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.”


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Election Update: Buttigieg Dropping Out Isn’t Good For Sanders

Pete Buttigieg ’ s decision to drop out of the race two days before Super Tuesday has hurt Sen. Bernie Sanders in our primary forecast .
Sanders ’ s chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates fell from 28 percent to 23 percent .
And the likelihood that no candidate gets a majority rose slightly from 59 to 64 percent .
Former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s majority chances were unchanged .
Sanders is still the favorite to win a plurality of delegates , but those chances dropped slightly too , from 63 percent to 60 percent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from 34 to 36 percent .
Buttigieg himself had almost no chance of getting a delegate plurality or majority , according to the model , so these changes purely reflect the effects that his dropping out has on the other candidates .
At first glance , this might seem counterintuitive .
How does a candidate dropping out increase the likelihood of no majority ?
Shouldn ’ t it clear the field up and make it easier to achieve a majority ?
The key is in how the Democrats ’ delegate math works .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ least 15 percent of the vote , typically , to win delegates statewide or at the district-level .
Buttigieg was projected to get under 15 percent in the vast majority of states and districts on Super Tuesday .
Thus , his votes were essentially wasted .
Redistributing his votes to other candidates will help them to meet the 15 percent threshold , however .
In particular , Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg were both close to the 15 percent line in many states or districts .
So even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help them get over that line in more places .
For instance , both Bloomberg and Warren were projected to finish with an average of 14 percent of the vote in California before Buttigieg ’ s dropout .
Now , they ’ re forecasted for 16 percent instead .
Biden was also projected to finish under 15 percent in some states and districts — so Buttigieg ’ s dropout helps him out also in a few places .
Biden went from a projected 14 percent of the vote to 16 percent in Minnesota @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was already projected to get 15 percent almost everywhere .
So although he will pick up a few Buttigieg voters , they don ’ t necessarily translate to more delegates .
How does our model decide where to assign Buttigieg ’ s voters ?
As described here , we use a series of priors based on the positioning of the candidates on ideological and other dimensions .
These are not purely based on left-right ideology either .
For instance , the model recognizes that both Buttigieg and Warren tend to appeal to college-educated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters despite their ideological differences .
The model also considers the overall popularity of each candidate .
So because Sanders is currently the most popular Democrat in the field , he ’ s likely to pick up some of Buttigeg ’ s support too .
Overall , the model has Buttigieg ’ s support being divided relatively evenly between Warren , Biden , Bloomberg , Sanders and — in the places where she ’ s strong — Sen. Amy Klobuchar .
That seems broadly in line with polls , which are somewhat inconsistent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go .
Of course , neither the model nor previous polling of the race consider the context in which Buttigieg dropped out , which comes amidst an increasing effort by moderate Democratic voters and party leaders to get behind Biden .
If his voters take Buttigeg ’ s dropout as a signal that they should switch to Biden , there ’ s more upside for BIden than our model implies .
And overall , Buttigieg ’ s dropout contributes to the uncertainty surrounding what will happen on Super Tuesday .
There were already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current state of the race following Biden ’ s dramatic surge in South Carolina — but this adds yet another complication .
Although the model may point in broadly the right direction — this is not great news for Sanders — this is one of those times when we mostly just have to wait and see what happens .

Election Update: Buttigieg Dropping Out Isn’t Good For Sanders And it may make it harder for anyone to reach a delegate majority.
Pete Buttigieg’s decision to drop out of the race two days before Super Tuesday has hurt Sen. Bernie Sanders in our primary forecast. Sanders’s chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates fell from 28 percent to 23 percent. And the likelihood that no candidate gets a majority rose slightly from 59 to 64 percent. Former Vice President Joe Biden’s majority chances were unchanged.
Sanders is still the favorite to win a plurality of delegates, but those chances dropped slightly too, from 63 percent to 60 percent, while Biden’s plurality chances increased from 34 to 36 percent.
Buttigieg himself had almost no chance of getting a delegate plurality or majority, according to the model, so these changes purely reflect the effects that his dropping out has on the other candidates.
At first glance, this might seem counterintuitive. How does a candidate dropping out increase the likelihood of no majority? Shouldn’t it clear the field up and make it easier to achieve a majority?
The key is in how the Democrats’ delegate math works. The rules require candidates to receive at least 15 percent of the vote, typically, to win delegates statewide or at the district-level.
Buttigieg was projected to get under 15 percent in the vast majority of states and districts on Super Tuesday. Thus, his votes were essentially wasted. Redistributing his votes to other candidates will help them to meet the 15 percent threshold, however. In particular, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg were both close to the 15 percent line in many states or districts. So even an extra percentage point or two would help them get over that line in more places. For instance, both Bloomberg and Warren were projected to finish with an average of 14 percent of the vote in California before Buttigieg’s dropout. Now, they’re forecasted for 16 percent instead.
Biden was also projected to finish under 15 percent in some states and districts — so Buttigieg’s dropout helps him out also in a few places. Biden went from a projected 14 percent of the vote to 16 percent in Minnesota, for example.
Conversely, Sanders was already projected to get 15 percent almost everywhere. So although he will pick up a few Buttigieg voters, they don’t necessarily translate to more delegates.
How does our model decide where to assign Buttigieg’s voters? As described here, we use a series of priors based on the positioning of the candidates on ideological and other dimensions. These are not purely based on left-right ideology either. For instance, the model recognizes that both Buttigieg and Warren tend to appeal to college-educated voters, and thus they share some voters despite their ideological differences.
The model also considers the overall popularity of each candidate. So because Sanders is currently the most popular Democrat in the field, he’s likely to pick up some of Buttigieg’s support too.
Overall, the model has Buttigieg’s support being divided relatively evenly between Warren, Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders and — in the places where she’s strong — Sen. Amy Klobuchar. That seems broadly in line with polls, which are somewhat inconsistent about where Buttigieg’s support will go.
Of course, neither the model nor previous polling of the race consider the context in which Buttigieg dropped out, which comes amidst an increasing effort by moderate Democratic voters and party leaders to get behind Biden. If his voters take Buttigieg’s dropout as a signal that they should switch to Biden, there’s more upside for Biden than our model implies.
And overall, Buttigieg’s dropout contributes to the uncertainty surrounding what will happen on Super Tuesday. There were already a lot of challenges in assessing the current state of the race following Biden’s dramatic surge in South Carolina — but this adds yet another complication. Although the model may point in broadly the right direction — this is not great news for Sanders — this is one of those times when we mostly just have to wait and see what happens.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Why Buttigieg Dropped Out

