Polling in and of itself has interest, national polling is irrelevant to primaries anyway, especially with Iowa, NH, SC and Super Tuesday being larger factors than California's primary since 1980. I think it's interesting in terms of settling into a pattern that the debate will almost certainly have to cause a upheaval of. You can see it on the graph too once everybody got in:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.htmlAt this point in 2007 everyone was still including Gore in their polls because he hadn't yet bowed out, and other than Bill Richardson sometimes nobody else was getting over 2% except Hillary/Obama/Gore/Edwards. The debates that cycle only increased Hillary's lead against the field, while boosting nobody lower-tier who Obama and Edwards stole from, until post-Iowa when they were down to the three-man debates.
The Democrats had only debate by September in 2003. They had had three debates already by the time of the upcoming debates in 2007.
September 25, 2003 was the last time Democrats had ten candidates or more in a debate (their polling % in June 2003): Lieberman (21%), Gephardt (17%), Kerry (13%), Graham (7%), Dean (7%), Edwards (6%), Sharpton (6%), Moseley Braun (5%), Kucinich (1%), Clark (NA)
spoiler (click to show/hide)
I figured Tasty wanted to see Warren's recent rise into double figures, something only Biden and Bernard have accomplished this cycle.
