The Ninth Debate.

The ninth debate of the Democratic party was held in Las Vegas last night. It was much more lively and eventful than the prior eight, because five of the candidates had a common target-the short fellow down at the end of the line.  They did not shirk from their mission to destroy him and they largely succeeded. Quick impressions:

I. Helped Their Cause.

1. Elizabeth Warren.  Her best debate. All those committee sessions where she eviscerates banking execs were good preparation for getting Bloomberg on the hook and reeling him in. The stuff on the non-disclosure agreements was devastating.  He now has two choices-let those women out of their non-disclosure agreements or give up on being the Democratic nominee.  This is probably a false choice because I suspect the contents of those non-disclosure agreements would also foreclose him from being the nominee.  

Warren also got in good digs at other candidates, and deftly got in a moment of diplomacy when Pete when after Klobuchar.  If there are any soft Bernie supporters, they are probably giving Warren a second look.  Grade: A.

2. Joe Biden.  His best debate so far. He obviously knows that he's now a long shot and he was able to make his strongest points pretty effectively. He also stayed around to do post-debate interviews, something that he should have done even when he was a front-runner.  Most of all he benefits by the attacks on Bloomberg.  If Bloomberg goes down in the polls, Biden should be the beneficiary.  Grade: B+.

II.  Neither Helped Nor Hurt.

3. Pete Buttigieg.  He usually does well in these debates and he didn't have any terrible moments last night. But he spent most of his time going after Klobuchar, who isn't a front-runner. I think his campaign peaked in Iowa but if Bloomberg and Biden both flounder, he can stay around and gather some delegates.  It's not like he has anything better to do with his time.  Grade: B.

4.  Amy Klobuchar.  For the first time, she was a target of significant incoming fire. That's what happens when you exceed the polls a couple times. She was prepared for the question about the Mexican president, of course but I don't think she came across as warm and prepared as she did at the New Hampshire debate.  She regressed to the mean, which is understandable. But she needs to finish February strong or she will not be around much beyond Super Tuesday.  Grade: B.

III.  Hurt His Case.

5. Bernie Sanders.  The rest of this field has been hesitant to really go after Bernie becuase they all worry about alienating his base. But he's the front-runner now and he took at least some hits last night. He made his same ponderous "policy" points as he always does but he looked petty when responding to Bloomberg's attacks about being a millionaire with three homes by pretending this was a common thing in Vermont. 

He is likely to end the primaries with a plurality of delegates. Last nigth he made the statement that the candidate who should gets the most votes should be the nominee.  That sounds like a prety straight-forward and even obvious principle....if you forget 2016.

The last Democratic primary was held on June14th, 2016.  When it was over, Hillary Clinton had 3.7 million more votes than Bernie Sanders. She had won 54 percent of the pledged delegates. She won, fair and square.  But it took Bernie over a month to endorse her and he talked openly about trying to persuade Super Delegates to change their votes.  Now that the math is shaping up the other way, he has had a convenient change of principles.

This will hurt him, at some point. Unless of course, he runs away with the primaries and wins an outright majority of delegates. Given how fractured and mediocre his opponents looked last night, he should think this is a reasonable goal. Grade: C+.

IV.  A Monkey Trying to Fuck a Football Bat.

6. Michael Bloomberg.  Money can not buy you a personality and it can not buy a thick skin. Bloomberg was unprepared, ill-tempered and out of his league.  He pays his people a lot of money and somehow they convinced him that "The NDAs were consensual" is a sufficient defense to why he is keeping some untold number of actions for workplace harassment and discrimination secret.

There is another debate next week.  If he is really serious about being the nominee he needs to spend the whole week preparing for it, including interviews with some unfriendly outlets.  Two performances like this in a row, and he might as well turn off the cash spigots. 

I don't think Bloomberg will be the nominee. The question becomes, will he really spend a billion dollars supporting any of the people who unmaked him on that stage last night?  I don't see him doing it for Bernie or Warren. But maybe he's a bigger man than he showed last night.

Grade: F.

Embrace the Uncertainty. (Democratic Horse Race Take 13)

Iowa and New Hampshire have Cauc-voted, and all we know for sure is that we don't know much.

I. New Hampshire Analysis.

My predictions were terrible but the polling averages were pretty accurate.  Let's compare:

1.  Bernie Sanders: Result 1st 25.9%.   Polling average 1st 28.7, Prediction 1st 28%.

Bernie did fine. He won and that's the most important thing. But his number was slightly lower than expected and as in Iowa, it does not seem that he brought out waves of young people to vote for him. The electorate is obviously focused on beating Trump and his electability argument is predicated on turning out young people to vote for him in unprecedented numbers. So far, we don't have evidence of that.

The optimistic take is that Bernie is the person most likely to wind up with a plurality of delegates. I am increasing skeptical that he will get through the process with a majority however.  Yesterday Nate Silver's model had him winding up with about 1,650 delegates. After NH the model has him winning 1,531. (1,990 are needed for a majority.)

2.  Pete Buttigieg.  Result: 2nd/24.4%  Polling average: 2nd/21.3%  Prediction:  3rd/16%.

Pete overperformed, slightly. His strategy officially paid off. By working IA and NH meticulously and accepting all free media invitations, he was able to get one gold and one silver. For the moment he has a negligible lead in delegates with 23. (Sanders has 21.)

Now he has to run nationally. He will get a lot of attention but I think voters will be concerned about his lack of experience. 

3. Amy Klobuchar  Result 3rd/19.8%  Polling average: 3rd/11.75  Prediction: 5th/11%.

No one can accuse me of being a homer. Klobuchar had a great night and will now get a lot of media attention. But she has to start running in places that have not paid much attention to her until very recently.   She had a fundraising windfall after the last debate and should have one today too. But she has to scale up in a hurry and I'm not sure what her campaign will focus on next.

She remains a huge long-shot. Nate Silver's model only has her winning 80 delegates. (Up from a project 57 before NH.)  That's two percent. She needs to start beating Pete and she has to worry that Bloomberg might get a lot of voters that otherwise would have voted for her.

I would advise her to keep pointing out the contrasts with Mayor Pete. She has the resume of a president. He does not.  But she also needs someone to go negative on Bernie. I don't think it's the right time to do that directly. But Biden and Warren might have to do that for their own interests.

4.  Elizabeth Warren  Result: 4th/9.3%.  Polling Average: 4th/11%  Prediction: 4th/14%.

It was not her night. Being from a neighboring state, she should have done better than 4th. But she can also claim with a straight face to have done as well as Klobuchar so far. (She in fact has 8 delegates, and Klobuchar 7.)  I think she is a pragmatist. Most years that would mean dropping out now. But this year looks like a fight for every delegate until Milwaukee. She will stay in until Super Tuesday, at least. Watch her fundraising. I think a lot of her donors might be drifting towards Amy Klobuchar today but I know Warren is a worker. She knows that she can still have a big say in who the nominee is and what the platform looks like.


5.  Joe Biden.  Result 5th/8.3%  Polling Average: 4th(tie)/11.0%. Prediction: 2nd/20%.
I thought NH would give Biden a comeback narrative. But his attack on Mayor Pete felt petty and he slid all the way down to 5th place. He skipped town before the voting was done.  But he does have an argument that will resonate with some-so far only white people have been voting. That can give him some hope but he's a wounded candidate and there will be a lot of money spent trying to deny him a win in South Carolina.  If he's going to be the nominee, he needs to have the best 18 days of his campaigning life.

I am starting to think that Trump's Ukraine/Hunter/Burisma fantasy hurt Biden. I don't think any Democrat believes this is a real scandal but there's probably some percentage who doesn't want to go through Hillary's emails again.  The unfortunate thing is that any candidate will have some version of that bullshit thrown at them by Trump and Fox News.  Biden's reputation is probably best suited to withstand it. But he got his ass kicked twice and I'm not sure how he turns that story around.

II.. The Horse Race.

The Top Tier (Front Runners)
1.  Bernie Sanders
2.  Pete Buttigieg (Up from 2)
3.  Michael Bloomberg (Up from 4)

Tier Two (The Alternatives)
4.  Amy Klobuchar (Up from 6)
5.  Elizabeth Warren

Tier Three: (The Wounded)
6. Joe Biden (Down from 2)

Tier Four: (Nothing Better to Do With the Lives)
7. Tom Steyer  He's already spent a fortune in NV and SC so he might as well stick around to see if he can get any return on it. I suspect not.
8.  Tulsi Gabbard  (Up from 9)

III.  The Power Rankings, Take 12
These are just my personal preferences among the remaining candidates.
1. Amy Klobuchar
2. Joe Biden (Up from 4)
3. Pete Buttigieg (Up from 5)
4. Elizabeth Warren (Up from 6)
5. Michael Bloomberg (Up from 7)
6. Bernie Sanders (Up from 8)
7. Tom Steyer (Up from 9)
8. Tulsi Gabbard (Up from 11)

Pour a little out for Andrew Yang, Michael Bennet and Deval Patrick. Bennet and Patrick would have been contenders for compromise candidates at a brokered convention. But I doubt that will happen now.

Andrew Yang will start a podcast and/or Multiple Level Marketing scheme any day now. His endorsement would be worth something, but I'm not sure who he would give it to. Without one, I suspect that the 3 percent of voters he got in NH will split pretty evenly, among Bernie and Pete.

Oscars

It's been nine months since I wrote a non-political post so I thought I would do a quick post about my thoughts on the Oscar contenders. Full disclosure-I have not seen some of the contenders and have been mostly underwhelmed by the five Best Picture nominees that I did see.

Best Picture.

1. Little Women- very well done movie but a little dull at times. There is also one odd casting choice that I think didn't work. (It's a bit of a spoiler, so I won't say more.)

2. Parasite.  Clever, entertaining and genuinely suspenseful at times. But it's an odd mash of genres and it didn't quite stick the landing.

3. The Irishman.  A good movie that is poignant at times but this is well-tread land and I do not intend to ever watch it again.

4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.  Have you ever wondered what Quentin Tarrantino day dreams about?  Apparently he day dreams about being a really handsome stunt man who beats up Bruce Lee and thrwarts the Manson Family Murders.  Other than letting the world know this about him, there is no reason for this movie to have been made.

5. Joker. An impressive acting performance in a dry and dull script that does more harm than good to the Batman universe. The only move left for this franchise is to cast the sequel as broad camp. Andy Daly needs to be Batman and I want Jaquin Phoenix to stay on as the Joker, but just do it in the style of Caeser Romero.

I did not see 1917, Jojo Rabbit, Ford v. Ferrari, or Marriage Story. I could watch Marriage Story at any time with the click of a button but I understand the premise of the movie is that a homely guy is sad because he is married to Scarlett Johansson. In no universe will I ever have time to watch that.

Prediction:  Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Rooting:  Little Women

Best Director:

Greta Gerwig was not nominated for Little Women, so I guess I'm rooting for Boong Joon-ho for Parasite. But I expect Quentin Tarrantino to win for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Best Actor:

Joaquine Phoenix is a lock to win this but I'm rooting for Jonathan Pryce in The Two Popes. I have no idea why Leo was nominated in this category. His performance was pedestrian and he was no more the lead than Brad Pitt, who was nominated in the supporting category. 

Best Actress:

I only saw one of these movies,. Renee Zellweger will probably win for Judy but I will be rooting for Saoirse Ronan in Little Women. Most likely the academy will make Saiorse wait a little bit longer, but she seems destined to win one eventually.

Best Supporting Actor:

This is the first category that I have seen all five nominees. Brad Pitt was the best part of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, so I will be fine with him winning. Anthony Hopkins was very good in The Two Popes. Tom Hanks was perfectly fine in the Mr. Rogers movie but I don't think he is winning his third Oscar for it. Al Pacino managed to tone it down a little for the Irishman, so that's why he got nominated.

But the best performance here by far was Joe Pesci in the Irishman. I will be rooting for him. But Pitt is the favorite.

Best Supporting Actress.

I only saw one of these performances so I guess I'm obligated to root for Florence Pugh in Little Women. Most likely the winner will be Laura Dern because its her turn.

Best Original Screenplay:

This has to go to Riann Johnson for Knives Out, the best movie I have mentioned so far. 

Best Adapted Screenplay:

Prediction and Rooting: Greta Gerwig for Little Women. But I would also be pleased if Anthony McCarten won for The Two Popes, which was very well written.

I can not believe Joker got a nomination in this category 

On to Cincinnati, I mean New Hampshire. And Then to Milwaukee.

The Iowa Caucus was both very, very close and riddled with administrative incompetence.  That is not a good way to start the election. I will begin my analysis by quoting Bernie Sanders:

"[W]hat happened Monday night at the Democratic caucuses was a debacle, period. The results were too close not to do a complete audit. This is not a — this is not, like, a winner-take-all thing. I think where we now stand... you have 22 delegates, I have 20 delegates. We need 2,500 delegates to win the nomination. You know, so this is not this is not the biggest deal in the world."

To clarify, that quote from Bernie Sanders was on February 4, 2016 during the Post-Iowa, Pre-New Hampshire debate. The 2016 Iowa caucus was basically a tie and so was the 2020 Iowa caucus. The screw up with the app and the delay in announcing results was bad in the moment but it will be forgotten soon enough. (Although I hope the Democratic party remember it when slating the next primary calendar. Iowa needs to go to the back of the line.)

I. Iowa Results.

The results are pretty muddled.  I will discuss each candidate with some reference to my predictions in the last post. 

1. Pete Buttigieg (26.2%, 13 or 14 delegates).

Buttigieg had a good night, finishing in a de-facto tie with Bernie Sanders. That's good for him, because a poor result in Iowa would have been fatal to his candidacy. He "won" to fight another day at least, and there is some evidence of an uptick in his New Hampshire numbers.  But I don't think he's going to have a long and deep run. His victory speech in Iowa rubbed people the wrong way, but he needed to do it because his fund raising has been sluggish.

I predicted he'd come 3rd with 17%, so a win/tie at 26 is a very good result.

2. Bernie Sanders (26.1% 12 or 13 delegates).

He did fine. He can make an honest claim of winning the raw vote, and in a virtual tie for delegates. His campaign did well at the satellite locations and turned out enough people to (almost) win. But turnout was lower than expected and the base theory of his campaign is that he is capable of turning out young and infrequent voters. Four years ago about 85,000 people turned up to caucus for him. This week, only about 26,000 chose him among a much larger field. Perhaps more troubling is that he didn't seem to gain a lot of voters between the 1st and 2nd rounds of voting, where Biden/Klobuchar and Warren voters gravitated towards Buttigieg, giving him the delegate lead.

I predicted he would win with 28%, so a very close 2nd with 26% is mildly disappointing. But he should win New Hampshire and the poor showing by Biden has pushed him into the lead of the betting markets.

3. Elizabeth Warren (18%, 8 delegates).

The good news is that she did better than her polling predicted. But she was pretty far off the lead and Bernie Sanders seems to be the clear choice of the progressive wing of the party. This is an adequate result for her and she will probably stick around past the early primaries.

I predicted she would be 4th with 14%, so she exceeded that.

4. Joe Biden (15.8%, 6 delegates).

He shit the bed. Iowa was not great for him demographically but he also failed to execute a good ground game, and that led to him underperforming. At the moment, he looks weak. And there's not much reason to think that New Hampshire will be much better for him.  He is going to stick around and make his stand in South Carolina. But he needs a stronger result in New Hampshire than this. 

I predicted he would be 2nd with 23%, so this is a very bad result.

5. Amy Klobuchar (12.3%, 1 delegate).

This was an adequate result. She was the first to take the podium on caucus night, taking advantage of the lack of results to claim that she had finished strong and was ready to move on to New Hampshire with momentum. She also won a delegate, which is significant because it gives her a guaranteed spot in the Nevada debate.

She also should be heartened by the Biden number. If Biden slips, Klobuchar could stand to gain a lot of his voters. Last night's debate in New Hampshire went very well for her and she was the overwhelming favorite of the "undecided" voters in the various TV audiences. Her campaign raised over a million dollars in just a few hours after the debate. If she can move up at all in NH, then she is probably going to stay in until at least Super Tuesday.

I predicted that she would be 5th with 12%, so I pretty much nailed that.

And for the non-delegate candidates:

These two chumps tried to compete in Iowa and came away with nothing for their efforts.

6. Andrew Yang 1%, Hardly surprising but still gratifying to see.

7. Tom Steyer 0.3%  Embarrassing.

The Non-Iowa candidates.

Four of the remaining 11 candidates decided to mostly skip Iowa in order to concentrate on New Hampshire, or in Bloomberg's case, the Super Tuesday States. 

8. Tulsi Gabbard   A grand total of 334 people turned up to caucus for her. That is 0.2%, which is 0.2% more than she deserved.

9. Michael Bloomberg 

10. Michael Bennet 

11, Deval Patrick

II. New Hampsire Predictions.

Bernie winning seems to be the only sure thing here.  The post-Iowa polls suggest that Bernie will win and Pete will come second. That would be the traditional revers of the Iowa result, but I think the margin should be significant.  In fact I think Pete is more likely to finish 3rd than to win.

The hardest candidate to hadicap is Biden. New Hampshire loves to reject the Iowa winner, so maybe he will bounce up to 2nd. But he also looks weak and feels vulnerable. Another 4th place finish would be a disaster. If he does fnish 4th (or 5th) it will be interesting to see where his voters go-to Buttigieg, Klobuchar or Warren. 

Without further ado, here is the official prediction for New Hampshire.

1. Bernie Sanders 28%.

2. Joe Biden 20%

3. Pete Buttigieg 16%

4. Elizabeth Warren 14%

5. Amy Klobuchar 11%

6. Yang 4%

7. Steyer 3%

8. Gabbard 2%

8. Patrick 1%

10. Bennet 0.3%

How to judge the results of each serious candidate:

• CANDIDATE                                    GOOD     ADEQUATE  BAD
• SANDERS                                          WIN            2ND             3RD
• BIDEN                                              2ND            3RD             4TH
• BUTTIGIEG                                      2ND            3RD             4TH
• WARREN                                          3RD            4TH              5TH
• KLOBUCHAR                                    3RD            4TH              5TH

*If anyone else finishes in the top 5, then the candidates they beat will probably have to drop out.

III.  Someone Has to Win This Thing.

Before Iowa, Joe Biden was the consensus front-runner. That is no longer the case. So far the race has been more like two separate races for the wings of the party. On the left, Bernie Sanders has solidified his base and has a clear lead over Elizabeth Warren.  In the center, Biden has faltered, with Buttigieg and Klobuchare both exceeding early expectations. And Michael Bloomberg is waiting in the wings to further confuse that end of the pool.

I think there are four likely outcomes to this race:  

1. Bernie Sanders wins a narrow majority after a potracted primary race. (40% chance)

2. The primaries end with no candidate having obtained a majority. (30% chance)

3.  Joe Biden consolidates the center and wins a majority of delegates. (25% chance)

4.  Pete Buttigieg and Michael Bloomberg win a combined majority of delegates and run on the same ticket (5%)

I hate that this gives short shrift to Elizabeth Warren. Maybe she can surprisse in New Hampshire and knock some of the smaller candidates out of the race early. If it becomes a head to head race between Sanders and Warren, some moderates will rally to her. But I don't think it's going to happen. But I have a hard time seeing her cobble together a delegate majority. Bernie owns all the real estate to her left and there are several viable options to her right.  I don't think this is her year.

Scenario number two is most interesting.  The current projections on 538.com have Bernie winning almost 42% of the delegates and Joe Biden winning 25%.  Buttigies and Warren each winning about 11% and Bloomberg winning about 9%. (These numbers will change wildly if any of the top candidates drop out before Super Tuesday.)

The easiest mathematical solution is a Sanders-Warren ticket. But there is a huge problem with that ticket. Both Vermont and Massachussets have Republican governors. If that ticket wins, it will immediately cost the Democratic party two senate seats.  In Massachussets, the interim senator will sit for about 100 days. In Vermont for up to six months.  Even if the Democrats win both special elections, the Warren-Sanders administration will be handicapped for the "First 100 days" of its term.  The party will not want to sign on to that.

So if that ticket doesn't happen, what does the party do?  If Bernie is very close to 50% of the delegates, he can probably pull it off. But if he is 300 or 400 delegates short, the party will be torn between rallying to him and pissing off his base. The only thing we know for sure, is that Bernie will fight to the last possible moment, just as he did in 2016. 

The Party regulars will not want to give it to Bernie for a variety of reasons. The simplest being that he is not a Democrat and he cares nothing about the party as an institution. That is alienating, and for good reason. (Imagine running for president of the local Ozzy Osbourne fan club with a platform of, "I don't care for Black Sabbath.")

