My "Black Population to Predict Primaries" model is now 14 of 15 (93.3%)
Last edited Tue May 17, 2016, 11:50 PM - Edit history (1)
Hypothesis: Simply by analyzing the percentage of a state's population that is black, I believe you can fairly accurately predict the "winner" of a state in upcoming primaries and caucuses. There will be misses, I am sure, but I'm bored, so let's see how this works out. I'll bump the thread and fill in actual results (With insightful commentary like, "Boy, that one was wrong!"
as primaries go on...assuming people are interested in my validation or humiliation, as the case may be.
So let's begin with states that have already voted
Your key for numbers below:
State Rank for Black Pop. State % of Pop. that is Black
All numbers from 2010 Census
Bernie Wins
44 NH 1.22%
33 CO 4.28%
31 MN 4.57%
26 OK 7.96%
49 VT 0.87%
29 KS 6.15%
32 NE 4.50%
47 ME 1.03%
16 MI 14.24%
48 ID 0.95%
43 UT 1.27%
Avg Black Pop 4.28%
At +1 Standard Deviation 8.38%
Hillary Wins
40 IA 2.68%
23 NV 9.00%
5 SC 28.48%
6 AL 26.38%
12 AR 15.76%
3 GA 31.4%
25 MA 8.1%
10 TN 16.78%
18 TX 11.91%
9 VA 19.91%
2 LA 32.4%
1 MS 37.30%
11 FL 15.91%
14 IL 14.88%
19 MO 11.49%
7 NC 21.60%
17 OH 12.04%
35 AZ 4.16%
Avg Black Pop 17.79%
At -1 Standard Deviation 7.80%
Prediction Methodology: If a state's black population is less than Bernie's 1 St Dev number, I predict he wins. If it is more than Hillary's 1 St Dev number, I predict she wins.
So my straight up, no commentary predictions (Note: this isn't a prediction of margin of victory, just who comes out on top as the state's winner. I also do not include territories):
34 AK 4.27% Bernie Correct
38 HI 3.08% Bernie Correct
36 WA 3.74% Bernie Correct
30 WI 6.07% Bernie Correct
42 WY 1.29% Bernie Correct
13 NY 15.18% Hillary Correct
21 CT 10.34% Hillary Correct
8 DE 20.95% Hillary Correct
4 MD 30.1% Hillary Correct
20 PA 10.79% Hillary Correct
27 RI 7.5% Bernie Correct
22 IN 9.07% Hillary Sanders--Clinton won black vote by 52%
37 WV 3.58% Bernie Correct
24 KY 8.2% Hillary Correct
41 OR 2.01% Bernie Correct
28 CA 6.67% Bernie
50 MT 0.67% Bernie
15 NJ 14.46% Hillary
39 NM 2.97% Bernie
46 ND 1.08% Bernie
45 SD 1.14% Bernie
** DC 50.7% Hillary
Now there will be some misses here, because the two data sets overlap in the 2nd Standard Deviation (Mean+2*StDev vs Mean -2*StDev), so the question will become which states and in which direction. That said, misses should favor Hillary as her Standard Deviation is over twice as wide as Bernie's (Wider standard deviation means more variation in the numbers. In this case, wider Deviation means Clinton has been more successful among a wider variation in black population than Bernie).
= new reply since forum marked as read
Sanders needed to not only reach out to African-Americans and make his program more explicitly inclusive of POC concerns, AND he needed to undercut the "Obama's third term" narrative, if not co-opt it for himself as the "change candidate". The problem is that Sanders would need to change up his style from the tone-deaf white leftist know-it-all model he and his cohorts have labored under for 50 years because that shit is like chalk on a blackboard to AAs. Clinton was vulnerable, because people are looking for something more, but Sanders as far as many if not most black people are concerned, are in "we're cool with you but there's a reason we ain't ever heard of you before". The problem is that white "leftists" have this tendency to NEVER fucking blame their own tactics or ideas for their failures, it's always "DA MAN" (actually the fact that typical white privileged "leftists" seem to be exactly what conservatives think leftism is about makes me think of a phrase that begins with "C" and ends with "N" keeping them from accomplishing anything, so the fact that "we ain't heard of you before" is to them, just evidence that there's a conspiracy to keep True ProgressivesTM out of the mainstream.
