fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Amy Klobuchar Looked Great On Paper. What Went Wrong?

Of the numerous Democratic presidential candidates who ran on an “ I can beat Trump ” message , Sen. Amy Klobuchar made perhaps the best case on paper .
Lots of voters are basically looking for someone who can win the Midwestern states that are likely to prove pivotal in a general election — Wisconsin , Michigan , Pennsylvania — and Klobuchar seemed like a logical choice .
In 2018 , she cruised to reelection in Minnesota , a state very much like those other three — i.e .
Midwestern with a large population of the white voters without college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 .
She has plenty of experience ( 13 years in the Senate ) , but isn ’ t that old ( 59 ) .
And she has a fairly liberal record , but she ’ s not as far to the left as Sens .
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren ( she ’ s never embraced positions like Medicare for All , for example ) .
But Klobuchar , who suspended her campaign on Monday , was never able to translate a strong theoretical case into reality .
Her high-water mark was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She finished fifth in Nevada , with around 10 percent of the initial popular vote .
She finished sixth in South Carolina , with just 3 percent of the vote .
And although she had a chance to win her home state of Minnesota , she looked unlikely to win any delegates in most other Super Tuesday states .
Like former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg — who exited the race on Sunday — Klobuchar appears to be heeding the advice of Democratic Party elites who wanted to clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help former Vice President Joe Biden consolidate the votes of more moderate Democrats and prevent Sanders from gaining too big a delegate lead on Super Tuesday .
Buttigieg and Klobuchar are reportedly endorsing Biden tonight .
So what went wrong for Klobuchar ’ s campaign ?
First and foremost : Biden .
The most obvious reason Klobuchar struggled is simply that Biden was in the race .
Both candidates were running on experience , electability and a liberal-but-not-too-liberal record .
But Biden started the campaign with a much bigger national profile than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls for most of 2019 .
And Klobuchar , like many other center-left candidates , simply couldn ’ t dislodge him from that position .
Gender also likely played a substantial role in Klobuchar ’ s failure to catch on .
Biden last won an election on his own — as opposed to running as vice president — in 2008 , and that was in always-blue Delaware .
Sanders is a democratic socialist who has only ever run in always-blue Vermont .
Neither can really make a great case for their electability at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consistently rated Biden and Sanders as the most electable candidates , which probably reflects their strong performance in head-to-head polls against Trump and the fact that both are white men .
It ’ s not totally clear that any woman running in 2020 — four years after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton — could have won the nomination by running on an electability-focused message .
If you take a “ lanes ” view of the primary , Klobuchar was also getting squeezed out by Buttigieg .
There may have been room for one Midwestern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it seems like there wasn ’ t room for two .
Klobuchar lost that mini-primary to the former mayor .
Buttigieg surged to the top of the polls in Iowa in November and although he dropped back into the pack after a while , he went on to , essentially , tie for first there , then finish ahead of Klobuchar again in the other three states that have voted so far .
Why did Buttigieg outperform Klobuchar ?
Maybe gender was a factor here too — perhaps some voters saw Buttigieg as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But I also think that Buttigieg presented his biography ( veteran , small-town mayor ) in a compelling way , while Klobuchar struggled to distinguish herself from the other candidates running .
Finally , Klobuchar ’ s campaign lacked support among black and Latino Democrats .
The flip side of being from a state with a lot of white voters , particularly white voters without degrees , is she also comes from a state that has few black ( 7 percent ) or Latino residents ( 6 percent ) , and those groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic primary electorate .
Klobuchar , like Buttigieg , polled terribly among black and Latino voters throughout the primary season and struggled with both groups in Nevada and South Carolina .
( She was the first choice of just 2 percent of black voters and 4 percent of Latino voters in Nevada , according to entrance polls .
She won 1 percent of the black vote in South Carolina , according to the exit polls . )
Part of Klobuchar ’ s weakness among those groups was probably because of Biden — he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for example , a group that Klobuchar could have plausibly appealed to if the former vice president weren ’ t in the race .
We don ’ t have great data on the views of younger black voters vs. older black voters , but it ’ s likely that older black voters are more moderate , so that ’ s the bloc where Klobuchar was probably best positioned to make gains .
Younger black voters have leaned toward Sanders .
Another way of saying all this , of course , is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really big .
A lot of candidates who looked good on paper — most notably , Klobuchar ’ s Senate colleagues Cory Booker and Kamala Harris — won ’ t win the nomination either .
In a field that numbered more than 20 serious candidates , everyone , individually , was a long shot , and Klobuchar never caught the breaks she needed .
That said , Klobuchar still may get to the White House .
She ’ s almost certain to be on the short list for vice president , particularly if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Washington experience that Georgia ’ s Stacey Abrams lacks , plus a long record campaigning in the Midwest that distinguishes her from Harris .
( It ’ s very likely that a male Democratic nominee will pick a female running mate . )
So Klobuchar could still get a chance to show that she can win the Midwest for her party — just not at the top of the ticket .

Of the numerous Democratic presidential candidates who ran on an “I can beat Trump” message, Sen. Amy Klobuchar made perhaps the best case on paper. Lots of voters are basically looking for someone who can win the Midwestern states that are likely to prove pivotal in a general election — Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania — and Klobuchar seemed like a logical choice. In 2018, she cruised to reelection in Minnesota, a state very much like those other three — i.e. Midwestern with a large population of the white voters without college degrees who broke from the Democrats in 2016. She has plenty of experience (13 years in the Senate), but isn’t that old (59). And she has a fairly liberal record, but she’s not as far to the left as Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (she’s never embraced positions like Medicare for All, for example).
But Klobuchar, who suspended her campaign on Monday, was never able to translate a strong theoretical case into reality. Her high-water mark was a surprising third-place finish in New Hampshire. She finished fifth in Nevada, with around 10 percent of the initial popular vote. She finished sixth in South Carolina, with just 3 percent of the vote. And although she had a chance to win her home state of Minnesota, she looked unlikely to win any delegates in most other Super Tuesday states. Like former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg — who exited the race on Sunday — Klobuchar appears to be heeding the advice of Democratic Party elites who wanted to clear the center-left section of the 2020 field to help former Vice President Joe Biden consolidate the votes of more moderate Democrats and prevent Sanders from gaining too big a delegate lead on Super Tuesday. Buttigieg and Klobuchar are reportedly endorsing Biden tonight.
So what went wrong for Klobuchar’s campaign?
First and foremost: Biden. The most obvious reason Klobuchar struggled is simply that Biden was in the race. Both candidates were running on experience, electability and a liberal-but-not-too-liberal record. But Biden started the campaign with a much bigger national profile than Klobuchar has. He led in national polls for most of 2019. And Klobuchar, like many other center-left candidates, simply couldn’t dislodge him from that position.
Gender also likely played a substantial role in Klobuchar’s failure to catch on. Biden last won an election on his own — as opposed to running as vice president — in 2008, and that was in always-blue Delaware. Sanders is a democratic socialist who has only ever run in always-blue Vermont. Neither can really make a great case for their electability at the national level. But Democratic voters consistently rated Biden and Sanders as the most electable candidates, which probably reflects their strong performance in head-to-head polls against Trump and the fact that both are white men. It’s not totally clear that any woman running in 2020 — four years after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton — could have won the nomination by running on an electability-focused message.
If you take a “lanes” view of the primary, Klobuchar was also getting squeezed out by Buttigieg. There may have been room for one Midwestern, moderate alternative to Biden, but it seems like there wasn’t room for two. Klobuchar lost that mini-primary to the former mayor. Buttigieg surged to the top of the polls in Iowa in November and although he dropped back into the pack after a while, he went on to, essentially, tie for first there, then finish ahead of Klobuchar again in the other three states that have voted so far. Why did Buttigieg outperform Klobuchar? Maybe gender was a factor here too — perhaps some voters saw Buttigieg as electable because he is a man. But I also think that Buttigieg presented his biography (veteran, small-town mayor) in a compelling way, while Klobuchar struggled to distinguish herself from the other candidates running.
Finally, Klobuchar’s campaign lacked support among black and Latino Democrats. The flip side of being from a state with a lot of white voters, particularly white voters without degrees, is she also comes from a state that has few black (7 percent) or Latino residents (6 percent), and those groups make up an essential part of the Democratic primary electorate. Klobuchar, like Buttigieg, polled terribly among black and Latino voters throughout the primary season and struggled with both groups in Nevada and South Carolina. (She was the first choice of just 2 percent of black voters and 4 percent of Latino voters in Nevada, according to entrance polls. She won 1 percent of the black vote in South Carolina, according to the exit polls. )
Part of Klobuchar’s weakness among those groups was probably because of Biden — he has been dominant among older black voters, for example, a group that Klobuchar could have plausibly appealed to if the former vice president weren’t in the race. We don’t have great data on the views of younger black voters vs. older black voters, but it’s likely that older black voters are more moderate, so that’s the bloc where Klobuchar was probably best positioned to make gains. Younger black voters have leaned toward Sanders.
Another way of saying all this, of course, is that the Democratic presidential field in 2020 was really big. A lot of candidates who looked good on paper — most notably, Klobuchar’s Senate colleagues Cory Booker and Kamala Harris — won’t win the nomination either. In a field that numbered more than 20 serious candidates, everyone, individually, was a long shot, and Klobuchar never caught the breaks she needed.
That said, Klobuchar still may get to the White House. She’s almost certain to be on the short list for vice president, particularly if Biden wins the nomination. She has the Washington experience that Georgia’s Stacey Abrams lacks, plus a long record campaigning in the Midwest that distinguishes her from Harris. (It’s very likely that a male Democratic nominee will pick a female running mate.) So Klobuchar could still get a chance to show that she can win the Midwest for her party — just not at the top of the ticket.
What is Amy Klobucharâs favorite statistic?


