IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New 538 says he was expected to win by 17%
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-needs-more-than-the-tie-he-got-in-iowa/ from February 2:

But neither Clinton nor Sanders did so well as to make me think either candidate will gain momentum heading into the New Hampshire primary next week. Sanders is likely to win in the Granite State — he has either an 89 percent chance or a 96 percent chance of winning there, depending on whether you look at FiveThirtyEight’s polls-plus forecast or polls-only forecast. Still, the results in Iowa suggest that polls in New Hampshire may tighten. That’s because the states look similar demographically. Even taking into account that Sanders lives next door in Vermont, Clinton probably shouldn’t be behind by 17 percentage points in the New Hampshire polling average right now.

Assuming Sanders holds on to win in New Hampshire, would that be bad news for Clinton? Although I’m not sure that anyone wants to lose a primary, how she frames a loss in New Hampshire will matter a lot. If she is seen as doing better than expected, she could get a bump (something she is now unlikely to get coming out of Iowa). If, however, Sanders gets good press, he may improve his chances despite the demographic challenges facing him in other states.

We’ve said for months that Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the best states for Sanders demographically. You can see why in the entrance poll taken in Iowa. Sanders won very liberal voters over Clinton by 19 percentage points, but he lost self-identified somewhat liberals and moderates to Clinton by 6 percentage points and 23 percentage points, respectively. That’s bad for Sanders because even though 68 percent of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers identified as liberal this year, only 47 percent of Democratic primary voters nationwide did so in 2008. We’ll need to see if Sanders can do better in a state that is more moderate than Iowa before thinking he can win the nomination.


AFAICS, that analysis is still holding.

:-)

Cheers,
Scott.
New Things have changed *a lot* since 2008.
Two-thirds of voters in the Democratic primary said that they are liberal, up from 56 percent who said the same in 2008, the last time there was a contested Democratic primary.

http://www.nytimes.com/live/new-hampshire-primary-2016-election/ideology

Also, https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/02/ExitDraft_V1_d_new.jpg&w=1484
New And he won by 22.5%
Which is what I said, no? He outperformed the polls by 5.5%.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/09/us/elections/new-hampshire-democrat-poll.html

Still, the results in Iowa suggest that polls in New Hampshire may tighten. That’s because the states look similar demographically. Even taking into account that Sanders lives next door in Vermont, Clinton probably shouldn’t be behind by 17 percentage points in the New Hampshire polling average right now.

See above. They didn't tighten, Sanders outperformed.

Sanders won very liberal voters over Clinton by 19 percentage points, but he lost self-identified somewhat liberals and moderates to Clinton by 6 percentage points and 23 percentage points, respectively. That’s bad for Sanders because even though 68 percent of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers identified as liberal this year, only 47 percent of Democratic primary voters nationwide did so in 2008.

Sanders won every demographic group in NH except > 65 and > $200K/yr. He also won every category of very liberal, somewhat liberal, and moderate by at least 14 points, 20 points in the case of moderate voters.

I'm sure it's my fault (eh, Peter? ;-), but I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out here. I don't think that analysis was very accurate. :-)
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Ok. I misread or mis-remembered some things. Too much multitasking. :-) Sorry.
     hillary's demographic - (boxley) - (19)
         I don't understand her purported support from the African-American community. - (mmoffitt) - (18)
             I think it's probably an exposure thing - (malraux) - (13)
                 That's what you call a whoopin' :0) - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                     actually no, in delegates won it was a tie - (boxley)
                 SC and NV should be interesting. - (Another Scott) - (10)
                     It's the content of her character that's her trouble. - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                         Ancient, really ancient history. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                             So, when she was more "idealistic" she was more right wing? - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                                 People don't pick their parents. She ended up on the right side. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                     You said the magic word.. - (Ashton)
                     NV comes first due to a quirk of Democrat scheduling - (malraux) - (4)
                         538 says he was expected to win by 17% - (Another Scott) - (3)
                             Things have changed *a lot* since 2008. - (mmoffitt)
                             And he won by 22.5% - (malraux) - (1)
                                 Ok. I misread or mis-remembered some things. Too much multitasking. :-) Sorry. -NT - (Another Scott)
             neither do some in the black community - (boxley) - (1)
                 A pithy article, Indeed. - (Ashton)
             So, you forgot Bill Clinton was the first black president? :) - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
                 I was reminded recently that WJC being the "first black president" wasn't a compliment. - (Another Scott)

You know it's bad when you hope it's a salmon rectum.
98 ms