• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Could the coronavirus help Bernie get the nomination?

GreatNews2night

GreatNews2night

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
8,761
Reaction score
3,312
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I've spoke of it before but most people dismissed it, as there was no visible change in behavior in the US population.

However the infection is spreading more and people are starting to panic, with long lines at Costco stores and we're starting to see empty shelves.

People under 30 years of age are at almost no risk of dying.

People older than 65 are at a much, much, much bigger risk.

Bernie polls better with the young, and Biden polls better with the old.

I wonder if panic really, really increases in the next few weeks, especially among the much more at risk senior citizens, the latter will avoid going to the voting precincts, afraid of the large number of people there (some of them could be carrying the disease) while the young people, much less scared because this virus is not killing their age group, will attend normally.

Could this be a boost for Bernie, or am I over-thinking it?

How many states in the next month or so with scheduled primaries, have vote by mail?
 
Last edited:
Seems like a stretch to me. I mean there will probably be a non-zero number of people fitting what you describe, but I doubt a significant number. Primary voters are the people who care more. Less likely to be scared off by a virus.
 
GreatNews2night said:
I've spoke of it before but most people dismissed it, as there was no visible change in behavior in the US population.

However the infection is spreading more and people are starting to panic, with long lines at Costco stores and we're starting to see empty shelves.

People under 30 years of age are at almost no risk of dying.

People older than 65 are at a much, much, much bigger risk.

Bernie polls better with the young, and Biden polls better with the old.

I wonder if panic really, really increases in the next few weeks, especially amont the much more at risk senior citizens, the latter will avoid going to the voting precincts, afraid of the large number of people there (some of them could be carrying the disease) while the young people, much less scared because this virus is not killing their age group, will attend normally.

Could this be a boost for Bernie, or am I over-thinking it?

How many states in the next month or so with scheduled primaries, have vote by mail?
Click to expand...

I think you're right and I had a similar view, but in light of the polling thus far, it will be a long shot overall in terms of a material impact; still, definitely feel there's a chance. There is also the fact that this may make Bernie's healthcare proposals more palatable and enticing.
 
Deuce said:
Seems like a stretch to me. I mean there will probably be a non-zero number of people fitting what you describe, but I doubt a significant number. Primary voters are the people who care more. Less likely to be scared off by a virus.
Click to expand...

Today the CDC recommended that old people don't go to places with lots of other people, like grocery stores (no kidding!). They said that old people should stock 1 month of food and medications at home, to avoid going out. If the panic really spreads and this advice is repeated on TV over and over, I think we may start seeing people not leaving home if they can avoid it.

This weekend I invited two couples from out of town to spend the weekend with us. We had booked two good restaurants. We decided to cancel the reservations and cook at home, specifically because our friends, whose age group is 55-65, said they were afraid of going to large restaurants.

I purchased tickets to two shows in the next few weeks. Expensive tickets, for two musicals. Non-refundable. My wife and I decided not to go. On Saturday we have an errand in a nearby large city, a 75-minute drive. Each time we go there for these errands, we make a weekend out of it, eat in a good restaurant, sometimes stay overnight in a hotel. We decided to go, run our errand, and head right back home.

My wife and I, and our friends, all share a profession that makes us more in tune with the risks the coronavirus is bringing / will bring. So maybe we're reacting sooner to the dangers. But if the risks start getting more and more publicized, I wonder if it will affect turnout in the primaries.

Biden's excellent performance on Super Tuesday came out of a surge of turnout he was able to inspire among older voters, who according to exit polls, were the majority of voters on Super Tuesday.

This could change.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Today the CDC recommended that old people don't go to places with lots of other people, like grocery stores (no kidding!). They said that old people should stock 1 month of food and medications at home, to avoid going out. If the panic really spreads and this advice is repeated on TV over and over, I think we may start seeing people not leaving home if they can avoid it.

This weekend I invited two couples from out of town to spend the weekend with us. We had booked two good restaurants. We decided to cancel the reservations and cook at home, specifically because our friends, whose age group is 55-65, said they were afraid of going to large restaurants.

