Harris ahead of Newsom by double digits in poll

[Melon]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/kamala-harris-beating-gavin-newsom-by-double-digits-in-2028-poll/ar-AA27zPOf?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6a50814955934cc89fb03c674d0dcad2&ei=37

[W_HAMILTON]

1. And ahead of every other potential Democratic candidate by even more.

35.3% Harris
17.7% Newsom
12.9% Buttigieg
11.1% Ocasio-Cortez
07.1% Shapiro

[Terry_M]

2. The definition of insanity

Sure, let's try the same thing again and hope for different results.

Why would the people who didnt vote for her in the general over Gaza vote for her in the general in 28? They wouldnt... but sure let's try again and expect different results.

[mopinko]

4. maybe they see how stupid that was?

they didnt vote at all. maybe they’re sorry.
at any rate, there r millions who didnt vote for whatever reasons. whoever runs, we need to mobilize THEM.

i’ve seen lots of ppl win on their 2nd try.

[Boo1]

7. Nope

They still defend it with "blah blah blah aipac"

[Terry_M]

22. No

First, I know people who despite some effort on my part did a third party protest vote. There is 0.000% chance they would vote for her in 2028.

Secondly for any person who does change their mind, there may be another who feels they already compromised by voting for her in 2024 who will sit out 2028 if they end up in the same situation a second time.

[Celerity]

25. In the 198 year history of our Party only one Democrat every won the POTUS after losing a POTUS

general election (as a Democrat). Grover Cleveland. And he had already won a POTUS general before that. He won tje POSTUS in 1884, lost his presidential reelection bid in 1888, but won the presidency again in 1892.

The very first Democratic POTUS, Andrew Jackson, won as a Democrat in 1828 (the year the party formed) after losing as a Democratic-Republican Party candidate in 1824.

If Harris wins the 2028 POTUS primary but loses the 2028 POTUS general, she joins 2 other Democrats as the only Democratic multiple POTUS general election losers:

Adlai Stevenson (twice a POTUS general election loser, in 1952 and 1956).

And the all-time failure record holder: William Jennings Bryant (a triple POTUS general election loser, in 1896, in 1900, and in 1908).

[BannonsLiver]

18. You're not interested in a replay of the "he's for you..." ad for months on end, except with Vance, DJTJR or Rubio?

I can’t imagine why.

[anamnua]

26. Like Richard Nixon?

It goes without saying that the comparison goes no further.
There is another maxim:
'If at first you don't succeed...'

[angrychair]

30. She is trying to change that mindset

She has had multiple phone calls and in person meetings with people like Mayor Mamdani and AOC and those groups that opposed her in places like Michigan.

She is working on her messaging and relationships across multiple communities of people.

It will be different this time.

[Intractable]

3. These numbers will be quite different after the first primary debate.

I'm sure Kamala will fare better than she did in the 2020 debates, but how much better?

I don't have a preference at this point.

There will be new players we don't yet know of and world events we cannot yet foresee.

May the best candidate win.

[Ars Longa]

5. I knew she was in the mix, but

35%??
Is it name recognition?
I don't dislike her, but I was not considering her...
We need to turn the page-on the Trump Era!

[mopinko]

10. polling at this point pretty much is.

[angrychair]

31. Every possible candidate

Is part of that era.

She has had multiple meetings with people like Mayor Mamdani and Representative AOC and the disaffected groups that opposed her in places like Michigan.

She is putting in the work to be a better candidate and I for one 100% support her as our next president.

[SocialDemocrat61]

6. In 2007, Hillary Clinton was the front runner

for the 08 nomination. How did that work out?
Until the actual campaign starts, polls are useless.

[mopinko]

11. she didnt win, but she came pretty close.

[SocialDemocrat61]

12. Close only counts with

horseshoes and hand grenades. LOL

[mopinko]

13. i'm just sayin- it wasnt measuring nothing.

[SocialDemocrat61]

14. FYI 2007 polls also had

Rudy Guiliani as the leader for the Republican nomination. Polls this far out only measure name recognition. They are meaningless.

[Ilikepurple]

20. I'm not sure you know what "meaningless" means?

Obviously there is more to Giuliani’s 2007 numbers than name recognition, but even name recognition is known to have impact on voting. Low predictive value? Maybe, but certainly not meaningless. If we are wasting our time paying attention to polling, what sort of information or speculation do you find meaningful at this time? It might help those of us know what facts and speculation we should focus our attention on.

[SocialDemocrat61]

21. None

Polling 2 years prior to an election has never been reliable. People would be better served focusing on the midterms and wait for the presidential campaign to actually begin.

[Ilikepurple]

23. This I agree with. I would say not very reliable but also not meaningless.

I just wouldn’t put too much stock in polls at the moment. They say more about voters current sentiments than their future votes, but they contain information. How much or if we know how to use it is questionable.

[SocialDemocrat61]

24. As the saying goes

The only reliable poll is the one on Election Day.

[Scrivener7]

8. Quantus Insights doesn't seem to have a lot of presence, though they do call themselves "a premier polling

organization."

I'd like to know more about the pollster and a quick google search yields only Quantus talking about Quantus.

[QueerDuck]

9. What exactly was the question? "Who do you recognize in this list?" "Who would you vote for?"

"Who do you predict will be the nominee?" --- I followed the links and looked but I could not find anything to clarify. Maybe I was looking in the wrong places.

[Takket]

15. Yeah let me clarify something because the poll is very confusing...

I didn’t understand how the poll couldn’t have any rethug names under “who do you want to be president” in 2028

They surveyed over 1000 people, consisting of Dems, rethugs and indies. They only asked DEMOCRATS who they wanted to be their nominee AFTER those people responded that they were democrats. Same for the rethugs.

Hope that helps you make sense of this lol.

[tritsofme]

16. In 2002, Joe Lieberman was leading polls like this. It's purely a name recognition contest at this point.

[BannonsLiver]

17. Lol

[MineralMan]

19. Way, way too early to be polling the 2028 primary races.

Why do we do this, time after time? It's a waste of time that could be betted used thinking about how to win in 2026!

[Doodley]

27. Only those who have risen to the challenge of taking on this fascist administration are qualified, IMO.

[DenaliDemocrat]

28. Neither will win vs a Republican

We need a candidate with broader appeal

[angrychair]

32. "Broader appeal"

She got the second most votes of any Democratic presidential candidate ever. Third most of any candidate ever.

She has very broad appeal and has over the last several months has bern working to mend fences with progressives by meeting with everyone from mayor Mamdani to representative AOC to the very disaffected groups that withheld their vote in the last election.

Give her a whole election cycle and not having to carry the messaging of another (due to being the sitting VP of a sitting president) and I think she will win in a landslide we haven't seen since Reagan.

[angrychair]

29. Super exciting

I know she has been talking to Mayor Mamdani and AOC and organizations that pro-Gaza organizations that withheld their vote last time to improve those relationships with progressives and I could not be happier.

I fully support and endorse VP Harris as our next president of the United States.

[sarisataka]

34. We have midterms to worry about first

Lat's focus on the immediate issue, winning those.

[hamsterjill]

35. No, thank you.

I think Harris would be a mistake. Were she to get the nomination, obviously, I'd support her. But I do not relish reliving the past. I never felt that she made her mark as VP. It was a disaster in Texas when she came to inspect the border situation. She was completely out of touch and blew the problems off instead of addressing them.

Not sure that I put much faith in this poll because I would think Mark Kelly would be somewhere in the mix.

Just my late night opinion, of course.

[Melon]

36. Harris is not for me in the next election.

I’m counting on our party to have better candidates to vote on. I’m not going down that path a second time.

[PufPuf23]

37. Quantus Insights is best known for having the "most accurate" poll in predicting the Trump win in 2024.

Quantus Insights is Jason Corley, GOP and a vigorous Trumper.

The poll could indicate that the GOP favors Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate and wants to depress Gavin Newsom and others.

edit to add link: https://quantus.substack.com/about