fivethirtyeight--2020-03-01--What Biden’s Big South Carolina Win Might Mean For Sanders

Saturday was Joe Biden ’ s first-ever win in a presidential primary or caucus .
It was an awfully big one : Biden won South Carolina by nearly 30 percentage points over Bernie Sanders .
And it made for one heck of a comeback : Biden ’ s lead over Sanders had fallen to as little as 2 to 3 percentage points in our South Carolina polling average in the immediate aftermath of New Hampshire .
What explains the big swing back to Biden in South Carolina ?
And what does it mean for the rest of the race — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had entered this weekend as the frontrunner ?
Here are five possible explanations — ranging from the most benign for Sanders to the most troubling for his campaign .
Hypothesis No .
1 : This was a “ dead cat bounce ” for Biden because voters were sympathetic to him in one of his best states .
It may have been a one-off occurrence .
Remember Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire in 2008 ?
Left for dead by the national media after she lost Iowa to Barack Obama in 2008 , she overcame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win in the Granite State .
It didn ’ t do her much good , though ; she won Nevada the next week but badly lost South Carolina two weeks later , eventually losing the nomination to Obama .
There are some similarities to Biden ’ s position in South Carolina .
Like Clinton before New Hampshire , the media all but counted him out of the running after Iowa .
Like Clinton in New Hampshire , Biden had a strong debate a few days before the primary along with some emotional moments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of the reporting from South Carolina suggests that certain South Carolina voters — especially older whites and African-Americans — felt deep loyalty toward Biden and wanted to keep him in the running .
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true : Low to moderate .
If this were truly just a one-off sympathy bounce , then Sanders can live with it .
Sure , Bernie missed an opportunity to put the race away with a win — or perhaps even a close second — in South Carolina .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you without creating a little bit of friction .
But if voters in other Super Tuesday states feel the same way that South Carolinians did , the sympathetic moment for Biden may not be over yet .
Hypothesis No .
2 : The disparate results so far are simply reflective of the geographic and demographic strengths and weaknesses of the candidates .
The notion of “ momentum ” is mostly a mirage .
If this is the case , you could wind up with a very regionally-driven primary , with Biden doing well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well everywhere else .
This is more or less what our model expects to happen , for what it ’ s worth ; it now has Biden favored in every Southern Super Tuesday state except Texas , and he ’ s an underdog everywhere outside of the South .
The counter to this : Biden clearly did much better in South Carolina counties and precincts that weren ’ t as emblematic of his base than he had in those kinds of districts in other states .
The counter to the counter : Geographic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that demographics alone miss .
So his strong performance in certain parts of South Carolina may bode well for how he ’ ll do in Alabama or North Carolina or Georgia .
It may not say much about his performance in Michigan or California , however .
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true : Low to moderate .
Sanders led Biden by about 12 points in national polls heading into South Carolina .
Moreover , our model — which uses demographics in its forecast — has Sanders ahead .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and regions , Sanders ’ s coalition looks as though it ’ s slightly bigger and broader overall — although a post-South Carolina bounce for Biden or swoon for Sanders could eat into that advantage .
Hypothesis No .
3 : The party is finally getting behind Biden .
It may or may not work .
Almost half of South Carolina primary voters said that Rep. James Clyburn ’ s endorsement of Biden was a big factor in their decision .
There are some questions about the cause and effect : It may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the endorsement and said it was a major factor , even though they were planning to vote for Biden already .
Still , Biden did get a big , late surge in the polls following the debate and the endorsement .
Clyburn is also one of the few party bigwigs to have endorsed a candidate .
While lots of U.S. representatives , mayors , lieutenant governors and so on have endorsed , not many senators , governors or party leaders have .
That leaves open the possibility there could be a surge of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He ’ s already scored several major endorsements in Virginia , for instance , which is a Super Tuesday state .
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true : Moderate .
The “ Party Decides ” view of the race treats endorsements and other cues from party leaders as being highly predictive and important .
And a surge of endorsements for Biden seems reasonably likely .
This could reverse a longstanding period of seeming indifference by party leaders toward Biden as they hoped for Michael Bloomberg or some other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not clear how effective an endorsement surge would be , as few legislators command the respect in their states that Clyburn does .
Moreover , although we ’ re not going to cover it at length here , there ’ s plenty of room to question how empirically accurate the “ Party Decides ” is .
Meanwhile , endorsements aren ’ t necessarily what Biden needs ; an influx of cash would do him more good .
Hypothesis No .
4 : Voters are behaving tactically .
Biden was the only real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he may be the only real alternative going forward .
Tactical voting is something you hear a lot about in multi-party systems like the United Kingdom ’ s , where voters are trying to find the most viable candidate from a number of similar alternatives ( for example , from among the various parties that opposed Brexit ) .
The same dynamics potentially hold in multi-candidate presidential primaries , and we ’ ve already seen evidence of it .
In New Hampshire , voters flocked to Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away from Biden and Elizabeth Warren .
In South Carolina , tactical voting may have worked in Biden ’ s favor , instead .
Biden was fairly clearly the most viable alternative to Sanders , so voters for candidates like Tom Steyer and Buttigieg may have gravitated toward him in the closing days of the campaign .
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true : High .
First , if voters are actively looking for alternatives to Sanders — but just can ’ t settle on which one is best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news for him , and gives some credence to the “ lanes ” theory of the race in which the moderate vote could eventually consolidate behind one alternative to Sanders .
The South Carolina exit poll had Sanders ’ s favorability rating at just 51 percent , which is some of the stronger evidence for a ceiling on his support so far .
Moreover , Biden ’ s strong finish in South Carolina , along with improved debate performances , endorsements , and increasingly favorable media coverage , could make it clear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Sanders after all , possibly with some exceptions where there are home-state alternatives ( Klobuchar in Minnesota and Warren in Massachusetts ) .
If Biden picks up support from tactical voters who had previously backed candidates such as Bloomberg and Buttigieg in polls , that could lead to a larger-than-usual South Carolina bounce .
Hypothesis No .
5 : There has already been a national surge toward Biden that is not fully reflected in the polls .
It didn ’ t get much notice , but polling outside of South Carolina was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of last week , including polls that showed sharp improvements for him in states such as Florida and North Carolina .
He ’ s also gotten better results in some national polls lately — climbing back into the low 20s — along with other , not-so-great ones .
The data isn ’ t comprehensive enough to know for sure .
Between the dense cluster of events on the campaign trail ( primaries , debates , etc . )
and the different races that pollsters are surveying ( South Carolina , Super Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting sliced pretty thin .
But we do know that Biden made big improvements since the debate in South Carolina polling , the one state where we did have enough data to detect robust trendlines .
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true : High .
Suppose that Biden gained 5 or 6 percentage points across the board nationally and in Super Tuesday states as a result of this week ’ s debate ( or other recent factors such as voters ’ reaction to coronavirus ) , but it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t been enough polling .
If that ’ s the case , then Biden may already be in a considerably better position than current polling averages and models imply — and then he could get a further bounce from winning South Carolina on top of it .
This is a scary possibility for Sanders , and although there isn ’ t enough data to prove it , there also isn ’ t much that would rule it out .