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--What Makes Southern Democrats Unique

What Makes Southern Democrats Unique

From 1964 to 2008 , three Democratic presidential candidates made it to the White House .
All of them were southerners .
Yet for the last half-century , the GOP ’ s Southern strategy eroded the Democratic Party ’ s stronghold on the South .
States on the edges of the South — Virginia , Florida and North Carolina — have turned purple or a light shade of blue , but the heart of the South unquestionably remains Republican territory in presidential elections .
Nonetheless , Democratic voters in the South still exert significant influence on the party during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former Confederacy will elect a little over one quarter of Democrats ’ pledged delegates in 2020 — six of them on Super Tuesday ( Alabama , Arkansas , North Carolina , Tennessee , Texas and Virginia ) .
And so as the 2020 Democratic primary contests move to the South , I figured it was worth a dive into what happened there in the 2016 Democratic primary , based on a 2016 survey of 3,668 Americans by the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics , of which I am the director .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the South are different from Democrats outside of the region — differences that may again come into play in 2020 .
They Are Much More Diverse The racial composition of self-identified Democratic voters is dramatically different in the South .
Outside of the South , the 2016 Blair Center Poll of African Americans , Latinx and white Americans shows that the racial breakdown of the party among these three groups was roughly 60 percent white , 17 percent African American and 23 percent Latinx .
On average , in the states of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 38 percent white , 37 percent African American and 25 percent Latinx .
Black churches are a campaign stop .
What do they get in return ?
That gap in diversity takes on heightened significance when candidates fare better among one racial/ethnic group compared to others .
Among those who voted for either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primaries and caucuses , Clinton fared the best among African Americans in the South , who chose her over Sanders 87 percent to 13 percent , a five-point improvement over her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South .
Similarly , Latinx voters in the South cast ballots for Clinton over Sanders 82 percent to 18 percent , a significant difference compared to Latinx voters outside of the South who favored Clinton over Sanders 65 percent to 35 percent .
It is important to note that this regional gap was driven primarily by Latino men , 84 percent of whom supported Clinton in the South , compared to 58 percent of Latinos living outside of the region , while among Latina women the gap was smaller , 81 to 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respectively .
Those differences help explain Southern Democrats ’ overall preferences in the 2016 primary .
On average , non-southerners voted 65 percent for Clinton to 35 percent for Sanders , but Clinton bested Sanders 77 percent to 23 percent among southerners .
Those numbers have me watching Latino voters in the 2020 Southern primaries .
If they break strongly for Sanders in the South on Super Tuesday , it would indicate a major shift since the last presidential election cycle .
They Tend To Be Among The Poorest In 2016 , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the South ( 23 percent ) had an annual household income of less than $ 30,000 , compared to 17 percent of Democratic primary voters outside of the South .
But that , too , is complicated by race .
For example , of the poorest non-Southern Democratic primary voters , the largest percentage were white ( 49 percent ) .
However , in the South , whites comprise only one quarter of Democratic voters with household incomes that low .
African Americans ( 50 percent ) and Latinx ( 25 percent ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the South at the bottom of the economic ladder .
Seemingly , low-income voters of color , particularly in the South where these voters are more highly concentrated , would be highly receptive to campaign messages aimed at leveling the economic playing field or providing more economic opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities .
However , these low-income voters , irrespective of race or region , voted for Clinton over Sanders in 2016 .
It could be that Sanders ’ economic plans did not reach these voters effectively , or if they did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why ?
One theory : The South ’ s long history of racial economic oppression might have made his revolution seem less possible or pragmatic .
In many Southern states , federal programs that level the playing field between whites and people of color have met resistance time and time again , from school integration to the extension of voting rights .
Take for example Medicaid expansion : Eight of the 14 states that refused to expand Medicaid after the Affordable Care Act was passed were in the South .
Consequently , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in January , 92 percent of adults who remain in the “ coverage gap ” live in the South , and they are disproportionately African Americans and Hispanics .
On the other hand , states that have expanded Medicaid have seen these racial gaps in coverage in their states begin to close , according to a Commonwealth Fund survey , also in January .
The ability of state governments to block or redirect federal aid to the detriment of minority communities ( as Texas has done with its federal welfare dollars ) could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — or skeptical of one .
They Lean More Moderate Ideologically But Are Party Loyalists Voter ideology also differs in the South .
About 57 percent of 2016 Democratic primary voters in the South considered themselves “ very liberal , ” “ liberal ” or “ moderately leaning liberal ” compared to 64 percent of their non-South counterparts .
There is a long history of conservative or moderate Democrats in the South .
For example , in the 1990s , many Southern , white , conservative Democratic members of Congress began referring to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats who had been “ choked blue ” by the leftward lunge of the party ) .
The Blue Dogs even formed their own congressional caucus after the Democrats ’ record losses in the 1994 midterm elections .
Eventually , however , these fiscally and socially conservative Blue Dog Democrats of the South lost their seats to Republican challengers as white voters in the region realigned with the Republican Party .
Today , that moderate to conservative ideological lean within the Democratic Party in the South is driven by African American and Latinx @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideologically moderate Democratic primary voters in the South in 2016 .
Yet they also expressed the strongest identification with the Democratic Party .
This combination of moderate ideology and strong party loyalty that is characteristic of African American Democrats in the South — particularly women — may be the product of religious and cultural values .
But it may also reflect a political pragmatism of sorts .
When the majority of Southern white Democrats realigned with the GOP in the post-civil rights movement era , African Americans became the backbone of the modern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just at the ballot box but in state parties as officers and committee leaders .
However , they did so right as the Democratic Party lost its majority control in the states of the former Confederacy .
Thus , for Southern Democrats to pass any type of progressive legislation , no matter how incremental , they have had to reach across the aisle from the middle .
That centrist perspective from the South ’ s Democratic base , who live blue in very red states , could trickle up to the 2020 Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the South looking for a candidate who can build a coalition from the middle outward .
Like the white , social conservative Blue Dog Democrats of the past , Southern Democrats are still more religious than Democrats outside of the region .
That ’ s mostly because African American Democrats in the South say they ’ re fundamentalist more often than outside the South — 65 percent compared to 47 percent .
These fundamentalist , African American Democrats in the South seem to draw a line between personal morality and government policies that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Only 17 percent of African Americans in the South who self-identify as both fundamentalists and Democrats , for example , support a law that would prohibit abortions in all circumstances .
Still , the separation of church and state to which many African American religious Democrats adhere should not overshadow the religious convictions and deep spiritual beliefs that so many hold .
Moreover , if there is any Southern institution that rivals the Democratic Party in terms of its power as an organizational force for progressive change , it is the African American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states where union organizing is extremely restricted .
This is why respect for personal religious belief and mobilization through religious institutions is critical for Democratic candidates campaigning in the South .
In these primarily red states in the South , the GOP brand amplifies whiteness , Christianity and traditional gender roles .
For the faction of white southerners who reject the GOP , they seem to do so quite definitively .
In fact , they move to the far left of the Southern Democratic Party .
For example , Southern white men who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on average more ideologically liberal than the white male Democrats who voted in those primaries and caucuses outside of the region .
Moreover , in the primaries and caucuses , they voted for Clinton in higher numbers ( 69 percent ) than Democratic white men outside of the South ( 56 percent ) .
The story is slightly different among Southern white female Democratic voters , who are , on average , just as liberal as their counterparts beyond the Mason-Dixon line .
Among the racial groups surveyed in the Blair Center Poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers in the South in 2016 ( 38 percent ) .
Sanders ’ s support among Southern white Democratic women was nearly double that of Southern Latina Democratic primary voters and four times that of African American women who voted in the Democratic primaries in the South last cycle .

