New Polling in New Hampshire Shows Same Four at Top

Last week we took note of a new poll from Quinnipiac University showing that the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination in Iowa appears to be centering on four candidates: Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Pete Buttigieg. According to new polling results out today from Quinnipiac, the battle for New Hampshire looks much the same:

Biden receives support from 20 percent of New Hampshire likely Democratic primary voters, with Senator Elizabeth Warren getting 16 percent, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg getting 15 percent, and Sen. Bernie Sanders at 14 percent.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard gets 6 percent, businessman Andrew Yang gets 4 percent, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar and businessman Tom Steyer are each at 3 percent. No other candidate tops 1 percent, and 14 percent of likely voters are undecided.

Just as with last week’s Quinnipiac polling from Iowa, the top four Democratic candidates are essentially tied when you consider the margin of error. There’s still time for other candidates to move up (keep hope alive, Sen. Michael Bennet!), but it’s looking more and more like a four-candidate race at the moment.

26 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. RepealAndReplace says:

    Wow, Old Joe is top dog in New Hampshire. I would have expected one of the senators from the neighboring states to hold that title.

    Tulsi Gabbard’s 6% is solely the result of HRC foolishly opening her pie hole and giving Gabbard’s candidacy some oxygen.

  2. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Recent comment from Never-Trump Republican, George Will, in the Washington Post: "If Democrats are smart, they'll give moderate options like (Amy) Klobuchar or Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet a second look. The "electoral realities" are obvious: to beat Trump, Democrats must win purple states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, and New Hampshire. In those states, the "radical change" promised by Warren and Sanders—including trillions in new taxes and spending—is likely to scare off swing voters. If the Democrats run a moderate who promises to get the country "back to normal," they can beat Trump in a rout.

    • Pseudonymous says:

      The Return of the Inexplicable Republican Best Friend

      It’s a trope that dates back more than a decade, but the rise of Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has seen a recent surge in the Inexplicable Republican Best Friend (IRPF), a specific genre of concern-trolling where a long-time Republican operative, politician or pundit offers “advice” to Democrats about how they should avoid going “too far left.”

      These takes—frequently featured as earnest appeals in liberal and centrist outlets—are ostensibly framed as straight-talk advice that should be accepted as objectively in the Democrats’ best interest, and never presented as an ideological argument that would otherwise make sense coming from a right-winger. “Republican hates socialism” isn’t that newsworthy, whereas “GOP operative identifies Democrats’ best interests” somehow is.

      • kwtree says:

        We don't have anybody like that posting on here, though.{eye roll}…:cough: CHB :cough: R&R:cough

        • Voyageur says:

          Well, we do have one inexplicable left wing best friend: Sudafed.  He boasts that he is not a member of our stinking party but never fails to cheer for left wing nut jobs.  Oh, we're gonna have jilliots, jilliots.  They're gonna vote jilliot, jilliot.  Let me hear their IQs drop…

  3. RepealAndReplace says:

    If we want to win over unaffiliated and anti Trump Republicans, don’t chase them off with grandiose promises of great structural changes.

  4. davebarnes says:

    A neighbor mine is an old lefty who makes Bernie look like a centrist.

    He pays attention to politics more than 99.9% of the vox populi .

    I asked him who he favors. “Whoever can beat Trump”.

    No one gives a crap about policies.

  5. JohnInDenver says:

    I'll be delighted to have Congress debate M4A and other approaches to better health insurance….

    AFTER we have a Democratic President, a Democratic Vice President able to sit in as the President of the Senate, a Democratic Senate Majority Leader, and a Democratic Speaker of the House. 

  6. spaceman65 says:

    Last time I checked, the moderate D lost the electoral college in 2016.  So let the pundits pundit.  If they think Klobuchar and Bennet are sure-fire winners, well, that's just amusing to me.

    • Conserv. Head Banger says:

      "Last time I checked," the “moderate D” lost the Electoral College in 2016 due to running an inept campaign. As in, taking PA, MI, and WI for granted; and not having answers to the con man grifter’s rhetoric.

      • RepealAndReplace says:

        HRC did take those states for granted and in doing so, made a big and foolish mistake.

        But let's not forget that some of the purists among the LWNJs wasted their votes on the Green Party candidate who won more votes than separated Trump and Clinton in those 3 states. Stupidity comes with a price.

        I saw this this morning.

        This is now a competitive district today where Obama carried it in '08, lost it in '12, and HRC won in '16. Does anyone seriously think that running Bernie or Warren on the "Free Stuff" Agenda is going to help carry districts like this one?

        • Duke Cox says:

          Your characterization of the progressive agenda as the "Free Stuff" agenda is absurd and does not advance your cause.

          Try a little respect and see if that doesn't work better. You oversimplify a nuanced situation and undercut your argument thereby.


          • Conserv. Head Banger says:

            Seems I recall kwtree mentioning that Medicare for All would have no premiums, no co-pays. And the left talks about forgiveness of college loans, free college tuition, etc. Yes, Duke, the situation is complex, but there isn't any absurdity there that I can see. The real question: my reading reveals that high taxes on the upper class won't begin to pay for M for A. At least Sanders has been honest in talking about likely tax increases on the middle class.

        • Diogenesdemar says:

          HRC did take those states for granted and in doing so, made a big and foolish mistake.

          A (rhetorical) question for the ages, why oh why does the great and unmatched wisdom of moderates,  so often turn out to be inept?

          You hear it, time and time again,:

          ”You know, I just love his (or her) incredible genius — it’s soooo moderate!”

          “George Washington was a tremendously great military moderate!”

          ”Albert Einstein, Leonardo DanVinci, Socrates, Jesus, George Patton, Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Edison, Nikolai Tesla — all profiles in moderation, to the core!”

          MAMA — Make America Moderate, Again!

        • DENependent says:

          And there were also more than three times as many votes for Gary Johnson and the Libertarian ticket than the Greens in Michigan in 2016. Where did those votes come from? LWNJs?

          The Clinton theory was that LWNJs did not matter because any people angry on the left would be more than balanced out by disgusted Republicans coming in from the middle. What actually happened? Clinton was such a great moderate candidate who could round up Republicans that 172,136 voters voted Libertarian in 2016 when only 7,774 did in Michigan in 2012.

          The Clinton failure has nothing to do with the left and everything to do with moderate Republicans hating even moderate Democrats so much that they’d rather protest vote than help a Democrat win.


  7. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Bad news for the Sanders & Warren fans. According to a Monmouth poll just released, Mayor Pete is now the frontrunner in Iowa. 

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.