Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:57 PM Mar 2016

First Half of the Primary Season: What Patterns Can We Point To?

Rather than talk about each candidate's chances of winning the nomination in terms of percentages (e.g., so-and-so has a 99% chance of winning), let's consider some undeniable patterns.

Clinton does best in larger, more diverse states and "blue" areas (such as St. Louis and Atlanta). Sanders does best in smaller, less diverse states and "red" areas (such as rural Missouri and rural Georgia).

Clinton does better among registered Democrats. Sanders does better among independents.

Clinton does better in primaries. Sanders does better in caucuses.

Most of the remaining contests are closed and most are primaries. The remaining contests with 100+ delegates are WA, NY, MD, PA, CA and NJ. WA has a caucus and the rest have primaries.

So, is there any reason to believe those various patterns will get flipped upside down?

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
First Half of the Primary Season: What Patterns Can We Point To? (Original Post) Garrett78 Mar 2016 OP
You left one out... brooklynite Mar 2016 #1
Clearly she does, overall. Garrett78 Mar 2016 #3
We can now say that Berne's revolution calguy Mar 2016 #2
The more heterogeneous the state the better Secretary Clinton does. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #4
Sanders can't win large, Democratic stronghold urban areas alcibiades_mystery Mar 2016 #5
AZ is a dry run for CA DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #6
Obviously, Bernie is not going to win Philadelphia, Newark, Baltimore, or New York City alcibiades_mystery Mar 2016 #7
What we can learn is that Gwhittey Mar 2016 #8

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
3. Clearly she does, overall.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:31 AM
Mar 2016

I just think when people talk about so-and-so having X% chance of winning, it's too abstract and subjective. It's best, I think, to consider patterns and whether or not there's any reason to think those patterns won't continue. Tonight's results will likely reinforce the patterns. And they'll likely be in line with what polling suggested was going to happen.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,708 posts)
4. The more heterogeneous the state the better Secretary Clinton does.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:33 AM
Mar 2016

The above observation is incontrovertible.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
5. Sanders can't win large, Democratic stronghold urban areas
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:34 AM
Mar 2016

Apart from some caucus wins (Denver, Minneapolis), the only "major" urban area he's won is Oklahoma City. OK, fine, Grand Rapids. He will probably win Salt Lake City tonight, though, again, a caucus. He just got his clock cleaned in Phoenix and Tuscon.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
7. Obviously, Bernie is not going to win Philadelphia, Newark, Baltimore, or New York City
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:42 AM
Mar 2016

He might win Seattle. He won't win Milwaukee, though he might win Wisconsin.

By the time Portland gets around, the things will already be sealed, so...

California? Come on.

 

Gwhittey

(1,377 posts)
8. What we can learn is that
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:57 AM
Mar 2016

People are ok with Media in this country favoring one and determining elections. Too bad that we are going to have a President Trump because people would rather have a fucked up media lying and devoting 10x more coverage to 1 Trump than Clinton and 100x more than Sanders. Too many of you are more focused on getting win for primary and ignoring the major corruption and bias media played in this election, it is going to come back and bite country in ass in the GE.

Americans in general are stupid and largely uninformed on issues. Most voters get their news from cable TV and not internet. So don't cheer about Hillary winning this primary when she got a clear bias in the media. Trump is getting more of bias and they already are dropping Hillary coverage over covering Trump.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»First Half of the Primary...