From 1964 to 2008, three Democratic presidential candidates made it to the White House. All of them were southerners. Yet for the last half-century, the GOP’s Southern strategy eroded the Democratic Party’s stronghold on the South. States on the edges of the South — Virginia, Florida and North Carolina — have turned purple or a light shade of blue, but the heart of the South unquestionably remains Republican territory in presidential elections.
Nonetheless, Democratic voters in the South still exert significant influence on the party during the primary season. The states of the former Confederacy will elect a little over one quarter of Democrats’ pledged delegates in 2020 — six of them on Super Tuesday (Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia). And so as the 2020 Democratic primary contests move to the South, I figured it was worth a dive into what happened there in the 2016 Democratic primary, based on a 2016 survey of 3,668 Americans by the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics, of which I am the director. It illustrates the ways in which Democrats in the South are different from Democrats outside of the region — differences that may again come into play in 2020.
They Are Much More Diverse
The racial composition of self-identified Democratic voters is dramatically different in the South. Outside of the South, the 2016 Blair Center Poll of African Americans, Latinx and white Americans shows that the racial breakdown of the party among these three groups was roughly 60 percent white, 17 percent African American and 23 percent Latinx. On average, in the states of the former Confederacy, those numbers were 38 percent white, 37 percent African American and 25 percent Latinx.
Black churches are a campaign stop. What do they get in return?
That gap in diversity takes on heightened significance when candidates fare better among one racial/ethnic group compared to others. Among those who voted for either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primaries and caucuses, Clinton fared the best among African Americans in the South, who chose her over Sanders 87 percent to 13 percent, a five-point improvement over her performance among African Americans outside of the South. Similarly, Latinx voters in the South cast ballots for Clinton over Sanders 82 percent to 18 percent, a significant difference compared to Latinx voters outside of the South who favored Clinton over Sanders 65 percent to 35 percent. It is important to note that this regional gap was driven primarily by Latino men, 84 percent of whom supported Clinton in the South, compared to 58 percent of Latinos living outside of the region, while among Latina women the gap was smaller, 81 to 72 percent in the South and non-South, respectively.
Those differences help explain Southern Democrats’ overall preferences in the 2016 primary. On average, non-southerners voted 65 percent for Clinton to 35 percent for Sanders, but Clinton bested Sanders 77 percent to 23 percent among southerners.
Those numbers have me watching Latino voters in the 2020 Southern primaries. If they break strongly for Sanders in the South on Super Tuesday, it would indicate a major shift since the last presidential election cycle.
They Tend To Be Among The Poorest
In 2016, a greater percentage of Democratic primary voters in the South (23 percent) had an annual household income of less than $30,000, compared to 17 percent of Democratic primary voters outside of the South. But that, too, is complicated by race. For example, of the poorest non-Southern Democratic primary voters, the largest percentage were white (49 percent). However, in the South, whites comprise only one quarter of Democratic voters with household incomes that low. African Americans (50 percent) and Latinx (25 percent) comprised the bulk of such voters in the South at the bottom of the economic ladder.
Seemingly, low-income voters of color, particularly in the South where these voters are more highly concentrated, would be highly receptive to campaign messages aimed at leveling the economic playing field or providing more economic opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities. However, these low-income voters, irrespective of race or region, voted for Clinton over Sanders in 2016.
It could be that Sanders’ economic plans did not reach these voters effectively, or if they did, they didn’t resonate. Why? One theory: The South’s long history of racial economic oppression might have made his revolution seem less possible or pragmatic.
In many Southern states, federal programs that level the playing field between whites and people of color have met resistance time and time again, from school integration to the extension of voting rights. Take for example Medicaid expansion: Eight of the 14 states that refused to expand Medicaid after the Affordable Care Act was passed were in the South. Consequently, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation issue brief in January, 92 percent of adults who remain in the “coverage gap” live in the South, and they are disproportionately African Americans and Hispanics. On the other hand, states that have expanded Medicaid have seen these racial gaps in coverage in their states begin to close, according to a Commonwealth Fund survey, also in January.
The ability of state governments to block or redirect federal aid to the detriment of minority communities (as Texas has done with its federal welfare dollars) could make these voters ready for a revolution — or skeptical of one.
They Lean More Moderate Ideologically But Are Party Loyalists
Voter ideology also differs in the South. About 57 percent of 2016 Democratic primary voters in the South considered themselves “very liberal,” “liberal” or “moderately leaning liberal” compared to 64 percent of their non-South counterparts.
There is a long history of conservative or moderate Democrats in the South. For example, in the 1990s, many Southern, white, conservative Democratic members of Congress began referring to themselves as Blue Dog Democrats (loyal Democrats who had been “choked blue” by the leftward lunge of the party). The Blue Dogs even formed their own congressional caucus after the Democrats’ record losses in the 1994 midterm elections. Eventually, however, these fiscally and socially conservative Blue Dog Democrats of the South lost their seats to Republican challengers as white voters in the region realigned with the Republican Party. Today, that moderate to conservative ideological lean within the Democratic Party in the South is driven by African American and Latinx voters.
African Americans were the most ideologically moderate Democratic primary voters in the South in 2016. Yet they also expressed the strongest identification with the Democratic Party. This combination of moderate ideology and strong party loyalty that is characteristic of African American Democrats in the South — particularly women — may be the product of religious and cultural values. But it may also reflect a political pragmatism of sorts. When the majority of Southern white Democrats realigned with the GOP in the post-civil rights movement era, African Americans became the backbone of the modern Democratic Party in the South, not just at the ballot box but in state parties as officers and committee leaders. However, they did so right as the Democratic Party lost its majority control in the states of the former Confederacy. Thus, for Southern Democrats to pass any type of progressive legislation, no matter how incremental, they have had to reach across the aisle from the middle. That centrist perspective from the South’s Democratic base, who live blue in very red states, could trickle up to the 2020 Democratic primaries, with African American Democrats in the South looking for a candidate who can build a coalition from the middle outward.
Most Are Religious
Like the white, social conservative Blue Dog Democrats of the past, Southern Democrats are still more religious than Democrats outside of the region. That’s mostly because African American Democrats in the South say they’re fundamentalist more often than outside the South — 65 percent compared to 47 percent.
These fundamentalist, African American Democrats in the South seem to draw a line between personal morality and government policies that impose that morality on the collective. Only 17 percent of African Americans in the South who self-identify as both fundamentalists and Democrats, for example, support a law that would prohibit abortions in all circumstances.
Still, the separation of church and state to which many African American religious Democrats adhere should not overshadow the religious convictions and deep spiritual beliefs that so many hold. Moreover, if there is any Southern institution that rivals the Democratic Party in terms of its power as an organizational force for progressive change, it is the African American church, particularly in the right-to-work Southern states where union organizing is extremely restricted. This is why respect for personal religious belief and mobilization through religious institutions is critical for Democratic candidates campaigning in the South.
White Democratic Voters In The South Embrace Liberalism
In these primarily red states in the South, the GOP brand amplifies whiteness, Christianity and traditional gender roles. For the faction of white southerners who reject the GOP, they seem to do so quite definitively. In fact, they move to the far left of the Southern Democratic Party. For example, Southern white men who participated in the 2016 Democratic primaries are on average more ideologically liberal than the white male Democrats who voted in those primaries and caucuses outside of the region. Moreover, in the primaries and caucuses, they voted for Clinton in higher numbers (69 percent) than Democratic white men outside of the South (56 percent).
The story is slightly different among Southern white female Democratic voters, who are, on average, just as liberal as their counterparts beyond the Mason-Dixon line. Among the racial groups surveyed in the Blair Center Poll, white women gave Sanders his best numbers in the South in 2016 (38 percent). Sanders’s support among Southern white Democratic women was nearly double that of Southern Latina Democratic primary voters and four times that of African American women who voted in the Democratic primaries in the South last cycle.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Which Super Tuesday Races Do You Need To Care About?

