Poll Shows Kamala Harris Overwhelmingly Likely to Be the Next Democratic Presidential Nominee

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse

The Politico and Morning Consult Poll, published on December 15th, shows the following question and its answers, among the 1,998 U.S. registered voters sampled:

[Question #5] If Joe Biden did not run for president in the 2024 election, for whom would you vote in a Democratic presidential primary? (N=916 [registered Democratic Party voters responding]) Cory Booker 42=5% Pete Buttigieg 101=11% Kamala Harris 286=31% Elizabeth Warren 74=8% Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 70=8% Gavin Newsom 24=3% Roy Cooper 6=1% Eric Adams 6=1% Gina Raimondo 6=1% Amy Klobuchar 27=3% Someone else (please specify) 20=2% Not sure 230=25% I would not vote 23=3%

Here was the poll’s methodology:

Methodology: This poll was conducted between December 11-13, 2021 among a sample of 1998 Registered Voters. The interviews were conducted online and the data were weighted to approximate a target sample of Registered Voters based on gender by age, educational attainment, race, marital status, home ownership, race by educational attainment, 2020 presidential vote, and region. Results from the full survey have a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

In other words: Kamala Harris, at the present time, is, amongst registered Democratic Party voters, the 2024 candidate top-preferred (#1) by approximately 31% of Democratic Party primary voters. #2 is tied at 8% each for Warren and for Ocasio-Cortez, who would be splitting the progressive-vote if both of them run. Yet, still, if only one of those two run, then there wouldn’t be more than 16% support for that candidate, at the present time. Since that 16% is only half of the number of voters who are top-preferring Harris, Harris does, at present, appear overwhelmingly likely to be the next Democratic Party nominee if Biden won’t be running then for re-election.

On December 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined “Kamala Harris would lose badly to Trump in 2024 but fare better than Pete Buttigieg, poll says” and reported that:

The Harvard/HarrisX poll, conducted among 1,989 respondents between Nov. 30 and Dec. 2, found that in a hypothetical Trump-Harris matchup, Trump receives 50% support, Harris receives 41% support and 9% are unsure. Trump would win the Electoral College in a landslide with that margin.

While the poll finds that Harris struggles against Trump, it found that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who would reportedly consider challenging Harris in a 2024 Democratic presidential primary if President Joe Biden does not seek re-election, fares even worse. …

The poll is actually a really good one for Harris in a hypothetical 2024 Democratic primary without Biden, as it shows her comfortably leading the field — which also includes Buttigieg, Sens. Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez among others — with 31% support. Sanders, who will be 82 at the time of the primaries and is seemingly unlikely to run a third time, received 15% support, and Buttigieg received 8% support.

Consequently: at present, on the basis only of those data, the likeliest next U.S. President is Donald Trump. Therefore, Democratic Party billionaires (and centi-millionaires), and all of the Republican Party billionaires (and centi-millionaires) who donated to Biden against Trump in 2020, will probably be donating to Harris in 2024, which means that she would probably be backed by more money than Trump would be. Consequently, Harris might actually be likelier to win than to lose in 2024 against Trump.

Further complicating the picture is that since Trump has lots more legal baggage weighing him down than does the much younger Harris, the billionaires who are preferring Harris against Trump will probably do all that they can to arrange for Trump to become indicted on some legal charge(s) in order to help assure that Harris would win the 2024 contest.

In the 2020 Democratic Party Presidential primaries, here were the numbers of billionaires who donated (in declared, not secret, donations) to each one of the candidates, as was reported by Forbes:

1. Pete Buttigieg: 23 billionaire donors

2. Cory Booker: 18 billionaire donors

3. Kamala Harris: 17 billionaire donors

4. Michael Bennet: 15 billionaire donors

5. Joe Biden: 13 billionaire donors

6. John Hickenlooper: 11 billionaire donors

7. Beto O’Rourke: 9 billionaire donors

9. Jay Inslee: 5 billionaire donors

10. Kirsten Gillibrand: 4 billionaire donors

11. Elizabeth Warren and John Delaney: 3 billionaire donors each

12. Steve Bullock: 2 billionaire donors

13. Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang, and Marianne Williamson: 1 billionaire donor each

14. Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro, Bill De Blasio, and Tim Ryan: 0 billionaire donors

Therefore, since Harris had even more appeal to billionaires than did Biden, the Democratic Party Presidential candidate in 2024 would probably be even better-financed if Harris becomes the nominee than if Biden will (or did). And, this time around, she would be receiving financial support not only from Democratic Party billionaires but also from many Republican Party billionaires.

Consequently: Harris is, at present, in a remarkably good position to become America’s next President, given that her current net approval-rating is -12.2% whereas Biden’s is -9.3%, and Trump’s is -11.5%. This indicates that whereas in a Biden-Trump matchup, the likely winner would be Biden, a Harris-Trump matchup would likely produce a Trump win. Basically, ever since probably 1944, U.S. Presidential-&-Vice-Presidential s‘elections’ have been won by the billionaires and centi-millionaires who donate the bulk of (official and especially unofficial) political-campaign funds, and so those few persons have been very well served by all or virtually all U.S. Administrations. In recent times, this has been confirmed in the scientific analyses that have been done on the matter, and it has even been confirmed to be the case granularly at the level of state legislatures (that, even at that level, “Politicians Don’t Actually Care What Voters Want” but are instead controlled not by the electorate, who are malleable by whatever the super-rich want them to believe, but by the super-rich, who basically hire the winning politicians). It also was confirmed to have been the case in recent U.S. Presidential contests, such as Hillary-versus-first-Sanders-and-then-Trump in 2016. And, yet again, it would happen if any of these three persons (Harris, Biden, or Trump) becomes the next U.S. President. This is why America’s billionaires are well-served no matter who wins, and why what the American public need or even want is always of secondary concern, if of any concern at all, to the people who win these s‘elections’ (by the billionaires and centi-millionaires). While the faces change, the basic policies remain the same. As Joe Biden said at a fund-raiser, “nothing would fundamentally change” under a Biden Presidency. Everyone who votes in America for “change” is voting for liars, but in that leaked comment which Biden made to a group of his mega-donors, what he spoke has turned out to have been the truth. Voting can’t fundamentally change anything in the American Government, because it’s a dictatorship, and everyone who says otherwise is either a liar or a fool. The data, by now, are overwhelming on that fact. And this is why, no matter which American Party dominates over the other, the billionaires in America are well-served, while the public are served poorly (if at all). The billionaires will go as far as they can, short of sparking a Second American Revolution (this time to conquer America’s super-rich instead of Britain’s), and what they, by now, have purchased in America’s Government, is their very own fascist dictatorship, ruled, collectively, behind-the-scenes, and very secretly, by themselves.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.


The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

What do you think?

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 15, 2021

of secondary concern, if of any concern at all, 

December 16, 2021

Only one huge problem which the Obama meister squeezed past. The Kamala (toes) lady (questionable), Is NOT eligible to be POTUS, since neither one of her parents were citizens at the time of her birth. She is NOT a Natural Born Citizen!

No argument is possible. So says the US constitution! Obama had much more convoluted circumstances when he ran and got away with it, mostly due to lack of awareness by electorate and help from friends in high places……..

Helga Fellay
Helga Fellay
Reply to  Earl
December 17, 2021

I attempted to explain this to you before, but apparently you are unteachable. According to US law, anyone born in the US is a US citizen, regardless of the status of their parents. These laws are different in every nation. Btw: Obama was born in the US of an American mother, which makes him a US citizen. I have intimate knowledge of a case in which a young Swiss man emigrated to the US where he was promptly drafted into the US army and stationed overseas in Germany. He married a German girl and they had a son. They first… Read more »

Sue Rarick
December 16, 2021

I continually find it amusing that people always talk about Russian Oligarchs and Ukraine Oligarchs, yet here is a listing of billionaires – Oligarchs right here in our own polluted backyard.
I only voted for Trump because Hillary was worse. Now, Trump in my opinion will just be too darn old in 2024. Give me someone younger.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sue Rarick
December 16, 2021
Rate this article :

I would definitely go with Not Sure as my choice. Not has done his time organizing and rallying support. Mr. Sure would be an excellent canditdate

Helga Fellay
Helga Fellay
Reply to  ShadowyOwl
December 17, 2021

It does not matter in the least whom the DNC nominate, or how many actual, real votes their candidate gets. They got away with election fraud the last time. As they were not held accountable, and nothing was done to change the voting system, they’ll get away with it next time. If they want Kamala, and it seems they do, she will be the next POTUS even if she doesn’t get a single legitimate vote.

Macron meets Orban. Clever political move by both leaders

TheDarkMan’s Predictions For 2022