Saturday was Joe Biden’s first-ever win in a presidential primary or caucus. It was an awfully big one: Biden won South Carolina by nearly 30 percentage points over Bernie Sanders. And it made for one heck of a comeback: Biden’s lead over Sanders had fallen to as little as 2 to 3 percentage points in our South Carolina polling average in the immediate aftermath of New Hampshire.
What explains the big swing back to Biden in South Carolina? And what does it mean for the rest of the race — and in particular for Sanders, who had entered this weekend as the frontrunner?
Here are five possible explanations — ranging from the most benign for Sanders to the most troubling for his campaign.
Hypothesis No. 1: This was a “dead cat bounce” for Biden because voters were sympathetic to him in one of his best states. It may have been a one-off occurrence.
Remember Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire in 2008? Left for dead by the national media after she lost Iowa to Barack Obama in 2008, she overcame a big polling deficit for an upset win in the Granite State. It didn’t do her much good, though; she won Nevada the next week but badly lost South Carolina two weeks later, eventually losing the nomination to Obama.
There are some similarities to Biden’s position in South Carolina. Like Clinton before New Hampshire, the media all but counted him out of the running after Iowa. Like Clinton in New Hampshire, Biden had a strong debate a few days before the primary along with some emotional moments on the campaign trail. Furthermore, some of the reporting from South Carolina suggests that certain South Carolina voters — especially older whites and African-Americans — felt deep loyalty toward Biden and wanted to keep him in the running.
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true: Low to moderate. If this were truly just a one-off sympathy bounce, then Sanders can live with it. Sure, Bernie missed an opportunity to put the race away with a win — or perhaps even a close second — in South Carolina. But voters rarely just hand the nomination to you without creating a little bit of friction. But if voters in other Super Tuesday states feel the same way that South Carolinians did, the sympathetic moment for Biden may not be over yet.
Hypothesis No. 2: The disparate results so far are simply reflective of the geographic and demographic strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. The notion of “momentum” is mostly a mirage.
If this is the case, you could wind up with a very regionally-driven primary, with Biden doing well in the South but perhaps not so well everywhere else. This is more or less what our model expects to happen, for what it’s worth; it now has Biden favored in every Southern Super Tuesday state except Texas, and he’s an underdog everywhere outside of the South.
The counter to this: Biden clearly did much better in South Carolina counties and precincts that weren’t as emblematic of his base than he had in those kinds of districts in other states. The counter to the counter: Geographic factors pick up a lot of information that demographics alone miss. So his strong performance in certain parts of South Carolina may bode well for how he’ll do in Alabama or North Carolina or Georgia. It may not say much about his performance in Michigan or California, however.
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true: Low to moderate. Sanders led Biden by about 12 points in national polls heading into South Carolina. Moreover, our model — which uses demographics in its forecast — has Sanders ahead. So although Biden has some strong groups and regions, Sanders’s coalition looks as though it’s slightly bigger and broader overall — although a post-South Carolina bounce for Biden or swoon for Sanders could eat into that advantage.
Hypothesis No. 3: The party is finally getting behind Biden. It may or may not work.
Almost half of South Carolina primary voters said that Rep. James Clyburn’s endorsement of Biden was a big factor in their decision. There are some questions about the cause and effect: It may be that Biden voters were pleased with the endorsement and said it was a major factor, even though they were planning to vote for Biden already. Still, Biden did get a big, late surge in the polls following the debate and the endorsement.
Clyburn is also one of the few party bigwigs to have endorsed a candidate. While lots of U.S. representatives, mayors, lieutenant governors and so on have endorsed, not many senators, governors or party leaders have. That leaves open the possibility there could be a surge of endorsements for Biden in the coming days. He’s already scored several major endorsements in Virginia, for instance, which is a Super Tuesday state.
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true: Moderate. The “Party Decides” view of the race treats endorsements and other cues from party leaders as being highly predictive and important. And a surge of endorsements for Biden seems reasonably likely. This could reverse a longstanding period of seeming indifference by party leaders toward Biden as they hoped for Michael Bloomberg or some other alternative to emerge.
But it’s not clear how effective an endorsement surge would be, as few legislators command the respect in their states that Clyburn does. Moreover, although we’re not going to cover it at length here, there’s plenty of room to question how empirically accurate the “Party Decides” is. Meanwhile, endorsements aren’t necessarily what Biden needs; an influx of cash would do him more good.
Hypothesis No. 4: Voters are behaving tactically. Biden was the only real alternative to Sanders in South Carolina, and he may be the only real alternative going forward.
Tactical voting is something you hear a lot about in multi-party systems like the United Kingdom’s, where voters are trying to find the most viable candidate from a number of similar alternatives (for example, from among the various parties that opposed Brexit). The same dynamics potentially hold in multi-candidate presidential primaries, and we’ve already seen evidence of it. In New Hampshire, voters flocked to Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar in the closing days of the campaign and away from Biden and Elizabeth Warren. In South Carolina, tactical voting may have worked in Biden’s favor, instead. Biden was fairly clearly the most viable alternative to Sanders, so voters for candidates like Tom Steyer and Buttigieg may have gravitated toward him in the closing days of the campaign.
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true: High. First, if voters are actively looking for alternatives to Sanders — but just can’t settle on which one is best — that can’t be good news for him, and gives some credence to the “lanes” theory of the race in which the moderate vote could eventually consolidate behind one alternative to Sanders. The South Carolina exit poll had Sanders’s favorability rating at just 51 percent, which is some of the stronger evidence for a ceiling on his support so far.
Moreover, Biden’s strong finish in South Carolina, along with improved debate performances, endorsements, and increasingly favorable media coverage, could make it clear to voters that Biden is the best alternative to Sanders after all, possibly with some exceptions where there are home-state alternatives (Klobuchar in Minnesota and Warren in Massachusetts). If Biden picks up support from tactical voters who had previously backed candidates such as Bloomberg and Buttigieg in polls, that could lead to a larger-than-usual South Carolina bounce.
Hypothesis No. 5: There has already been a national surge toward Biden that is not fully reflected in the polls.
It didn’t get much notice, but polling outside of South Carolina was also pretty favorable to Biden toward the end of last week, including polls that showed sharp improvements for him in states such as Florida and North Carolina. He’s also gotten better results in some national polls lately — climbing back into the low 20s — along with other, not-so-great ones.
The data isn’t comprehensive enough to know for sure. Between the dense cluster of events on the campaign trail (primaries, debates, etc.) and the different races that pollsters are surveying (South Carolina, Super Tuesday, national polls), everything is getting sliced pretty thin. But we do know that Biden made big improvements since the debate in South Carolina polling, the one state where we did have enough data to detect robust trendlines.
Degree of concern for Sanders if this hypothesis is true: High. Suppose that Biden gained 5 or 6 percentage points across the board nationally and in Super Tuesday states as a result of this week’s debate (or other recent factors such as voters’ reaction to coronavirus), but it’s gone largely undetected because there hasn’t been enough polling. If that’s the case, then Biden may already be in a considerably better position than current polling averages and models imply — and then he could get a further bounce from winning South Carolina on top of it. This is a scary possibility for Sanders, and although there isn’t enough data to prove it, there also isn’t much that would rule it out.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-29--What Went Down At The South Carolina Primary

Search
No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-29--Black Churches Open Their Doors To Candidates, But What Do They Get In Return?

On Wednesday , most of the Democratic candidates spoke at a National Action Network Ministers ’ Breakfast in South Carolina .
The event was held at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church , a predominantly black church in North Charleston .
FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast host and reporter Galen Druke was there to speak with the attendees about the 2020 primary race .
Mount Moriah ’ s Senior Pastor , Rev .
Byron Benton , sat down with Galen in the church ’ s sanctuary before the event .
He talked about the changes he ’ d like the next president to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faith plays a role in his politics .
He also addressed the lingering effects on his congregation of the 2015 white nationalist terrorist attack at Mother Emanuel , nearby in Charleston .
Later , Galen spoke with attendees at the breakfast .
Pamala Rumph , a supporter of former Vice President Joe Biden , said that younger members of her church aren ’ t taking the primary race seriously .
Felisha Woodberry and her daughter , Quati Woodberry-Gadson , support Sen. Bernie Sanders .
When asked about Biden appealing to black voters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relying too much on his past with the Obama administration , and not doing enough to show that he is working for black communities today .
For more of FiveThirtyEight ’ s coverage of the primary in South Carolina , subscribe to our channel on YouTube .