Editor ’ s Note : We made this video before Sen. Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race .
Fourteen @ @ @ @ @ headed to the polls on Super Tuesday .
Which ones could change the race for @ @ @ @ @ and Sen. Bernie Sanders ?

Which Super Tuesday Races Do You Need To Care About?
Editor’s Note: We made this video before Sen. Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race.
Fourteen states and one territory are headed to the polls on Super Tuesday. Which ones could change the race for former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders?


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Bloomberg Bet Big On California. It Might Not Pay Off.

The first thing I noticed when I walked into Michael Bloomberg ’ s campaign headquarters in downtown Los Angeles was the wall of terrariums .
For one brief second I wondered , staring at the multitude of tiny , meticulously groomed succulents clustered on a bookshelf that ran almost half the length of a cavernous , industrial-chic loft , if I had somehow misstepped and stumbled into an Anthropologie .
But there was the former New York mayor — or at least , a cutout of him , propped up across from a huge white wall plastered with campaign signs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morning , but the Bloomberg bus had already pulled up outside to drop off a group of gun safety advocates who had been touring the state and talking to local leaders .
Staffers were setting up for a private roundtable with a local prosecutor and a LA city council member who had recently endorsed Bloomberg , placing a “ Bloomberg 2020 ” screen in front of a giant mural of a pink-skinned woman in sunglasses with rainbow hair , spelling out “ LA ” with her fingers .
Still stunned by the opulence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mendez , a spokesperson for the Bloomberg campaign , where they had found so many terrariums .
“ Oh , it came this way , ” she said , shrugging .
“ We had to ramp up in California so quickly — we just took the office space we could find.
” It ’ s hard to avoid thinking of Bloomberg ’ s bid as a kind of political science experiment — a test of whether an elderly , extraordinarily wealthy ex-Republican can run a competitive campaign almost entirely on the basis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generously paid staff .
That experiment will play out across the country this week , when Bloomberg will finally appear on the ballot after a bizarre campaign in which he entered the race late , skipped the four early states and focused instead on winning the trove of delegates that await on Super Tuesday .
And California is , in many ways , the maximal test of Bloomberg ’ s strategy .
He ’ s invested a lot in other big Super Tuesday states like Texas , but California is the state where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because its media markets are so expensive and the state ’ s large , diverse population makes it hard to set up an effective ground game .
His spending spree has certainly gotten him somewhere in California .
Bloomberg is now polling around 13 percent in California , according to our average , up from 4 percent in January .
But Californians also love to tell you about the self-funded candidates who have tried — and failed — to spend their way into public office .
Take Meg Whitman , Carly Fiorina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After this Tuesday , we ’ ll know whether Bloomberg will join that inglorious pantheon or whether California ’ s unexpected contribution to the Democratic nomination process is the elevation of a self-funded billionaire ’ s candidacy .
Right now , it seems like Bloomberg will finish in third or fourth place even though he has spent tens of millions of dollars in the state .
But after seeing Bloomberg ’ s swanky office , I wanted to find out how ordinary Californians were feeling about his campaign .
After spending several days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one thing became clear : Bloomberg ’ s spending has bought him notoriety , but hasn ’ t translated into widespread enthusiasm .
It ’ s hard to find a Californian who ’ s not aware of Bloomberg ’ s run , thanks to his advertising blitz in the state over the past few months .
Since the beginning of the year , he ’ s spent more than $ 36 million on television advertising alone .
“ I ’ d describe it as a bombardment , ” said Khalid Maznavi , 39 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ He ’ s there whenever I turn on the radio or watch TV .
And it ’ s been like that for weeks.
” Fueled by Bloomberg ’ s bottomless fortune , the campaign has also quickly assembled an enormous outreach machine to reach California voters .
According to research by FiveThirtyEight contributor and political scientist Joshua Darr , Bloomberg now has the biggest footprint in the state , with 25 field offices scattered across California — just barely topping Sen. Bernie Sanders , who has 23 field offices .
His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
As recently as last week , his campaign was “ urgently hiring ” for organizers who would be paid $ 18 per hour , well above the state ’ s minimum wage .
Bloomberg has also amassed a wide network of high-profile local supporters and endorsers — like San Francisco Mayor London Breed and Michael Tubbs , the millennial mayor of Stockton — even though Bloomberg is relatively new to California , having only opened his first office in the state two months ago .
But on the ground in Los @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find .
Some of the glitzy events sponsored by the campaign were relatively sparsely attended , despite the lure of free food and drinks and even a live band .
In many cases , the people at the events seemed to have been drawn more by curiosity than passion for Bloomberg ’ s message .
At an event at a restaurant in Chinatown , Ed Choi , 44 , told me that he had “ kind of lost track ” of the presidential primary after his first choice , Andrew Yang , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg had taken the time to hold an event in Chinatown .
“ It ’ s the first time I ’ ve been to one of those , so that counts for something , ” he said .
But he said he was there with an open mind .
“ I just need to know more about where he stands on the issues.
” Paul Chen , a CPA who was schmoozing with one of the hosts of the Chinatown event , said that he hadn ’ t made up his mind yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choose a candidate on the spot , it would be Biden .
He dismissed Sanders with a sentiment that was widespread among attendees , who were largely local businesspeople .
“ I don ’ t like the way he ’ s all about everything being free , ” Chen told me .
But he added that he wasn ’ t yet convinced by Bloomberg either .
“ He ’ s got the financial backing , but I ’ m not sure he ’ ll be accepted by mainstream Democrats .
That could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off in search of Bloomberg supporters at events across Los Angeles , his press staff warned me to make sure I wasn ’ t talking to a campaign employee .
Only volunteers were permitted to share their opinions with journalists .
It was often a struggle to find someone who wasn ’ t paid to be there and willing to talk about their perspective on the record .
Bloomberg ’ s campaign has recently hired hundreds of paid influencers to get out the word about his campaign on social media and via text @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rallies or events are normally happy to chat with journalists , a surprising number of people refused to talk to me or let me use their names .
One man nearly ran away when I said I was a reporter , saying he would never hear the end of it from his Sanders-supporting friends if word got out that he was considering Bloomberg .
By the time I did stumble upon a diehard Bloomberg fan , waiting outside a Los Angeles soccer stadium for a get-out-the-vote event , it felt like I had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Fabio Sabzevari , 25 , told me with great enthusiasm that he had been volunteering in the Northridge office for two weeks .
“ It ’ s simple .
I believe that he ’ s the moderate candidate who can win against Trump , ” Sabzevari said .
“ And he ’ s got the resources to fight Trump ’ s multibillion-dollar disinformation machine .
Who else in this race can do that ?
” But Bloomberg ’ s ability to pour millions into his presidential bid was not a selling point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to me that someone purporting to be acting under progressive ideals would be wasting millions and millions of dollars basically trying to force people to vote for him , ” said Rhiannon Wilson , 22 , a Sanders supporter .
Wilson told me that her aversion to Bloomberg went well beyond his political stances .
She said she was “ disgusted ” that he was trying to buy the nomination .
That attitude was far from unusual among the Californians I talked to .
Tessie Borden , 53 , who is supporting Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg .
“ I would not vote for that man .
I think he ’ s a Republican plant , ” she said .
I asked her what she would do if he won the nomination .
She shook her head a little and said , “ I would write in Warren.
” Even if Bloomberg does overperform in California , that sentiment is one he ’ s likely to face in other states as the primary contest moves forward .
Bloomberg is gambling that Democrats will be drawn to him because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidate who can win .
His spending spree is part of that appeal for some voters , who look at President Trump and wonder if he can only be defeated by another billionaire .
But Bloomberg ’ s cash-fueled strategy also seems to be earning him genuine animosity in other corners of the Democratic base .
And if his candidacy survives past Super Tuesday , it won ’ t be easy to convince those voters that he can be trusted .

The first thing I noticed when I walked into Michael Bloomberg’s campaign headquarters in downtown Los Angeles was the wall of terrariums. For one brief second I wondered, staring at the multitude of tiny, meticulously groomed succulents clustered on a bookshelf that ran almost half the length of a cavernous, industrial-chic loft, if I had somehow misstepped and stumbled into an Anthropologie. But there was the former New York mayor — or at least, a cutout of him, propped up across from a huge white wall plastered with campaign signs.
It was still early in the morning, but the Bloomberg bus had already pulled up outside to drop off a group of gun safety advocates who had been touring the state and talking to local leaders. Staffers were setting up for a private roundtable with a local prosecutor and a LA city council member who had recently endorsed Bloomberg, placing a “Bloomberg 2020” screen in front of a giant mural of a pink-skinned woman in sunglasses with rainbow hair, spelling out “LA” with her fingers. Still stunned by the opulence of the space, I asked Lys Mendez, a spokesperson for the Bloomberg campaign, where they had found so many terrariums. “Oh, it came this way,” she said, shrugging. “We had to ramp up in California so quickly — we just took the office space we could find.”
It’s hard to avoid thinking of Bloomberg’s bid as a kind of political science experiment — a test of whether an elderly, extraordinarily wealthy ex-Republican can run a competitive campaign almost entirely on the basis of his own advertising and a big, generously paid staff. That experiment will play out across the country this week, when Bloomberg will finally appear on the ballot after a bizarre campaign in which he entered the race late, skipped the four early states and focused instead on winning the trove of delegates that await on Super Tuesday.
And California is, in many ways, the maximal test of Bloomberg’s strategy. He’s invested a lot in other big Super Tuesday states like Texas, but California is the state where his dollars should carry him the furthest, because its media markets are so expensive and the state’s large, diverse population makes it hard to set up an effective ground game.
His spending spree has certainly gotten him somewhere in California. Bloomberg is now polling around 13 percent in California, according to our average, up from 4 percent in January. But Californians also love to tell you about the self-funded candidates who have tried — and failed — to spend their way into public office. Take Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Michael Huffington or Al Checchi. After this Tuesday, we’ll know whether Bloomberg will join that inglorious pantheon or whether California’s unexpected contribution to the Democratic nomination process is the elevation of a self-funded billionaire’s candidacy.
Right now, it seems like Bloomberg will finish in third or fourth place even though he has spent tens of millions of dollars in the state. But after seeing Bloomberg’s swanky office, I wanted to find out how ordinary Californians were feeling about his campaign. After spending several days talking to voters across Los Angeles, one thing became clear: Bloomberg’s spending has bought him notoriety, but hasn’t translated into widespread enthusiasm.
It’s hard to find a Californian who’s not aware of Bloomberg’s run, thanks to his advertising blitz in the state over the past few months. Since the beginning of the year, he’s spent more than $36 million on television advertising alone. “I’d describe it as a bombardment,” said Khalid Maznavi, 39, who is supporting Sen. Elizabeth Warren. “He’s there whenever I turn on the radio or watch TV. And it’s been like that for weeks.”
Bloomberg has dominated the airwaves in California The estimated amount of money each active Democratic presidential candidate spent on broadcast TV ads from Jan. 1 to Feb. 27, 2020, in California-based media markets, and the number of times their ads aired Candidate Estimated Spending on TV Ads Number of Airings Michael Bloomberg $36,270,860 49,506 Bernie Sanders 5,540,490 10,246 Source: Kantar/Campaign Media Analysis Group
Fueled by Bloomberg’s bottomless fortune, the campaign has also quickly assembled an enormous outreach machine to reach California voters. According to research by FiveThirtyEight contributor and political scientist Joshua Darr, Bloomberg now has the biggest footprint in the state, with 25 field offices scattered across California — just barely topping Sen. Bernie Sanders, who has 23 field offices.
His rapidly expanding team is well-compensated for its time. As recently as last week, his campaign was “urgently hiring” for organizers who would be paid $18 per hour, well above the state’s minimum wage. Bloomberg has also amassed a wide network of high-profile local supporters and endorsers — like San Francisco Mayor London Breed and Michael Tubbs, the millennial mayor of Stockton — even though Bloomberg is relatively new to California, having only opened his first office in the state two months ago.
But on the ground in Los Angeles, Bloomberg fans were surprisingly hard to find. Some of the glitzy events sponsored by the campaign were relatively sparsely attended, despite the lure of free food and drinks and even a live band. In many cases, the people at the events seemed to have been drawn more by curiosity than passion for Bloomberg’s message. At an event at a restaurant in Chinatown, Ed Choi, 44, told me that he had “kind of lost track” of the presidential primary after his first choice, Andrew Yang, dropped out. He was impressed that Bloomberg had taken the time to hold an event in Chinatown. “It’s the first time I’ve been to one of those, so that counts for something,” he said. But he said he was there with an open mind. “I just need to know more about where he stands on the issues.”
Paul Chen, a CPA who was schmoozing with one of the hosts of the Chinatown event, said that he hadn’t made up his mind yet either, but if he had to choose a candidate on the spot, it would be Biden. He dismissed Sanders with a sentiment that was widespread among attendees, who were largely local businesspeople. “I don’t like the way he’s all about everything being free,” Chen told me. But he added that he wasn’t yet convinced by Bloomberg either. “He’s got the financial backing, but I’m not sure he’ll be accepted by mainstream Democrats. That could be an issue.”
Each time I set off in search of Bloomberg supporters at events across Los Angeles, his press staff warned me to make sure I wasn’t talking to a campaign employee. Only volunteers were permitted to share their opinions with journalists. It was often a struggle to find someone who wasn’t paid to be there and willing to talk about their perspective on the record. Bloomberg’s campaign has recently hired hundreds of paid influencers to get out the word about his campaign on social media and via text message. And although people at candidate rallies or events are normally happy to chat with journalists, a surprising number of people refused to talk to me or let me use their names. One man nearly ran away when I said I was a reporter, saying he would never hear the end of it from his Sanders-supporting friends if word got out that he was considering Bloomberg.
By the time I did stumble upon a diehard Bloomberg fan, waiting outside a Los Angeles soccer stadium for a get-out-the-vote event, it felt like I had sighted a rare bird in the wild. Fabio Sabzevari, 25, told me with great enthusiasm that he had been volunteering in the Northridge office for two weeks. “It’s simple. I believe that he’s the moderate candidate who can win against Trump,” Sabzevari said. “And he’s got the resources to fight Trump’s multibillion-dollar disinformation machine. Who else in this race can do that?”
But Bloomberg’s ability to pour millions into his presidential bid was not a selling point for everyone. “It is mind-boggling to me that someone purporting to be acting under progressive ideals would be wasting millions and millions of dollars basically trying to force people to vote for him,” said Rhiannon Wilson, 22, a Sanders supporter. Wilson told me that her aversion to Bloomberg went well beyond his political stances. She said she was “disgusted” that he was trying to buy the nomination.
That attitude was far from unusual among the Californians I talked to. Tessie Borden, 53, who is supporting Warren, physically recoiled when I brought up Bloomberg. “I would not vote for that man. I think he’s a Republican plant,” she said. I asked her what she would do if he won the nomination. She shook her head a little and said, “I would write in Warren.”
Even if Bloomberg does overperform in California, that sentiment is one he’s likely to face in other states as the primary contest moves forward. Bloomberg is gambling that Democrats will be drawn to him because of his claim that he’s a candidate who can win. His spending spree is part of that appeal for some voters, who look at President Trump and wonder if he can only be defeated by another billionaire. But Bloomberg’s cash-fueled strategy also seems to be earning him genuine animosity in other corners of the Democratic base. And if his candidacy survives past Super Tuesday, it won’t be easy to convince those voters that he can be trusted.
Nathaniel Rakich contributed research.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Pick Your Own Super Tuesday Winners And Watch The Race Change

1🗳Pick a winner Pick the winner in one of the contests below .
( You ’ re limited to the @ @ @ @ @ as you ’ ll soon learn , the 10,000 model simulations you start with can @ @ @ @ @ 2✨🤖✨Beep boop The simulations where another candidate wins that state are thrown out , and @ @ @ @ @ of winning a majority of pledged delegates are adjusted .
3🗳🗳🗳Pick more winners !
Keep @ @ @ @ @ your choices would mean for the rest of the primary .
Good luck !