Why Buttigieg Dropped Out

Pete Buttigieg pulled off a surprisingly successful presidential run .
The 38-year-old former mayor of South Bend , the fourth-largest city in Indiana , was unable to win the race for chair of the Democratic National Committee three years ago .
In the 2020 Democratic primary , however , he not only outlasted prominent Democrats like Sen. Cory Booker and Sen. Kamala Harris , but Buttigieg also effectively tied for first in Iowa and finished a close second in New Hampshire .
He won more support than Sen. Elizabeth Warren , another party heavyweight , in all four early caucuses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Warren ( and her proposal for Medicare For All ) in October and November were arguably one of the most important moments of the primary , helping blunt Warren ’ s rise when it seemed like she could become the race ’ s front-runner .
But beating expectations and winning primaries and caucuses are different things .
By this past weekend , Buttigieg appeared to have little chance of winning the nomination , and on Sunday news broke that Buttigieg will reportedly end his bid for the presidency .
He finished far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way , way behind former Vice President Joe Biden in South Carolina .
He had stalled out at around 10 or 11 percent in national polls , and there was a good chance that he would fail to reach 15 percent — typically the threshold to win delegates to the national convention — in any of the 14 states voting on Super Tuesday , nor in a ton of congressional districts .
It just didn ’ t seem like Buttigieg had a path to start accumulating delegates .
Just as important as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ losing .
More than 30 percent of Democratic voters are black or Latino .
And the Democratic Party thinks of itself as the party that represents people of color .
But Buttigieg never gained much popularity with black or Latino voters , punctuated by him getting an estimated 3 percent of the black vote in South Carolina .
It was going to be hard for white Democrats , both party elites and voters , to mobilize behind a candidate with such weak support among people of color as the center-left alternative to Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have seemed sudden , but it ’ s likely that the former mayor was going to struggle on Super Tuesday and possibly run out of campaign funds .
So this decision is a face-saving move for him .
That said , I don ’ t think Buttigieg ’ s departure is solely due to his struggles .
Elite voices in the Democratic Party have been worried that the multiple center-left candidates in the race — Biden , Buttigieg , former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg , Sen. Amy Klobuchar , etc .
— @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowing the Vermont senator to amass a huge lead in delegates on Super Tuesday while his rivals finished below 15 percent in many states .
South Carolina is only one state , but Biden ’ s resounding win there suggests that the former vice-president can combine older , moderate voters , black and white , into a big coalition in a way that Buttigieg probably could not .
So my view is that Buttigieg stepped aside in part to help the center-left bloc of the party consolidate around Biden .
To some extent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why would Buttigieg do that ?
The former mayor might genuinely think that Sanders would be a terrible nominee for the Democratic Party .
But there is a potential upside for Buttigieg in making this decision too .
At his age , Buttigieg has four decades to try to become president .
In leaving the race now , he builds goodwill with Democratic Party officials broadly and Biden in particular .
If Biden is elected president , it ’ s easy to imagine him putting Buttigieg in a top administration post that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think U.S .
Ambassador to the United Nations .
And goodwill among party officials will help Buttigieg if , as I expect , he eventually runs for president again .
The Buttigieg departure , in fact , suggests that the Democratic Party establishment has learned some lessons from how GOP party elites allowed President Trump to win the Republican nomination over their objections four years ago .
Perhaps Democratic elites are still organized and influential enough to affect party politics .
In the time between the Nevada caucuses and today , you heard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned about nominating a Democratic socialist to take on Trump .
But that freakout resulted in some actions — prominent figures in the party urged some candidates to drop out and endorsed Biden .
Buttigieg heard the message .
If Biden is elected president , that will be a good outcome for the center-left wing of the Democratic Party — and probably for Pete Buttigieg as well .

Perry Bacon Jr. (perry.bacon@fivethirtyeight.com)

Pete Buttigieg pulled off a surprisingly successful presidential run. The 38-year-old former mayor of South Bend, the fourth-largest city in Indiana, was unable to win the race for chair of the Democratic National Committee three years ago. In the 2020 Democratic primary, however, he not only outlasted prominent Democrats like Sens. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, but Buttigieg also effectively tied for first in Iowa and finished a close second in New Hampshire. He won more support than Sen. Elizabeth Warren, another party heavyweight, in all four early caucuses and primaries. And his sharp attacks on Warren (and her proposal for Medicare for All) in October and November were arguably one of the most important moments of the primary, helping blunt Warren’s rise when it seemed like she could become the race’s front-runner.
But beating expectations and winning primaries and caucuses are different things. By this past weekend, Buttigieg appeared to have little chance of winning the nomination, and on Sunday news broke that Buttigieg will reportedly end his bid for the presidency. He finished far behind Sen. Bernie Sanders in Nevada and way, way behind former Vice President Joe Biden in South Carolina. He had stalled out at around 10 or 11 percent in national polls, and there was a good chance he would fail to reach 15 percent — typically the threshold to win delegates to the national convention — in any of the 14 states voting on Super Tuesday and in a ton of congressional districts. It just didn’t seem like Buttigieg had a path to start accumulating delegates.
Just as important as the losing itself was the way Buttigieg was losing. More than 30 percent of Democratic voters are black or Latino. And the Democratic Party thinks of itself as the party that represents people of color. But Buttigieg never gained much popularity with black or Latino voters, punctuated by him getting an estimated 3 percent of the black vote in South Carolina.
It was going to be hard for white Democrats, both party elites and voters, to mobilize behind a candidate with such weak support among people of color as the center-left alternative to Sanders.
So Buttigieg’s departure may have seemed sudden, but it’s likely that the former mayor was going to struggle on Super Tuesday and possibly run out of campaign funds. So this decision is a face-saving move for him.
That said, I don’t think Buttigieg’s departure is solely due to his struggles. Elite voices in the Democratic Party have been worried that the multiple center-left candidates in the race — Biden, Buttigieg, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, etc. — would divide the non-Sanders vote, potentially allowing the Vermont senator to amass a huge lead in delegates on Super Tuesday while his rivals finished below 15 percent in many states. South Carolina is only one state, but Biden’s resounding win there suggests that the former vice president can combine older, moderate voters, black and white, into a big coalition in a way that Buttigieg probably could not. So my view is that Buttigieg stepped aside in part to help the center-left bloc of the party consolidate around Biden. To some extent, he was being a team player.
Why would Buttigieg do that? The former mayor might genuinely think that Sanders would be a terrible nominee for the Democratic Party. But there is a potential upside for Buttigieg in making this decision too. At his age, Buttigieg has four decades to try to become president. In leaving the race now, he builds goodwill with Democratic Party officials broadly and Biden in particular. If Biden is elected president, it’s easy to imagine him putting Buttigieg in a top administration post that helps Buttigieg fill out his resume — think U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. And goodwill among party officials will help Buttigieg if, as I expect, he eventually runs for president again.
The Buttigieg departure, in fact, suggests that the Democratic Party establishment has learned some lessons from how GOP party elites allowed President Trump to win the Republican nomination over their objections four years ago. Perhaps Democratic elites are still organized and influential enough to affect party politics. In the time between the Nevada caucuses and today, you heard a bit of a freakout from Democrats concerned about nominating a democratic socialist to take on Trump. But that freakout resulted in some actions — prominent figures in the party urged some candidates to drop out and endorsed Biden. Buttigieg heard the message. If Biden is elected president, that will be a good outcome for the center-left wing of the Democratic Party — and probably for Pete Buttigieg as well.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Super Tuesday Preview: Sanders Is Favored In California, But Biden Is Strong In Parts Of The State