Black Churches Open Their Doors To Candidates, But What Do They Get In Return?
On Wednesday, most of the Democratic candidates spoke at a National Action Network Ministers’ Breakfast in South Carolina. The event was held at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church, a predominantly black church in North Charleston. FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast host and reporter Galen Druke was there to speak with the attendees about the 2020 primary race.
Mount Moriah’s Senior Pastor, Rev. Byron Benton, sat down with Galen in the church’s sanctuary before the event. He talked about the changes he’d like the next president to make in his community, and how faith plays a role in his politics. He also addressed the lingering effects on his congregation of the 2015 white nationalist terrorist attack at Mother Emanuel, nearby in Charleston.
Black churches are a campaign stop. What do they get in return?
Later, Galen spoke with attendees at the breakfast. Pamala Rumph, a supporter of former Vice President Joe Biden, said that younger members of her church aren’t taking the primary race seriously.
South Carolina Biden supporter wants him to stop talking about Obama
Felisha Woodberry and her daughter, Quati Woodberry-Gadson, support Sen. Bernie Sanders. When asked about Biden appealing to black voters in the state, she said he is relying too much on his past with the Obama administration, and not doing enough to show that he is working for black communities today.
South Carolina Sanders supporter on Joe Bidenâs appeal to black voters
For more of FiveThirtyEight’s coverage of the primary in South Carolina, subscribe to our channel on YouTube.


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-29--What Our Forecast Says About The South Carolina Primary At The District Level

South Carolina is the most populous state yet to vote in the Democratic primary by far .
It is worth 54 pledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention ( Iowa , the next-most delegate-rich early state , was worth 41 ) .
And like in the first three states to vote , a majority ( 35 ) of those delegates are awarded based on the results in each South Carolina congressional district ; the statewide results only affect the allocation of 19 delegates .
This means South Carolina has the most congressional districts ( seven ) of any state to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday coming up , that ’ s just the tip of the iceberg .
As much as I would like to , I don ’ t have time to take you on a 53-district tour of California between now and Tuesday , so we ’ re going to take a more sweeping approach to our state previews going forward .
Instead of describing the characteristics of each district , we ’ ll direct your attention to a few key districts and explain why we ’ re watching them .
But don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know what our primary forecast says in each district .
For example , here is our average forecast for each candidate ’ s vote share across South Carolina as of 7 a.m. Eastern on Feb. 29 , when we froze the forecast .
Just as former Vice President Joe Biden has opened up a sizable statewide lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders this week , he now has comfortable leads in all seven districts and should snag a majority of their delegates .
But the size of those leads ranges from 11 points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are stronger in some districts than others as well .
The center of the action in South Carolina is the 6th Congressional District , which reaches into the urban cores of Columbia and Charleston ; it is worth eight pledged delegates , the most of any South Carolina district .
It ’ s little surprise , then , that candidates are investing significant field resources into it .
Three of Biden ’ s seven South Carolina field offices are located here , as are two of Tom Steyer ’ s three .
Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here ( three offices ) , though it ’ s a smaller share of her overall operation ( 10 offices statewide ) .
We are forecasting Biden to get 48 percent of the vote here , on average — well above his statewide performance of 40 percent .
We are also forecasting Steyer ( 16 percent ) to do well enough to almost tie Sanders ( 17 percent ) in the district .
Our forecast predicts Biden will win 5.4 pledged delegates , on average , while Sanders will win 1.3 and Steyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s relative strength in the district can largely be attributed to their strength with black voters , who make up 57 percent of the district ’ s population .
( No other South Carolina district has a black population larger than 29 percent . )
House Majority Whip James Clyburn also represents this district in Congress , and the power broker has endorsed Biden , which could carry outsized weight with his constituents .
Candidates like former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they haven ’ t made many inroads with black voters .
And although Sanders performs respectably among African Americans in polls , he is even stronger with white voters , so he underperforms his statewide forecast ( 21 percent ) in this majority-black district .
The 1st Congressional District , which runs along much of the South Carolina coast and includes the remainder of the Charleston area , is also a valuable prize ( worth six pledged delegates ) .
It is the most college-educated and wealthiest district in South Carolina , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump era — six years after Mitt Romney carried it by 18 points , it elected a Democratic congressman in 2018 .
Since black voters make up a relatively small part of the Democratic electorate here , it ’ s forecasted to be Biden ’ s worst district , although he still wins it over Sanders , 34 percent to 23 percent , on average .
In 2016 , Sanders got 34 percent of the vote in the South Carolina 1st , which actually made it one of his best districts in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Accordingly , we ’ re also forecasting it to be one of his best areas in 2020 .
We anticipate that the 1st District will be Buttigieg ’ s and Klobuchar ’ s best district , too , because so many of their supporters are college-educated white voters .
If Buttigieg wins any delegates out of South Carolina , they will likely be from here — but we currently expect both Buttigieg and Klobuchar to fall below the 15-percent threshold for getting delegates .
The results in the 4th Congressional District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a curiosity — worth four pledged delegates , it ’ s not exactly pivotal to the Democratic race .
In 2016 , this upstate district was Sanders ’ s best by a hair , and our model thinks it will be again , giving him 24 percent of the vote here , on average .
We ’ re also forecasting this to be Warren ’ s best district and Steyer ’ s worst .
Demographically , the 4th District stands out for being South Carolina ’ s most urban district ( centering on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and for having one of the state ’ s smallest black populations .
It is also home to many colleges and universities , especially in Spartanburg ; Sanders even held a rally at one on Thursday night .
The state ’ s other districts are less noteworthy .
Reliably Republican in general elections , they each send five or fewer pledged delegates to the DNC .
Take the 3rd Congressional District , worth a scant three pledged delegates — none of the top six candidates has opened a single field office there .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty close to their statewide vote shares in these districts ; for instance , the 2nd Congressional District , being a smidge more affluent and college-educated than the state average , is relatively good for Buttigieg and Sanders and relatively bad for Biden and Steyer , but the differences aren ’ t worth writing home about .
In case you ’ re wondering , our model thinks the 5th Congressional District and the 7th Congressional District will be the best bellwethers for the state as a whole , so if you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , each candidate ’ s vote share there should be pretty close to his or her statewide number .
South Carolina Could Be Just One More Step Toward A Contested Convention

South Carolina is the most populous state yet to vote in the Democratic primary by far. It is worth 54 pledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention (Iowa, the next-most delegate-rich early state, was worth 41). And like in the first three states to vote, a majority (35) of those delegates are awarded based on the results in each South Carolina congressional district; the statewide results only affect the allocation of 19 delegates.
This means South Carolina has the most congressional districts (seven) of any state to vote thus far — but with Super Tuesday coming up, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. As much as I would like to, I don’t have time to take you on a 53-district tour of California between now and Tuesday, so we’re going to take a more sweeping approach to our state previews going forward. Instead of describing the characteristics of each district, we’ll direct your attention to a few key districts and explain why we’re watching them. But don’t worry — we’ll still let you know what our primary forecast says in each district. For example, here is our average forecast for each candidate’s vote share across South Carolina as of 7 a.m. Eastern on Feb. 29, when we froze the forecast.
Biden dominates across South Carolina Average forecasted vote share for the top six Democratic presidential candidates in South Carolina congressional districts, according to the FiveThirtyEight model as of 7 a.m. on Feb. 29 District Biden Sanders Steyer Buttigieg Warren Klobuchar SC-01 34% 23% 11% 12% 9% 6% SC-02 37 22 12 10 8 5 SC-03 37 21 14 10 8 5 SC-04 38 24 11 9 9 5 SC-05 42 21 12 9 8 4 SC-06 48 17 16 6 5 3 SC-07 40 20 15 9 7 5 State 40 21 13 9 8 5
Just as former Vice President Joe Biden has opened up a sizable statewide lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders this week, he now has comfortable leads in all seven districts and should snag a majority of their delegates. But the size of those leads ranges from 11 points to 32 points — and other candidates are stronger in some districts than others as well.
The center of the action in South Carolina is the 6th Congressional District, which reaches into the urban cores of Columbia and Charleston; it is worth eight pledged delegates, the most of any South Carolina district. It’s little surprise, then, that candidates are investing significant field resources into it. Three of Biden’s seven South Carolina field offices are located here, as are two of Tom Steyer’s three. Sen. Elizabeth Warren also has a strong presence here (three offices), though it’s a smaller share of her overall operation (10 offices statewide).
We are forecasting Biden to get 48 percent of the vote here, on average — well above his statewide performance of 40 percent. We are also forecasting Steyer (16 percent) to do well enough to almost tie Sanders (17 percent) in the district. Our forecast predicts Biden will win 5.4 pledged delegates, on average, while Sanders will win 1.3 and Steyer 1.2.
Biden’s and Steyer’s relative strength in the district can largely be attributed to their strength with black voters, who make up 57 percent of the district’s population. (No other South Carolina district has a black population larger than 29 percent.) House Majority Whip James Clyburn also represents this district in Congress, and the power broker has endorsed Biden, which could carry outsized weight with his constituents. Candidates like former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar aren’t expected to do well here, as they haven’t made many inroads with black voters. And although Sanders performs respectably among African Americans in polls, he is even stronger with white voters, so he underperforms his statewide forecast (21 percent) in this majority-black district.
The 1st Congressional District, which runs along much of the South Carolina coast and includes the remainder of the Charleston area, is also a valuable prize (worth six pledged delegates). It is the most college-educated and wealthiest district in South Carolina, which has helped make it competitive in the Trump era — six years after Mitt Romney carried it by 18 points, it elected a Democratic congressman in 2018. Since black voters make up a relatively small part of the Democratic electorate here, it’s forecasted to be Biden’s worst district, although he still wins it over Sanders, 34 percent to 23 percent, on average.
In 2016, Sanders got 34 percent of the vote in the South Carolina 1st, which actually made it one of his best districts in the state (he got 26 percent overall). Accordingly, we’re also forecasting it to be one of his best areas in 2020. We anticipate that the 1st District will be Buttigieg’s and Klobuchar’s best district, too, because so many of their supporters are college-educated white voters. If Buttigieg wins any delegates out of South Carolina, they will likely be from here — but we currently expect both Buttigieg and Klobuchar to fall below the 15-percent threshold for getting delegates.
The results in the 4th Congressional District may be interesting, if only as a curiosity — worth four pledged delegates, it’s not exactly pivotal to the Democratic race. In 2016, this upstate district was Sanders’s best by a hair, and our model thinks it will be again, giving him 24 percent of the vote here, on average. We’re also forecasting this to be Warren’s best district and Steyer’s worst. Demographically, the 4th District stands out for being South Carolina’s most urban district (centering on the cities of Greenville and Spartanburg) and for having one of the state’s smallest black populations. It is also home to many colleges and universities, especially in Spartanburg; Sanders even held a rally at one on Thursday night.
The state’s other districts are less noteworthy. Reliably Republican in general elections, they each send five or fewer pledged delegates to the DNC. Take the 3rd Congressional District, worth a scant three pledged delegates — none of the top six candidates has opened a single field office there. And each candidate is forecasted to come pretty close to their statewide vote shares in these districts; for instance, the 2nd Congressional District, being a smidge more affluent and college-educated than the state average, is relatively good for Buttigieg and Sanders and relatively bad for Biden and Steyer, but the differences aren’t worth writing home about. In case you’re wondering, our model thinks the 5th Congressional District and the 7th Congressional District will be the best bellwethers for the state as a whole, so if you’re following along with us on election night, each candidate’s vote share there should be pretty close to his or her statewide number.
Joshua Darr contributed research.
Whoâs ahead heading into South Carolina?


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-29--Our Final Forecast For The South Carolina Primary

