NM - BWD Global: Clinton +25
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 12:43:46 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
  NM - BWD Global: Clinton +25
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: NM - BWD Global: Clinton +25  (Read 5500 times)
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,719
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2016, 10:54:55 AM »

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.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2016, 11:18:58 AM »

This is what you get for insulting Hispanics, Donald.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2016, 11:20:54 AM »

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.

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.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,418
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2016, 11:24:14 AM »

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.

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.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 13 queries.