2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNate Silver - Sanders wins those caucus states extremely white and therefore poorly representative
nate silvers review of the numbers are quite stunning.
And the sort of wishful thinking Sanders is engaged in can cut both ways. Yes, Clintons lead would be considerably narrower (although shed still be winning) without delegates from the Deep South. But what if you excluded delegates from caucuses, where Sanders has gained a net of 150 delegates on Clinton? Without those delegates, Sanders couldnt even maintain the pretense of a competitive race. Not only are most of those caucus states extremely white and therefore poorly representative of Democrats national demographics many of them (such as Idaho and Nebraska) are also quite red. Furthermore, caucuses tend to disenfranchise voters by making it harder to vote. Our demographic modeling suggests that this has hurt Clinton and that Sanders wouldnt have won by the same enormous margins if those caucus states had held primaries instead.
But overall, the math is pretty simple. Sanders is winning states that are much whiter than the Democratic electorate as a whole, Clinton is winning states that are much blacker than the Democratic electorate as a whole, and Clinton is winning most of those states that are somewhere in the middle, whether theyre in the South (like Virginia) or elsewhere (like Ohio or Nevada). Thats why shell probably be the Democratic nominee
Secretary Clinton cleaned our clock in the Deep South, no question about it, Bernie Sanders said during Thursday nights Democratic debate in Brooklyn. That is the most conservative part of this great country, he continued. But you know what, were out of the Deep South now. And were moving up.
I have a few problems with this line of argument, which seems to imply that Democratic voters in the Deep South dont reflect the larger Democratic electorate. (The remarks Thursday night echo previous comments made by Sanders and his campaign.) Consider Sanderss reference to the term Deep South, which traditionally describes Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina: These are five of the only six states, along with Maryland, where at least a quarter of the population is black. Given the United States history of disenfranchising black voters not to mention the importance of black voters to Democrats in November its dicey for Sanders to diminish Clintons wins there.
But the Deep South isnt Sanderss only issue. His problems in the rest of the South are what really dooms him. Clintons largest net delegate gains over Sanders came from Texas (+72) and Florida (+68), two states that are within the South as the Census Bureau (and most other people) define it. Clinton also cleaned Sanderss clock in Virginia and North Carolina. Overall, Clinton gained a net of 155 delegates on Sanders in the five Deep South states, but she also added 211 delegates to her margin in the rest of the region
In addition to being important to the Democratic Partys electoral present and future, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Texas are quite diverse. Theyre diverse ideologically Miami and Austin arent exactly the most conservative part of the country and theyre diverse racially. They contain not only a substantial number of African-Americans but also Hispanics and, increasingly, Asian-American voters.
In fact, these states are among the most demographically representative of the diverse Obama coalition that Clinton or Sanders will have to rely on in November.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-winning-the-states-that-look-like-the-democratic-party/
northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)Good to know that two of the MOST diverse states are once more white. Also nice to know the states with the HIGHEST voter turn out are not representing, while the states with the record lowest turn out are better? Find another record to play, this one is getting old.
hack89
(39,171 posts)it is not one of the most diverse states in America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States#Breakdown_by_state.2Fterritory
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Much more accurate, useful and adaptable demographic tool at US Census
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00,53
hack89
(39,171 posts)northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)In the simplest break down of demographics Washington was more diverse that 28 other states if I recall correctly. Plus Washington is steadily changing. But hey good for you in whitewashing us. Oh and thanks for white washing all non-whites since the polls show Asians support Bernie along with other groups. But you knew that already.
factfinder_77
(841 posts)Although it will be a couple of decades before the electorate as a whole is majority-minority, the Democratic vote is already getting there. In 2012, only 55 percent of President Obamas voters were white, according to the national exit poll. Our demographic projections of this Novembers electorate, which account for population growth since 2012, calculate that the white share of the Democratic vote will tick down another percentage point, to 54 percent. The rest of the Democratic vote will be black (24 percent), Hispanic (15 percent), or belong to Asian or other races (7 percent), according to our projections.
So lets take those projections as being maximally representative of the broader Democratic electorate as it stands today. In which primary or caucus states has turnout come closest to those ratios?
In 21 states to have voted so far, we have data on this from exit polls. See here for Virginia, for example, where Democratic turnout was 63 percent white, 26 percent black, 7 percent Hispanic and 5 percent Asian or other when it voted on Super Tuesday. Thats pretty close to the Democratic electorate overall, although with too few Hispanic voters. In the other 29 states those that havent voted yet or where no exit poll was conducted Ill estimate the Democratic electorate based on our demographic projections, with an adjustment for the fact that the Democrats who vote in primaries are somewhat whiter than those who vote in November.1
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-winning-the-states-that-look-like-the-democratic-party/
northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)You are quoting numbers from the General election, which are not relevant to the primary, as has been stated many times. As for the percentages, I have found little luck on voter demographics so far due to poor data. All I have found is total turn out, and the south excluding Florida had record low turn out compared to the last primary in 2012. Democratic membership has fallen in the south, and republican has risen. If you have a demographic breakdown for which person they voted for and the number of votes that group cast it would be nice. I wanted to see some for the chart I was making trying to include as much data as possible, but Arkansas for example just give a percentage of total black population that is eligible to vote, a percentage that are in that said group that are registers, and a percentage that voted. Sadly a good amount of it was estimates.
angrychair
(8,733 posts)It also has the 3rd highest Asian population in the nation and 18 highest Hispanic population.
factfinder_77
(841 posts)http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/primary-turnout-means-nothing-for-the-general-election/
. As others have pointed out, voter turnout is an indication of the competitiveness of a primary contest, not of what will happen in the general election. The GOP presidential primary is more competitive than the Democratic race.
Indeed, history suggests that there is no relationship between primary turnout and the general election outcome. You can see this on the most basic level by looking at raw turnout in years in which both parties had competitive primaries. There have been six of those years in the modern era: 1976, 1980, 1988, 1992, 2000 and 2008.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Hawaii white too.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)And Colorado and Oklahoma, which were won by Bernie, are more diverse than Arkansas and Tennessee.
DetroitSocialist83
(169 posts)Good luck in the general!
hack89
(39,171 posts)and a critical factor as to why Bernie is losing. It bodes well for the general that Hillary has the ability to connect with a diverse electorate, especially in battle ground states.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)The optics on his derogatory comments on the Southern States voting habits, has doomed his candidacy.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)Where were the states mentioned in this video on the KKK again? Is Mississippi and Virginia?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)dsc
(52,166 posts)we just never catch a break. We never got our choice of President, no wait we got 43 straight. We never got to vote, no wait we voted from the very beginning. We are the poorest demographic, no wait, we aren't any such thing.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)race,race,race,race,race......
True economic and social justice? Not so much.
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)But the narrative fits the Clinton campaign tactic of racial division.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)unless you are a partisan hack I guess.