Hillary only wins the South! Bernie only wins white states! There are lots of throwaway claims about who wins what and where, so let’s take an actual look at who is winning what and where.
|
Clinton |
Sanders |
All states |
18 |
14 |
Delegates |
1,253 (55%) |
1,025 (45%) |
Blue |
7 |
8 |
Red |
11 |
6 |
Caucus |
2 |
10 |
Primary |
16 |
4 |
> 75% white |
3 |
10 |
< 75% white |
15 |
4 |
< 16% UNDER 30* |
9 |
2 |
> 17% under 30* |
6 |
2 |
Open |
12 |
8 |
Closed |
6 |
6 |
Northeast |
1 |
3 |
South |
11 |
1 |
Midwest |
4 |
4 |
West |
2 |
6 |
Of the four browner states that Bernie Sanders won (Colorado, Oklahoma, Hawaii, Washington), only Oklahoma was a primary. Of the three heavily white states that Hillary Clinton won, two were primaries (Ohio, Missouri) and one (Iowa) was a caucus, and she barely won that one. Nevada was also a closer race than demographics would indicate (look at Arizona, Texas, and Florida for comparison). It’s clear that Sanders has a caucus advantage given his far more motivated supporter base.
The “under 30” category is incomplete, as most caucus states didn’t have exit (or entrance) polling, and Sanders obviously cleaned up with those. Still, I thought we’d see a clearer division there. Sanders won both New Hampshire and Michigan on the strength of strong youth turnout—19 percent of voters in both states. However, the highest-performing state with youth voters was Texas, at 20 percent, and Clinton won that one handily. She also won Massachusetts, where 19 percent of voters were under 30.
For regional divisions, I used the Census’ definition. I ignored overseas contests, though Clinton is ahead 2-1 on those. I expected to see a bigger disparity between open and closed contests, but … not really. Well, except that of the six closed states Sanders won, five were caucuses. Meanwhile, of Clinton’s six closed-state victories, only one was a caucus. “Caucus vs primaries” appears to be the biggest fault line here. Well, that and race.
And here I must caution—when Sanders supporters dismissively talk about Clinton winning “the South," or more nefariously, “the Confederacy," we’re talking about Clinton winning the region’s Democratic base: African Americans. Don’t imply, whether deliberately or not, that their votes don’t count just as much as everyone else’s. (Same with Arizona and Texas and Latinos.)
So what’s on tap the rest of this primary season?
All States |
19 |
delegates |
1,721 |
BLUE |
12 |
Red |
7 |
Caucus |
2 |
Primary |
17 |
Open |
8 |
Closed |
11 |
> 75% WHITE |
11
|
< 75% WHITE |
8 |
NORTHEAST |
5 |
SOUTH |
5 |
MIDWEST |
4 |
WEST |
5 |
I included the District of Columbia as a “state” while ignoring the “overseas” category again. But perhaps I shouldn’t because Puerto Rico has a whopping 60 pledged delegates, more than many states. (New Mexico, for example, has 34. Connecticut has 55. DC has only 20.) Seems like another bullshitty point in a primary season full of bullshitty points.
The two caucuses are in Wyoming and North Dakota. Sanders should win both handily. He’ll be wishing there were more. Puerto Rico also has a caucus, but Clinton should win that one handily.
Polling in Wisconsin shows essentially a 50-50 race. (Marquette has promised a new poll on Wednesday, so we’ll all be looking forward to that one, as they are pretty much the best in the state.) Then after a brief stopover in Wyoming, Sanders will hit a rough patch on April 19 in New York, then on April 26 in Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Rhode Island will be competitive.
People like me have written off Sanders’ chances because of those two weeks. That whole “the map is more favorable to Sanders” thing? That was last week and a few scattered states here and there. Now things get hard, with Sanders having to average double-digit victories from here on out in a large number of closed-primary states with unfavorable demographics. Even a narrow win in Wisconsin would be a loss. The number of remaining states is shrinking fast.
But hey, strange things have happened all primary season! So who knows? Just remember that no matter what, our nominee will be either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, so treat them in comments as though the nation’s future depends on either of them winning—because it does.