Sunday, February 21, 2016

TRUMP WILL WIN THE NOMINATION

The South Carolina results are in.  With 32.5% of the vote, Trump all 50 delegates.  My calculations were correct, save for my failure to understand that the 5 Superdelegates must vote for the overall vote winner on the first ballot at the Convention.  This is the second state in a row in which the polls have been accurate.  What is more, the race has developed, as I projected, into a three-way contest among Trump, Cruz, and Rubio with Trump getting 30-35% of the vote and Cruz and  Rubio sharing 45-50%.  If the polls for the Super Tuesday [March 1] states prove equally accurate, my analysis shows that Trump will have enough delegates for nomination before the Convention.

Clinton won the Nevada caucuses and pretty clearly will win the nomination.  I am deeply fearful of the outcome of this match up, for several reasons, but we must await the inevitable polls.

Here is my up-dated spreadsheet, giving 44 delegates to Trump:

State Pledged Delegates Likely Trump Actual Trump Trump Vote %
New Hampshire 20 7 10 35
South Carolina 50 41 50 32.5
Alabama 47 32
Arkansas 37 14
Georgia 76 40
Massachusetts 39 14
Okalahoma 40 20
Tennessee 55 28
Texas 152 86
Vermont 16 6
Virginia 46 17
Louisiana 44 16
Idaho 29 10
Mississippi 37 14
Michigan 56 21
Puero Rico 20 7
Ohio 63 63
Florida 99 99
Illinois 66 25
Missouri 49 34
North Carolina 72 25
Arizona 58 58
Wisconsin 42 30
New York 92 52
Connecticut 25 14
Delaware 16 16
Maryland 38 29
Pennsylvania 68 14
Rhode Island 16 6
Indiana 54 45
West Virginia 31 18
Oregon 25 9
California 169 145
Montana 24 24
New Jersey 48 48
New Mexico 21 8
South Dakota 26 26
Nebraska 33 33
Washington 41 14
1940 1208
Caucus States
Iowa 30 7
Nevada 30
Alaska 25
Colorado 34
Minnesota 35
North Dakota 25
Wyoming 26
Kansas 40
Kentucky 42
Maine 20
Hawaii 16
District of Columbia 19
Northern Mariana Islands 6
Virgin Islands 6
Utah 40
394
Territorial Convention
Guam 6
American Samoa 6
12
Trump Total 67
Needed to Win 1273
at

10 comments:

  1. enzo rossiFebruary 21, 2016 at 7:00 AM

    I'm afraid you're right. Now, given that it seems that Clinton's victory in Nevada was due to the Latino vote, and that her Southern Firewall seems to be working, would it be fair to say that identity politics is helping win the primaries for the Right of both parties?
    I find all this all the more infuriating as Sanders is the one with the far better record on civil rights and race.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChrisFebruary 21, 2016 at 9:11 AM

    I can't for the life of me figure out what Clinton is garnering the black vote.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ChrisFebruary 21, 2016 at 9:15 AM

    Enzo, according to the most recent five thirty post: "This year, the entrance poll had Sanders winning Latinos 53 percent to 45 percent"

    ReplyDelete
  4. David AuerbachFebruary 21, 2016 at 9:19 AM

    I think Clinton's black vote is very weak among younger blacks. But we'll see. Certainly word is getting around about her bad record on race. But really, what's more important is movement building. And that's what Sanders is doing and it's important for him to stay in the race until the convention.

    ReplyDelete
  5. enzo rossiFebruary 21, 2016 at 9:21 AM

    Ah, that's interesting Chris, thanks. The NYT figures I saw told a completely different story. Well if the firewall isn't holding then there may be some hope left for Bernie. But I fear the NYT is right overall:

    Mr. Sanders did appeal to a good number of Hispanic voters: According to entrance polls by Edison Research, he was ahead of Mrs. Clinton among Hispanics. These numbers may not reflect the final vote tally, however, because Mrs. Clinton was performing strongly in heavily Hispanic neighborhoods around Clark County, which encompasses Las Vegas. Mrs. Clinton won 60 percent of the delegates in the 22 Latino-majority precincts that had reported results on Saturday night, according to her campaign aides.

    Mr. Sanders fared poorly among African-American voters, earning support from only 22 percent of them, according to the entrance polls.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ludwig RichterFebruary 21, 2016 at 9:40 AM

    Professor Wolff, could you say more about why you're deeply fearful of a Trump-Clinton match up?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tom CathcartFebruary 21, 2016 at 10:11 AM

    In response to Chris: Charles Blow, writing in the Times a couple weeks ago, said something along the lines of, "We blacks are tired of being scolded for not voting for Sanders, as it's supposedly in our best interest to do. We're perfectly capable of deciding what's in our own best interest, thank you, and we have a deep historical skepticism toward people who promise too much. We've been burnt too many times."

    ReplyDelete
  8. David AuerbachFebruary 21, 2016 at 11:40 AM

    I remember thinking at the time that that was an unusually bad column of Blow's.

    ReplyDelete
  9. ChrisFebruary 21, 2016 at 12:17 PM

    Same, David Auerbach. Okay, vote in your interest, so why is Clinton in one's interest and not Bernie?

    ReplyDelete
  10. ChrisFebruary 21, 2016 at 12:19 PM

    Also, just as a matter of statistics, are't black voters being told to vote Hillary too? I don't see how his argument doesn't work in exactly an inverse way, unless we actually analyze whose policies, and visions, are better for the african american community?

    ReplyDelete