This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/upshot/the-most-important-primary-is-wait-indiana.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| The Most Important Primary Is ... Wait, Indiana? | The Most Important Primary Is ... Wait, Indiana? |
| (about 13 hours later) | |
| It may be Indiana or bust for Donald Trump. | It may be Indiana or bust for Donald Trump. |
| If the polls are right, he will dominate in New York on Tuesday and in the coming races across the Eastern Seaboard. He could win nearly all of the delegates at stake — keeping him on a narrow path toward the Republican nomination. That would set him up for what will probably be the most important test of the race: Indiana on May 3. | If the polls are right, he will dominate in New York on Tuesday and in the coming races across the Eastern Seaboard. He could win nearly all of the delegates at stake — keeping him on a narrow path toward the Republican nomination. That would set him up for what will probably be the most important test of the race: Indiana on May 3. |
| It may sound strange, but when you start gaming out the rest of the primary contest, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that his quest to reach a majority of delegates before the convention could all turn on Indiana. If you divvy up the states by expected results, Mr. Trump wins big in the East and West Virginia, loses the winner-take-all rural Western states, and earns his expected share of proportional delegates in Washington, Oregon and New Mexico. | It may sound strange, but when you start gaming out the rest of the primary contest, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that his quest to reach a majority of delegates before the convention could all turn on Indiana. If you divvy up the states by expected results, Mr. Trump wins big in the East and West Virginia, loses the winner-take-all rural Western states, and earns his expected share of proportional delegates in Washington, Oregon and New Mexico. |
| That puts him about 175 delegates short of the required 1,237. Only two real tossup states remain: California (172 delegates) and Indiana (57). | That puts him about 175 delegates short of the required 1,237. Only two real tossup states remain: California (172 delegates) and Indiana (57). |
| You can see the basic issue: If he doesn’t win Indiana, he has to sweep California and get some lucky breaks elsewhere, which isn’t realistic. He would need an upset in a state like Montana, in a region that has been hostile to him. | You can see the basic issue: If he doesn’t win Indiana, he has to sweep California and get some lucky breaks elsewhere, which isn’t realistic. He would need an upset in a state like Montana, in a region that has been hostile to him. |
| But even though Indiana may be pivotal — it awards its delegates on a winner-take-all basis by congressional district and statewide — the state is a big mystery because there hasn’t been a single poll there. That’s not just because of East Coast media bias (although it may be part of it); it’s a tough state to poll. Indiana law prohibits automated polling, the go-to method for many low-cost pollsters. | But even though Indiana may be pivotal — it awards its delegates on a winner-take-all basis by congressional district and statewide — the state is a big mystery because there hasn’t been a single poll there. That’s not just because of East Coast media bias (although it may be part of it); it’s a tough state to poll. Indiana law prohibits automated polling, the go-to method for many low-cost pollsters. |
| The state does not have party registration, which makes it modestly more challenging and costly for pollsters to conduct surveys of the voter registration file. Many of the prolific public pollsters employ the random-digit dialing method, like Quinnipiac, and have no history in the state. I suspect that a few pollsters will ultimately field surveys, but there won’t be many. | The state does not have party registration, which makes it modestly more challenging and costly for pollsters to conduct surveys of the voter registration file. Many of the prolific public pollsters employ the random-digit dialing method, like Quinnipiac, and have no history in the state. I suspect that a few pollsters will ultimately field surveys, but there won’t be many. |
| At first glance, the state looks as if it should be a good one for Mr. Trump. It’s a mostly working-class state with below-average educational attainment among white voters, which has been a strong correlate for Trump support. He has run well in states along or near the Ohio River, including Illinois, Missouri and Kentucky. He lost Ohio, but it was John Kasich’s home state. Mr. Trump also won Michigan, which borders Indiana to the north. | |
| According to an Upshot demographic model of Mr. Trump’s support, Indiana is perhaps a tick beneath his national average — he’s estimated to win around 40 percent of the vote, compared with the 43 percent support he holds nationwide. It’s not a state like Wisconsin, where Mr. Trump was in obvious danger. That state is better educated than Indiana, it has higher marriage rates, and it has more voters with an ancestry rooted in predominantly Protestant countries in northwest Europe, all factors that have hurt Mr. Trump in prior contests. | According to an Upshot demographic model of Mr. Trump’s support, Indiana is perhaps a tick beneath his national average — he’s estimated to win around 40 percent of the vote, compared with the 43 percent support he holds nationwide. It’s not a state like Wisconsin, where Mr. Trump was in obvious danger. That state is better educated than Indiana, it has higher marriage rates, and it has more voters with an ancestry rooted in predominantly Protestant countries in northwest Europe, all factors that have hurt Mr. Trump in prior contests. |
| The problem for Mr. Trump is not that Indiana’s a tough state for him; it’s that it’s a better state for Ted Cruz than many of the more liberal states in the Midwest. And it’s a worse state for Mr. Kasich. A more consolidated anti-Trump vote would give Mr. Cruz a far better chance of victory here than in Illinois or Michigan. | The problem for Mr. Trump is not that Indiana’s a tough state for him; it’s that it’s a better state for Ted Cruz than many of the more liberal states in the Midwest. And it’s a worse state for Mr. Kasich. A more consolidated anti-Trump vote would give Mr. Cruz a far better chance of victory here than in Illinois or Michigan. |
| The split between Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich is always tough to predict. But in general, the Cruz/Kasich vote breaks along the lines of cultural liberalism and conservatism. Mr. Cruz does better (and Mr. Kasich does worse) in areas with more evangelical Christians, more white Republicans and fewer people with postgraduate educations. Mr. Cruz also does better in areas that look more like the “traditional” Republican Party — conservative areas with more families and married couples and people whose heritage is Protestant northwest Europe. | The split between Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich is always tough to predict. But in general, the Cruz/Kasich vote breaks along the lines of cultural liberalism and conservatism. Mr. Cruz does better (and Mr. Kasich does worse) in areas with more evangelical Christians, more white Republicans and fewer people with postgraduate educations. Mr. Cruz also does better in areas that look more like the “traditional” Republican Party — conservative areas with more families and married couples and people whose heritage is Protestant northwest Europe. |
| Many of these factors have hurt Mr. Cruz in the blue states of the Midwest. He has often finished third in more liberal places like the Detroit or Chicago metropolitan areas. It’s also why he’s poised to fare poorly in the Northeast. | Many of these factors have hurt Mr. Cruz in the blue states of the Midwest. He has often finished third in more liberal places like the Detroit or Chicago metropolitan areas. It’s also why he’s poised to fare poorly in the Northeast. |
| But Mr. Cruz has not had this problem in less liberal metropolitan areas in the Midwest, like Milwaukee; Grand Rapids, Mich.; Kansas City, Mo.; and St. Louis, or in medium-sized cities in central Illinois like Springfield, Peoria, Bloomington or Champaign-Urbana. Mr. Kasich was no threat to Mr. Cruz in these areas, and indeed Mr. Cruz wound up beating Mr. Trump in most. | But Mr. Cruz has not had this problem in less liberal metropolitan areas in the Midwest, like Milwaukee; Grand Rapids, Mich.; Kansas City, Mo.; and St. Louis, or in medium-sized cities in central Illinois like Springfield, Peoria, Bloomington or Champaign-Urbana. Mr. Kasich was no threat to Mr. Cruz in these areas, and indeed Mr. Cruz wound up beating Mr. Trump in most. |
| The Indianapolis area is somewhat more like Milwaukee, St. Louis, Kansas City and Grand Rapids than Detroit or Chicago. Most obviously, the Indianapolis area — and the state of Indiana — is conservative and tends to vote Republican. That’s underpinned by the demographic characteristics of the state: It’s more evangelical, less educated and, in particular, has fewer people with postgraduate degrees. | The Indianapolis area is somewhat more like Milwaukee, St. Louis, Kansas City and Grand Rapids than Detroit or Chicago. Most obviously, the Indianapolis area — and the state of Indiana — is conservative and tends to vote Republican. That’s underpinned by the demographic characteristics of the state: It’s more evangelical, less educated and, in particular, has fewer people with postgraduate degrees. |
| The tilt toward evangelicals and conservatism should allow Mr. Cruz to do better in Indiana than he did in Illinois or Michigan. It could be more like Missouri, which was almost a tie, or North Carolina, where Mr. Trump won by a slight margin. Mr. Trump also won by a slight margin in Illinois outside of the core of the Chicago metropolitan area. | The tilt toward evangelicals and conservatism should allow Mr. Cruz to do better in Indiana than he did in Illinois or Michigan. It could be more like Missouri, which was almost a tie, or North Carolina, where Mr. Trump won by a slight margin. Mr. Trump also won by a slight margin in Illinois outside of the core of the Chicago metropolitan area. |