1🗳Pick a winner Pick the winner in one of the contests below. (You’re limited to the top five candidates because, as you’ll soon learn, the 20,000 model simulations you start with can run out fast.)
2✨🤖✨Beep boop The simulations where another candidate wins that state are thrown out, and each candidate’s odds of winning a majority of pledged delegates are adjusted.
3🗳🗳🗳Pick more winners! Keep picking winners and see what your choices would mean for the rest of the primary. Good luck!


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--California Is The First Big Test Of Sanders’s Voter Turnout Machine

California is a place of superlatives and extremes — it ’ s the most populous state in the nation , with the hottest deserts and the tallest trees , the flashiest celebrities and the best avocados .
And in terms of pure math , it is Super Tuesday ’ s largest prize .
About 10 percent of the total pledged delegates in the Democratic presidential primary will be up for grabs in California on Tuesday — or , to put it another way , about as many delegates as Virginia , North Carolina , Colorado , Oklahoma , Utah and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been overlooked in the Democratic primary , stuck in June at the end of a months-long process , in which the state ’ s millions of votes mostly functioned as a rubber stamp for the winner .
That changed , though , in 2017 , when the California legislature moved its contest up with the hope of giving the state the kind of influence over the process that befits its massive delegate haul .
It seemed like this year , California voters could finally get their due .
Except when I arrived in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t feel much like a presidential primary was underway .
And as I drove into the city from the airport , the only political billboards I saw were for local elections , like district attorney or county supervisor .
Several presidential candidates had scheduled quick , last-minute trips to California , but the state wasn ’ t getting more attention than smaller , more geographically manageable Super Tuesday states like Arkansas , Alabama or Colorado .
Look at the polls , and it ’ s easier to understand why candidates mostly chose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to our average of polls in California , Sen. Bernie Sanders has the support of 33 percent of the state ’ s voters , with all of the other candidates in a messy , distant scuffle for second .
And driving that lead , according to a Los Angeles Times/University of California , Berkeley poll released Friday , is Sanders ’ s commanding support among some of California ’ s key voting blocs — Latinos , young people and the very liberal .
According to our model , he has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes , and could walk away with more than half of the state ’ s pledged delegates .
Almost a year ago , Sanders made a risky bet to go big on California .
And since then he has steadily ramped up his presence in the state , making a big , long-term investment in winning over its voters .
It ’ s true that former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has dropped millions in California over the past few months and vastly outspent his competitors in TV ads .
But Sanders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made California a key part of his strategy , relying on the army of volunteers he began to build four years ago , when he lost California to former Sen. Hillary Clinton , 53.4 percent to 45.7 percent .
Sanders ’ s operation could make him unstoppable in California on Tuesday — especially if it can help him capture the support of voters of color who tended to break for Clinton back in 2016 .
The question now is whether it ’ ll work .
“ Even more than Nevada or South Carolina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which Sanders has successfully expanded his support into communities of color , ” said Dan Schnur , a political strategist in California .
“ That was his biggest obstacle in 2016 .
The results in California will show if he ’ s figured out how to overcome it.
” Covering one of the first four states in a presidential primary is a little like entering a weeklong political carnival .
The candidates ricochet across the state , hosting concerts and sports events , lunches and town halls , trying to win over undecided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the final frantic days before the vote .
True to stereotype , California ’ s primary has a more laid-back mood .
That ’ s because the state ’ s massive scale and the way it runs elections are less suited to frenetic , retail politics campaigning .
For one thing , many Californians don ’ t vote on Super Tuesday at all .
Most of California ’ s voters received mail-in ballots in early February .
By the time I landed in Los Angeles , more than 750,000 Democrats had already sent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time , some early voting centers were also open for more than a week before Super Tuesday .
And now , according to Political Data , Inc. , a group that tracks early voting in California , 20 percent of Democratic voters who received a mail-in ballot have returned it .
Deanna Lepree , a 29-year-old nursing student , told me outside a polling place , where she had just cast her ballot for Sanders , that many of her friends from school had voted already .
“ After class today , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voted , and I thought , ‘ Gosh , I ’ d better get to it , ’ ” she said .
There were no candidates barnstorming up and down the coast .
Instead , it was up to the organizers and volunteers to keep stolidly canvassing and phone banking — the way they ’ d been doing for weeks or even months .
And in terms of their presence on the ground , Sanders and Bloomberg have a huge advantage over the other candidates .
Sanders has 23 field offices scattered throughout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FiveThirtyEight contributor and political scientist Joshua Darr , and Bloomberg has 25 .
The other two candidates with a field presence in California — former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren — have only a fraction of that reach , and one of Warren ’ s four offices has been open for less than a week .
As I started criss-crossing the city to see how the various campaigns were getting out the vote , it was clear that young Californians were a big part of Sanders ’ s push .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of voters ages 18 to 29 , according to the L.A. Times/Berkeley poll , and 53 percent of voters ages 30 to 39 — far more than any other candidate .
On the idyllic , leafy campus of the University of California , Los Angeles on Thursday , a group of Sanders ’ s student supporters had staked out a place on the quad with a table full of “ Students for Bernie ” stickers and pins and a battered , slightly-too-short cutout of Sanders that the students chipped in to buy for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been through a lot , ” said Dylan Portillo , 21 , a junior who has the honor of schlepping the Sanders cutout back and forth from his apartment .
“ People really love taking selfies with him.
” Henry Burke , 21 , told me he volunteered for the Sanders campaign in 2016 , while he was still in high school .
As soon as Sanders announced he was running again , he signed up to help out .
“ In 2016 , we were pretty much running just on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year , he thinks the campaign is more organized and streamlined .
He pulled an app out of his pocket to show me how he can quickly look up a voter ’ s registration status , which he said is especially helpful for students who may not know where they ’ re registered , or if they ’ re registered at all .
Outreach to voters of color — particularly Latino voters — has also been an important part of Sanders ’ s California strategy .
On Saturday night , as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I stopped by Sanders ’ s field office in East Los Angeles .
The space was buzzing with volunteers and organizers who seemed unperturbed by Biden ’ s first big win .
Every few minutes , they would ring a bell when a canvasser returned with a voter ’ s mail-in ballot , which the campaign has been collecting to submit on their behalf .
