of their people and clicked.

Anyway, I'm guessing the the total respondents per poll might render itself irrelevant by the time you get to poll #100 or #200.

Thanks for doing this, Bill. Will be a daily visit along with 538 and Real Clear Politics.


12:18 PM May 6th
 
arnewcs
How many of you were aware that any of the five people in the last tier, 22nd through 26th, were running for president? I knew about Williamson, but she was the only one.
11:52 AM May 6th
 
myersb
When someone says 'I have absolutely no doubt that I am right', I tune out... nothing political in that: it's just obnoxious.
11:52 AM May 6th
 
ScottSegrin
There is a strong left lean among people who closely follow and analyze baseball (i.e. people more likely to be exposed to this poll.) I'm not saying that's good or bad. I'm also not saying that I have scientifically measured it. I am saying that I have observed it enough that I have absolutely no doubt that I am right (no pun intended.)
9:54 AM May 6th
 
taosjohn
Could you not get a pretty fair read on the validity of each sample by also asking them which of the four leading candidates they voted for last time? If the result of that poll varies very sharply from the actual outcome, that would suggest that your sample isn't all that representative to start with.

Not that it matters much because your system will rend to sort wheat from chaff anyway...


9:43 AM May 6th
 
raincheck
Kasich’s strength comes from the imbalance in the number of candidates from each party. He was probably the only Republican choice each time.

The “cult of personality” candidates - Trump, Bernie, and Beto - are an interesting cluster..
9:26 AM May 6th
 
phorton01
I guess I don't fully understand (or agree with) the methodology, but it seems to me it ignores the very inconvenient, but real, problem that the election will end being between one Republican and one Democrat. Giving people a choice between a mix of the parties seems like it will give skewed results.

I suppose you aren't necessarily trying to offer a prediction of what is likely to happen. Allowing Republicans to vote for their favorite Democrat (and vice versa) will not lead to insight into who will actually win the nomination.
9:05 AM May 6th
 
 
©2019 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Web site design and development by Americaneagle.com|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy