AZ-PPP: Hillary Clinton leads all, except Jeb Bush

[pbrower2a]

Arizona would probably be about the 35th-best state for Hillary Clinton. It's impossible to lose a Presidential election while winning 35 states or even 30.

Arizona has gone for the Democratic nominee for President only twice since WWII: 1948 (ancient history) and 1996. The Democrat won both elections. It was close in 1964 -- with a Favorite Son as the Republican nominee.

[pbrower2a]

Question:

Why is Hillary under-performing in Colorado and over-performing in Arizona?

The only explanation I have is that Coloradans is by far the most highly educated of the US states - and the US has never had a smarter, or at least more highly educated president, than Obama before. I'm pretty sure he's the first president ever to be a practically teaching professor in constitutional law. I mean, professionally you can't get any smarter than that - at least not within the US.

When it comes to Arizona, I guess it's a mixture of changing demographics and a very, very strong anti GOP backlash which they did not feel at all in 2008 and 2012 due to McCain being the aliviator in that one state but in none of the remaining 49.

Colorado breaks late for Democrats, at least since 2006. Colorado doesn't look so great for Democrats early. The state has a loud Right that has a high floor but a low ceiling. Arizona demographics are going increasingly favorably toward Democrats due to the quickly-expanding Hispanic (largely Mexican-American) electorate.   Arizona may be becoming more like Colorado and Nevada in its voting.

 

[pbrower2a]

The interesting thing about AZ vs CO/NV/NM is that while NM has the highest latino/hispanic population, almost 50%... AZ is the second highest out of them with around 30% (give or take).

What dictates the final result in these states tends to be more about the mix of the non-latino voters, which is why AZ has remained consistently Republican, if you look at the results since 2000, the Democratic vote has barely shifted, while the state's latino population grows, why? Because it's white voters are older and more Republican.

Exit poll data from 2012
Colorado - Obama: White vote 44% (+5 on nation) - Latino vote 75% (+4 on nation)
Nevada - Obama: White vote 43% (+4 on nation) - Latino vote 71% ( -)
New Mexico - Obama: White vote: 41% (+2 on nation) - Latino vote 65% (-6 on nation)... but the Latino vote in NM is 37% of the electorate versus 14-17% in the other states

But Arizona?
Arizona - Obama: White vote 32% (-7 on nation) - Latino vote: 74% (+3 on nation)...

The Arizona GOP has on the whole gone far to the right. That's how the GOP went in California toward the end of its domination of California politics. The GOP has pushed some extreme politics, as if in the knowledge that enacting them is a now-or-never proposition.

Democrats can obviously win the Presidential election without Arizona. The state is frosting on the cake. With such a state as Pennsylvania or Virginia as the tipping-point state in 2016 I see this order of winning the states through Arizona:

New Hampshire
Iowa
Pennsylvania/Virginia
Ohio
Colorado
Florida
North Carolina
Georgia
Arizona
Missouri
Indiana
  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But know well: the enmity that whites have had toward Latinos has never been as severe as that against blacks.  White people in Arizona are more likely to have a Hispanic in-law.  

[pbrower2a]

It's impossible to lose a Presidential election while winning 35 states

317 GOP
221 Dem

I think that we get the general idea. It's highly unlikely that either Party is going to win both California and Texas short of a 40-state landslide. How is a Republican going to win Vermont and not win about 45 states (OK, Landon won three states in 1936, one of which was Vermont)? Or Minnesota without winning 40+ states?

How is a Democrat now going to win Utah (short of the Republicans threatening to persecute the Mormons) without winning 45+ states?  That would be one way to get some comparisons between a Republican nominee and ... some fellow born about 80 years after Abraham Lincoln.

[pbrower2a]

Bill Clinton won this state twice so would it be that big of a deal if Hillary won Arizona?

Clinton won it once -- in 1996. Perot may have splintered the conservative-leaning vote that year.

Arizona would seem, except for its older white population, to be similar to Colorado -- which Clinton won but once.

Arizona is a big deal even as one state. Eleven electoral votes is no triviality. Most significantly, if Hillary Clinton can win it in 2016, their could be a Senate seat up for grabs. (I figure that John McCain is approaching the end of the line). Should Democrats flip the areas around Phoenix and Tucson, then such could play a significant role in flipping the House of Representatives in 2016.

Arizona has gone for the Democratic nominee only once since 1948. If it goes D,  it's practically the equivalent of Virginia going for Barack Obama.  But even if it is close, then Hillary Clinton has about a 54-46 split of the popular vote and the Democrats are getting much the same in the overall House race.