WA - Elway: Clinton leads, tied race on GOP side

[Xing]

Total junk. The way that this poll was conducted should be evidence enough that the results are not believable. Those of you who actually think Clinton would've won a closed primary here with delegates at stake are the delusional ones, not the ones who think Sanders will win Oregon.

[Xing]

No one thinks Clinton would've won a closed primary in Washington. But it wouldn't have been a 45% margin win for Sanders.

I know, I was mainly responding to the poster who seems to think Oregon will be very close. It won't be. Sanders' margin won't be what it was in WA, but the PNW is still a very pro-Sanders region.

[Xing]

No one thinks Clinton would've won a closed primary in Washington. But it wouldn't have been a 45% margin win for Sanders.

I know, I was mainly responding to the poster who seems to think Oregon will be very close. It won't be. Sanders' margin won't be what it was in WA, but the PNW is still a very pro-Sanders region.

Uh, just out of curiosity, what makes you think the PNW is a "very pro-Sanders region"? Yes it's like 99% white (and I admit that's arguably that's been the best predictor of Sanders' vote) but Washington and Oregon both have some of the most moderate elected Democrats in the country. The PNW Democratic Parties aren't exactly a bastion of Sanders-style liberalism in the way that, say, the Wisconsin Democratic Party is (Tammy Baldwin, Russ Feingold, ect.) It's also, again, a closed primary, a format that Sanders has done badly in so far.

I'd like to stress that I wouldn't be surprised if he won Oregon -- I'm just saying that I don't expect it to be a blowout, and I don't think the result of an open caucus in Washington tells us much about how Oregon will vote using a completely different format.

Some of our Democratic politicians happen to be a bit more moderate (not Murray or Inslee), but that does not mean the Democratic voting population isn't very progressive. It is about as progressive as Wisconsin or Vermont's. I can tell you definitively that WA and OR are very polarized, inelastic states, which makes them good fits for both Sanders and Cruz. Trust me, I know my home state, and while the caucus results may be very Sanders-friendly, they're much closer to reality than this poll.

[Xing]

This isn't too surprising actually. In 08 Obama won the caucus by 37 points, but the beauty contest by only 5 points. In Nebraska he won the caucus by 36 points and the beauty contest by 3 points. In Texas he lost the primary by 4 but won the caucus by 12. We saw it on the Republican side too, with Ted Cruz winning Maine when he's about as popular as herpes in the Northeast. It seems to be a trend.

If she actually comes within single digits here (or wins it), it will definitely be another great arrow in the quiver of the cause of caucus abolition. It's true that it won't be representative either since Bernie won't be focused on running up the score and spending money there, but it will definitely be more representative than the caucus was (granted, that's not saying very much.)

I really don't think you can put any stock in beauty contests. People in this state who are likely to vote in the primary are more reliable voters (older, more affluent) which skews the results toward Hillary, similar to how caucus results are skewed to some degree toward Bernie. Your Texas example is a good one, though, since both contests were held on the same day, and both had delegates at stake, so there was incentive to participate in both. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Washington is very pro-Sanders. He might not be favored 3:1 here, but it's certainly not close, which the beauty contest might be.

[Xing]

There's really nothing to definitely prevent Democrats from voting Republican in the primary. Yet another reason why the current system in WA needs to change, and why the primary results shouldn't be considered an accurate reflection of the electorate.