538 - "What To Expect In The Democratic Primaries In Kentucky And Oregon"

[TomCADem]

I think 538 is just trying to make up for past mistakes by trying to inflate its estimates how much Bernie was going to win by in Oregon.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-to-expect-in-the-democratic-primaries-in-kentucky-and-oregon/

Today’s Democratic primaries in Kentucky and Oregon are the last meaningful ones of the month.1 Hillary Clinton is a slight favorite in Kentucky (with 55 delegates at stake), and Bernie Sanders has a good shot at taking Oregon (with 61 delegates at stake). Overall, Sanders probably won’t make much of a dent in Clinton’s lead of 280 elected delegates, because all Democratic primaries allocate their delegates proportionally. Unless Sanders wins by a very large margin, which is unlikely, he won’t pick up many more delegates than Clinton will.

Kentucky doesn’t line up particularly well for either candidate demographically. My colleague Nate Silver’s demographic model, released in late April, projects that Clinton will win the state by about 2 percentage points. Why? In the last general election with an exit poll in every state (2008), whites made up about 75 percent of Barack Obama voters in Kentucky. That’s good — but not great — news for Sanders, who has done better with white voters than nonwhite voters. Blacks, meanwhile, made up about 25 percent. What could turn the tide for Clinton is that Kentucky is a closed primary, which means only registered Democrats can vote. Sanders has done better among unaffiliated voters in open primaries. There’s been limited polling in Kentucky, but the last poll released there (in early March) had Clinton ahead by 5 percentage points.

Oregon is different. Nate’s demographic model gives Sanders an edge of about 15 percentage points. That’s because whites made up about 90 percent of Obama voters in the 2008 general election. Keep in mind too that Sanders won next door in the Washington caucuses in March by about 45 percentage points. Clinton is expected to do better in Oregon because, unlike Washington, Oregon is a primary and is closed to non-Democrats. I should note that the only two polls taken this year, including one taken this month, have shown Clinton ahead, so it’s possible that she’ll pull it out.

Of course, the only thing that matters is delegates. If Clinton wins Kentucky by 2 percentage points and Sanders wins Oregon by 15 percentage points, this translates into Sanders cutting his elected delegate deficit by about eight. That would leave Clinton with a lead of 272 elected delegates with very few primaries left.

[anotherproletariat]

1. Pretty close. I especially like the last paragraph...

"Of course, the only thing that matters is delegates. If Clinton wins Kentucky by 2 percentage points and Sanders wins Oregon by 15 percentage points, this translates into Sanders cutting his elected delegate deficit by about eight. That would leave Clinton with a lead of 272 elected delegates with very few primaries left."

And even though the Sandroids here do not want to count super delegates...they are predominantly for Hillary, and have no reason to switch to the guy who is losing. The supers are dedicated, long-term party members who are just as fed up with the antics of Sanders and his minions as the rest of us. If he had been smart, Sanders should have considered that he might need to be nice to the supers at some point if he ever wanted their support (and maybe condemned his fans for their threatening phone calls to various supers). Bottom line, the supers will never switch.

[anotherproletariat]

5. Not too worried. At this stage in 2008 Obama lost several states (including CA) and he was received

just fine in the general election. Given that she shifted attention to Trump three weeks ago, and just did a last minute 4 day push in KY, no one really expected much. Every pundit I have heard has been saying that she won't clinch until June 7, which is what we are expecting.

You also can't discount the drag of the attacks from Sanders himself. But at least those should help her in the long run, since he has started to really go after the Democratic Party...the very people he needs to support him as super delegates if he were to have any hope.

[anotherproletariat]

8. I'm happy for you. I agree with the objectives of your war, just not the tactics to get there.

[Garrett78]

2. The demographics in both states favor Sanders.

Simple as that. He should have won KY and he should have won OR by more. Clinton didn't even campaign in Oregon.

This is a lot like 2008, except that '08 was a closer race. The eventual nominee is losing a majority of the contests down the stretch, but the mathematical and demographic realities can't be overcome.

[QC]

4. Clinton won Kentucky 65.48% - 29.92% in 2008.

I don't think the state's demographics have changed that dramatically in eight years.

[auntpurl]

6. You don't get it.

Hillary is winning Obama's areas. It's easier if you look at the electoral maps and see Hillary as Obama and Bernie as Hillary.

[Garrett78]

10. Yeah, I just started a thread about this.

It's hard to believe people still don't see what's happening, because it's been happening for months now. Clinton is relying on the Obama Coalition. Naturally, as a result, Sanders is going to do well where Clinton did well in '08 and Clinton is going to do well where she didn't do so well in '08. How is that not obvious to everyone? Heck, how was that not obvious 2 months ago?

[auntpurl]

11. I really don't know.

It was obvious to me after the South.

I think a lot of Bernie supporters are quite new to the political process? They seem thrown by straightforward rules and procedures that have been in place for many years, and they don't seem to understand the difference between a primary and a GE.

[QC]

12. That's a very clever rationalization. Nice work! n/t

[auntpurl]

13. By all means, don't take my word for it.

Look at the electoral maps yourself. Overlay them and compare them. If you find any substantive difference between Hillary 16 and Obama 08 come back here and tell me. I'm all ears.

[stevenleser]

15. They will fight any idea that doesn't fit with what they want no matter how strong the logic or

facts.

[Garrett78]

17. There's really nothing clever about it.

It's just obvious.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. KY was a coup. HRC wanted it, worked it, and won it.

Also, holding BS <10 in OR was a coup.

[Garrett78]

16. Yeah, last night's results may suggest his campaign is waning.

If he can't reach the margins he needs in states like OR and KY, how can anyone not see that this race is essentially over? Of course, I've been wondering that same thing for 2 months now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. What is ironic is Sanders argued she won KY by a large margin last time.

No crap. In KY and WV she became Obama in the voter's eyes. The same Democrats who preferred a white female candidate over a black male candidate now preferred a white male candidate over a white female candidate.

This primary season didn't go exactly the way I anticipated. I initially thought HRC would get the same voters as she got in 08 and add African Americans. That would make for an easy win. I never anticipated she would bleed white voters to the extent she did.

[Garrett78]

19. Sanders has done better than I expected, but...

...given that it's been a 2-person race pretty much the whole way and given the political climate of today (vs. 2008) and given that we have an outgoing Democratic president (as opposed to Dubya), the results aren't terribly surprising.

You're exactly right, of course Clinton is doing worse in places like KY than she did in '08. I wrote about this here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511990307.