Fifty-three congressional districts , 415 pledged delegates , potentially 10 million voters — California is the big kahuna of Super Tuesday .
According to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast , Sen. Bernie Sanders is golden in the Golden State ; he has a 9 in 10 ( 90 percent ) chance of winning the most votes .
But because of California ’ s massive size , the results here are significant beyond who wins and loses .
Finishing in second place with , say , 25 percent of the vote can represent the support of millions of people — and potentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available in the four early states combined .
In the average FiveThirtyEight model run , Sanders gets 35 percent of the vote in California , former Vice President Joe Biden gets 25 percent , and Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg both get 16 percent .
Any candidate who gets 15 percent or more of the statewide vote is guaranteed some number of California ’ s 144 statewide delegates , so the exact results will be important to watch .
Given the wide range of uncertainty in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether Warren and Bloomberg will manage to cross the 15-percent threshold , and if they do , by how much .
And if Sanders and Biden do notably better or worse than expected , it could add or subtract dozens of delegates to their totals .
The remaining 271 pledged delegates out of California are awarded based on the results in each of the state ’ s congressional districts , worth between four and seven delegates each .
This is no small matter ; California is demographically diverse , which means different corners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to our forecast , this translates into different congressional districts supporting different Democratic candidates .
Sanders ’ s support figures to be pretty steady across the state ; we ’ re forecasting him to get between 31 and 39 percent of the vote in every district .
That ’ s enough for him to finish first almost everywhere .
Biden ’ s support fluctuates a lot more based on a district ’ s demographics ; his highs ( e.g.
, 31 percent in the 44th District ) are high enough for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but his lows ( e.g.
, 19 percent in the 18th District ) are low enough that he has a chance of falling beneath the qualifying threshold in others .
Warren and Bloomberg , like Sanders , figure to perform pretty consistently from district to district , but because those performances are consistently close to 15 percent , every percentage point will matter .
Right now , we ’ re forecasting Warren and Bloomberg to be eligible for delegates in 39 districts each , but those numbers could easily be zero or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support .
In general , Biden and Bloomberg overperform their statewide performances in the districts where Sanders and Warren underperform , while Sanders and Warren overperform their statewide performances in the districts where Biden and Bloomberg underperform .
We won ’ t bore you by going through all 53 districts , but here ’ s an overview of what distinguishes each kind of district .
Let ’ s start with the districts where Biden and Bloomberg overperform .
While Sanders certainly isn ’ t forecasted to do poorly in any of these districts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — enough that he and Biden should run about even in them .
The districts listed below are also generally Warren ’ s worst in the entire state ; we ’ ll be watching them to see whether Warren falls below 15 percent and gets shut out of delegates there .
Some of Biden ’ s ( and , to a lesser extent , Bloomberg ’ s ) best districts can be found south of downtown Los Angeles on either side of the 110 .
These are among the most densely populated districts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , we ’ re forecasting Biden to get 29 percent in the 40th District ( which includes South Central Los Angeles , East Los Angeles and Downey ) , which is both the least white and most Latino district in the state .
The 44th District ( Compton , San Pedro ) , which is 93 percent nonwhite , is expected to be Biden ’ s best district in the whole state .
And the nearby 37th District ( Culver City , Vermont Square ) and 43rd District ( Inglewood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black populations in California , and Biden has consistently polled well among black voters .
Biden is also strong in majority-minority rural districts , like those in the Central Valley .
And these are also the districts where Bloomberg has the best chance to pick up delegates .
For example , the 21st District ( covering much of the San Joaquin Valley between Fresno and Bakersfield ) , an agricultural district that is 74 percent Latino , is forecasted to give Biden 31 percent and Bloomberg 17 percent .
You can also look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fresno , Merced ) and 36th District ( Palm Springs and the desert communities in eastern Riverside County ) to get an idea of Bloomberg ’ s California ceiling .
In general , Biden and Bloomberg tend to be strong in districts with low median incomes and relatively small shares of college-educated voters .
And perhaps unsurprisingly , these districts have also historically voted for establishment Democrats .
The 36th , 43rd and 21st districts were former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ’ s three best districts in California in the 2016 primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 20 points .
On the flip side , Biden and Bloomberg do especially badly — and Warren excels — in districts encompassing California ’ s most upscale suburbs .
In fact , Biden ’ s very worst district , and Warren ’ s very best , is the 18th District ( Palo Alto , Mountain View , Campbell , Los Gatos ) in Silicon Valley .
Sixty-two percent of its adult population holds at least a bachelor ’ s degree , and it has the highest median household income in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s a similar story in the 33rd District ( Malibu , Santa Monica ) in coastal Los Angeles ; its high white ( 65 percent , fourth among California districts ) and college-educated ( 64 percent , first ) population is a bad combination for Biden and Bloomberg .
And in the predominantly white and college-educated 52nd District ( western San Diego , La Jolla ) , Biden underperforms his statewide average by 4 points .
Warren also does well in more racially diverse upscale districts , especially in the Bay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get 19 percent or more in the 17th District ( Santa Clara , Milpitas , Fremont ) , the 12th District ( San Francisco ) and the 14th District ( South San Francisco , San Mateo ) — cosmopolitan , diverse districts all .
In Southern California , Warren also overperforms in districts that fit a similar profile , such as the 39th District ( Fullerton , Yorba Linda ) and 45th District ( Irvine , Mission Viejo ) in Orange County .
Both are well-to-do and have significant white , Asian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are several districts where no candidate departs significantly from his or her statewide forecast .
These bellwether districts include places like the 20th District ( Santa Cruz , Salinas ) , 5th District ( Santa Rosa , the city of Napa ) and 53rd District ( eastern San Diego , Chula Vista ) .
But we are expecting the 7th District ( Sacramento ’ s eastern suburbs ) to most closely approximate the Democratic electorate statewide .
The district is representative of California in terms of income , education and density , although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state as a whole .
In a perfect world , you ’ d be able to follow the results in each of these districts on Tuesday night and use them to predict which candidates are on track to over- or underperform statewide .
But in California , you should treat the election-night results as incomplete .
That ’ s because a majority of Californians vote by mail , and ballots need only be postmarked by Election Day ; election offices can receive them as late as Friday .
And in a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than entire states , full results from California will take days , maybe even weeks , to report .
And the initial results are not guaranteed to be representative , either .
For instance , young voters tend to wait until the last minute to mail their ballots , so they may be underrepresented in the early results ; because Sanders is so popular with young voters , that might mean he will be disproportionately weak in the initial count .
Biden , too , might be stronger among last-minute voters , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisive win in South Carolina .
The bottom line is that California is a big , complicated state .
We should wait until every vote is counted before forming our final opinions about who won and who lost .