With South Carolinians headed to the polls , it ’ s time to freeze FiveThirtyEight ’ s forecast and take a final look at the state of the Democratic nomination race before we get the results from the “ First in the South ” primary .
This means we won ’ t be adding any new information to the forecast or updating the candidates ’ odds until South Carolina ’ s results are available .
Luckily , South Carolina uses a primary , so we probably won ’ t have to wait days to get near-complete results .
First , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the candidates ’ overall chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates .
The single most likely outcome is actually that no candidate wins a majority by the time voting finishes on June 6 in the Virgin Islands .
There ’ s about a 1 in 2 ( 52 percent ) chance of that happening .
Among the candidates , Sen. Bernie Sanders has the best chance of winning a majority of pledged delegates , with around a 1 in 3 ( 32 percent ) shot .
After Sanders comes former Vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 1 in 6 ( 16 percent ) chance .
Rounding out the remaining contenders , former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a 1 in 100 ( 1 percent ) chance while both Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg have less than a 1 percent shot .
As for the South Carolina primary , our forecast views Biden as the heavy favorite , to the tune of a 29 in 30 ( 97 percent ) chance of claiming first place .
The only other candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is Sanders , who has a 1 in 30 ( 3 percent ) shot — a Sanders win is plausible , but it would register as one of the bigger polling upsets we ’ ve seen in a primary .
South Carolina is only the fourth contest in the 2020 Democratic primary , but Biden ’ s win probability there is the highest any candidate has had when we ’ ve frozen our forecast ahead of the early states , surpassing Sanders ’ s roughly 6 in 7 ( 85 percent ) chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s rise in South Carolina happened very quickly — a week ago , he had a 2 in 5 ( 40 percent ) chance of winning , slightly behind Sanders ’ s almost 1 in 2 ( 46 percent ) chance .
Then a plethora of post-Nevada polls came out showing Biden leading in the state by double-digit margins .
As for the last batch of South Carolina polls , they continued to give Biden a clear lead , though there was disagreement over just how big an advantage he has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if he does win — will likely matter , influencing how the media views his win and thus affecting how voters react to it heading into Super Tuesday .
That is , a narrow victory could look bad for Biden , especially now that he has a sizable lead in the polls , while a bigger margin could spark a “ comeback ” narrative .
So let ’ s take a look at those final South Carolina polls ( with the most recent surveys listed first ) : • The last poll we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which found Biden at 35 percent and Sanders at 24 percent .
The only other candidate in double digits was Steyer with 12 percent , while Buttigieg had 8 percent , Warren 7 percent and Klobuchar 4 percent .
But before we put a poll in our model , we adjust for a pollster ’ s house effects — how well or poorly a candidate usually does in the pollster ’ s poll — as well as the national trend .
In this case , AtlasIntel has been a little bearish on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden shifts up to 36 percent and Sanders slides to 22 percent after our adjustments .
• Republican pollster Trafalgar Group took a look at the Democratic race and found Biden leading Sanders by a nearly two-to-one margin , 44 percent to 23 percent .
Steyer and Buttigeg were far behind at 11 percent and 10 percent , while both Klobuchar and Warren had 6 percent .
Once we account for house effects and the national trend , the poll goes into the model with Biden up 19 points .
• On Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new poll that found Biden leading Sanders by 9 points , 34 percent to 25 percent .
The only other candidates in double digits were Steyer and Buttigieg , who both had 13 percent .
Data for Progress has been pretty accurate so far this cycle , so it ’ s notable it found a somewhat smaller lead for Biden than other pollsters .
But its polls have also tended to find better results for Sanders than some other pollsters — after adjusting for house effects and the national trend , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders by roughly 13 points .
We also got five new national surveys , which collectively may be reassuring to Sanders ’ s chances beyond South Carolina .
He led in each survey , though the polls showed varying degrees of competitiveness , as Sanders ’ s margin ranged from 6 to 13 points .
Here are the latest nationwide polls ( again with the newest surveys listed first ) : • On Friday night , Change Research published a national poll conducted Tuesday through Thursday showing Sanders way out in front with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( ! )
with 20 percent .
They were followed by Buttigieg at 14 percent , Biden 9 percent , Klobuchar 8 percent , Bloomberg 3 percent and Steyer 2 percent .
Obviously showing Warren in second makes this survey a bit of an outlier , but Change Research has tended to find better results for Sanders and worse results for Biden than other pollsters .
After it ’ s adjusted for house effects , Sanders is at 35 percent , Warren is at 16 percent , Biden is at 12 percent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is at 8 percent , Bloomberg is at 6 percent and Steyer is at 2 percent .
• On Friday afternoon , Morning Consult released a national poll conducted since Tuesday ’ s debate in South Carolina .
The survey found Sanders ahead of Biden by 12 points , 33 percent to 21 percent , though it showed Biden gaining the most ground after the debate .
The other candidates in double figures were Bloomberg at 17 percent , Warren at 11 percent and Buttigieg at 10 percent .
Once we adjust for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the model as Sanders 29 percent , Biden 17 percent and Bloomberg 15 percent , with the other candidates seeing little change .
• A Yahoo News/YouGov national poll on Friday found Sanders with about half as large a lead compared to the Morning Consult survey .
Sanders had 27 percent , Biden 21 percent , Warren 18 percent , Bloomberg 14 percent and Buttigieg 10 percent .
YouGov usually has very good numbers for Warren and worse ones for Bloomberg , so the model treats this as a 15 percent result for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Also on Friday , SurveyUSA/FairVote put out a survey that had Sanders up 7 points , 28 percent to 21 percent , over both Biden and Bloomberg , who tied for second .
The only other candidates close to 10 percent were Buttigieg and Warren , at 9 and 8 percent , respectively .
Because SurveyUSA tends to have better numbers for Biden and Bloomberg , their totals were docked slightly in our model , with Bloomberg getting 19 percent and Biden 18 percent .
An additional wrinkle with this poll was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and after whittling the field down to two candidates , Sanders led Biden 51 percent to 49 percent .
• Fox News released a survey on Thursday that found Sanders with a 13-point lead over Biden , 31 percent to 18 percent , with Bloomberg close behind at 16 percent .
Additionally , Buttigieg was at 12 percent and Warren at 10 percent .
After taking into account house effects , Biden went into the model with 16 percent , with small changes for everyone else .
Although Biden is in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these national polls suggest that he still has work to do if he wants to catch up to Sanders across the country .
Looking ahead to Super Tuesday , when many big states vote , the Biden campaign ’ s lack of investment in those states compared to other campaigns ( including Sanders ’ s ) could make building on a South Carolina win more challenging .
Biden may really need a huge win in South Carolina to overcome a resource disadvantage in the states that vote just three days later .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ odds-on favorite to win the Palmetto State .
There ’ s a chance he doesn ’ t finish first there , but it looks like the main thing to watch for will be his margin of victory .
The polls disagree about what we might expect on that front , and the scope of Biden ’ s expected win could affect how much it helps him going forward .
With all eyes on South Carolina tonight , make sure to join us on our live blog as we analyze the results as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Democratic nomination race going forward .
South Carolina Could Be Just One More Step Toward A Contested Convention

With South Carolinians headed to the polls, it’s time to freeze FiveThirtyEight’s forecast and take a final look at the state of the Democratic nomination race before we get the results from the “First in the South” primary. This means we won’t be adding any new information to the forecast or updating the candidates’ odds until South Carolina’s results are available. Luckily, South Carolina uses a primary, so we probably won’t have to wait days to get near-complete results.
First, here’s what our forecast says about the candidates’ overall chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates. The single most likely outcome is actually that no candidate wins a majority by the time voting finishes on June 6 in the Virgin Islands. There’s about a 1 in 2 (52 percent) chance of that happening. Among the candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders has the best chance of winning a majority of pledged delegates, with around a 1 in 3 (32 percent) shot. After Sanders comes former Vice President Joe Biden, who has about a 1 in 6 (16 percent) chance. Rounding out the remaining contenders, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a 1 in 100 (1 percent) chance while both Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg have less than a 1 percent shot.
As for the South Carolina primary, our forecast views Biden as the heavy favorite, to the tune of a 29 in 30 (97 percent) chance of claiming first place. The only other candidate who has a meaningful chance of winning is Sanders, who has a 1 in 30 (3 percent) shot — a Sanders win is plausible, but it would register as one of the bigger polling upsets we’ve seen in a primary. South Carolina is only the fourth contest in the 2020 Democratic primary, but Biden’s win probability there is the highest any candidate has had when we’ve frozen our forecast ahead of the early states, surpassing Sanders’s roughly 6 in 7 (85 percent) chance of victory in Nevada last weekend.
Biden’s rise in South Carolina happened very quickly — a week ago, he had a 2 in 5 (40 percent) chance of winning, slightly behind Sanders’s almost 1 in 2 (46 percent) chance. Then a plethora of post-Nevada polls came out showing Biden leading in the state by double-digit margins.
As for the last batch of South Carolina polls, they continued to give Biden a clear lead, though there was disagreement over just how big an advantage he has. And Biden’s margin — if he does win — will likely matter, influencing how the media views his win and thus affecting how voters react to it heading into Super Tuesday. That is, a narrow victory could look bad for Biden, especially now that he has a sizable lead in the polls, while a bigger margin could spark a “comeback” narrative. So let’s take a look at those final South Carolina polls (with the most recent surveys listed first):
The last poll we got from South Carolina comes from AtlasIntel, which found Biden at 35 percent and Sanders at 24 percent. The only other candidate in double digits was Steyer with 12 percent, while Buttigieg had 8 percent, Warren 7 percent and Klobuchar 4 percent. But before we put a poll in our model, we adjust for a pollster’s house effects — how well or poorly a candidate usually does in the pollster’s poll — as well as the national trend. In this case, AtlasIntel has been a little bearish on Biden and bullish on Sanders, so Biden shifts up to 36 percent and Sanders slides to 22 percent after our adjustments.
Republican pollster Trafalgar Group took a look at the Democratic race and found Biden leading Sanders by a nearly two-to-one margin, 44 percent to 23 percent. Steyer and Buttigeg were far behind at 11 percent and 10 percent, while both Klobuchar and Warren had 6 percent. Once we account for house effects and the national trend, the poll goes into the model with Biden up 19 points.
On Thursday evening, Data for Progress put out a new poll that found Biden leading Sanders by 9 points, 34 percent to 25 percent. The only other candidates in double digits were Steyer and Buttigieg, who both had 13 percent. Data for Progress has been pretty accurate so far this cycle, so it’s notable it found a somewhat smaller lead for Biden than other pollsters. But its polls have also tended to find better results for Sanders than some other pollsters — after adjusting for house effects and the national trend, this poll enters the model with Biden leading Sanders by roughly 13 points.
We also got five new national surveys, which collectively may be reassuring to Sanders’s chances beyond South Carolina. He led in each survey, though the polls showed varying degrees of competitiveness, as Sanders’s margin ranged from 6 to 13 points. Here are the latest nationwide polls (again with the newest surveys listed first):
On Friday night, Change Research published a national poll conducted Tuesday through Thursday showing Sanders way out in front with 40 percent, and Warren in second (!) with 20 percent. They were followed by Buttigieg at 14 percent, Biden 9 percent, Klobuchar 8 percent, Bloomberg 3 percent and Steyer 2 percent. Obviously showing Warren in second makes this survey a bit of an outlier, but Change Research has tended to find better results for Sanders and worse results for Biden than other pollsters. After it’s adjusted for house effects, Sanders is at 35 percent, Warren is at 16 percent, Biden is at 12 percent, Buttigieg is at 10 percent, Klobuchar is at 8 percent, Bloomberg is at 6 percent and Steyer is at 2 percent.
On Friday afternoon, Morning Consult released a national poll conducted since Tuesday’s debate in South Carolina. The survey found Sanders ahead of Biden by 12 points, 33 percent to 21 percent, though it showed Biden gaining the most ground after the debate. The other candidates in double figures were Bloomberg at 17 percent, Warren at 11 percent and Buttigieg at 10 percent. Once we adjust for house effects, this poll goes into the model as Sanders 29 percent, Biden 17 percent and Bloomberg 15 percent, with the other candidates seeing little change.
A Yahoo News/YouGov national poll on Friday found Sanders with about half as large a lead compared to the Morning Consult survey. Sanders had 27 percent, Biden 21 percent, Warren 18 percent, Bloomberg 14 percent and Buttigieg 10 percent. YouGov usually has very good numbers for Warren and worse ones for Bloomberg, so the model treats this as a 15 percent result for Warren and 16 percent for Bloomberg.
Also on Friday, SurveyUSA/FairVote put out a survey that had Sanders up 7 points, 28 percent to 21 percent, over both Biden and Bloomberg, who tied for second. The only other candidates close to 10 percent were Buttigieg and Warren, at 9 and 8 percent, respectively. Because SurveyUSA tends to have better numbers for Biden and Bloomberg, their totals were docked slightly in our model, with Bloomberg getting 19 percent and Biden 18 percent. An additional wrinkle with this poll was the use of ranked-choice voting by respondents, and after whittling the field down to two candidates, Sanders led Biden 51 percent to 49 percent.
Fox News released a survey on Thursday that found Sanders with a 13-point lead over Biden, 31 percent to 18 percent, with Bloomberg close behind at 16 percent. Additionally, Buttigieg was at 12 percent and Warren at 10 percent. After taking into account house effects, Biden went into the model with 16 percent, with small changes for everyone else.
Although Biden is in a good position to win South Carolina, these national polls suggest that he still has work to do if he wants to catch up to Sanders across the country. Looking ahead to Super Tuesday, when many big states vote, the Biden campaign’s lack of investment in those states compared to other campaigns (including Sanders’s) could make building on a South Carolina win more challenging. Biden may really need a huge win in South Carolina to overcome a resource disadvantage in the states that vote just three days later.
But heading into tonight, Biden is the odds-on favorite to win the Palmetto State. There’s a chance he doesn’t finish first there, but it looks like the main thing to watch for will be his margin of victory. The polls disagree about what we might expect on that front, and the scope of Biden’s expected win could affect how much it helps him going forward. With all eyes on South Carolina tonight, make sure to join us on our live blog as we analyze the results as they come in and ponder what they mean for the Democratic nomination race going forward.
Whoâs ahead heading into South Carolina?