I purchased tickets to two shows in the next few weeks. Expensive tickets, for two musicals. Non-refundable. My wife and I decided not to go. On Saturday we have an errand in a nearby large city, a 75-minute drive. Each time we go there for these errands, we make a weekend out of it, eat in a good restaurant, sometimes stay overnight in a hotel. We decided to go, run our errand, and head right back home.

My wife and I, and our friends, all share a profession that makes us more in tune with the risks the coronavirus is bringing / will bring. So maybe we're reacting sooner to the dangers. But if the risks start getting more and more publicized, I don wonder if it will affect turnout in the primaries.

Biden's excellent performance on Super Tuesday came out of a surge of turnout he was able to inspire among older voters, who according to exit polls, were the majority of voters on Super Tuesday.

This could change.
Click to expand...

I mean I wish everyone over 50 would stay the **** home in both the primary and the general, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.
 
New chief of staff and former freedumb circus leader mark meadows now in self-quarantine.
 
Surrealistik said:
There is also the fact that this may make Bernie's healthcare proposals more palatable and enticing.
Click to expand...

Or the opposite. Maybe if people are scared, they get more dependent on the long-term relationship they have established with their doctors, and get insecure and afraid of having that established care disrupted by Bernie's proposals (although there would likely be little disruption, given that Bernie is proposing a change in payer, not a change in providers, but regular people may have trouble understanding that). When people are afraid they tend to be weary of uncertain and new things, and may want to stick with the reassuring and familiar same old, same old.
 
Last edited:
Washington is the Super Tuesday II state that has really got a serious issue going on that we know about and Bernie is going to win Washington. I don't think the other states will have a problem. Then by the next Primary day, if in fact Americans are doing as they should be doing they will be stir crazy by then and looking for any good reason to get outta' the house.
 
GreatNews2night said:
I've spoke of it before but most people dismissed it, as there was no visible change in behavior in the US population.

However the infection is spreading more and people are starting to panic, with long lines at Costco stores and we're starting to see empty shelves.

People under 30 years of age are at almost no risk of dying.

People older than 65 are at a much, much, much bigger risk.

Bernie polls better with the young, and Biden polls better with the old.

I wonder if panic really, really increases in the next few weeks, especially amont the much more at risk senior citizens, the latter will avoid going to the voting precincts, afraid of the large number of people there (some of them could be carrying the disease) while the young people, much less scared because this virus is not killing their age group, will attend normally.

Could this be a boost for Bernie, or am I over-thinking it?

How many states in the next month or so with scheduled primaries, have vote by mail?
Click to expand...

If the polls are right, this thing could be over by the end of March. A double digit lead in every state except Washington which is a tie. Plus Idaho and North Dakota where no polling has been conducted. According to the polls

10 March
Idaho No polling information
Michigan Biden by 20
Missouri Biden by 21
Mississippi Biden by 45
North Dakota No polling information
Washington tie

It's interesting to note that on 4 March Sanders had an 11 point lead in Michigan and a 20 point lead in Washington. Biden was up by 8 in Missouri.

17 March
Illinois Biden by 22
Florida Biden by 12
Ohio Biden by 19
Arizona Biden by 19

24 March
Georgia Biden by 33

As for the coronavirus, if it lingers I think it would help Biden. Biden is the epitome of safe, reliable, steady leadership whereas Sanders is more of a radical, a revolutionary for the Democratic Socialist cause.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
You should read posts before responding to them.
Click to expand...

You should clarify what I got wrong before pretending I got something wrong.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Or the opposite. Maybe if people are scared, they get more depending on the long-term relationship they have established with their doctors, and get insecure and afraid of having that established care disrupted by Bernie's proposals (although there would likely be little disruptive, given that Bernie is proposing a change in payer, not a change in providers, but regular people may have trouble understanding that). When people are afraid they tend to be weary of uncertain and new things, and may want to stick with the reassuring and familiar same old, same old.
Click to expand...

I would very much doubt it given the very structure and cost of healthcare in the States directly lends itself to non-compliance, containment failure and under-reporting; overall only the most uncritical and surface level thinking would see this as a case against.