Fifty-three congressional districts, 415 pledged delegates, potentially 10 million voters — California is the big kahuna of Super Tuesday. According to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast, Sen. Bernie Sanders is golden in the Golden State; he has a 9 in 10 (90 percent) chance of winning the most votes. But because of California’s massive size, the results here are significant beyond who wins and loses. Finishing in second place with, say, 25 percent of the vote can represent the support of millions of people — and potentially win a candidate more delegates than were available in the four early states combined.
In the average FiveThirtyEight model run, Sanders gets 35 percent of the vote in California, former Vice President Joe Biden gets 25 percent, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg both get 16 percent. Any candidate who gets 15 percent or more of the statewide vote is guaranteed some number of California’s 144 statewide delegates, so the exact results will be important to watch. Given the wide range of uncertainty in our forecast, there is real suspense over whether Warren and Bloomberg will manage to cross the 15-percent threshold, and if they do, by how much. And if Sanders and Biden do notably better or worse than expected, it could add or subtract dozens of delegates to their totals.
The remaining 271 pledged delegates out of California are awarded based on the results in each of the state’s congressional districts, worth between four and seven delegates each. This is no small matter; California is demographically diverse, which means different corners of the state can be worlds apart. According to our forecast, this translates into different congressional districts supporting different Democratic candidates.
There’s a stark geographic divide in California Top candidates’ average forecasted vote share in California congressional districts, according to FiveThirtyEight’s model as of 5:40 p.m. on March 2 District Sanders Biden Warren Bloomberg CA-01 34% 25% 16% 17% CA-02 35 23 17 16 CA-03 34 26 16 16 CA-04 35 24 17 16 CA-05 35 25 16 16 CA-06 33 28 15 17 CA-07 35 25 17 16 CA-08 32 29 14 17 CA-09 33 28 15 17 CA-10 34 27 15 17 CA-11 35 24 17 15 CA-12 38 20 20 14 CA-13 34 25 17 15 CA-14 38 21 19 14 CA-15 37 22 18 14 CA-16 32 29 14 17 CA-17 39 20 20 12 CA-18 38 19 20 13 CA-19 37 23 18 14 CA-20 35 25 16 16 CA-21 31 31 13 17 CA-22 33 28 15 17 CA-23 33 28 15 17 CA-24 35 24 17 16 CA-25 34 26 16 16 CA-26 36 24 17 15 CA-27 36 23 18 15 CA-28 35 23 18 16 CA-29 34 27 15 17 CA-30 36 23 18 15 CA-31 33 28 15 16 CA-32 34 26 16 16 CA-33 37 20 20 14 CA-34 34 27 16 17 CA-35 33 29 15 16 CA-36 32 29 14 17 CA-37 31 29 15 17 CA-38 34 27 16 16 CA-39 37 23 18 14 CA-40 32 29 14 17 CA-41 32 29 14 17 CA-42 35 26 16 16 CA-43 31 31 14 17 CA-44 31 31 14 17 CA-45 37 21 19 14 CA-46 35 26 16 16 CA-47 35 25 16 16 CA-48 37 21 19 15 CA-49 36 22 18 15 CA-50 35 24 17 16 CA-51 32 29 14 17 CA-52 37 20 19 14 CA-53 35 25 17 16 State 35 25 17 15
Sanders’s support figures to be pretty steady across the state; we’re forecasting him to get between 31 and 39 percent of the vote in every district. That’s enough for him to finish first almost everywhere. Biden’s support fluctuates a lot more based on a district’s demographics; his highs (e.g., 31 percent in the 44th District) are high enough for him to beat Sanders in some areas, but his lows (e.g., 19 percent in the 18th District) are low enough that he has a chance of falling beneath the qualifying threshold in others. Warren and Bloomberg, like Sanders, figure to perform pretty consistently from district to district, but because those performances are consistently close to 15 percent, every percentage point will matter. Right now, we’re forecasting Warren and Bloomberg to be eligible for delegates in 39 districts each, but those numbers could easily be zero or 53 with small shifts in their statewide support.
In general, Biden and Bloomberg overperform their statewide performances in the districts where Sanders and Warren underperform, while Sanders and Warren overperform their statewide performances in the districts where Biden and Bloomberg underperform. We won’t bore you by going through all 53 districts, but here’s an overview of what distinguishes each kind of district.
Let’s start with the districts where Biden and Bloomberg overperform. While Sanders certainly isn’t forecasted to do poorly in any of these districts, they are below average for him — enough that he and Biden should run about even in them. The districts listed below are also generally Warren’s worst in the entire state; we’ll be watching them to see whether Warren falls below 15 percent and gets shut out of delegates there.
Some of Biden’s (and, to a lesser extent, Bloomberg’s) best districts can be found south of downtown Los Angeles on either side of the 110. These are among the most densely populated districts in the state and are heavily nonwhite. For example, we’re forecasting Biden to get 29 percent in the 40th District (which includes South Central Los Angeles, East Los Angeles and Downey), which is both the least white and most Latino district in the state. The 44th District (Compton, San Pedro), which is 93 percent nonwhite, is expected to be Biden’s best district in the whole state. And the nearby 37th District (Culver City, Vermont Square) and 43rd District (Inglewood, Torrance) have the two largest black populations in California, and Biden has consistently polled well among black voters.
Biden is also strong in majority-minority rural districts, like those in the Central Valley. And these are also the districts where Bloomberg has the best chance to pick up delegates. For example, the 21st District (covering much of the San Joaquin Valley between Fresno and Bakersfield), an agricultural district that is 74 percent Latino, is forecasted to give Biden 31 percent and Bloomberg 17 percent. You can also look to places like the 16th District (Fresno, Merced) and 36th District (Palm Springs and the desert communities in eastern Riverside County) to get an idea of Bloomberg’s California ceiling.
In general, Biden and Bloomberg tend to be strong in districts with low median incomes and relatively small shares of college-educated voters. And perhaps unsurprisingly, these districts have also historically voted for establishment Democrats. The 36th, 43rd and 21st districts were former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s three best districts in California in the 2016 primary, going for her over Sanders by more than 20 points.
On the flip side, Biden and Bloomberg do especially badly — and Warren excels — in districts encompassing California’s most upscale suburbs. In fact, Biden’s very worst district, and Warren’s very best, is the 18th District (Palo Alto, Mountain View, Campbell, Los Gatos) in Silicon Valley. Sixty-two percent of its adult population holds at least a bachelor’s degree, and it has the highest median household income in the state: $122,124 a year. It’s a similar story in the 33rd District (Malibu, Santa Monica) in coastal Los Angeles; its high white (65 percent, fourth among California districts) and college-educated (64 percent, first) population is a bad combination for Biden and Bloomberg. And in the predominantly white and college-educated 52nd District (western San Diego, La Jolla), Biden underperforms his statewide average by 4 points.
Warren also does well in more racially diverse upscale districts, especially in the Bay Area. We’re forecasting her to get 19 percent or more in the 17th District (Santa Clara, Milpitas, Fremont), the 12th District (San Francisco) and the 14th District (South San Francisco, San Mateo) — cosmopolitan, diverse districts all. In Southern California, Warren also overperforms in districts that fit a similar profile, such as the 39th District (Fullerton, Yorba Linda) and 45th District (Irvine, Mission Viejo) in Orange County. Both are well-to-do and have significant white, Asian and Latino populations.
Finally, there are several districts where no candidate departs significantly from his or her statewide forecast. These bellwether districts include places like the 20th District (Santa Cruz, Salinas), 5th District (Santa Rosa, the city of Napa) and 53rd District (eastern San Diego, Chula Vista). But we are expecting the 7th District (Sacramento’s eastern suburbs) to most closely approximate the Democratic electorate statewide. The district is representative of California in terms of income, education and density, although it is a fair bit whiter than the state as a whole.
In a perfect world, you’d be able to follow the results in each of these districts on Tuesday night and use them to predict which candidates are on track to over- or underperform statewide. But in California, you should treat the election-night results as incomplete. That’s because a majority of Californians vote by mail, and ballots need only be postmarked by Election Day; election offices can receive them as late as Friday. And in a state where some counties have more eligible voters than entire states, full results from California will take days, maybe even weeks, to report.
And the initial results are not guaranteed to be representative, either. For instance, young voters tend to wait until the last minute to mail their ballots, so they may be underrepresented in the early results; because Sanders is so popular with young voters, that might mean he will be disproportionately weak in the initial count. Biden, too, might be stronger among last-minute voters, if he receives a polling bump from his decisive win in South Carolina.
The bottom line is that California is a big, complicated state. We should wait until every vote is counted before forming our final opinions about who won and who lost.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Super Tuesday Preview: Sanders And Biden Are Duking It Out In Texas

