Upcoming Primary/Caucus States

[brooklynite]

Arizona (P)
538 model says Sanders needs to win 55-45 (+10)
Sanders currently trailing 50-24 (-26)

Idaho (C)
538 model says Sanders needs to win 60-40 (+20)
Sanders currently leading 47-45 (+2)

Utah (C)
538 model says Sanders needs to win 58-42 (+16)
Sanders currently trailing 51-44 (-7)

[hrmjustin]

1. Might be a better night for Hillary than the pundits are predicting.

[Cheese Sandwich]

2. 538 model is wrong though because they assume no superdelegates would switch sides

[hack89]

4. She will win without the superdelegates. nt

[Cheese Sandwich]

8. ok but the "targets" in the "538 model" are wrong because they assume superdelegates never switch

[hack89]

14. True the targets do not take into account superdelegates

they are purely pledged delegates. But Hillary can win without the superdelegates.

Don't you expect the superdelegelates to respect the process and vote for the candidate with the most delegates and votes? Are you counting on Sanders winning by undermining the choice of the voters?

[Cheese Sandwich]

16. I think they do take into account superdelegates.

They are just assuming none will ever switch sides.

Hillary Clinton is trying to suppress the vote by acting like the election is over.

[hack89]

17. The stated methodology specifically says they do not include superdelegates.

The Democratic National Committee includes 712 “superdelegates,” usually elected officials and party leaders, whose votes at the convention are not bound to a candidate based on primary and caucus results. Because superdelegates can change their preferences before the convention, we are not including them in our delegate targets.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/

[Cheese Sandwich]

18. That's interesting thanks

My error.

[Agnosticsherbet]

27. That is a great post. Thanks.

[virtualobserver]

3. Attn. Team Bernie, These daily words of discouragement have been brought to you by..Team inevitable.

[artislife]

35. As they drive the nail in the coffin of switchover hope shut. nt

[MADem]

5. Many a slip twixt cup and lip, but I don't think Sanders can deliver dozens of blowouts in

succession--and that's what he needs to do.

I'd give him Idaho, though--the demographics and culture there favor him. If HRC can get close it's as good as a win.

[leftofcool]

7. The demographics and culture favored him in MO too and look what happened

[MADem]

11. I will be the first to admit that shocked the shit out of me. I was prepared to cede

MO days before the contest--I said as much here on this board.

When she won that state, I said to myself, "There's a sea change going on up in here!"

There's a bit more diversity in MO than there is in Idaho. I am not expecting lightning to strike twice.

[MineralMan]

22. MO was really a tie.

It benefited neither candidate, really. The delegate lead is all that matters, and Hillary was a major net winner on that score this past Tuesday.

Ties or near misses don't count, really. They just build the totals for both candidates. Wins are the only races that matter, and their importance depends on the state's delegate numbers. Bernie's not winning large states. He must, if he's going to have any chance at the nomination. Idaho and Wyoming have few delegates to split between the candidates. Even large wins in such states have little effect on the delegate lead margin.

[MADem]

23. Psychologically it was important, though. It got put in her column and that's how history will

record it--just as Michigan went to Sanders.

It meant, when that result was finalized, that she'd run the table--that she owned the night.

It was a Big Freakin' Deal in that regard.

[MineralMan]

25. Yes, in that sense. And it's important.

Predictions were widespread that Sanders would win some of the March 15 races. He won none of them. That's an indication, I think, that he simply does not have enough supporters to win the nomination. He's doing far better than I expected, but not better enough to overcome Hillary's chances.

If he had enough support to do that, Hillary would not be 2.5 million voted ahead of him in the popular primary voting.

I don't see a big change on the horizon in that regard.

[Agnosticsherbet]

31. Ties are important when they either exceed or fail to meet Delegate goals.

Missouri was polled as being close, and it turned out that way.

From this point on, any virtual tie will benefit Clinton (she is in the lead) and disadvantage Sanders (His is way behind).

[MineralMan]

32. True enough. I watch the site at the link below

to follow that:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/

[workinclasszero]

6. Any close loss for Hillary is a defeat for Bernie

Proportional delegates kids, uh huh.

[Cheese Sandwich]

9. "kids"... You're an adult addressing a group of children?

[workinclasszero]

10. Whatever

Its a word.

Bern fans a little touchy this morning?

[MADem]

12. Yes indeed!

FWIW, you can call me "kid" any day of the week.

It's been a long, long time!

[workinclasszero]

15. LOL

Well I'm probably older than lots of folks here.

Just stay off my lawn and there won't be any trouble!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I suspect HRC wins AZ and the VT senator wins ID and UT

Last edited Fri Mar 18, 2016, 11:29 AM - Edit history (2)

If he can't win homogeneous Utah where can he win?

[morningfog]

19. If Tuesday's results are close to these polls,

Last edited Fri Mar 18, 2016, 11:32 AM - Edit history (1)

I don't see how he can even arguably secure a majority of the PDs.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. I changed independent to senator in deference to you.

[morningfog]

26. I will edit accordingly.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. I will be shocked if HRC wins Utah.

He wins

Utah
Hawaii
Idaho
Washington
Oregon
Wyoming

Push states (slightly favor Bernie)

Wisconsin
West Virginia
Kentucky

HRC wins the rest.

I might be missing some.

If there is a bandwagon effect we will see it soon.

[LonePirate]

20. AZ is a closed primary. ID is an open caucus. UT is an open caucus with a few rules.

Clinton should win AZ while Sanders should win ID and UT.

[MineralMan]

21. And there you have the Sanders Dilemma.

What he needs and what appears likely to happen are far from being the same. Arizona, for example, is a closed primary, while the other two are caucuses. Arizona also has many more delegates than the other two states. It is unlikely to be a win for Sanders.

Utah is harder to call. Even though it is a caucus state, it is also home to a lot of more conservative Democrats than many other caucus states. Sanders is unlikely to do better than tie there, which won't do him any good at all.

Idaho is close. It's a tossup, but will probably end up dividing its small delegation pretty evenly. Again, no help for Sanders.

And then, looming on the horizon is New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, all to be decided later. Their delegate counts are overwhelmingly larger than these smaller states. I don't see a bit Sanders win in any of them. Even California, which Sanders fans are saying will go to him would be unlikely to do so with any sort of large margin. That's just not in the cards, and it's actually more likely to be in the Clinton camp.

I don't see the path. I don't see it happening at all.

[NowSam]

28. 538 was very wrong in MI.

So there is that.

[brooklynite]

30. 538 did an informative podcast on the Michigan outcome...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/elections-podcast-the-biggest-primary-polling-upset-ever/

[Agnosticsherbet]

33. That was good. Thanks.

[CalvinballPro]

34. Indeed, that was more a failure of polling companies to regularly check in with the electorate...

... than any actual "surge" by Sanders.

They stopped polling people a day before a major debate, and then did nothing afterwards. Plus, they were only polling likely Democratic voters, who actually voted pretty much in line with how the polls said they would. But they didn't poll independents, despite the state being an open primary, and got side-swiped by the results.