From the adjusted Iowa caucus entrance polls:
|
Clinton |
Sanders |
Total |
49.9 |
49.6 |
Higher Income Counties |
49.9 |
49.6
|
Lower Income Counties |
49.7 |
49.6 |
College Grad |
48 |
48 |
High School or less |
58 |
39 |
Democrat |
56 |
39 |
Independent |
26 |
69 |
Men |
44 |
50 |
Women |
53 |
42 |
Married men |
52 |
41 |
Married women |
60 |
34 |
Age 17-29 |
14 |
84 |
Age 30-44 |
37 |
58 |
Age 45-64 |
58 |
39 |
Age 65+ |
69 |
39 |
(Update: County income results from here.)
Just about everyone in Iowa is white—even more so among the people caucusing, so we get no racial and ethnic breakdowns. But what we do see is an obvious breakdown among both age and partisan identification.
I’d be willing to bet that there is strong correlation among marriage status and partisan ID with age, with young voters less likely to be married and allied with the Democratic Party. This presents continued challenges for the Sanders camp moving forward: Young voters are the least likely to vote (and the 17-44 cohort was only 37 percent of all Iowa voters, a little more and Sanders win easily), and if Clinton is drawing even with whites, how can Sanders counterbalance her strengths with communities of color? And what about that independent vote? Let’s look at the contests in the next month or so:
State |
Date |
Open/Closed |
NH |
2/9 |
Open* |
NV |
2/20 |
Closed
|
SC |
2/20 |
Open |
AL |
3/1 |
Open |
AS |
3/1 |
Open |
Ar |
3/1 |
Open |
GA |
3/1 |
Open |
MA |
3/1 |
Open* |
MN |
3/1 |
Open |
OK |
3/1 |
Closed |
TN |
3/1 |
Open |
TX |
3/1 |
Open |
VT |
3/1 |
Open |
VA |
3/1 |
Open |
KS |
3/5 |
Closed |
LA |
3/5 |
Closed |
NE |
3/5 |
Closed |
ME |
3/6 |
Closed |
* Open to unaffiliated voters only
Nevada is closed, but all other states through March 1 are open—a definite relief for Team Sanders. Interesting that all of the states coming up that following Saturday are closed. But unless Sanders keeps things close on the delegate and expectations front, March 5 won’t matter much. And that means taking the white states (Massachusetts, Vermont, and Minnesota) and keeping things close elsewhere, particularly in delegate-rich Texas, Georgia, and Virginia.
One additional interesting tidbit from the entrance poll: Look how evenly all economic groups voted for the candidates. There is no distinction based on economic status. I was looking at county data, not individual voter data, sorry for the confusion.