Super Tuesday is tomorrow ( ! )
, so FiveThirtyEight is unpacking what our forecast has to say about the 14 states and one territory voting that day .
We ’ ve already gone through the state of play in many other states , but now it ’ s time to look at the second-biggest Super Tuesday contest in terms of pledged delegates : Texas .
It ’ s shaping up to be a close race , too .
Overall , our Texas forecast shows almost a tie between former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders , giving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 56 percent ) chance of winning and Sanders around a 2 in 5 ( 43 percent ) shot .
But remember , there ’ s a lot we don ’ t know in Texas — or in the other Super Tuesday states — as we don ’ t have new polls conducted entirely after South Carolina ’ s primary .
So our model is trying to anticipate just how much of a bounce Biden may have gotten from his win in South Carolina and what former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means , but without new polls , we don ’ t have as clear of a picture as we ’ d like of any last-minute movement among voters .
That said , at this point , the only other candidate with any real shot of winning Texas — and it ’ s still a long shot — appears to be to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg , who has a 1 in 50 ( 2 percent ) chance .
Seventy-nine of Texas ’ s 228 pledged delegates will be allocated based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ currently forecasts that Biden and Sanders will get the lion ’ s share , with each winning an average of about 30 percent of the statewide vote .
Bloomberg is in third with a projected vote share of 19 percent , while Sen. Elizabeth Warren is in fourth at 13 percent .
The overall delegate picture isn ’ t too different in Texas ’ s 31 state Senate districts which will award 149 pledged delegates .
Only Sanders and Biden are projected to win any districts outright .
But in many of Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still competitive .
Bloomberg ’ s average vote share puts him above the 15 percent mark in every district , and Warren is also forecasted to be above the delegate threshold in a handful of districts and very close to hitting it in other parts of the state , as you can see in the table below .
A lot of the variation we see in candidates ’ individual performance boils down to the diversity of Texas ’ s districts .
In 2016 , the primary electorate was 43 percent white , 32 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to the exit poll , making it one of the most racially and ethnically diverse electorates in the country .
And of the 2020 candidates , Biden has the widest range in outcomes , performing best in districts that have larger shares of black voters .
He is projected to get 38 percent of the vote , for instance , in the 13th Senate District ( in Houston ) and 23rd Senate District ( in Dallas ) , both of which are roughly 40 percent African American .
But in districts with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters , like the 14th Senate District ( mostly Austin ) , he ’ s projected to get only 24 percent of the vote .
Bloomberg ’ s performance in individual districts largely mirrors Biden ’ s , though he is projected to earn a much lower voter share overall , between 17 and 21 percent .
Sanders ’ s best districts , on the other hand , tend to be whiter ones with higher incomes and more college-educated voters .
Among these are the 8th and 12th Senate districts in the Dallas-Fort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 14th District , which has the most delegates of any Texas seat ( 10 ) .
But Sanders ’ s strength isn ’ t concentrated in any one district ; his projected support is relatively consistent across Texas , ranging from 23 percent to 33 percent .
Additionally , he polls well among Hispanic voters , which is clearly a plus for him in Texas , though at the district level there isn ’ t a strong relationship between his expected vote share and the Latino share of the population .
As for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters nationwide also shows up on the Texas map .
In each of the six seats where she ’ s forecasted at or above 15 percent , 40 percent or more of the adult population has at least a four-year college degree , well above the statewide share , which is around 30 percent .
Her best marks come in the 8th and 14th Senate districts , which are also some of Sanders ’ s strongest areas .
With Buttigieg ’ s departure , Warren is in a better position to reach 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and maybe even better positioned statewide .
And Amy Klobuchar dropping out of the race on Monday could boost both Sanders and Warren , as the Minnesota senator ’ s strongest seats were projected to be in some of the same affluent , highly educated places where Sanders and Warren are expected to perform best .
On Tuesday night , watch how well Biden and Bloomberg are doing relative to one another .
Similar to states like North Carolina and Virginia , the projected vote shares for Biden and Bloomberg in Texas tend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the same sorts of districts .
So if Biden gets a notable bounce out of South Carolina , he might be able to keep the former mayor below the 15 percent mark in some districts .
But if Bloomberg holds up , that could stop Biden from being competitive in Texas , which would give Sanders an edge .
Similarly , if Warren underperforms expectations — or if any early votes cast for Klobuchar help fragment the vote in Warren ’ s stronger districts — that could mean she would mostly fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be a boon to Sanders , whose best districts are on the same turf .
Should Warren outperform expectations , however , that could hold down Sanders ’ s expected delegate haul .
The good news for Sanders is that his consistent support makes him a sure bet to clear the delegate threshold everywhere .
And if Warren underperforms her forecast , that might help Sanders win Texas , which would give him a very big feather in his primary cap — he ’ s strongly favored to win California , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air .
But Texas has the second-most delegates at stake tomorrow , so if he ’ s able to pull victory off here , he might be able to stall the anti-Sanders momentum that Biden is hoping to build coming out of South Carolina .

