In an attempt to lower expectations for the upcoming caucuses, she's misrepresenting the state's demographics.
Stinging from its lopsided defeat in New Hampshire and bracing for a tougher-than-expected primary fight against Bernie Sanders, the Hillary Clinton campaign has sought to lower expectations for the next contest, this Saturday's Nevada caucuses. To do so, the campaign has been subtly pushing a curious line: Don't read too much into the results of the Nevada caucuses, because the state is disproportionately white, just like New Hampshire and Iowa.
As I explained last week, Nevada should be a firewall state for Clinton, and that's how the Clinton campaign long painted it. But last Tuesday, campaign spokesman Brian Fallon tried to dash those impressions during an appearance on MSNBC. As recounted by Buzzfeed's Ruby Cramer, Fallon tried to suggest that Sanders had an edge in the caucuses thanks to the makeup of the state.
"There’s an important Hispanic element to the Democratic caucus in Nevada," Fallon said. "But it’s still a state that is 80 percent white voters. You have a caucus-style format, and he’ll have the momentum coming out of New Hampshire presumably, so there's a lot of reasons he should do well."
Campaign manager Robby Mook, who ran Clinton's 2008 campaign in the state, made a similar argument the next day when talking with congressional Democrats:
Is Nevada as lacking in diversity as Iowa and New Hampshire? Not even close. It's actually one of the more diverse states in the country. The population is 9 percent African American, just a few points below the national average of 13 percent. It's also 9 percent Asian American or Pacific Islander, above the national 5.6 percent average. And Nevada boasts a far larger Latino population than the country writ large: 27.8 percent, versus 17.4 percent nationally.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/hillary-clinton-nevada-diverse-latino