NBC/WSJ poll: Enthusiasm for Warren surges while same for Biden, Sanders falls

I'm happy to see her do so well. In a perfect world she'd be my candidate.

since Biden actually still has the highest enthusiasm numbers.

As far as preferences, it may signal a drop in voting preference in the future. I think that is what happened with the Beto and Pete surges after they announced; people were excited about them. In a recent poll, Beto seems to be getting a second wind while Pete's number is going down.

So even though down he's still higher than Liz who is at 64% so that's my point.

And right now it's just two points higher, so within the margin of error.

Such as here.

His numbers were so high it was inevitable they would come down a bit.

Hardly a statistic worth mentioning.

It takes three points to show a pattern. e.g. 2,4,6 (even numbers); 2,3,5 (prime numbers). You get no information on pattern from just two numbers. From two points you might be able to tell that there is an orientation (say) upwards, but one cannot tell the nature of that movement. Is it linear? Exponential? Oscillating? The third data point gives us a lot of additional information about drift that two points simply cannot give.

May I give you a syntax lesson? The word "potential" in this context indicates the speaker's opinion that something COULD happen, but, in fact, has not yet happened. If three points make a trend, then two points do not. But two points COULD be part of a trend that might be established with additional data. Or it could not happen, which is always implied when the word "could" or "potential" is used.

The use of capitals to emphasize the word "potential" in the response above is meant to further emphasize the highly uncertain and subjective nature of this analysis, as does the emphasized word "could" in this post.

The acknowledged lack of support for the opinion is further reinforced by the follow-up sentence which said that Biden shouldn't be worried yet, indicating that the change should not be taken as a sign of a problem for him, in the way an actual trend might.

But she is definitely moving up for me. I love her thoughtful positions. I dont get the feeling most of the candidates have put as much thought into what they believe.

I also think she's got some good political advisors. Dealing early with the elephant in the room was smart!

On this. It makes me sad and angry. But we have to win.

of the country as she will in other parts. If it comes down to her v the baboon (trump), my money is on her. She is certainly smarter by infinity, but she also has a element about her where she quietly roll up her sleeves and work to remove roadblocks - I think that is critical in defeating Trump.

take a chance.

You are wrong. If we did not have caustic disruption of our party mechanics and socalled progressive telling people not to vote for the democrat, we would have a female president RIGHT NOW!!!! It is about time people realize that and get their heads screwed on, the stakes are too high not to this time around.

...way you do. But she just recently snuck up on me.

"And yet she persisted".

and would have no problem voting them in. In fact, I would relish it. And I think I wouldnt be the only one.

Two women running the Executive Branch would make an everslasting and positive impact onnn the country.

In the early days of the campaign, I was big on Kamala Harris. She's disappeared! At this point, I'd put her on SCOTUS.

some time between the two. I too am waiting for debates.

Some people aren't. Some people think polls are predictive of what will happen a year away. Some people don't think they are.

#Warren2020

and believe women can't do the job

And will do so in the general.

People sometimes say they would vote for a woman, but not that particular woman. But sometimes they find some woman so impressive, they vote for her anyway. Think of a liberal Margaret Thatcher. I think Warren is that tough, but in a more subtle way.

Please don't take the Thatcher analogy too far. Just pointing out that a few women do succeed in a man's world.

People don't like to hear it, but I think there are people who wouldn't vote for HRC but would vote for Warren. I like your liberal Thatcher comparison - strong but compassionate (unlike Thatcher).

any momentum. This is in contrast to 2016 when more visibility equaled more support.

People don't seem to be flirting with the idea of democratic socialism as much as they were in the past.

This augurs well for Klobuchar, IMHO. Hear me out: While Biden holds the pragmatism crown now, Klobuchar's platform is closest in substance to what Biden is selling. If Biden slips and Klobuchar's message holds, then I see her inching up in the polls.

I firmly believe that Klobuchar is the sleeper candidate this cycle. She is impressive in town halls, and her proposals seem possible to accomplish. What she needs is more visibility, and will get that during the debates.

She's a bit centrist for my taste, but I know I'm to the left of the average voter. I know that about myself, and would support her enthusiastically.

looking for change. Sanders was the change candidate on the Democratic side, so he outperformed expectations. This time he has competition from several other change candidates.

I like Klobuchar. I think she comes across well. Today she put out a long list of policy proposals. Nothing major but ambitious for it's breadth. People may prefer that kind of change to the more wholesale changes proposed by Warren.