RCP Polls has Bloomberg at 8.2% as of now.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

The Economist has Bloomberg at 9%.
https://projects.economist.com/democratic-primaries-2020/

538 has Bloomberg at 8.4%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/national/

Understanding Uncertainty

Two professors work to better visualize probability for the next election.

Across the political spectrum, surprise was a common reaction to the 2016 presidential election. For most people, the predictions leading up to Nov. 8 made it seem as if Hillary Clinton was all but certain to become the first female president. Depending on your perspective, waking up on Nov. 9 felt like an icy splash of water or a thrilling upset.

And some of that surprise, say Northwestern professors Jessica Hullman and Steve Franconeri, can be credited to the predictive charts and graphs used in 2016. Hullman, who holds appointments in both the McCormick School of Engineering and the Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications, studies how data visualizations can help people understand uncertainty. Franconeri, a psychology professor in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences and director of the Northwestern Cognitive Science Program, studies how people process visual information.

These two researchers say incomplete or oversimplified visuals, paired with our human tendency to see what we want to see, contributed to the difficulty many people had in fully grasping the range of possible election outcomes.

Here, journalism, computer science and psychology collide as Hullman and Franconeri break down some of what went wrong in 2016 visualizations, and how data journalists can show probabilities more effectively in 2020 — and beyond — to better prepare voters.

Voters who prioritize beating Trump thought Warren did best

How debate-watchers scored candidates’ performances (on a four-point scale where higher is better) in the January Democratic debate, by which type of candidate they prefer

VOTER PREFERS A CANDIDATE WHO …
CANDIDATE SHARES STANCE ON ISSUES CAN BEAT TRUMP

Warren 3.0 3.4
Biden 2.6 3.1
Buttigieg 2.7 3.1
Sanders 3.1 3.1
Klobuchar 2.6 3.0
Steyer 2.7 3.0

Warren got high marks

First up, who viewers thought had the best debate performance. To answer this, we compared candidates’ pre-debate favorability ratings1 to how well respondents who watched the debate thought the candidates performed. Candidates are graded on a four-point scale where higher numbers are better; comparing those grades to favorability ratings helps us adjust our expectations, since people may be inclined to view well-liked candidates in a positive light. Warren got the highest marks for her performance on Tuesday night, and they were strong enough to be impressive even after you account for her high favorability. That represents an improvement for her, after she fell slightly below expectations during the December debate. Sanders, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and former Vice President Biden didn’t do poorly per se, but because they were already well-liked, we expected a lot of voters to view their debate performance favorably.

Defying pressure from Congress, Facebook said on Thursday that it would continue to allow political campaigns to use the site to target advertisements to particular slices of the electorate and that it would not police the truthfulness of the messages sent out.

The stance put Facebook, the most important digital platform for political ads, at odds with some of the other large tech companies, which have begun to put new limits on political ads.

Facebook’s decision, telegraphed in recent months by executives, is likely to harden criticism of the company heading into this year’s presidential election.

So...

Sanders + Warren have 48% of Black Democrats age 18 to 34 to Biden's 30%

Sanders + Warren have 31% of Black Democrats age 35 to 49 to Biden's 41%