If Biden has a plurality of the delegates, he will probably be the nominee. He can offer Veep to Klobuchar, who might control 50 or 100 delegates and who is well-liked by the establishment. And Buttigieg might realize that his future is long and bright so long as he doens't rock the boat. Bloomberg would also be fine with a Biden-Klobuchar ticket. So I think that's an easy sell.

But if the number really look like Nate Silver's forecast, the party might need to turn to a compromise candidate. It would be a huge risk to run an unvetted candidate, but let's consider some of the options.

Some of the best choices have probably taken themselves out of the running by having run in this race on their own.  Imagine a world in which the Democratic party needed to win with an unknown face who could do well in the Midwest, had no obvious diaqualifying qualities and appealed to most of the Democratic base?  Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris and Deval Partick all fit that description on paper. But ti would be hard for the party to foist a candidate on the general public who had been rejected by the voters.

Other possiblities:

1. Sherrod Brown.  This would cost the party a senate seate for 2 full years but he has a foot in both worlds of the party and he might make Ohio competitive. He's probably the best option in this scenario, if only because the decison to not run in this verkhata primary makes him look 10 IQ points smarter.

2. Stacey Abrams.  The party faithful will embrace her. But running a black woman whose highest electoral win is a state legislture race is very, very risky. Definitely on the VP short list though.

3. Tom Wolf.  Let me save you a Google.  He is the governor of Pennsyvlania. He's sane, sober and popular in one of the most important swing states.  He's also both bald and bland, so he won't excite anyone.  But he has to be considered.

4. Chris Murphy.  He doesn't put any swing states in play but he's young and handsome and moderate. His very public advocacy of gun control would help him with surubabn women but would also hurt him in some of the swing states that the Dems need to win back. He is viable.

5. Tammy Baldwin.  On the one hand, she is a popular senator twice elected in the 2016 tipping poin state of Wisconsin. On the other, she is lesbian and some people will think that's risky. She is also unmarried and childless, which I do believe are impediments to national candidates.

IV. The Old Metrics.

This is the 12th post I've done on the Democratic field, so I might as well update my usual standings.  There have been changes, after all.

A. The Horse Race, Take 12

The Top Tier (Front-Runners)

1. Bernie Sanders (up from 2)

2. Joe Biden (Down from 1)

3. Pete Buttigieg (Up from 5)

4. Mike Bloomberg

Tier Two (The Alternatives)

5. Elizabeh Warren (Down from 4)  This just does not seem to be her year. But if she does well in NH, I will happily put her back in the top tier.

6. Amy Klobuchar.

She has qualified for every debate stage (sometimes just barely) and she won an delegate in Iowa (just barely.) But she needs to actually lap some people in NH.

Tier Three; The Novelty Candidates.

7.  Tom Steyer.  (Up from 10)  He's the rich weirdo.

8. Andrew Yang (Up from 9) He's the amiable weirdo.

9. Tulsi Gabbard (Up from 11)  She's the malevlolent weirdo.

Tier Four: The Long Shots.

10. Deval Patrick (Down from 8)

11. Michael Bennet (Down from 7)

Note: I moved the Novelty Candidates ahead of the Long Shots. Now that we have some votes on the board, it's pretty obvious that Patrick and Bennet are not going to catch fire with the electorate. Steyer migth be committed to setting 20% of his fortune on fire, so he could hang around for awhiel.  Tulsi and Yang have never been serious about running for president, but it might serve their actual agenda to pretend to keep running for awhile.

B.  The Power Rankings, Take 11.

These are just my personal preferences among the remaining candidates.

1. Amy Klobuchar

2. Michael Bennet

3. Deval Patrick (Up from 7)

4. Joe Biden (Down from 3)

5. Pete Buttigieg (Down from 4)

6. Elizabeth Warren (Down from 5)

7. Michael Bloomberg (Up from 9)

8. Bernie Sanders (Down from 6)

9. Tome Steyer (Down from 8)

10. Andrew Yang

11. Tulsi Gabbard

This One Goes to Eleven (Handicapping the Democratic Field, Take 11 PLUS Iowa Predictions!

A few days ago, former Representative John Delaney dropped out of the race. He spent over $20 million of his own money and didn't even stick around long enough for the voting to start.  This is not a healthy system.