Super Tuesday is tomorrow (!), so FiveThirtyEight is unpacking what our forecast has to say about the 14 states and one territory voting that day. We’ve already gone through the state of play in many other states, but now it’s time to look at the second-biggest Super Tuesday contest in terms of pledged delegates: Texas.
It’s shaping up to be a close race, too. Overall, our Texas forecast shows almost a tie between former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders, giving Biden nearly a 3 in 5 (56 percent) chance of winning and Sanders around a 2 in 5 (43 percent) shot. But remember, there’s a lot we don’t know in Texas — or in the other Super Tuesday states — as we don’t have new polls conducted entirely after South Carolina’s primary.
So our model is trying to anticipate just how much of a bounce Biden may have gotten from his win in South Carolina and what former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s departure from the race means, but without new polls, we don’t have as clear of a picture as we’d like of any last-minute movement among voters. That said, at this point, the only other candidate with any real shot of winning Texas — and it’s still a long shot — appears to be to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has a 1 in 50 (2 percent) chance.
Seventy-nine of Texas’s 228 pledged delegates will be allocated based on the statewide result, and our model currently forecasts that Biden and Sanders will get the lion’s share, with each winning an average of about 30 percent of the statewide vote. Bloomberg is in third with a projected vote share of 19 percent, while Sen. Elizabeth Warren is in fourth at 13 percent.
The overall delegate picture isn’t too different in Texas’s 31 state Senate districts which will award 149 pledged delegates. Only Sanders and Biden are projected to win any districts outright. But in many of Texas’s 31 districts, things are still competitive. Bloomberg’s average vote share puts him above the 15 percent mark in every district, and Warren is also forecasted to be above the delegate threshold in a handful of districts and very close to hitting it in other parts of the state, as you can see in the table below.
Biden and Sanders are battling for first in Texas Average forecasted vote share for the top four Democratic presidential candidates in Texas state Senate districts, according to the FiveThirtyEight model as of 5 p.m. on March 2 District Biden Sanders Bloomberg Warren SD-01 34% 26% 21% 11% SD-02 32 28 20 12 SD-03 33 26 21 12 SD-04 31 28 20 13 SD-05 28 31 19 14 SD-06 33 27 20 12 SD-07 29 30 19 14 SD-08 25 32 17 16 SD-09 29 30 19 14 SD-10 32 28 20 13 SD-11 29 30 19 14 SD-12 26 32 18 15 SD-13 38 24 20 10 SD-14 24 33 17 16 SD-15 33 27 19 12 SD-16 27 31 18 15 SD-17 27 31 18 15 SD-18 30 29 19 13 SD-19 31 28 19 13 SD-20 31 29 19 13 SD-21 31 29 19 13 SD-22 31 28 20 12 SD-23 38 23 20 10 SD-24 30 29 20 13 SD-25 25 32 18 16 SD-26 30 29 19 14 SD-27 31 29 19 13 SD-28 29 29 20 13 SD-29 30 30 19 14 SD-30 28 30 20 14 SD-31 29 29 20 13 State 30 29 19 13 Texas Democrats use the state’s 31 Senate districts to allocate district-level pledged delegates to the national convention.
A lot of the variation we see in candidates’ individual performance boils down to the diversity of Texas’s districts. In 2016, the primary electorate was 43 percent white, 32 percent Latino and 19 percent black, according to the exit poll, making it one of the most racially and ethnically diverse electorates in the country. And of the 2020 candidates, Biden has the widest range in outcomes, performing best in districts that have larger shares of black voters. He is projected to get 38 percent of the vote, for instance, in the 13th Senate District (in Houston) and 23rd Senate District (in Dallas), both of which are roughly 40 percent African American. But in districts with large shares of college-educated voters and white voters, like the 14th Senate District (mostly Austin), he’s projected to get only 24 percent of the vote. Bloomberg’s performance in individual districts largely mirrors Biden’s, though he is projected to earn a much lower voter share overall, between 17 and 21 percent.
Sanders’s best districts, on the other hand, tend to be whiter ones with higher incomes and more college-educated voters. Among these are the 8th and 12th Senate districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, as well as the 14th District, which has the most delegates of any Texas seat (10). But Sanders’s strength isn’t concentrated in any one district; his projected support is relatively consistent across Texas, ranging from 23 percent to 33 percent. Additionally, he polls well among Hispanic voters, which is clearly a plus for him in Texas, though at the district level there isn’t a strong relationship between his expected vote share and the Latino share of the population.
As for Warren, her disproportionate support from college-educated voters nationwide also shows up on the Texas map. In each of the six seats where she’s forecasted at or above 15 percent, 40 percent or more of the adult population has at least a four-year college degree, well above the statewide share, which is around 30 percent. Her best marks come in the 8th and 14th Senate districts, which are also some of Sanders’s strongest areas. With Buttigieg’s departure, Warren is in a better position to reach 15 percent in many parts of the state and maybe even better positioned statewide. And Amy Klobuchar dropping out of the race on Monday could boost both Sanders and Warren, as the Minnesota senator’s strongest seats were projected to be in some of the same affluent, highly educated places where Sanders and Warren are expected to perform best.
On Tuesday night, watch how well Biden and Bloomberg are doing relative to one another. Similar to states like North Carolina and Virginia, the projected vote shares for Biden and Bloomberg in Texas tend to be stronger — and weaker — in the same sorts of districts. So if Biden gets a notable bounce out of South Carolina, he might be able to keep the former mayor below the 15 percent mark in some districts. But if Bloomberg holds up, that could stop Biden from being competitive in Texas, which would give Sanders an edge.
Similarly, if Warren underperforms expectations — or if any early votes cast for Klobuchar help fragment the vote in Warren’s stronger districts — that could mean she would mostly fall short of the delegate threshold, which would be a boon to Sanders, whose best districts are on the same turf. Should Warren outperform expectations, however, that could hold down Sanders’s expected delegate haul.
The good news for Sanders is that his consistent support makes him a sure bet to clear the delegate threshold everywhere. And if Warren underperforms her forecast, that might help Sanders win Texas, which would give him a very big feather in his primary cap — he’s strongly favored to win California, but Texas is much more up in the air. But Texas has the second-most delegates at stake tomorrow, so if he’s able to pull victory off here, he might be able to stall the anti-Sanders momentum that Biden is hoping to build coming out of South Carolina.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Election Update: Klobuchar’s Exit Boosts The Odds No One Will Win A Delegate Majority

