HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » "Hillary Clinton's Nevada...

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 10:59 PM

"Hillary Clinton's Nevada victory - what's different from 2008?" (HINT - Sanders outperformed Obama)

link; excerpt:

In 2008, Hillary Clinton won the Nevada caucuses, beating then-Sen. Barack Obama 51 percent to 45 percent, and now, eight years later, she scored a repeat performance against her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders, this time by a slightly narrower margin, 52 percent to 48 percent.

What's different eight years later, and what do those difference say about the the race ahead?
...
Potential trouble ahead for Clinton
Clinton may have done well with some key groups, but the data also show that there are some warning signs on the horizon for the Clinton campaign. Despite going to Nevada early and spending a good deal of time there in comparison to Sanders, Clinton didn't perform as well as she did eight years ago with a few demographic groups, in particular Hispanics, young people, and independents.

Hispanics
Sanders captured 53 percent of the Hispanic vote this year in contrast to Clinton's 45 percent. This represents a substantial decline in support for Clinton among Hispanics compared to eight years ago. In 2008, Clinton got 64 percent of the Hispanic vote, compared to Mr. Obama's 26 percent.

Young people
Clinton did not win young people in either 2008 or 2016. But eight years ago she captured 33 percent of those under the age of 30, compared with just 12 percent in Saturday's contest.

Independents
Nevada limits its caucus to registered Democrats, but same-day registration is available. Among those caucus goers who identify as independent, Sanders did well, capturing more than 70 percent of the vote, compared to Clinton's 23 percent. While Clinton lost independents to Obama in 2008, at that time she was able to capture 33 percent to his 47 percent. As in the case of Hispanics and young people, among this important constituency we see that Clinton's support has dipped.

22 replies, 1369 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Hillary Clinton's Nevada victory - what's different from 2008?" (HINT - Sanders outperformed Obama) (Original post)
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 OP
asuhornets Feb 2016 #1
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #3
asuhornets Feb 2016 #5
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #7
frylock Feb 2016 #20
morningfog Feb 2016 #21
frylock Feb 2016 #22
BeyondGeography Feb 2016 #2
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #11
BeyondGeography Feb 2016 #15
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #17
Robbins Feb 2016 #4
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #6
Robbins Feb 2016 #8
book_worm Feb 2016 #10
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #12
Robbins Feb 2016 #14
BeyondGeography Feb 2016 #16
Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #18
book_worm Feb 2016 #9
nadinbrzezinski Feb 2016 #13
frylock Feb 2016 #19

Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:01 PM

1. Obama did better than Sanders in Nevada ...

Clinton also did better this time around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:06 PM

3. If by "better" you mean "his loss was not as close as today's results," I agree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:32 PM

5. that's even worse for Sanders

Obama loss Nevada but he still did better than Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:39 PM

7. I think a 4.5% margin is smaller than a 6% margin. Agree to disagree, I guess

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asuhornets (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 12:57 AM

20. In what world is 45 greater than 48?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #20)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 12:58 AM

21. In double think land.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 01:01 AM

22. A little too much Victory Gin perhaps?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:04 PM

2. It's a competition for delegates

You might want to check how Obama did in that department in the 2008 NV caucus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:44 PM

11. You may be forgetting that super delegates flip as the lead flips (in 2008, Clinton had a huge

super delegate lead over Obama, but then super delegates flipped to Obama after Clinton fell behind Obama in the voter-assigned delegate count).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:51 PM

15. So the supers are going to put Sanders over the top in NV?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #15)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 12:00 AM

17. We'll see what happens at the convention. I suspect the super delegates will stay with Clinton if

she wins a majority of voter-assigned delegates but I suspect they will not disenfranchise the voters if Sanders goes into the convention with a voter-assigned delegate lead.

We won't know how that will play out until the convention.

I'm sure we agree on this: if Clinton gets fewer voter-assigned delegates, she will never be president regardless of whether she is awarded the nomination in an anti-democratic process or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:11 PM

4. except

Obama didn't have the caucus fixed against him.

Obama won SC after nevada loss.Clinton will win SC.all MSM spin will be is bernie loser because clinton won 3 out of first 4
states.

Nevada may be sign of things to come is blacks and seniros are enough to defeat 18-45 year olds and latinos In south.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:37 PM

6. On Super Tuesday, 4 states look strong for Sanders (Colorado, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Vermont)

with Oklahoma too close to call.

During the following week, Sanders looks strong in Kansas, Nebraska, Maine, and Michigan.

But the game change looks like it will come in the stretch from March 22 to April 9. Eight states vote in this three week period:
Arizona, Idaho, Utah, then Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, then Wisconsin and then Wyoming. Sanders looks very strong in all eight of these states, where Sanders is either leading in a poll or the betting markets (many of these states have not been polled recently as so the bettering markets are the closest proxy in the absence of polling) or leading in the state-by-state cross-tabs in national polling.

By April 9, current projections suggest that Sanders is likely to have won at least 17 (or more, perhaps as many as 22) of the first 34 contests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #6)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:39 PM

8. bernie can't win COlorado and minnesota

they are both caucus states.

any states with caucus is fixed for clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:43 PM

10. How did Obama win lots of caucus states?

Those caucus states are his best chance. What is your excuse going to be next week when Hillary wins South Carolina?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:46 PM

12. Sanders outperformed the aggregate polling in Iowa and mirrored polling in Nevada. He's polling

ahead in Colorado and he's ahead in cross tabs in Minnesota.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #12)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:51 PM

14. dem establishment has caucus states fixed

bernie can't win in colorado and minnesota.if they were primarys he could unfortully they are not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #14)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:57 PM

16. Bernie will win plenty of caucus states

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #14)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 12:06 AM

18. Several people have analyzed the data and concluded that Sanders will likely win ALL the caucuses

after today:

While Clinton has won the first two caucuses in the Democratic race — while losing New Hampshire, the only primary — it’s possible that Bernie Sanders will win every state caucus from here on out.

Here’s why I say that. The remaining Democratic states to hold caucuses are: Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska, Washington and Wyoming. Other than Hawaii — where I’m not going to pretend we have any earthly idea what’s going to happen — those are a bunch of really white states that otherwise look favorable for Sanders and which he could win even if he slightly trails Clinton nationally.

Clinton is probably favored in the territorial caucuses in American Samoa, Guam and the Virgin Islands, however, as territorial caucuses tend to heavily favor “establishment” candidates.

This is a prediction from an in-the-bag-for-Clinton polling analyst who is far from alone in this analysis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:42 PM

9. Currently Hillary has a +5.2 margin over Bernie in Nevada

with more votes in Clark County (her best county) than the rest of the state. In 2008 She beat Obama by 5.7% so she basically is doing about as well as in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:48 PM

13. Good to know I am not the only one seeing this

 

And yes, ran the story on RSD a while ago, but not wroth the tummy ache of posting it here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Sun Feb 21, 2016, 12:56 AM

19. Savor that victory, Hillary Supporter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread