Handicapping The Democratic Field V

With 10 days left before the Iowa Caucuses now seems like a great time to revisit where things in the Democratic field stand.

Following other posts I've written like this I'm going to continue to rate candidates in terms of their likeliness via broadly defined tiers. However I'm going to add something new, taking a (very, very) rough guess at the percentages of a given outcome and see where they line up with 538's cool new prediction model on who will win the nomination. So with an eye towards how idiotic this will probably look in three months, let's jump right in! (Also if you'd like to see how my thinking from about this has changed just click on the 2020 tag at the bottom of this post).

TIER 1:
Joe Biden: Simply put Biden has been and remains the front runner in the 2020 Democratic nomination cycle. Despite negative coverage by much of the press, and the never ending "gaffes" we hear so much about, he remains on top by most measures. In 538's national poll tracker he's about 6.5 points above Bernie, and over 10 points above Elizabeth Warren. Likewise he has a large lead in endorsements compared to his nearest competitor, 226 points to Warren's 81 by 538's methodology.  More over Biden's support among state legislators, another metric of party support, is the best with him having the most endorsements overall, and probably more importantly having a sizable contingent of endorsements from all four early states, unlike his competitors. And finally he has significant support from unions (see this awesome tracker somebody made), with only Bernie Sanders also having formal support among this key aspect of the Democratic coalition. To be sure, this hardly guarantees success, there is no national primary after all, and endorsements might be less valuable now that they appear to have been in past cycles. But never the less Biden is the front runner.
-538's odds of Biden winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24: 41%
-Longwalk's guesstimate: I'd go a bit higher, as I guess his older, multiracial coalition is more durable than most suspect and there's a reasonable chance he could see a flood of party support after Iowa. Let's say 50%.

TIER 2A:
Elizabeth Warren: Warren seems to have basically been treading water since I last wrote about the race back at the beginning of December. She's in 3rd place in national polling at around 15% while generally tying Pete for fourth in Iowa and New Hampshire. Likewise she's gathered some more endorsements over January and is in second place after Biden by 538's count, but her pace of new support isn't very impressive. She picked up 13 new endorsement points in January compared to Biden's 54, Bloomberg's 22, Pete's 10, Bernie's 7, Bennet's 3, and Steyer's 1. That's not very impressive. Never the less she is well positioned as a big tent unity candidate if Biden and/or Bernie falter in early states.
-538's odds of Warren winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24: 13%
-Longwalk's guesstimate: That seems low to me, I'll go with 25%.

TIER 2B:
Bernie Sanders: I've been bearish on Bernie's chances for a long time, mainly because he's a factional candidate running in a party that values coalition building and big-tentism. But I can't deny he has real support in the form of close polling in Iowa with Joe Biden and a small recent lead in New Hampshire while being second nationally. Likewise he recently passed Klobuchar and moved into third place in endorsement support. So despite my longstanding doubts, it is quite possible Bernie can succeed. Having said that I still think Warren and Biden are far more likely.
-538's odds of Bernie winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24: 23%
-Longwalk's guesstimate: Due to the above factors I still think this is high, but having gotten this far and retaining real support means Bernie has a chance. I'll go with 10%, and feel free to mock me when he wins (I can then point out you don't know how probability works).

TIER 3A:
Pete Buttigieg: Since early December Pete has gone down in national polls from about 10% to 7.5% basically tying him with a rising Bloomberg. In addition, his support in Iowa and New Hampshire has declined making him roughly tied for fourth with Warren in both. Likewise, he remains weak when comes to party support, with his tiny roster of state legislators being pretty noteworthy, at least to me. But despite these difficulties it's his total lack of support among non-white voters in general and black voters in particular, that remains his biggest challenge. Could he win Iowa and somehow dramatically upend this race? I guess anything is possible, but at this point in the race he strikes me as a longshot.
-538's odds of Pete winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24:7%
-Longwalk's guesstimate: Seems about right!

TIER 3B
Amy Klobuchar, Michael Bloomberg: I see both of these candidates as extreme long shots, but for very different reasons. Klobuchar has run a classic "Iowa or bust!" campaign hoping to use a victory there to launch a bandwagon that everyone will climb aboard, similar to what happened with John Kerry in the 2004 cycle, or Jimmy Carter way back in '76. Unfortunately while she has improved her standing in Iowa into the high single digits, she's still way behind everyone else. Moreover she seems to have little to no support in states after that. In that sense I really don't see it happening for her.
-538's odds of Klobuchar winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24: Essentially Nil (538 gives everyone but the "Big Four" a .6% combined chance of winning).
-Longwalk's guesstimate: Hey, Trump's president right? So let's say 3%.

Michael Bloomberg has been trending up in national polls after spending God knows how much money of TV ads and hiring an army of staffers. Likewise he's been able to parlay his extensive connections with mayors and other Democratic political actors into some real endorsements, earning him 33 points by 538's counting, right behind Pete's 36. At this point he's no longer someone who can be dismissed. But at the same time the fact that he's skipping the early states, something that has never worked for other candidates who've tried it, and has a record that's deeply out of touch with the contemporary Democratic Party makes him a major long shot in my view. But then again look who's president!
-538's odds of Bloomberg winning more than half of the delegates as of 1/24: Essentially Nil.
-Longwalk's guesstimate: Hey, Trump's president right? So let's say 3%.

TIER 3C:
Contested Convention: As far back as I can remember journalists and pundits have fantasized about this outcome and thus every four years people try desperately to try to find ways bring the dream to life, and this cycle is no exception. But a mid-20th Century style convention in Milwaukee where the ultimate nominee is unknown when the convention is gaveled in remains really unlikely. Why? Well Dave Hopkins summed this up nicely last spring when professional take writers first got excited about it. Simply put such an outcome is unlikely because the winnowing based process we've already seen happening will only accelerate once voting starts, the front loaded calendar might end the process soon rather than later, the Democratic Party isn't "highly fractious", and party elites will work incredibly hard to prevent what would undoubtedly be a disaster in the modern era where there simply are no "brokers" to "broker" the convention.
-538's odds of a contested convention as of 1/24: 16%.
-Longwalk's guesstimate: Something really remote, let's say 2%.

TIER 4:
Everybody else. Sorry, you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.