On Monday afternoon , Sen. Amy Klobuchar suspended her campaign for president , and she will now endorse former Vice President Joe Biden at a rally tonight .
It ’ s hard to miss that this came on the heels of former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg dropping out .
( Buttigieg , too , is planning to endorse Biden . )
It sure seems like the establishment wing of the Democratic Party is trying to consolidate its vote and stop Sen. Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination .
And according to the latest FiveThirtyEight forecast , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount of progress toward that goal — with a big asterisk .
Sanders now has a 1 in 6 ( 17 percent ) chance of winning a majority of pledged delegates in our forecast ; that ’ s a tad lower than the 1 in 5 ( 20 percent ) chance he had immediately before Klobuchar dropped out .
But Biden ’ s chances didn ’ t go up ; he was at 1 in 7 ( 15 percent ) before and is at 1 in 7 ( 14 percent ) now .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidate receives a majority is only getting more and more likely : It ’ s up to a 7 in 10 ( 69 percent ) chance after being at 2 in 3 ( 65 percent ) at midday .
And Sanders is still — barely — the candidate most likely to have a plurality of delegates when voting is over , which could be important in the event no one wins a majority .
( There are lots of scenarios where the plurality winner is nominated without a contested convention . )
Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance ( 54 percent ) of a delegate plurality , while Biden has just under a 1 in 2 chance ( 45 percent ) .
The near-term impact of Klobuchar ’ s withdrawal could be small as well .
She wasn ’ t polling high enough in most Super Tuesday states for her former voters to meaningfully affect Sanders ’ s or Biden ’ s chances of winning them .
However , her exit does make it slightly more likely that candidates like Biden , Sen. Elizabeth Warren or former New York City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the threshold needed to win delegates ) in some states and districts .
Their average forecasted national delegate hauls edged up accordingly ; Biden ’ s went up by 29 , Bloomberg ’ s by 26 and Warren ’ s by 21 .
( Sanders ’ s went down by 29 . )
But Klobuchar ’ s withdrawal does change the shape of the race in one Super Tuesday locale : her home state of Minnesota , where she was previously a slight favorite to beat Sanders .
Now , however , our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 66 percent ) chance of carrying the Gopher State .
Funnily enough , Klobuchar retains a 1 in 4 ( 23 percent ) chance of winning the state ; she is still on the ballot , after all , and early voting has been taking place there for weeks .
But Klobuchar ’ s departure doesn ’ t hand as many delegates to Sanders in Minnesota as you might think .
Before she dropped out , our model expected Sanders to win an average of 27 delegates in Minnesota ; now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average of 30 .
In terms of Minnesota delegates , Biden and Warren appear to be the bigger beneficiaries of Klobuchar ’ s exit ; Biden gained an average of 6.5 delegates and Warren gained an average of 4.8 .
What happens in Minnesota tomorrow now will certainly be worth watching .
Indeed , Klobuchar ’ s endorsement of Biden doesn ’ t mean all of her voters will flock to the former vice president en masse .
According to two polls conducted last week ( by Morning Consult and SurveyUSA ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 16 or 17 percent of Klobuchar supporters — about the same number who had Warren or Bloomberg as their backup .
( Buttigieg was actually their top second choice in both polls . )
Our model reassigns a dropout ’ s supporters to other candidates based on which remaining candidates have the closest proximity scores to the dropout along axes measuring factors such as ideology , outsider-insider status and highbrow-middlebrow positioning .
The model thinks Biden and Bloomberg are the closest fits for Klobuchar supporters , followed by Warren and finally Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls and our model might be underestimating the amount of Klobuchar ’ s support that will go to Biden .
Klobuchar ’ s endorsement probably will mean something to some of her former supporters .
For that matter , Buttigieg ’ s endorsement could also move his former supporters to Biden in ways we aren ’ t yet factoring in .
And both of their dropouts come at a time when anti-Sanders factions are sending pretty clear signals that like-minded voters should coalesce around Biden .
Klobuchar and Buttigieg aren ’ t the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the last few days ; multiple party bigwigs , such as former Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz , have done so as well .
The cumulative effects of these endorsements could form an aura of inevitability around Biden .
It ’ s not hard to see how our model might be underestimating Biden ’ s chances on Super Tuesday and beyond .
In fact , the race is moving so fast that the entire forecast is pretty uncertain .
Not only do we not have a lot of polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from winning South Carolina ( which somehow was only two days ago ) , but we literally have zero polls of a Buttigieg- and Klobuchar-less race .
We can make ( and are making ) educated guesses about what will happen , but we could be in for some big surprises tomorrow night .

