Tulsi Lands 3rd Qualifying Poll--One Week until Deadline

A just-released CNN/Des Moines Register poll in Iowa (which is a debate-qualifying poll) shows Tulsi at 2% in Iowa.

CNN/Des Moines Register Poll

This joins a previous national CNN poll and a CBS/University of New Hampshire poll (in that state), which now gives Tulsi 3 of the needed 4 qualifying polls to join the October debates. The deadline for that debate is something like Sept. 28, so there is one week left for Tulsi's campaign to snag that final poll.

Seems like CNN isn't being influenced so much by the mainstream media and DNC, as they now have their name on two of the qualifying polls.

17 users have voted.


Maybe it's a matter of survival for them.

5 users have voted.
boriscleto's picture

9 users have voted.

" In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy "

Pluto's Republic's picture

That is a powerful statement. What she does during this campaign is important for the future.

It is a very long time in dog years before the first primary votes will occur. The only candidates who are getting traction are those armed with Bold Agendas that will directly benefit the lives of voters. We can already see primary voters growing tired of the echo-chamber candidates who want to improve on more-of-the-same solutions that have not solved the problems. Like Obamacare.

Voters are looking for a new, fresh vision that will avoid future problems while eliminating current problems that are degrading the quality of life for all Americans. Like homelessness and rampant child hunger. We are growing new citizens with epigenetic brain damage from poverty and abuse. We are releasing former prisoners into our communities after they have suffered mental health trauma and brain damage while they were incarcerated in our national Hell Holes. None of this is the behavior of a sane country.

People aren't stupid. They know that all their problems are caused by underfunded social development and infrastructure inadequacies. They know that more than half of all government revenues are wasted on foreign wars and the living disasters that survive those wars. The Problem contains the answer to the question: "How are you going to pay for that?"

The way you pay for 'social good' is by prioritizing it — and then living in that reality. The same way you are now paying for the nation-destroying war economy. You jump off the cliff and build your wings on the way down.

That's the reason you see candidates like Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard climbing in the polls. They speak the kind of truth that people want to hear and they offer bold, sensible solutions.

Currently, Joe Biden is the exception to this trend. He is an echo-chamber candidate offering intermittent tweaking on more-of-the-same policies. In a recent poll of Democratic voters, 47 percent of them want to move toward more moderate positions. These are the centrist dems who control the Party. They are reaching out to moderate Republicans and Trump haters for votes. The Dems have no aggressive interest in young voters or non voters, because, in the end, the social improvements that they want are not what the Dems corporate donors want. However, if these disenfranchised voters do come out to vote, the candidate that they support will win the primaries.

[edit=correction final sentence.]

13 users have voted.

The purpose of a writer is to keep civilization from destroying itself.
– Albert Camus

on Moon over Alabama that said she had qualified for the debate.

7 users have voted.

Sanders at 11%, well behind Biden and Warren? If that holds up, I think it’s a disaster.

3 users have voted.
Wally's picture


Here's another recent one by CBS News/YouGov:
Biden 29
Bernie 26
WARren 17

I've noted more than a few times that I've given a few bucks to Tulsi and hope she gets into the next debate but I wish she wouldn't do stuff like this:

8 users have voted.

@Wally is that the latest CNN/DMR poll was conducted by a very credible polling outfit, Selzer & Co, which correctly noted the surge in Iowa for Obama in late 2007 against Hillary (h/t Michael Tracey).

So nothing to scoff at, and given the numbers, quite a bit there for the Bernie camp to be concerned about. And it may well track with Bernie's own internal statewide polling, as the campaign just pink slipped their #2 campaign person in that state before this poll was released.

Other notable items in this poll: 1) the trend line compared with the last poll (June) in IA by this reputable polling firm has EW up by 7 pts, Biden down 3 its, Bernie down 5, Buttigieg down 6;

2) of those polled who caucused for Bernie in 2016, Warren now leads. Bernie comes in second among his own former caucusers.

3) Warren also leads among under-35 Iowans polled. The youth vote is supposed to be Bernie's reliable group among his base.

Re Tulsi, it's encouraging she has just one more poll to go to qualify for the Oct debate, but discouraging that she is coming down to the wire (8 more days left) to qualify. I will also look for her comments following the scheduled joint appearance by Trump and Modi in Houston at a large "Howdy!" rally which seems like a political arrangement to provide Donald with added and needed FP cred.

2 users have voted.

@wokkamile Ann Selzer is a credible pollster only in the same universe that calls Jon Rolston of Nevada a credible journalist. Not here on Earth, 2019.

Jon,known on msdnc as "the Dean of Las Vegas" is the buffoon from a Las Vegas rag, whose zealous work on behalf of hillbots & company, spread chair-throwing and other fake news.

Ann, another fake, wants us to believe that 802 people in Iowa are predicting anything except who is paying them.

( In other news, Her newspaper, the Des Moines Register had a story up this am that Bernie got the most enthusiastic reception at an event this morning.)

5 users have voted.


@NYCVG to consider revising your opinion of the Selzer poll if you were to take a minute to watch the relevant portion, a few minutes in, of the above-linked M Tracey podcast. Tracey reports that Selzer is not only a legit but well-respected poll inside IA, which poll correctly noted the Obama surge in 2007 against Hillary in IA.

And Tracey is a confirmed Bernie Backer. But he's honest, and reports the truth, even if painful.

This strikes me as a case of some people not wanting to hear and accept unwelcome news. Me, I try to keep an emotional distance from the pols I back (Tulsi, Bernie, with Liz as an acceptable alternative) and I always appreciate when honest analysts like Tracey are also so inclined despite their own preferences.

That said, I consider this poll as an important one to consider in the current horserace, probably more accurate than most, but yet still only a snapshot of the standings in a long race, with months to go. And I suspect the Bernie camp is not dismissing it either, and will continue to make adjustments to do very well, i.e. win, in an important early state for him.

3 users have voted.
Wally's picture


Please get your facts straight. He's been supporting Tulsi for quite some time now.

So, in this context, I can see why he's gushing over Selzer now.

And what's the margin of error in that poll? So if someone gets less than, say 4% or so, the error can go up but it can also go down.

And I agree with WoodsDweller about the polls being all over the map. And it wasn't so long ago that even Tracey was complaining about how all these polls sample a very tiny proportion of the population with them being skewed in many different directions.

In any event, looking at aggregate polling on RCP or 538, it seems clear that Bernie and Warren are splitting the "progressive" vote and allowing Biden to maintain his lead.

I think she's in it primarily to screw over Bernie and soon enough she'll be toadying up to Biden or . . . ahem . . . somebody whose name comes up as the nomination moves on to a second ballot. And it won't be hers. And I don't think that Obama is gonna let his buddy flutter in the wind if and when push comes to shove.

5 users have voted.

@Wally don't cite a source for your assertion, it's not entirely clear which candidate(s) MT may have expressly endorsed, if any. I gave an opinion above based only on what I've heard on some of his podcasts and reading some of his tweets. A search didn't provide much more clarity, although it's possible he's just in the "strong defender" of Tulsi and Bernie category, rather than a more overt supporter of one or the other like Jordan Chariton, who constantly reminds that he's backing Bernie. And being a strong defender of one doesn't preclude being a strong defender or overt supporter of the other. I favor both Tulsi and Bernie for instance, but like both Tracey and Chariton, I don't avoid talking about their flaws.

That said, an article in WaMo refers to MTracey as a Sanders supporter as well as a strong defender of Tulsi.

And this piece from MT late last year is clearly written with a pro-Bernie tone, if short of outright endorsement. In the podcast I cited above, MT is hardly taking an anti-Bernie tone, just an honest objective attitude which acknowledges and addresses the significance of the bad news.

Note too that even the strong Bernie backer Jordan Chariton remarks in his most recent podcast, as I did, that this recent IA poll, while not the whole story, is not to be dismissed just b/c Bernie supporters don't like the results. This same strong Bernie supporter, who also recognizes the validity of this IA poll but has a legit question about it (which no one here has raised), also criticizes Bernie for not being stronger so far in debates in going after Biden. Again, valid criticism which his supporters should want to consider, rather than reacting to shoot the messenger for daring to discuss information not in keeping with the pro-Bernie cheerleading.

0 users have voted.
Wally's picture


from Tracey in the past six months?

How many tweets or articles critical of Tulsi? Bernie?

C'mon. It's not even remotely close. Which is fine. Tracey can mostly support and/or defend whoever he wants. I've always appreciated his work.

And from what's I've read, Bernie's campaign staff and Bernie himself are pretty, pretty dismissive of that Iowa poll based on the campaign's internal polling and other observations. Maybe Tracey will investigate and write and youtube about that in some more detail. And/or Chariton.

By the way, you've never noticed my being critical of Bernie's campaign and policies, ever? I maintain I have been critical on multiple occasions and can document that but won't because I won't dwell on the negatives.

2 users have voted.
Wally's picture


3 users have voted.
WoodsDweller's picture

Iowa 09/20 -- DM Register/CNN -- Warren 22, Biden 20, Sanders 11
Iowa 09/18 -- Iowa State University -- Warren 24, Biden 16, Sanders 16
Polls like this will eat away at Biden's electability argument.

National 09/19 -- Fox -- Biden 29, Sanders 18, Warren 16
National 09/18 -- Economist/YouGov -- Biden 26, Warren 21, Sanders 14
National 09/18 -- Survey USA -- Biden 33, Warren 19, Sanders 17

I don't see any recent polls by Emerson, the latest seems to be
National 08/27 -- Emerson -- Biden 31, Sanders 24, Warren 15

Emerson seems to give Sanders another 10 points over other pollsters. More than ever I think polls are being used to set the narrative. The broad outlines of Biden/Warren/Sanders seem to be born out in multiple recent polls, but is that an accurate picture of the race or simply consistent messaging?

6 users have voted.

"I cannot ignore reality, but I can embrace beauty." -- magiamma