In otherwords, what you're saying would likely be true for some, but not most if the healthcare connection is made at all.
 
Airyaman said:
You should clarify what I got wrong before pretending I got something wrong.
Click to expand...

Your response had strictly nothing to do with the original post. My OP was talking about how VOTERS will react to the epidemic, if the older voters will stay home while the younger voters will show up to vote, thus changing Biden's ability to turnout large number of older voters who generally prefer him to Bernie, like he did on Super Tuesday.

You responded by comparing Bernie to Trump as both being clueless about this public health issue.

The OP was not asking about what candidate is more knowledgeable about this issue. The OP was asking if people think that voter behavior by age group will change in terms of going out of their homes to go vote.
 
Surrealistik said:
I would very much doubt it given the very structure and cost of healthcare in the States directly lends itself to non-compliance, containment failure and under-reporting; overall only the most uncritical and surface level thinking would see this as a case against.

In otherwords, what you're saying would likely be true for some, but not most if the healthcare connection is made at all.
Click to expand...

You are probably right about it. If a huge fiasco is apparent, with scarcity of test kits, not enough ICU beds, not enough ventilators, people with no paid sick leave contributing to spreading the infection, and a large number of people start dying, in itself this would be a boost for any Dem, if Trump is blamed for the fiasco, and especially for Bernie; people might feel "wow, our health care system sucks, maybe Bernie is right about overhauling it."

But I suspect that this would be an issue for November rather than for the primaries.

I'm thinking more about primaries turnout, if it's affected by the epidemic, and in a different way for different age groups.
 
Perotista said:
If the polls are right, this thing could be over by the end of March. A double digit lead in every state except Washington which is a tie. Plus Idaho and North Dakota where no polling has been conducted. According to the polls

10 March
Idaho No polling information
Michigan Biden by 20
Missouri Biden by 21
Mississippi Biden by 45
North Dakota No polling information
Washington tie

It's interesting to note that on 4 March Sanders had an 11 point lead in Michigan and a 20 point lead in Washington. Biden was up by 8 in Missouri.

17 March
Illinois Biden by 22
Florida Biden by 12
Ohio Biden by 19
Arizona Biden by 19

24 March
Georgia Biden by 33

As for the coronavirus, if it lingers I think it would help Biden. Biden is the epitome of safe, reliable, steady leadership whereas Sanders is more of a radical, a revolutionary for the Democratic Socialist cause.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting these numbers from? RCP averages? They look very different from the last time I looked. They have probably changed, though, as new polls come up.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Your response had strictly nothing to do with the original post. My OP was talking about how VOTERS will react to the epidemic, if the older voters will stay home while the younger voters will show up to vote, thus changing Biden's ability to turnout large number of older voters who generally prefer him to Bernie, like he did on Super Tuesday.

You responded by comparing Bernie to Trump as both being clueless about this public health issue.

The OP was not asking about what candidate is more knowledgeable about this issue. The OP was asking if people think that voter behavior by age group will change in terms of going out of their homes to go vote.
Click to expand...

At least you mentioned the pertinent part.

Why would people flock to clueless person like Bernie over clueless Donnie? Perhaps Joe is clueless too, but c'mon, give us a premise we can work with.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Neat. I do consult 538 a lot, but more to read Nate Silver's prediction essays. Usually I go to RCP for averages. When I checked yesterday they had a much bigger lead for Biden in Florida, but a much smaller one in Michigan.
Click to expand...

Things change constantly. RCP and Nate may not include the same polls. It's a good idea to check both and do as RCP does, average them out. I check both RCP and 538 out prior to doing my monthly forecasts.
 
Airyaman said:
At least you mentioned the pertinent part.

Why would people flock to clueless person like Bernie over clueless Donnie? Perhaps Joe is clueless too, but c'mon, give us a premise we can work with.
Click to expand...

Again, the OP was not about voters' choice or flocking to anybody. It was about voters who have already decided to vote for Biden but they are older, and they might not go to the precincts due to fear of the virus, while younger voters who are less afraid and are more likely to prefer Bernie, might attend.