On Monday afternoon, Sen. Amy Klobuchar suspended her campaign for president, and she will now endorse former Vice President Joe Biden at a rally tonight. It’s hard to miss that this came on the heels of former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg dropping out. (Buttigieg, too, is planning to endorse Biden.) It sure seems like the establishment wing of the Democratic Party is trying to consolidate its vote and stop Sen. Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination.
And according to the latest FiveThirtyEight forecast, Klobuchar’s decision makes a small amount of progress toward that goal — with a big asterisk. Sanders now has a 1 in 6 (17 percent) chance of winning a majority of pledged delegates in our forecast; that’s a tad lower than the 1 in 5 (20 percent) chance he had immediately before Klobuchar dropped out. But Biden’s chances didn’t go up; he was at 1 in 7 (15 percent) before and is at 1 in 7 (14 percent) now.
Instead, the scenario in which no candidate receives a majority is only getting more and more likely: It’s up to a 7 in 10 (69 percent) chance after being at 2 in 3 (65 percent) at midday. And Sanders is still — barely — the candidate most likely to have a plurality of delegates when voting is over, which could be important in the event no one wins a majority. (There are lots of scenarios where the plurality winner is nominated without a contested convention.) Sanders has just over a 1 in 2 chance (54 percent) of a delegate plurality, while Biden has just under a 1 in 2 chance (45 percent).
The near-term impact of Klobuchar’s withdrawal could be small as well. She wasn’t polling high enough in most Super Tuesday states for her former voters to meaningfully affect Sanders’s or Biden’s chances of winning them. However, her exit does make it slightly more likely that candidates like Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren or former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg exceed 15 percent (the threshold needed to win delegates) in some states and districts. Their average forecasted national delegate hauls edged up accordingly; Biden’s went up by 29, Bloomberg’s by 26 and Warren’s by 21. (Sanders’s went down by 29.)
But Klobuchar’s withdrawal does change the shape of the race in one Super Tuesday locale: her home state of Minnesota, where she was previously a slight favorite to beat Sanders. Now, however, our forecast gives Sanders a 2 in 3 (66 percent) chance of carrying the Gopher State. Funnily enough, Klobuchar retains a 1 in 4 (23 percent) chance of winning the state; she is still on the ballot, after all, and early voting has been taking place there for weeks. But Klobuchar’s departure doesn’t hand as many delegates to Sanders in Minnesota as you might think. Before she dropped out, our model expected Sanders to win an average of 27 delegates in Minnesota; now, we are forecasting him to win an average of 30. In terms of Minnesota delegates, Biden and Warren appear to be the bigger beneficiaries of Klobuchar’s exit; Biden gained an average of 6.5 delegates and Warren gained an average of 4.8. What happens in Minnesota tomorrow now will certainly be worth watching.
Indeed, Klobuchar’s endorsement of Biden doesn’t mean all of her voters will flock to the former vice president en masse. According to two polls conducted last week (by Morning Consult and SurveyUSA), Biden was the second choice of only about 16 or 17 percent of Klobuchar supporters — about the same number who had Warren or Bloomberg as their backup. (Buttigieg was actually their top second choice in both polls.) Our model reassigns a dropout’s supporters to other candidates based on which remaining candidates have the closest proximity scores to the dropout along axes measuring factors such as ideology, outsider-insider status and highbrow-middlebrow positioning. The model thinks Biden and Bloomberg are the closest fits for Klobuchar supporters, followed by Warren and finally Sanders.
On the other hand, earlier polls and our model might be underestimating the amount of Klobuchar’s support that will go to Biden. Klobuchar’s endorsement probably will mean something to some of her former supporters. For that matter, Buttigieg’s endorsement could also move his former supporters to Biden in ways we aren’t yet factoring in. And both of their dropouts come at a time when anti-Sanders factions are sending pretty clear signals that like-minded voters should coalesce around Biden. Klobuchar and Buttigieg aren’t the only major Democratic figures to endorse Biden in the last few days; multiple party bigwigs, such as former Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, have done so as well. The cumulative effects of these endorsements could form an aura of inevitability around Biden.
It’s not hard to see how our model might be underestimating Biden’s chances on Super Tuesday and beyond. In fact, the race is moving so fast that the entire forecast is pretty uncertain. Not only do we not have a lot of polls measuring what kind of bounce Biden got from winning South Carolina (which somehow was only two days ago), but we literally have zero polls of a Buttigieg- and Klobuchar-less race. We can make (and are making) educated guesses about what will happen, but we could be in for some big surprises tomorrow night.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-02--Politics Podcast: What’s At Stake On Super Tuesday

The biggest day of the primary cycle is upon us !
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , @ @ @ @ @ at stake as 14 states , American Samoa and Democrats Abroad cast their ballots on @ @ @ @ @ debate how former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg ’ s exit from @ @ @ @ @ results .
The team recorded the podcast before the news broke that Sen. Amy Klobuchar @ @ @ @ @ planned to endorse former Vice President Joe Biden .
You can listen to the episode @ @ @ @ @ ” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the @ @ @ @ @ podcast platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
@ @ @ @ @ Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating @ @ @ @ @ Have a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” @ @ @ @ @ email , on Twitter or in the comments .

The biggest day of the primary cycle is upon us! In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew previews what is at stake as 14 states, American Samoa and Democrats Abroad cast their ballots on Super Tuesday. They also debate how former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s exit from the race could shape the results. The team recorded the podcast before the news broke that Sen. Amy Klobuchar would also drop out and planned to endorse former Vice President Joe Biden.
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.