But what is a striking Sanders signal for his chances of winning the nomination? This is a good thing: the primary winners tend to be in the early collection of funds. Despite this, the story shows that fundraising does not tell us much about predicting primary winners when we participate in early surveys. Simply put: when fundraising speaks of one story, and early polls say who most likely wins the nomination, early voting is likely to be prognostic.
This 62% of the early prediction of fundraising the winner has nothing to sneeze. Most people who run for president will not win their party nominations, so that what is most likely to be winning is obvious.
Perhaps Sanders is another Obama in this way: his strong fundraising numbers tell us that he is a more serious competitor than conventional wisdom. Early fundraising, however, is usually not a magic bullet to tell us something more than doing the first polls. Although most Americans are not set to compete for 2020, voters in the first state of New Hampshire receive many visits from various democratic candidates. In other words, New Hampshire have a good reason to pay close attention to the President's race, as others. They know Sanders very well, because he from neighboring Vermont and won the state primary in 2016.
The fact that Sanders does not lead in New Hampshire should be of concern, given how well-known early New Hampshire research has traditionally foreseen the future of the nominees. All but three nominees (Dukakis in 1988, Obama in 2008 and Trump in 2016) were led by the time they first submitted their candidacy to the FEC. All except Obama led a poll in New Hampshire at the time they submitted their first half or a complete financial collection from the FEC.
Obviously, the past is not always prognostic. We are dealing with a relatively small sample size here, and not many primaries have so many candidates that will work in 2020.
However, when you set up early fundraising and early New Hampshire research into the statistical regression of all candidates (and not just candidates), early fundraising historically gave us no additional predictive ability compared to early New Hampshire polls. . This should not be too strange, because there were many people who were really good fundraisers, but did not go anywhere in their own primaries.
Of course, if Sanders can continue his strong fundraising by the end of this quarter by the FEC (that is, by March) and will have leadership in polls, then he will become a true sign of strength. In addition, it will be interesting to see where the survey will be if Biden decides not to run. We will get a better understanding of how stable some Democrats are to the candidacy of Sanders. The clear leadership of Sanders without Biden in the race again will suggest a stronger Sanders rate, which generally adheres to the generally accepted view.