fivethirtyeight--2020-02-29--Voters Who’ll Support Biden — But Not Sanders — Probably Really Do Mean It

Joe Biden ’ s prospects for winning the Democratic nomination have waned after both the former vice president ’ s disappointing fourth and fifth place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire and Sanders ’ s strong first-place finish in Nevada .
But despite those setbacks , Biden still often outperforms other Democratic contenders against Trump when people are asked about potential general election match-ups .
But how much should we really trust these polls ?
And is there a deeper explanation for why Biden does well ?
In other words , is there something unique to his support ?
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve overseen a long-running panel survey of Americans ’ political attitudes that sheds light on how their political views have evolved , and one of the questions I ’ ve consistently asked is who panelists would back in a general election .
And as of our most recent survey in late January , they backed Biden over Trump 48 to 40 , while backing Warren , Sanders , and Buttigieg by smaller margins of 1 to 3 percentage points over the president .
What ’ s more , 8 percent said they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 percent said the reverse .
Now , some of that is probably related to one downside of our survey — we don ’ t have any respondents under the age of 30 .
( Respondents had to be at least 18 to participate when the panel began in 2007 . )
That means some of the voters who are the most pro-Sanders are underrepresented and some of Biden ’ s supporters are probably overrepresented .
( The survey respondents are also likely to be especially politically engaged , seeing as they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over a decade . )
Asking respondents about their general election preferences this far in advance isn ’ t totally meaningless , though .
Using our panel data , we found that the candidate respondents told us they ’ d back during the primaries has often matched whom they backed later in the general election .
Consider 2008 : Thirteen percent who answered our survey during the later half of the primaries said they would back Hillary Clinton but not Barack Obama in the general .
Many meant it : When we asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fall of 2008 , 33.5 percent of those respondents said they backed Sen. John McCain and another 28.2 percent backed neither major-party candidate .
Likewise , in January 2016 , those who said they would back Sen. Marco Rubio but not Trump in the general ( 11 percent ) remained wary of Trump .
In October 2016 , 25.5 percent told us they now backed Clinton while another 48.2 percent said they remained uncommitted , wouldn ’ t vote , or backed a third-party candidate .
So simply put , there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of panelists tell us they ’ ll only back Biden and not Sanders — or 3 percent , in the case of voters who said they ’ d only back Sanders and not Biden — many of them mean it , and their minds won ’ t necessarily change months later .
That raises the question : Just who are these voters who back Biden but not Sanders , his chief Democratic rival ?
One thing we know is that these voters are more likely to be Republican and conservative and less likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than those who would vote for multiple Democrats .
That said , this isn ’ t just true of Biden-but-not-Sanders supporters ; the respondents who said they ’ d back Sanders but not Biden also tended to be more Republican and conservative .
Those who would back Biden versus Trump — but would not back Sanders — also tend to be older , with an average age of 53 for the Biden backers versus 45 for the Sanders backers .
Those who back Biden were also more likely to have a higher income @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of $ 79,000 , as opposed to $ 60,000 for Sanders ’ s backers .
( However , the sample sizes in each group were too small to be sure that the differences were statistically significant once we account for multiple comparisons . )
Biden also did better than Sanders among respondents in almost every partisan category in our sample , from strong Democrats to strong Republicans .
One of the groups among which he did better than Sanders , “ weak ” Republicans , could be particularly consequential , given that converting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backers is often key to winning against an incumbent .
These results suggest that , as the Democrats decide on who their nominee will be , they are also to some extent deciding on who the election ’ s swing voters will be .
Swing voters do still exist , but they come in different types — and different candidates might alienate different voters .
For instance , given what we know about who supports Biden and not Sanders , Biden might be able to win over wealthier , slightly more Republican voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be able to build up his margins among the young if he wins the nomination .
To some degree , the demographic divisions we currently see in the Democratic primary already foreshadow which coalitions either candidate might build in the general election .