| That might still seem like a bleak precedent for Mr. Cruz. But the upside for him is that all of those contests occurred before Marco Rubio left the race. The results in Utah and Wisconsin suggest that many of Mr. Rubio’s remaining voters broke to Mr. Cruz. In Wisconsin, it was probably most of them. | That might still seem like a bleak precedent for Mr. Cruz. But the upside for him is that all of those contests occurred before Marco Rubio left the race. The results in Utah and Wisconsin suggest that many of Mr. Rubio’s remaining voters broke to Mr. Cruz. In Wisconsin, it was probably most of them. |
| If the same story plays out in Indiana, Mr. Cruz will probably win the state. The Upshot’s demographic-based model estimated after the March 15 primaries that Mr. Trump would win Indiana, 41 percent to 37 percent, over Mr. Cruz, with Mr. Kasich at 14 percent and Mr. Rubio at 8 percent. Mr. Cruz would then become a clear favorite there — similar to what happened in Wisconsin — if he won the preponderance of Mr. Rubio’s voters or benefited from a slide in Mr. Kasich’s support. | If the same story plays out in Indiana, Mr. Cruz will probably win the state. The Upshot’s demographic-based model estimated after the March 15 primaries that Mr. Trump would win Indiana, 41 percent to 37 percent, over Mr. Cruz, with Mr. Kasich at 14 percent and Mr. Rubio at 8 percent. Mr. Cruz would then become a clear favorite there — similar to what happened in Wisconsin — if he won the preponderance of Mr. Rubio’s voters or benefited from a slide in Mr. Kasich’s support. |
| And indeed Mr. Cruz now has a slight edge in the same demographic model, 43 percent for Mr. Cruz to 40 percent for Mr. Trump, with 16 percent to Mr. Kasich, after adding the results from Arizona, Wisconsin and Utah and adding a variable to account for the absence of Mr. Rubio. | And indeed Mr. Cruz now has a slight edge in the same demographic model, 43 percent for Mr. Cruz to 40 percent for Mr. Trump, with 16 percent to Mr. Kasich, after adding the results from Arizona, Wisconsin and Utah and adding a variable to account for the absence of Mr. Rubio. |
| But the split between Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich in Indiana should be considered nothing more than a rough guess. The same approach estimated that Mr. Kasich would win 21 percent of the vote in Wisconsin; in the end, he won just 14 percent and Mr. Cruz ran up the score. Mr. Cruz could easily gain at Mr. Kasich’s expense again — especially if he receives high-profile endorsements from trusted conservative figures, the way he did in Wisconsin. | But the split between Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich in Indiana should be considered nothing more than a rough guess. The same approach estimated that Mr. Kasich would win 21 percent of the vote in Wisconsin; in the end, he won just 14 percent and Mr. Cruz ran up the score. Mr. Cruz could easily gain at Mr. Kasich’s expense again — especially if he receives high-profile endorsements from trusted conservative figures, the way he did in Wisconsin. |
| But there’s downside for Mr. Cruz. Mr. Kasich seems set to post a series of relatively strong showings in the Northeast, which could give him new strength heading into Indiana. | But there’s downside for Mr. Cruz. Mr. Kasich seems set to post a series of relatively strong showings in the Northeast, which could give him new strength heading into Indiana. |
| Indiana also abuts Mr. Kasich’s home state, Ohio, and that could help him as well. Mr. Kasich did a bit better in the southern part of Michigan and in the northern part of Kentucky, areas bordering Ohio, than one would have guessed from demographics alone. | Indiana also abuts Mr. Kasich’s home state, Ohio, and that could help him as well. Mr. Kasich did a bit better in the southern part of Michigan and in the northern part of Kentucky, areas bordering Ohio, than one would have guessed from demographics alone. |
| Even if Mr. Kasich proves as weak as Mr. Cruz hopes, Mr. Trump could still win. Mr. Trump figures to be around 40 percent of the vote — and if it’s a few points on the higher side of that, which is certainly possible, it will probably be enough for him to beat even a relatively strong Mr. Cruz. | Even if Mr. Kasich proves as weak as Mr. Cruz hopes, Mr. Trump could still win. Mr. Trump figures to be around 40 percent of the vote — and if it’s a few points on the higher side of that, which is certainly possible, it will probably be enough for him to beat even a relatively strong Mr. Cruz. |
| The bottom line is that it’s very hard to be confident about Indiana forecasts. My guess is that we still wouldn’t be confident even if there were polls because it’s hard to see a large advantage for any candidate. | The bottom line is that it’s very hard to be confident about Indiana forecasts. My guess is that we still wouldn’t be confident even if there were polls because it’s hard to see a large advantage for any candidate. |
| What’s clear is that if Mr. Trump wins Indiana, the drama continues on to California; if he doesn’t, even California almost certainly won’t be enough for him to secure the nomination by primary season’s end. | What’s clear is that if Mr. Trump wins Indiana, the drama continues on to California; if he doesn’t, even California almost certainly won’t be enough for him to secure the nomination by primary season’s end. |