Steven Gibson , 64 , who volunteered for Sanders in 2016 and now works as a regional field director for the campaign , said that even after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Los Angeles , he was surprised by the energy for Sanders in heavily Latino neighborhoods like the one surrounding the field office .
“ You ’ ll walk down the street in a Sanders shirt and young black or Latino people will stop you and say , ‘ Hey Bernie , I love Bernie !
’ ” Gibson said .
“ That wasn ’ t happening in 2016.
” “ The Sanders campaign missed some opportunities in California four years ago , I think in part because they didn ’ t really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitchell , a California political consultant and the vice president of Political Data , Inc .
He pointed to the campaign ’ s aggressive outreach to independent voters — who were more likely to support Sanders in 2016 but , thanks to the quirks of California election law , have to jump through extra hoops to vote for the Democratic presidential candidates — as an example of the campaign ’ s newfound savvy .
“ This time , they ’ re focusing on early voters and Latinos and independents .
In some ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign for them.
” Sanders ’ s lead in the polls is , however , dependent on voters who have historically been less likely to vote — particularly young people , independents and Latinos .
According to the L.A. Times/Berkeley poll , slightly more than half ( 51 percent ) of Latinos are now supporting Sanders , up 13 points from January .
He also has the support of half of voters who identify as very liberal .
One way to judge the success of his outreach machine is whether he can consolidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to turn out in high numbers .
And that ’ s not an easy task , particularly in a place like Los Angeles , where the presidential primary can easily be forgotten .
Many voters told me they weren ’ t really talking about the election with their friends .
“ It ’ s confusing to me , because I think this election is so , so important , but I just don ’ t think most people are that interested in it , ” said Avery Robinson , 21 , who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday afternoon , I followed two Sanders volunteers , Jess ( who asked that her last name not be used ) and Graziela Flores , as they went out door-knocking in a South Los Angeles neighborhood with a mix of black and Latino residents .
Back at the local Sanders field office , standing in the backyard of a big , rambling house , an organizer named Justin Lewis had told them not to worry about convincing undecided voters .
Their task was to find Sanders supporters and persuade them to go vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be reaching out to people who don ’ t vote regularly , who might not realize they can vote early , ” he said to a group of about 20 volunteers .
“ Your job is to help give people the inspiration you feel when you go vote.
” It was a hot day , and we wandered down sun-baked streets lined with bungalows , with sleepy dogs basking in front yards .
Very few of the voters Jess and Graziela talked to knew that they could vote early .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he could vote for Sanders before Tuesday , and said he ’ d round up his whole family to go that afternoon .
But it was a struggle to convince others that voting was worth it .
Another man paused by his car and said he ’ d heard good things about Sanders but wasn ’ t sure he had time to vote .
Jess pressed him , pointing out that the early voting center was just a few blocks away .
“ Bernie is promising free college and free health care , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help him win.
” He laughed and said he ’ d promise to try .
“ I ’ d say that ’ s a win , ” said Jess , 25 , a recent Los Angeles transplant who knocked on doors for Sanders in New York in 2016 .
“ He seemed like he was really going to think about it.
” As in Nevada , where Sanders ’ s victory in the caucuses was powered in part by strong Latino support , the Sanders campaign has consciously targeted Latinos in California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , hiring Latino organizers and starting their efforts early .
Latinos are the largest racial and ethnic group in California , making them a key group to mobilize .
They also skew young , which makes them an even more logical target for Sanders , whose coalition in the early states is mostly defined by one thing — its youth .
Yet Mindy Romero , a professor at the University of Southern California , says it ’ s rare for campaigns to do this kind of concerted outreach to Latinos .
“ Within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders ’ s ] support wasn ’ t so high , ” she said .
“ But now he ’ s the only candidate doing a real ground game in Latino communities and that can send an important message to historically marginalized communities — a sign of trust and respect.
” Sanders ’ s bet on California was never guaranteed to pay off .
California is , in many ways , a presidential primary candidate ’ s nightmare — you won ’ t get far with handshakes and meet-and-greets in a state with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and almost 400,000 miles of highways .
“ Normally in California , the conventional wisdom is , you don ’ t do grassroots because it doesn ’ t matter , ” said Mike Madrid , a GOP strategist in California who focuses on Latino communities .
“ It ’ s throwing money down a rat hole because we ’ re too big .
We ’ re too diverse .
You basically have to set up a 50-state strategy in one state.
” But in the end , the quirks of California ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ struggle to break into a clear second place — could end up vindicating Sanders ’ choice to focus so heavily on his West Coast prize .
The state ’ s pledged delegates are split into two pools : 144 are reserved for candidates who can crack the 15 percent threshold statewide , and the remaining 271 are divvied up according to the candidates ’ performance in the state ’ s 53 congressional districts .
Candidates with fewer resources and some strategic savvy can run up their totals by focusing on districts where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s possible that Biden in particular could improve his standing after his victory in South Carolina .
But a strong first-place finish for Sanders and a muddled scrum for second place — with several candidates clustered around the 15 percent threshold — could be , in the words of pollster Mark DiCamillo , a “ perfect storm ” for Sanders .
“ If Sanders is the only candidate who gets significantly above 15 percent , that means he ’ s not only going to win statewide , he might be the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” DiCamillo said .
“ That means he could rack up several hundred delegates just in California .
That ’ s a big deal .
And he could do it with less than one-third of the statewide vote.
” That ’ s all good news for the Sanders campaign in theory .
But this year ’ s primary will tell us a lot about how far a tactile , boots-on-the-ground strategy can go in California .
Biden is also popular with voters of color — particularly black voters — and Bloomberg has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who tend to be more politically moderate .
The Sanders outreach machine made the difference for at least one voter , though .
Dana Goldman , 35 , said that he was “ 99.9 percent sure ” that he was voting for Sanders but wasn ’ t sure whether he was registered or how he could vote .
I watched as a Sanders volunteer pulled his phone out of his pocket and gave Goldman the information he needed with a few swipes of his thumb .
Goldman , impressed , promised to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Polls ” event the following day .
“ I was going to maybe follow through with making sure I ’ m registered to vote , but now that these folks are here and I ’ m feeling inspired by their energy , it ’ s like , ‘ OK , I ’ m definitely going to go vote and show up for your thing tomorrow , ” he said .
“ That little bit of outreach — it makes a huge difference .
”