Joe Biden’s prospects for winning the Democratic nomination have waned after both the former vice president’s disappointing fourth and fifth place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire and Sanders’s strong first-place finish in Nevada. But despite those setbacks, Biden still often outperforms other Democratic contenders against Trump when people are asked about potential general election match-ups.
But how much should we really trust these polls? And is there a deeper explanation for why Biden does well? In other words, is there something unique to his support?
For the last 12 years, I’ve overseen a long-running panel survey of Americans’ political attitudes that sheds light on how their political views have evolved, and one of the questions I’ve consistently asked is who panelists would back in a general election. And as of our most recent survey in late January, they backed Biden over Trump 48 to 40, while backing Warren, Sanders, and Buttigieg by smaller margins of 1 to 3 percentage points over the president. What’s more, 8 percent said they would back Biden but not Sanders, while 3 percent said the reverse.
Now, some of that is probably related to one downside of our survey — we don’t have any respondents under the age of 30. (Respondents had to be at least 18 to participate when the panel began in 2007.) That means some of the voters who are the most pro-Sanders are underrepresented and some of Biden’s supporters are probably overrepresented. (The survey respondents are also likely to be especially politically engaged, seeing as they were willing to take repeated political polls for over a decade.)
Asking respondents about their general election preferences this far in advance isn’t totally meaningless, though. Using our panel data, we found that the candidate respondents told us they’d back during the primaries has often matched whom they backed later in the general election. Consider 2008: Thirteen percent who answered our survey during the later half of the primaries said they would back Hillary Clinton but not Barack Obama in the general. Many meant it: When we asked again about who they supported in the fall of 2008, 33.5 percent of those respondents said they backed Sen. John McCain and another 28.2 percent backed neither major-party candidate.
Likewise, in January 2016, those who said they would back Sen. Marco Rubio but not Trump in the general (11 percent) remained wary of Trump. In October 2016, 25.5 percent told us they now backed Clinton while another 48.2 percent said they remained uncommitted, wouldn’t vote, or backed a third-party candidate.
So simply put, there’s reason to believe that when 8 percent of panelists tell us they’ll only back Biden and not Sanders — or 3 percent, in the case of voters who said they’d only back Sanders and not Biden — many of them mean it, and their minds won’t necessarily change months later.
That raises the question: Just who are these voters who back Biden but not Sanders, his chief Democratic rival? One thing we know is that these voters are more likely to be Republican and conservative and less likely to have supported Democrats in past elections than those who would vote for multiple Democrats. That said, this isn’t just true of Biden-but-not-Sanders supporters; the respondents who said they’d back Sanders but not Biden also tended to be more Republican and conservative.
Those who would back Biden versus Trump — but would not back Sanders — also tend to be older, with an average age of 53 for the Biden backers versus 45 for the Sanders backers. Those who back Biden were also more likely to have a higher income, with a mean income in 2016 of $79,000, as opposed to $60,000 for Sanders’s backers. (However, the sample sizes in each group were too small to be sure that the differences were statistically significant once we account for multiple comparisons.)
Biden also did better than Sanders among respondents in almost every partisan category in our sample, from strong Democrats to strong Republicans. One of the groups among which he did better than Sanders, “weak” Republicans, could be particularly consequential, given that converting some of the other side’s backers is often key to winning against an incumbent.
These results suggest that, as the Democrats decide on who their nominee will be, they are also to some extent deciding on who the election’s swing voters will be. Swing voters do still exist, but they come in different types — and different candidates might alienate different voters. For instance, given what we know about who supports Biden and not Sanders, Biden might be able to win over wealthier, slightly more Republican voters in a general election, while Sanders might be able to build up his margins among the young if he wins the nomination. To some degree, the demographic divisions we currently see in the Democratic primary already foreshadow which coalitions either candidate might build in the general election.


fivethirtyeight--2020-03-01--Election Update: South Carolina — And A Bunch Of New Polls — Are Showing A Close Super Tuesday Race

Former Vice President Joe Biden didn ’ t just have a good night in South Carolina on Saturday ; he had a great night , winning by a larger margin than anticipated .
With 100 percent of precincts reporting , Biden took 48 percent of the vote in the Palmetto State , while Sanders took 20 percent .
Billionaire Tom Steyer received only 11 percent ; having staked his campaign on a strong showing in South Carolina , he dropped out of the race late last night .
Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 8 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sen. Amy Klobuchar at 3 percent and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard at 1 percent brought up the rear .
The FiveThirtyEight forecast in South Carolina was expecting Biden to win big , forecasting on average that Biden would win 40 percent of the vote .
Biden outperformed that estimate by 8 points , but because our model had already anticipated he would do well , our forecast didn ’ t drastically change ( and some of the changes were actually due to some new polls we got over the weekend , not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the biggest takeaway from our national forecast is just how chaotic the race for the nomination remains — the most likely outcome at this point is that no single candidate will win a majority of pledged delegates .
As of Sunday at 11:10 a.m. Eastern , there is a 3 in 5 ( 59 percent ) chance that no one will win a majority — up from 1 in 2 ( 52 percent ) before South Carolina .
Sanders has a 1 in 4 ( 27 percent ) chance of getting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 3 ( 32 percent ) chance on Saturday morning .
And Biden has a 1 in 7 ( 14 percent ) chance of getting a majority , little changed from where he stood before South Carolina ( 1 in 6 , or a 16 percent chance ) .
All other candidates , frankly , have few paths to the nomination , and South Carolina didn ’ t change that .
Some of those changes are attributable to a number of good polls Sanders picked up over the weekend .
According to Marist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent to 19 percent among likely voters in Texas , with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg ( 15 percent ) , Warren ( 10 percent ) and Buttigieg ( 8 percent ) within shouting distance .
However , after adjusting for Marist ’ s house effects , our model interprets this poll as more like Sanders 32 percent , Biden 20 percent .
A Dallas Morning News/University of Texas at Tyler poll agrees that Sanders ( at 29 percent ) has a lead on Biden ( at 19 percent ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at 21 percent .
However , a YouGov/CBS News survey shows a closer race — Sanders 30 percent , Biden 26 percent .
Warren ( 17 percent ) and Bloomberg ( 13 percent ) are further behind , although once you account for house effects , they swap positions : Bloomberg is closer to 15 percent and Warren is closer to 14 percent .
And in North Carolina , both Marist and East Carolina University find a close race between Sanders and Biden , with Bloomberg , Warren and especially the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at 26 percent among likely voters , Biden at 24 percent , Bloomberg at 15 percent , Warren at 11 percent , Buttigieg at 7 percent and Klobuchar at 5 percent ; with house effects stripped away , though , it ’ s Biden 25 percent , Sanders 24 percent , Bloomberg 15 percent , Warren 11 percent , Buttigieg 6 percent and Klobuchar 4 percent .
ECU puts Biden at 29 percent , Sanders at 25 percent , Bloomberg at 14 percent , Warren at 11 percent , Klobuchar at 5 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effects don ’ t meaningfully change the picture .
Finally , YouGov/CBS News also released a poll today confirming that Sanders has a solid lead in California : He gets 31 percent support , while Biden gets 19 percent , Warren gets 18 percent , Bloomberg gets 12 percent and Buttigieg gets 9 percent .
Considering house effects , though , Warren is only barely ahead of Bloomberg , 15 percent to 14 percent .
However , all these polls were obviously taken before the South Carolina results are known , and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden might ( or might not ) get .
All this new data means it ’ s high time to check in again on the outlook in the 15 states and territories that vote just two days from now , on Super Tuesday .
While Sanders has maintained his grip on the Northeastern and Western Super Tuesday states — most importantly , delegate-rich California — Biden is now favored to win all seven Southern Super Tuesday states except Texas , which is a virtual toss-up .
And the average number of pledged delegates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receive on Super Tuesday goes to show why we think it ’ s so likely that no candidate will win a majority of pledged delegates .
Sanders should still win the most delegates ( 540 on average ) , but Biden shouldn ’ t be too far behind ( 395 on average ) .
And even Bloomberg and Warren could pocket a significant number .
That ’ s important because , by Wednesday , 38 percent of all pledged delegates will be committed to a candidate ( unless those candidates drop out ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a contested convention .
We ’ ll close with a word of warning .
The FiveThirtyEight model is probably its most uncertain immediately following a big primary day ; it ’ s really just making an educated guess about what post-South Carolina polls will say , so we ’ d urge you to wait for some new polls before taking the model ’ s predictions too literally , as we did after Iowa , New Hampshire and Nevada .
Of course , the complicating factor here is that the next election is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be time for many new polls to be conducted between South Carolina and Super Tuesday .
That may mean we are in for some surprises .

Former Vice President Joe Biden didn’t just have a good night in South Carolina on Saturday; he had a great night, winning by a larger margin than anticipated. With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Biden took 48 percent of the vote in the Palmetto State, while Sanders took 20 percent. Billionaire Tom Steyer received only 11 percent; having staked his campaign on a strong showing in South Carolina, he dropped out of the race late last night. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 8 percent, Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 7 percent, Sen. Amy Klobuchar at 3 percent and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard at 1 percent brought up the rear.
The FiveThirtyEight forecast in South Carolina was expecting Biden to win big, forecasting on average that Biden would win 40 percent of the vote. Biden outperformed that estimate by 8 points, but because our model had already anticipated he would do well, our forecast didn’t drastically change (and some of the changes were actually due to some new polls we got over the weekend, not the South Carolina results). In fact, the biggest takeaway from our national forecast is just how chaotic the race for the nomination remains — the most likely outcome at this point is that no single candidate will win a majority of pledged delegates.
As of Sunday at 11:10 a.m. Eastern, there is a 3 in 5 (59 percent) chance that no one will win a majority — up from 1 in 2 (52 percent) before South Carolina. Sanders has a 1 in 4 (27 percent) chance of getting a majority, slightly worse than his 1 in 3 (32 percent) chance on Saturday morning. And Biden has a 1 in 7 (14 percent) chance of getting a majority, little changed from where he stood before South Carolina (1 in 6, or a 16 percent chance). All other candidates, frankly, have few paths to the nomination, and South Carolina didn’t change that.
The chance no one wins a majority increased How the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast changed after the South Carolina primary Candidate Avg. projected delegates Change Chance of majority Change No majority — — 59% +7 Sanders 1645 -25 27 -5 Biden 1352 +82 14 -2 Bloomberg 563 -10 0.5 -1 Warren 198 -26 0 0 Buttigieg 158 -14 0 0 South Carolina results are unofficial but 100 percent of precincts are reporting.
Some of those changes are attributable to a number of good polls Sanders picked up over the weekend. According to Marist College, Sanders is beating Biden 34 percent to 19 percent among likely voters in Texas, with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (15 percent), Warren (10 percent) and Buttigieg (8 percent) within shouting distance. However, after adjusting for Marist’s house effects, our model interprets this poll as more like Sanders 32 percent, Biden 20 percent. A Dallas Morning News/University of Texas at Tyler poll agrees that Sanders (at 29 percent) has a lead on Biden (at 19 percent), but it also shows Bloomberg doing well, at 21 percent. However, a YouGov/CBS News survey shows a closer race — Sanders 30 percent, Biden 26 percent. Warren (17 percent) and Bloomberg (13 percent) are further behind, although once you account for house effects, they swap positions: Bloomberg is closer to 15 percent and Warren is closer to 14 percent.
And in North Carolina, both Marist and East Carolina University find a close race between Sanders and Biden, with Bloomberg, Warren and especially the other candidates further back. Marist puts Sanders at 26 percent among likely voters, Biden at 24 percent, Bloomberg at 15 percent, Warren at 11 percent, Buttigieg at 7 percent and Klobuchar at 5 percent; with house effects stripped away, though, it’s Biden 25 percent, Sanders 24 percent, Bloomberg 15 percent, Warren 11 percent, Buttigieg 6 percent and Klobuchar 4 percent. ECU puts Biden at 29 percent, Sanders at 25 percent, Bloomberg at 14 percent, Warren at 11 percent, Klobuchar at 5 percent and Buttigieg at 4 percent; house effects don’t meaningfully change the picture.
Finally, YouGov/CBS News also released a poll today confirming that Sanders has a solid lead in California: He gets 31 percent support, while Biden gets 19 percent, Warren gets 18 percent, Bloomberg gets 12 percent and Buttigieg gets 9 percent. Considering house effects, though, Warren is only barely ahead of Bloomberg, 15 percent to 14 percent. However, all these polls were obviously taken before the South Carolina results are known, and they do not take into effect any bounce Biden might (or might not) get.
All this new data means it’s high time to check in again on the outlook in the 15 states and territories that vote just two days from now, on Super Tuesday. While Sanders has maintained his grip on the Northeastern and Western Super Tuesday states — most importantly, delegate-rich California — Biden is now favored to win all seven Southern Super Tuesday states except Texas, which is a virtual toss-up.
Biden now leads in most Southern Super Tuesday states The percent chance each Democratic presidential candidate has of winning each contest on Super Tuesday, according to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast as of 11:10 a.m. Eastern on March 1 Contest Biden Bloomberg Buttigieg Klobuchar Sanders Warren Calif. 7% 0% 0% 0% 91% 1% Texas 48 3 0 0 49 0 N.C. 77 5 0 0 18 0 Va. 48 10 0 0 41 0 Mass. 4 2 2 0 63 30 Minn. 2 0 0 56 40 2 Colo. 6 2 1 0 85 6 Tenn. 61 10 1 0 26 2 Ala. 79 9 0 0 11 0 Okla. 45 27 1 0 25 1 Ark. 39 24 6 0 30 1 Utah 0 4 3 0 87 6 Maine 11 9 6 0 67 6 Vt. 0 0 0 0 99 0 A.S. 32 20 4 2 35 8
And the average number of pledged delegates that we are forecasting each candidate to receive on Super Tuesday goes to show why we think it’s so likely that no candidate will win a majority of pledged delegates. Sanders should still win the most delegates (540 on average), but Biden shouldn’t be too far behind (395 on average). And even Bloomberg and Warren could pocket a significant number. That’s important because, by Wednesday, 38 percent of all pledged delegates will be committed to a candidate (unless those candidates drop out), making it increasingly difficult to avoid a contested convention.
Super Tuesday could spread the delegate wealth The average number of delegates each Democratic presidential candidate is forecasted to receive from each Super Tuesday contest, according to the FiveThirtyEight primary forecast as of 11:10 a.m. Eastern on March 1 Contest Biden Bloomberg Buttigieg Klobuchar Sanders Warren Calif. 115 40 9 1 199 51 Texas 85 42 2 0 88 12 N.C. 49 21 1 0 35 4 Va. 35 20 5 1 35 3 Mass. 12 7 8 1 35 27 Minn. 7 1 3 30 28 6 Colo. 12 7 5 0 32 11 Tenn. 25 15 2 0 18 4 Ala. 25 12 1 0 12 2 Okla. 13 10 2 0 10 2 Ark. 10 8 4 0 9 1 Utah 1 5 4 0 14 5 Maine 4 4 3 0 10 3 Vt. 0 1 1 0 13 1 A.S. 2 1 0 0 2 1 Total 395 194 50 33 540 133
We’ll close with a word of warning. The FiveThirtyEight model is probably its most uncertain immediately following a big primary day; it’s really just making an educated guess about what post-South Carolina polls will say, so we’d urge you to wait for some new polls before taking the model’s predictions too literally, as we did after Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. Of course, the complicating factor here is that the next election is in just two days, so there probably won’t be time for many new polls to be conducted between South Carolina and Super Tuesday. That may mean we are in for some surprises.