CA-NBC/WSJ: Clinton +2

[NOVA Green]

I could see this being a close race, but some of the subsamples do look a bit off, other than just the Anglo/Latino numbers.

Bay Area 56-42 Clinton, but LA County 54-40 Clinton?

I would imagine the Bay Area being a bit closer and LA County to be more heavily Clinton.

[NOVA Green]

I could see this being a close race, but some of the subsamples do look a bit off, other than just the Anglo/Latino numbers.

Bay Area 56-42 Clinton, but LA County 54-40 Clinton?

I would imagine the Bay Area being a bit closer and LA County to be more heavily Clinton.

If those are right, how is this a 2 point race? Most of the Democratic electorate is in those 2 parts of the state (in fact most of the voters). Orange County and San Diego would have to be at least 60-40 for Sanders to get a 2 point race

Poll shows Inland/Valley 54-44 Bernie and Coastal 58-36 Bernie.

My theory has been for a few weeks that you will see a massive Obama '08 to Bernie '16 swing in many smaller Northern California counties, similar to what you saw in Oregon in May, as well as a significant drop in Hillary support in Central Valley areas, including Sacramento & Fresno.

[NOVA Green]

I just read something horrible.

Apparently it can take days and even weeks to count all the absentee/early votes in California, if the race is very close we might not know the winner for awhile.

There are still mail in ballots being counted in Oregon and the election was 15 days ago...

Although not a close election at all, still unfortunately it is the downside of making it easier to vote by mail.

[NOVA Green]

I actually think California is the state provides us the best outlook to how Hispanics really feel about the two candidates. Everywhere else Hispanics were relevant:

Nevada and Colorado - Caucuses
Illinois - Everyone hates Rahm
New York - Closed primary, registration deadline so early that it actually should be illegal
Florida and New Mexico - Closed primaries
Texas - Sanders didn't compete
Arizona - Who knows who really benefited from the long lines?

California doesn't seem to have any major knocks against it. Independents are allowed to vote, the registration deadline is lenient, republicans can't screw with the result because they aren't allowed to vote, no same-day registration (which would be very favorable to Sanders), the governor is a Democrat, both candidates are competing, no mayor to rally against, and it's not a caucus.

I just read something horrible.

Apparently it can take days and even weeks to count all the absentee/early votes in California, if the race is very close we might not know the winner for awhile.

Yeah, that's true for the general, where turnout tends to be pretty high despite the state being Safe D. Not sure how well it pertains to the primary. Of course, this is a largely mail-in state, and they're still counting votes in WA.......

Sanders didn't compete in Texas precisely because the Latino population backed Hillary big-time there and he couldn't move them

He didn't compete in Texas as well because there were a ton of other states voting, including some much more favorable and it costs a ton of money to compete in the air wars in Texas.

[NOVA Green]

[/quote] Or we could stop thinking about Hispanics as a monolithic group and accept that differences exist between states and areas.


[/quote]

Agreed....

Just as "Asian-Americans" might vote very differently in the cities of Cupertino (Heavily Chinese-Americans) and Garden Grove (Heavily Vietnamese-American), let alone the huge Iranian-American community in Metro LA.

I suspect, and might well be wrong, that not only is there an age-income-regional scenario in California, but also a 2nd generation Latino population in SoCal where the Central American community (~600k) fleeing political violence in Central America in the '70s/80s, is living, working, and closely connected with a similar population from heavily indigenous states like Oaxaca and Guerrero in Mexico.

Not only do these communities come from regions/countries where there has been a recent history of struggle against extremely repressive, and even Fascist political structures, but also the parents of the millennial generation remember the mass deportation policies of the Bill Clinton Administration, that disproportionately targeted Central Americans in the '90s AND see a similar type of policy under Obama and what many consider to be his designated successor Hillary Clinton.

Note that this could not only explain some of the polling discrepancy in LA County, but also in places like Salinas/Watsonville/Fresno, where Central Americans are now surpassing Mexican-Americans working in the "pastures of plenty" that is California.

So yeah... will be interesting to look at precinct returns and compare from Pico Union/ McArthur Park (LA) to East LA and some areas in the Central Valley.

