Compared to the last Quinnipac Biden lost 8 points, Sanders 6, Warren 1, Harris gained 13, Buttigieg lost 4, Beto down 2 (to 1%). Booker, Gabbard, Castro all gained a little.

I think Harris could be the nominee but I don't see her doing much better in the midwest compared to Clinton. Maybe she can make that up by trying to win some more Southern states.

#New #National @YouGovUS/@DataProgress Post Debate Poll:
Biden 23%
Warren 22%
Harris 17%
Sanders 15%
Buttigieg 7%
O'Rourke 2%
Yang 2%
Booker 2%
Klobuchar 1%
Inslee 1%
Hickenlooper 1%
Castro 1%
Delaney 1%
Gabbard 1%

— Political Polls (@Politics_Polls) July 3, 2019

By now Steve Bullock seems to be ahead of Eric Swalwell in tiebreaker rules qualifying for the second debate: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/have-we-seen-the-last-of-eric-swalwell/

Well..."absolute faith" is a strong term. I don't actually consider myself to necessarily be an ideological progressive, I just agree with the left the most on economics. I trust female progressives more than other candidates when it comes to the combination of economic and social issues, but that doesn't mean I actually have great faith in any particular kind of politician when it comes to women's issues. I think the left is often characterized, in part, by varying levels of left wing misogyny.

If right wing misogyny refers to a belief that women should be the private property of individual men (i.e. patriarchy) then left wing misogyny refers to the belief that women should instead be the public property of all men. For example, since 2018, the official platform of Women's March, Inc. has included a plank advocating the legalization of prostitution. A classic example of what their advocacy around that looks like was seen last year when they protested the closing of Backpage.com, the internet's leading facilitator of child sex trafficking at the time, disingenuously claiming that "The shutting of Backpage is an absolute crisis for sex workers..." Jacobin magazine, the official publication of the Democratic Socialists of America, feels much the same way about prostitution. I just highlight the intersectional left's enthusiasm for prostitution here as a particularly clear example of what I mean.

In this country, unfortunately we don't seem to recognize the existence of left wing misogyny and it's a major cultural blind spot. So to say that I have absolute faith in progressives in the area of women's interests is a stretch. I'm not a big fan of the sex industry, the beauty industry, gender identity, any of that sort of thing any more than I am the prohibition of abortion or intolerance for lesbians. Just for clarity!

A post-debate analysis based on data: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-kamala-harriss-new-voters-came-from/

Well, there are always, in all countries and at all times some overarching narratives that shape political discussion. Sometimes multiple conflicting narratives exist between followers of different political directions (as currently between Trumps republicans and the democrats) or between different social groups (left-wing liberalism of educated coastal elites vs. more pragmatic middle-of-the-road approaches on poorer, less educated mid-country people). But one thing is clear: most of all political ideas and ideologies are underrepresented or misrepresented in the most common narratives. One remarkable thing about Bernie Sanders is, that he established a narrative about the working poor which need support, which existed before but was far from mainstream.

So yes, left wing misogyny is something not in the common mainstream narratives, mainstream narratives equate right-wing with misogyny (which undoubtely exists, but even among right-wingers there are different wings with differing views on gender-issues). Personally about the points you touched: I am heavily unsure how to see the sex industry, I see the abuse often included in it, but I am unsure if the work itself may have merit. I abhor the beauty industry as superficial and basically unneeded for the real needs of people, or even destructive as it connects self-awareness with looks, which is desastrous for the mental health of people with bad luck in the genetic lottery. And while I feel the complexity of gender identities needs more awareness, I feel many of the discussions about the topic completely loose every ground in reality and relevance.

Running for Senate instead? Now that would be great news! What good would it be if they win the election and get screwed by a Senate of Republican naysayers who don't let anything get past them?

Buttigieg's national service plan. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/03/buttigieg-national-service-2020-1396600
"Buttigieg's plan would immediately increase the number of available national service positions to 250,000 opportunities, up from the current 75,000. It would emphasize recruiting students at high schools, community colleges, historically black colleges and universities, and vocational schools, as well as Americans between 16 and 24 who aren't working or in school.
The proposal also calls for establishing grant funding programs for "service ecosystems" focused on local and regional issues.
Service fellows would be considered for student debt forgiveness, hiring preference and vocational training. The plan also calls for developing new types of service corps like a Climate Corps, a Community Health Corps, or a Intergenerational Service Corps. All of them would operate under the leadership of a chief service officer, who would serve on the Domestic Policy Council and the National Security Council.
The ultimate goal of the plan is to set up a pipeline for as many as 4 million high school graduates every year to do a national service program."

Well, I just had a crazy thought: What would Senator Hickenlooper do, if one of the "socialist" proposals of President Sanders lands on his desk?