California is a place of superlatives and extremes — it’s the most populous state in the nation, with the hottest deserts and the tallest trees, the flashiest celebrities and the best avocados. And in terms of pure math, it is Super Tuesday’s largest prize. About 10 percent of the total pledged delegates in the Democratic presidential primary will be up for grabs in California on Tuesday — or, to put it another way, about as many delegates as Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Oklahoma, Utah and Minnesota combined.
But California has often been overlooked in the Democratic primary, stuck in June at the end of a months-long process, in which the state’s millions of votes mostly functioned as a rubber stamp for the winner. That changed, though, in 2017, when the California legislature moved its contest up with the hope of giving the state the kind of influence over the process that befits its massive delegate haul. It seemed like this year, California voters could finally get their due.
Except when I arrived in Los Angeles on Wednesday, it didn’t feel much like a presidential primary was underway. And as I drove into the city from the airport, the only political billboards I saw were for local elections, like district attorney or county supervisor. Several presidential candidates had scheduled quick, last-minute trips to California, but the state wasn’t getting more attention than smaller, more geographically manageable Super Tuesday states like Arkansas, Alabama or Colorado.
Look at the polls, and it’s easier to understand why candidates mostly chose to save their energy for other states. According to our average of polls in California, Sen. Bernie Sanders has the support of 33 percent of the state’s voters, with all of the other candidates in a messy, distant scuffle for second. And driving that lead, according to a Los Angeles Times/University of California, Berkeley poll released Friday, is Sanders’s commanding support among some of California’s key voting blocs — Latinos, young people and the very liberal. According to our model, he has a 93 percent chance of winning the most votes, and could walk away with more than half of the state’s pledged delegates.
Almost a year ago, Sanders made a risky bet to go big on California. And since then he has steadily ramped up his presence in the state, making a big, long-term investment in winning over its voters. It’s true that former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has dropped millions in California over the past few months and vastly outspent his competitors in TV ads. But Sanders, more than any other candidate, has made California a key part of his strategy, relying on the army of volunteers he began to build four years ago, when he lost California to former Sen. Hillary Clinton, 53.4 percent to 45.7 percent.
Sanders’s operation could make him unstoppable in California on Tuesday — especially if it can help him capture the support of voters of color who tended to break for Clinton back in 2016. The question now is whether it’ll work.
“Even more than Nevada or South Carolina, California will demonstrate the degree to which Sanders has successfully expanded his support into communities of color,” said Dan Schnur, a political strategist in California. “That was his biggest obstacle in 2016. The results in California will show if he’s figured out how to overcome it.”
Covering one of the first four states in a presidential primary is a little like entering a weeklong political carnival. The candidates ricochet across the state, hosting concerts and sports events, lunches and town halls, trying to win over undecided voters and turn out their base in the final frantic days before the vote.
True to stereotype, California’s primary has a more laid-back mood. That’s because the state’s massive scale and the way it runs elections are less suited to frenetic, retail politics campaigning. For one thing, many Californians don’t vote on Super Tuesday at all. Most of California’s voters received mail-in ballots in early February. By the time I landed in Los Angeles, more than 750,000 Democrats had already sent their ballots back. For the first time, some early voting centers were also open for more than a week before Super Tuesday. And now, according to Political Data, Inc., a group that tracks early voting in California, 20 percent of Democratic voters who received a mail-in ballot have returned it. Deanna Lepree, a 29-year-old nursing student, told me outside a polling place, where she had just cast her ballot for Sanders, that many of her friends from school had voted already. “After class today, they were talking about how they’d voted, and I thought, ‘Gosh, I’d better get to it,’” she said.
There were no candidates barnstorming up and down the coast. Instead, it was up to the organizers and volunteers to keep stolidly canvassing and phone banking — the way they’d been doing for weeks or even months. And in terms of their presence on the ground, Sanders and Bloomberg have a huge advantage over the other candidates. Sanders has 23 field offices scattered throughout California, according to data gathered by FiveThirtyEight contributor and political scientist Joshua Darr, and Bloomberg has 25. The other two candidates with a field presence in California — former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren — have only a fraction of that reach, and one of Warren’s four offices has been open for less than a week.
As I started criss-crossing the city to see how the various campaigns were getting out the vote, it was clear that young Californians were a big part of Sanders’s push. He has the support of 61 percent of voters ages 18 to 29, according to the L.A. Times/Berkeley poll, and 53 percent of voters ages 30 to 39 — far more than any other candidate. On the idyllic, leafy campus of the University of California, Los Angeles on Thursday, a group of Sanders’s student supporters had staked out a place on the quad with a table full of “Students for Bernie” stickers and pins and a battered, slightly-too-short cutout of Sanders that the students chipped in to buy for $45 on Amazon. “He’s been through a lot,” said Dylan Portillo, 21, a junior who has the honor of schlepping the Sanders cutout back and forth from his apartment. “People really love taking selfies with him.”
Henry Burke, 21, told me he volunteered for the Sanders campaign in 2016, while he was still in high school. As soon as Sanders announced he was running again, he signed up to help out. “In 2016, we were pretty much running just on enthusiasm,” he said. But this year, he thinks the campaign is more organized and streamlined. He pulled an app out of his pocket to show me how he can quickly look up a voter’s registration status, which he said is especially helpful for students who may not know where they’re registered, or if they’re registered at all.
Outreach to voters of color — particularly Latino voters — has also been an important part of Sanders’s California strategy. On Saturday night, as the results of the South Carolina primary trickled, I stopped by Sanders’s field office in East Los Angeles. The space was buzzing with volunteers and organizers who seemed unperturbed by Biden’s first big win. Every few minutes, they would ring a bell when a canvasser returned with a voter’s mail-in ballot, which the campaign has been collecting to submit on their behalf. Steven Gibson, 64, who volunteered for Sanders in 2016 and now works as a regional field director for the campaign, said that even after months of work in communities of color in Los Angeles, he was surprised by the energy for Sanders in heavily Latino neighborhoods like the one surrounding the field office. “You’ll walk down the street in a Sanders shirt and young black or Latino people will stop you and say, ‘Hey Bernie, I love Bernie!’” Gibson said. “That wasn’t happening in 2016.”
“The Sanders campaign missed some opportunities in California four years ago, I think in part because they didn’t really understand the state,” said Paul Mitchell, a California political consultant and the vice president of Political Data, Inc. He pointed to the campaign’s aggressive outreach to independent voters — who were more likely to support Sanders in 2016 but, thanks to the quirks of California election law, have to jump through extra hoops to vote for the Democratic presidential candidates — as an example of the campaign’s newfound savvy. “This time, they’re focusing on early voters and Latinos and independents. In some ways, this primary feels like a makeup campaign for them.”
Sanders’s lead in the polls is, however, dependent on voters who have historically been less likely to vote — particularly young people, independents and Latinos. According to the L.A. Times/Berkeley poll, slightly more than half (51 percent) of Latinos are now supporting Sanders, up 13 points from January. He also has the support of half of voters who identify as very liberal.
One way to judge the success of his outreach machine is whether he can consolidate support among these groups and convince them to turn out in high numbers. And that’s not an easy task, particularly in a place like Los Angeles, where the presidential primary can easily be forgotten. Many voters told me they weren’t really talking about the election with their friends. “It’s confusing to me, because I think this election is so, so important, but I just don’t think most people are that interested in it,” said Avery Robinson, 21, who is planning to vote for Sanders.
On Friday afternoon, I followed two Sanders volunteers, Jess (who asked that her last name not be used) and Graziela Flores, as they went out door-knocking in a South Los Angeles neighborhood with a mix of black and Latino residents. Back at the local Sanders field office, standing in the backyard of a big, rambling house, an organizer named Justin Lewis had told them not to worry about convincing undecided voters. Their task was to find Sanders supporters and persuade them to go vote — today. “We’re going to be reaching out to people who don’t vote regularly, who might not realize they can vote early,” he said to a group of about 20 volunteers. “Your job is to help give people the inspiration you feel when you go vote.”
It was a hot day, and we wandered down sun-baked streets lined with bungalows, with sleepy dogs basking in front yards. Very few of the voters Jess and Graziela talked to knew that they could vote early. One young man was thrilled to hear that he could vote for Sanders before Tuesday, and said he’d round up his whole family to go that afternoon. But it was a struggle to convince others that voting was worth it. Another man paused by his car and said he’d heard good things about Sanders but wasn’t sure he had time to vote. Jess pressed him, pointing out that the early voting center was just a few blocks away. “Bernie is promising free college and free health care,” she said. “We have to help him win.” He laughed and said he’d promise to try. “I’d say that’s a win,” said Jess, 25, a recent Los Angeles transplant who knocked on doors for Sanders in New York in 2016. “He seemed like he was really going to think about it.”
As in Nevada, where Sanders’s victory in the caucuses was powered in part by strong Latino support, the Sanders campaign has consciously targeted Latinos in California — opening field offices in Latino neighborhoods, hiring Latino organizers and starting their efforts early. Latinos are the largest racial and ethnic group in California, making them a key group to mobilize. They also skew young, which makes them an even more logical target for Sanders, whose coalition in the early states is mostly defined by one thing — its youth. Yet Mindy Romero, a professor at the University of Southern California, says it’s rare for campaigns to do this kind of concerted outreach to Latinos. “Within the Latino community in 2016, [Sanders’s] support wasn’t so high,” she said. “But now he’s the only candidate doing a real ground game in Latino communities and that can send an important message to historically marginalized communities — a sign of trust and respect.”
Sanders’s bet on California was never guaranteed to pay off. California is, in many ways, a presidential primary candidate’s nightmare — you won’t get far with handshakes and meet-and-greets in a state with 20 million registered voters, 200-plus languages and almost 400,000 miles of highways. “Normally in California, the conventional wisdom is, you don’t do grassroots because it doesn’t matter,” said Mike Madrid, a GOP strategist in California who focuses on Latino communities. “It’s throwing money down a rat hole because we’re too big. We’re too diverse. You basically have to set up a 50-state strategy in one state.”
But in the end, the quirks of California’s Democratic primary process — and his rivals’ struggle to break into a clear second place — could end up vindicating Sanders’ choice to focus so heavily on his West Coast prize. The state’s pledged delegates are split into two pools: 144 are reserved for candidates who can crack the 15 percent threshold statewide, and the remaining 271 are divvied up according to the candidates’ performance in the state’s 53 congressional districts. Candidates with fewer resources and some strategic savvy can run up their totals by focusing on districts where their support is strongest, and it’s possible that Biden in particular could improve his standing after his victory in South Carolina. But a strong first-place finish for Sanders and a muddled scrum for second place — with several candidates clustered around the 15 percent threshold — could be, in the words of pollster Mark DiCamillo, a “perfect storm” for Sanders.
“If Sanders is the only candidate who gets significantly above 15 percent, that means he’s not only going to win statewide, he might be the only candidate who gets delegates in every district,” DiCamillo said. “That means he could rack up several hundred delegates just in California. That’s a big deal. And he could do it with less than one-third of the statewide vote.”
That’s all good news for the Sanders campaign in theory. But this year’s primary will tell us a lot about how far a tactile, boots-on-the-ground strategy can go in California. Biden is also popular with voters of color — particularly black voters — and Bloomberg has made some inroads with older Latinos, who tend to be more politically moderate.
The Sanders outreach machine made the difference for at least one voter, though. Dana Goldman, 35, said that he was “99.9 percent sure” that he was voting for Sanders but wasn’t sure whether he was registered or how he could vote. I watched as a Sanders volunteer pulled his phone out of his pocket and gave Goldman the information he needed with a few swipes of his thumb. Goldman, impressed, promised to vote and show up for a “March to the Polls” event the following day. “I was going to maybe follow through with making sure I’m registered to vote, but now that these folks are here and I’m feeling inspired by their energy, it’s like, ‘OK, I’m definitely going to go vote and show up for your thing tomorrow,” he said. “That little bit of outreach — it makes a huge difference.”