Reality is that in the event Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, she's going to have a hard time persuading working-class Latinos to register and turn out to vote when they see Democrat after Democrat making promises and yet not delivering, while deportations that "the Clinton's" have supported over the years are still continuing, even in what should be an extremely favorable environment after all of the hate speech that Trump has been spouting from the beginning to get his foot in the door in a long-shot Rep primary run.

[NOVA Green]

He didn't compete in Texas as well because there were a ton of other states voting, including some much more favorable and it costs a ton of money to compete in the air wars in Texas.

Let's dispel with the notion that Sanders didn't compete in Texas. He spent time and money there and withdrew only after he saw that he wasn't making any progress.

Or we could stop thinking about Hispanics as a monolithic group and accept that differences exist between states and areas.

Again, Clinton has carried Hispanics in every state but Illinois. From Connecticut to Florida and from Virginia to Arizona.
I see many saying that California's Hispanics might be more young and that's why it's plausible Sanders winning them. But young Latinos also supported Obama in 2008, yet still Clinton won them overall in California 67-32. I can believe that Sanders will overperform Obama but not by THAT much.

Also according to the 2008 primary exit poll California isn't an especially young state. The 18-29 voters were 16% of the electorate, just about the same as the entire US.

Not True... Bernie also won the Latino vote in Oregon, despite the lack of exit polls.

Although we don't yet have many county precinct returns available from Oregon, he won all 30%+ Latino counties, two of which an overwhelming majority of Anglos vote Republican (Malheur & Umatilla Counties). Additionally, precinct level results from Hood River County show that Bernie won 57-43 in 40%+ Latino precincts in more rural parts of the state. Additionally, the largest urban area (Marion Co.) with a large 25%+ Latino population, where again many Anglos vote Republican Bernie won 53-47%.

Results from the "Beauty Contest" in Washington State, with much lower voter turnout levels might be harder to discern, however we see similar results from >40% Latino Counties that are heavily Republican where Hillary dramatically underperformed versus her '08 results.

West Coast is quite a bit different from Arizona, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Connecticut, and California is even a totally different beast altogether.

[NOVA Green]

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

[NOVA Green]

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

I basically agree with this map made by Holmes in another thread. I would only disagree with Napa County. As for specific counties, I see San Francisco going to Sanders by about 5-10 points, with Alameda and Santa Clara going for Clinton by similar margins. San Mateo, Marin and Contra Costa will be closer but should be Clinton wins. The San Joaquin Valley will also go for Clinton but not by 2008 margins but still solid margins in Fresno and Kern. Sacramento will be close but I still see Clinton winning. The Sacramento Valley should be won by Sanders but not by huge margins (with the exception of Butte and Yolo which should be blowouts). Sanders wins the mountains and north coast by comfortable margins.

The central coast is a little tough. I'm pretty torn on Monterey County but in any case it should be close. Santa Cruz is an obvious Sanders win along with San Luis Obispo. He should also win Santa Barbara but it will be close. Clinton wins Ventura county by about a 3-7 point margin. Los Angeles should be about 10-15 points. Orange should be about 5-10 points and San Diego should be about 3-7 points. The Inland Empire I also see at about a 5-10 point Clinton margin. Overall I am thinking Clinton by about 5-10 though looking at the latest Field poll, closer to 5 might be a safer bet. I trust the Field poll a lot and if they are finding a close race, then maybe there is something to it.

Cool--- thks for posting!

Overall, the logic sounds pretty solid, although obviously California presents some significant challenges predicting outcomes compared to most states, because of the rapid demographic and population changes in just a few election cycles, and is a difficult state to model based upon election results elsewhere in the primary season.

It's pretty close to the map I have, although I see Marin tilting towards Bernie, despite Hillary improvements among upper income Anglos from '08 to '16 in West Coast large cities. One of the things I'm wrestling with is how higher-income voters on paper, that still have smaller amounts of disposable income because of high cost of living, in places like the Bay Area are going to vote, many of whom have adult children still living with them because of the housing crisis.

In a close election/ narrow Bernie win, I could see Contra Costa and Santa Clara flip from Hillary '08 counties and think Alameda will be an Obama > Hillary flip regardless but with tight margins.

