Talk Elections

https://www.scribd.com/doc/314323239/DEM-PREZ-MEMO-pdf
(I hate giving a scribd link but its all I can find)
New Mexico Dem Primary LV:
Clinton - 53.3%
Sanders - 27.6%
Undecideds - 19.0%

This is pretty funny. Bernie doing best among conservatives and worst among liberals, but respectably among progressives. I wonder what makes Bernie supporters so much more inclined to identify as progressive rather than liberal. Is it in age thing?

unless I just happen to know every Sanders support in the state personally, this is junk. not going to be this lopside.

Land-line only.
Junk poll.

Let's not go down this route. "Everyone I know voted for Bernie!1!!" is how Reddit justifies their fraud accusations. If PA was based on who I knew, Bernie would've won by 50 points. His supporters are more vocal and also more likely to spread their opinion far and wide through technology.

That said, I do agree she's not winning by 25. I think it'll be similar to AZ.

lol, Bernie losing among progressives. Clinton should easily win here, but not by this much.

Nice. Gonna make a lot of money shorting the New Mexico margin >15 market on PredictIt after this one!

Despicable lies! We all know that Bernie will win 95%-5%.

Looks pretty junkified.

No, its probably going be NJ.

No way will she win by that much in New Mexico.

The margins seem to be extremely sketchy, I can't see New Mexico going for Hillary by significantly larger margins than Arizona, and quite likely could be significantly closer, considering much lower percentage of 65+ voters and much higher proportion of voters <35 in a primary where generational divide is most regions of the country has been an even larger factor than ethnicity/income.

It is easy to look at the "% of Latinos" in a given state and then automatically start to assign a % of the vote to candidate X or Candidate Y, however the reality is that in New Mexico almost 10% of the population identifies as "Spanish" in origin, with hundreds of years of roots in the region, and there is even a separate Castilian Spanish dialect at home, so there really isn't any reasonable comparison that one could make based upon similar counties/regions, etc...

Now, one item that could prove interesting is the Native American vote in a state where 10% of the population is Native American.... No idea how this will play out in NM, but it is worth noting that Hillary exceeded her statewide averages in Navajo and Apacha counties in NM, which also include the Navajo, Apache, and Hopi Nations. Although we don't have tons of data to look at regarding the Native Nations (MT and SD have yet to vote on Tuesday) Bernie looks to have won the Ojibwe/Chippewa in the Upper-Midwest, as well as indigenous communities in Alaska, and although we don't have much precinct level data from Oregon, quite possibly Warm Springs and people of Native background in Klamath County, Oregon.

Point being, New Mexico is a state that is so fundamentally different demographically from anywhere else in the United States, that I think unless there is another poll or two coming down before Tuesday, no one has any idea how this will all shake down.

Epic fail.

I never bought this as a big win - this was one state where age beat out race in 2008, and while I didn't expect this narrow a result, these predictions of 15%+ blowouts were kind of baseless.

This was really the anomaly of the night. I guess age really made the difference.

Mhmm. She really outperformed everywhere but here, which is really interesting considering it's closed and heavily Hispanic. Ah well.

Unfortunately without exit polls we will never know what happened.

NM was...quite a surprise considering how the rest of the night went. If you would've told me yesterday that she'd win SD, possibly win CA by double digits, win NJ by nearly 30, and keep MT within single digits, I'd have guessed NM was a 20+ point blowout.

Really sad. I would love to see some California exit polling too.

NM was the NC of last Tuesday.

Amazing job, BWD Global ...

Well everywhere but here and North Dakota anyway...

I feel like Clinton did as expected in North Dakota. Sanders kind of underperformed, because 10% went uncommitted. I wonder why? Could the fact that it was an open primary and the Republicans didn't really hold a public contest (just a convention) lead some Republicans to attend the Democratic caucus and just vote for neither of the two? Sounds unlikely but you never know.

Albuquerque surprised me. Is New Mexico the only state where a major urban area supported Sanders more than the rural and outstanding areas of the state?

Oregon, perhaps? Lane county went more strongly to Sanders than Multnomah did of course, as did a few rural counties here and there, but the rest of the state was generally more pro-Clinton.

This is what you get for insulting Hispanics, Donald.

I don't know, I expected North Dakota to be a lot closer than it was. This was one of Hillary's best caucus states in 2008. Sanders ended up doing a lot better than Obama did (at least in terms of the MOV) which hasn't been the case in all that many states outside of New England and parts of Appalachia.

Oregon would be about even between "major urban area" vs rest of state with the three counties of Metro Portland +13.6% Bernie and elsewhere +14.2% Bernie (Although Multnomah outperformed statewide results regardless). If we add Lane County to "major urban" it would flip the other way narrowly, although 25% of the County is basically small town and rural, so we would need to way until we get precinct level results.