The big news this week was the Senate's capitulation to Donald Trump. The Republican majority refused to even have a proper trial with witnesses and evidence. They're just going to bit the bullet and stick with their man and hope that he lets them hold on to power for a few more years while the Baby Boomers take their resentment and entitlement to the grave.

In about 30 hours, the people of Iowa will caucus for the remaining 11 candidates.  I will go through each of those option, in the order which I rank their chances of being president. For each, I will say what is a Good Result, Adequate and Disappointing result tomorrow.

My theory remains that we will not know who is likely to be the nominee until Super Tuesday.  None of the early states is representative of the Democratic party nationally. Iowa and New Hampshire have almost no minority voters. Nevada has a lot of Latin voters, but not many black voters. Then South Carolina balances things out by having a disproportionately high number of black voters.  Only on Super Tuesday will we have a big enough sample to know where the country is going. 

And this years is the first time that a truly major candidate is skipping the early states all together. If Biden under performs in those early states, a lot of moderate will give Michael Bloomberg a long hard look. 

Here are my early state predictions:

Iowa:  1. Sanders (28%). 
            2. Biden (23%) 
            3. Buttigieg (17%)  
            4. Warren (14%) 
            5. Klobuchar (12%)


NH*    1. Biden  2. Sanders   3. Warren  4. Klobuchar 
NV       1. Sanders  2. Biden  3. Warren 
SC        1. Biden  2. Sanders 

* To clarify-I think Bernie/Biden will finish in the top 2 in IA and NH. The order will switch be NH has decided that their purpose in life is to veto the winner of the Iowa caucuses.

 The Top Tier (The Front Runners).

1. Joe Biden 
GOOD IOWA RESULT: Win
ADEQUATE IOWA RESULT: 2nd
BAD IOWA RESULT: 4th

2. Bernie Sanders 
Good: Win
Adequate: 2nd
Bad:  4th

3. Elzabeth Warren
Good: 2nd
Adequate: 3rd
Bad: 4th. 

4. Mike Bloomberg 
N/A

B.  Tier Two (The Alternatives).

5. Pete Buttigieg 
Good: Win.  (If he can't win here, he probably can't win anywhere.)
Adequate: 2nd
Bad:  4th.  He can probably justify a close 3rd place finish but if he doesn't make the medal table in Iowa, he might as well drop out. His national numbers have tanked and Indian doesn't vote until May. 

6.  Amy Klobuchar  
Good:  3rd
Adequate: 4th.  (Especially if she finishes ahead of Warren.)
Bad: 6th  She's beein in 5th place in Iowa for awhile now but she has had a couple good polls that have her in 3rd or 4th. Finishing ahead of Pete and or Warren will be a win. As an avowed Klobuchar supporter, I thin here best result looks something like Bernie 30, Biden 24, Klobuchar 15, Buttigieg 13, Warren 11.  Yang 4 Gabbard 3. 

C. Long Shots:

7.  Michael Bennet  

8. Deval Patrick.  (Up from 9)
Both of these guys have been focusing on NH.

D. Novelty Candidates.

9. Andrew Yang (Up from 10)
Good Result: 5th
Adequate Result; 6th
Bad Result:  If he gets under 5 percent, then we officially know he's just an internet meme. Anything over 5 percent or finishging ahead of Steyer and Klobuchar would suggest that he has more of a game ground than I suspected.

10. Tom Steyer (Up from 11) 
Good Result:  5th
Adequate Result: 6th
Bad Result: 7th
He has spent a ton of money in all of the early states. He needs to show a pulse in IA, but even a terrible result won't cause him to drop out.   He is angry at money, apparently.

11. Tulsi Gabbard (Up from 12)
It doesn't really matter. She's going to keep running. I don't know what her objective is, but I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with being the Democratic nominee for president in 2020.

III. The Power Rankings, Take Ten.

These are just my personal preferences among the remaining candidates.

1.  Amy Klobuchar
2.   Michael Bennet   
3.   Joe Biden 
4.   Pete Buttigieg 

5.   Elizabeth Warren 
6.   Bernie Sanders (Up from 7)
7.   Deval Patrick (Up from 8)
8.  Tom Steyer

9.  Michael Bloomberg (Up from 10) 

10 Andrew Yang  (Up from 11)

11.   Tulsi Gabbard  (Up from 12)