Not seeing Monterey County flipping from '08 to '16, but if it does, then Hillary will have some significant problems with margins in the Central Valley (Fresno, Kern, etc...) since Salinas areas will account for >40% of the vote.

San Diego/Orange will likely be key indicators of a potential upset, the former with a large military/veteran component, student population, and within the city of San Diego a large "very liberal" Democratic electorate, and the latter a test of Sanders ability to dominate among voters <45 to offset older and wealthier OC Dems. Clinton beat Obama by 18% in '08, and other than Riverside/San Bernadino was her 3rd best county in the state, with the exception of a handful of small rural counties and medium-size Central Valley pop centers (Fresno/Kern in '08).

[NOVA Green]

I hate to break it to you guys but Clinton will win with almost double digit margins.

Do you have any regional/county predictions or is this just a statement of perceived fact?

I basically agree with this map made by Holmes in another thread. I would only disagree with Napa County. As for specific counties, I see San Francisco going to Sanders by about 5-10 points, with Alameda and Santa Clara going for Clinton by similar margins. San Mateo, Marin and Contra Costa will be closer but should be Clinton wins. The San Joaquin Valley will also go for Clinton but not by 2008 margins but still solid margins in Fresno and Kern. Sacramento will be close but I still see Clinton winning. The Sacramento Valley should be won by Sanders but not by huge margins (with the exception of Butte and Yolo which should be blowouts). Sanders wins the mountains and north coast by comfortable margins.

The central coast is a little tough. I'm pretty torn on Monterey County but in any case it should be close. Santa Cruz is an obvious Sanders win along with San Luis Obispo. He should also win Santa Barbara but it will be close. Clinton wins Ventura county by about a 3-7 point margin. Los Angeles should be about 10-15 points. Orange should be about 5-10 points and San Diego should be about 3-7 points. The Inland Empire I also see at about a 5-10 point Clinton margin. Overall I am thinking Clinton by about 5-10 though looking at the latest Field poll, closer to 5 might be a safer bet. I trust the Field poll a lot and if they are finding a close race, then maybe there is something to it.

Cool--- thks for posting!

Overall, the logic sounds pretty solid, although obviously California presents some significant challenges predicting outcomes compared to most states, because of the rapid demographic and population changes in just a few election cycles, and is a difficult state to model based upon election results elsewhere in the primary season.

It's pretty close to the map I have, although I see Marin tilting towards Bernie, despite Hillary improvements among upper income Anglos from '08 to '16 in West Coast large cities. One of the things I'm wrestling with is how higher-income voters on paper, that still have smaller amounts of disposable income because of high cost of living, in places like the Bay Area are going to vote, many of whom have adult children still living with them because of the housing crisis.

In a close election/ narrow Bernie win, I could see Contra Costa and Santa Clara flip from Hillary '08 counties and think Alameda will be an Obama > Hillary flip regardless but with tight margins.

Not seeing Monterey County flipping from '08 to '16, but if it does, then Hillary will have some significant problems with margins in the Central Valley (Fresno, Kern, etc...) since Salinas areas will account for >40% of the vote.

San Diego/Orange will likely be key indicators of a potential upset, the former with a large military/veteran component, student population, and within the city of San Diego a large "very liberal" Democratic electorate, and the latter a test of Sanders ability to dominate among voters <45 to offset older and wealthier OC Dems. Clinton beat Obama by 18% in '08, and other than Riverside/San Bernadino was her 3rd best county in the state, with the exception of a handful of small rural counties and medium-size Central Valley pop centers (Fresno/Kern in '08).

I agree that San Diego and Orange County will be the bellwethers. Perhaps the average of those two counties. The Inland Empire I think is a little more unpredictable. Those areas haven't been doing well as of late and are susceptible to Bernie's message but they also have a lot of Hispanics and Blacks. I think Orange County and the IE ending up voting similarly.

You may be right about Monterey County. I may be underestimating the Salinas/Salinas Valley vote and overestimating the Monterey liberal vote. That being said the margins will be lower than Clinton'08. Especially in the central valley because like the IE, they will be susceptible to Bernie's message due to local economic conditions. I don't think that will be enough to overcome the demographic problems Bernie has there though.

I am fairly certain about Santa Clara County voting for Hillary, perhaps by even a greater margin than Alameda. Alameda County has Berkeley and the white people who live in Oakland are also major Bernie supporters. There is no similar area in Santa Clara County, including Stanford. Bernie might win Stanford but it won't be by the same margins as Berkeley. Moreover, the areas surrounding it are not going to be comfortable with Bernie's message. The caveat of course being those with incomes in the 100-150k range may be more susceptible to Bernie's message in the Bay Area than in other places due to the high cost of living.

As an aside, how the Hispanic and especially the Asian vote go will make a huge difference. At this point I am assuming Asians vote 60% + for Hillary and Hispanics around 55% or so. Like you said, we don't have good exit polling from nearby states to validate that so we are flying blind in that regard. I am especially unsure how the Asian and Hispanic vote goes in the Bay Area. It's possible they vote Sanders but the rest of the state votes differently.

So this poll states a 56-42 Hillary win in the Bay Area, and to compare to '08 when Obama lost the state by 8.3% but won the Bay Area 47.9-47.5 (Am basically rolling 7/9 Metro counties and excluding Napa and Sonoma).

In order for this poll to make sense, regardless of MOE on regional sub-samples it makes absolutely no sense, where the Bay Area accounts for ~25% of the state primary votes, and even less sense if we broaden the Bay Area to include counties like Sonoma and Santa Cruz. The only way to explain it would be an extraordinary anti-Hillary swing in SoCal, regardless of a collapse in her support in rural Northern/Coastal/Mountain NorCal.

Still wrestling with the Bay Area, but if we look at Santa Clara County and potential swings, Obama's best cities was Palo Alto, and NW Santa Clara County (Los Altos and Mountain View) as well as some very wealthy white liberal towns like Los Gatos and Saratoga.

Hillary's three best cities were Milipitas (62% Asian-American), which has a rapidly growing Asian-American population, particularly Taiwanese-Americans and Indian-Americans, and is relatively "affordable" by Bay Area standards. Gilroy at the Southern end of Silicon Valley but more heavily agriculture oriented (60% Latino and could potentially be an indicator of similar areas), and then lastly San Jose (50% of the Dem Prim vote in Santa Clara County in '08), where Obama garnered barely 36% of the vote.

San Jose is 32% Asian (with over 10% of the population Vietnamese-Americans), and 33% Latino-Americans, and a fairly low 65+ population with an extremely large younger electorate, that regardless of ethnicity appear to be a strong Bernie voting block.

I think the 2016 Democratic Primary precinct swing map will be fascinating in the Bay Area in particular, because what I suspect we might see is more of a leveling out of the map because of age trumping ethnicity in many areas.

In San Francisco, the Hillary coalition was heavily based upon a coalition of Asian-Americans , particularly in the Western part of the city (Sunset District, Ocean Beach, and Chinatown), combined with more of a traditional "white working-class" population in South SF, as well as SOMA precincts, with Obama dominating in Height/Castro/Noe-Valley/Mission/Pacific-Heights-Marina, as well as historically AA areas like Hunters Point-Bayview.

In Santa Clara County, Hillary will likely over-perform in wealthier and Anglo areas like Mtn View, Saratoga, and Los Gatos, but see a significant swing against her in San Jose, Sunnyvale, and Miliptas, and heading over to the East Bay Contra Costa and Alameda are likely to see some dramatic shifts as well, not only in the flatland, but also the Oakland and Berkeley Hills and even further inland into places like Concord and Walnut Creek.

If Bernie wins California, Cupertino will likely flip as a broader representation of Asian-American voters in Silicon Valley as a 63% Asian-American city and Global HQ of Apple, where Hillary only won 51% of the Primary vote in '08, despite winning the county by 13% in '08.

[NOVA Green]

So Hillary leads with whites and Sanders leads with Hispanics, that's different.

Didn't Sanders win hispanics in NV?

No. The exit poll showed him winning them but actual results showed Clinton winning with more than 60% the Latino heavy precincts.

Do you have actual precinct results to back that up, or just blowing hot wind energy from Denmark?