I wasn't talking about people flocking to a candidate as in changing their minds, but rather, if the fear could change the demographics of the public who will be willing to go vote.
 
Perotista said:
Things change constantly. RCP and Nate may not include the same polls. It's a good idea to check both and do as RCP does, average them out. I check both RCP and 538 out prior to doing my monthly forecasts.
Click to expand...

Wow! I looked up RCP again and the change is striking! I guess it's because now polls are fully reflecting the fact that Bloomberg dropped out and endorsed Biden, whose lead increased significantly:

Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary Monmouth Biden 51, Sanders 36 Biden +15
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary Yahoo News/YouGov Biden 54, Sanders 42 Biden +12
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary Detroit Free Press Biden 51, Sanders 27 Biden +24
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary Mitchell Research Biden 54, Sanders 33 Biden +21
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary Target-Insyght Biden 65, Sanders 24 Biden +41
Missouri Democratic Primary Data for Progress (D) Biden 62, Sanders 32 Biden +30
Mississippi Democratic Primary Data for Progress (D) Biden 77, Sanders 22, Gabbard 1 Biden +55
Arizona Democratic Primary OH Predictive Insights Biden 45, Sanders 17, Warren 13, Bloomberg 12 Biden +28
Wisconsin Democratic Primary Yahoo News/YouGov Sanders 38, Biden 49 Biden +11
Pennsylvania Democratic Presidential Primary Yahoo News/YouGov Biden 59, Sanders 31 Biden +28
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination CNN Biden 52, Sanders 36, Gabbard Biden +16
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Quinnipiac Biden 54, Sanders 35, Gabbard 2 Biden +19

You are right, it's looking like quite the sweep, and this might indeed be over by the end of March, to the point that what I'm talking about, a late older voter turnout decrease due to the virus, might be too little too late for Bernie.

Wow, it's Biden Biden Biden all over the place.

Even Washington, the latest RCP poll from March 8 shows Biden with +3
 
OK, now I looked at 538 and for them, it's all but over.

They have Biden's odds of getting an absolute majority of pledged delegates, thus winning the nomination in first ballot at the convention, at... brace for it... 99%!!!
No majority, 1%.
Bernie's odds, they list as less than 1%.

Updated two hours ago.

I guess Nate sees the new polls after all the endorsements, and it's Biden all over the place, so he concluded that it is over for Bernie.
 
Last edited:
Surrealistik said:
I think you're right and I had a similar view, but in light of the polling thus far, it will be a long shot overall in terms of a material impact; still, definitely feel there's a chance. There is also the fact that this may make Bernie's healthcare proposals more palatable and enticing.
Click to expand...

People were getting $3200 bills for being tested, and the administration rushed to try to find a way to provide free testing for all...
 
538 also points to a Biden almost sweep by the end of March:

MARCH 10
CONTEST BIDEN SANDERS MARGIN
Michigan 57.5% 40.5% +17.0
Washington 48.6 49.1 +0.5
Missouri 58.7 39.6 +19.1
Mississippi 71.7 27.3 +44.4
Idaho 49.5 47.9 +1.6
North Dakota 51.6 46 +5.6
Democrats Abroad 47.8 49.2 +1.4
MARCH 14
CONTEST BIDEN SANDERS MARGIN
Northern Marianas 55.3% 41.8% +13.5
MARCH 17
CONTEST BIDEN SANDERS MARGIN
Florida 66.7% 31.6% +35.1
Illinois 54.8 43.4 +11.4
Ohio 54.1 44.1 +10.0
Arizona 55 42.9 +12.1
MARCH 24
CONTEST BIDEN SANDERS MARGIN
Georgia 61.5% 36.7% +24.8
MARCH 29
CONTEST BIDEN SANDERS MARGIN
Puerto Rico 53.4% 44.4% +9.0

From here to the end of March, Bernie is only ahead in Washington (0.5%, that is, delegates will be split in half so he won't make gains) and Democrats Abroad.

Everywhere else, Biden is favored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom