The two numbers that explain Iowa caucus vote
Two numbers explain a lot about what happened in last night鈥檚 Iowa caucuses 鈥� and what might now occur in the primary race ahead.
The first is 64. That鈥檚 the percentage of Hawkeye State GOP caucus goers who were Evangelicals, according to entrance polls. That鈥檚 much higher than anticipated: The final Des Moines Register poll released Saturday assumed that about 47 percent of Republican caucus attendees would be evangelical 海角大神s.
Ted Cruz did really well with these voters. He won about one-third of Evangelicals, while Donald Trump won about one-fifth.
鈥淎nd that pretty much explains Cruz鈥檚 victory,鈥� writes John McCormack in the .
Senator Cruz outperformed his poll numbers and pulled off a surprising win because Evangelicals turned out in big numbers. Among non-evangelical voters, he lost to Trump, 22 to 29 percent. That鈥檚 close to how final polls had predicted the caucuses would end up.
What鈥檚 the larger meaning of this? That polling is really hard, for one thing. Miss on the electorate鈥檚 demographics, and you miss on final numbers. It鈥檚 not just about predicting how people will vote. It鈥檚 about predicting who will vote, as well.
Also, Mr. Trump may have upended the race, but he hasn鈥檛 destroyed the effectiveness of old-style retail campaigning. Cruz 鈥� the son of a preacher 鈥� worked for years to win the grass-roots religious vote. Trump targeted a few evangelical leaders whose endorsement would make cable news, such as Liberty University鈥檚 Jerry Falwell Jr. Cruz鈥檚 approach won, and he appears to be the Evangelicals鈥� 2016 favorite.
The second number is 84. That鈥檚 the percentage of voters age 18 to 29 won by Bernie Sanders, according to an .
That鈥檚 dominance, at least in that age group. Senator Sanders won the next oldest group as well, taking 58 percent of voters age 30 to 44.
Look at it this way: Sanders did better with young voters than did Barack Obama in his hope-and-change campaign of 2008. Obama won 57 percent of the under-29 crowd in that year鈥檚 Iowa Democratic caucus.
Young adults made up a smaller share of the vote this time around, 18 percent of caucus attendees, as opposed to 22 percent in 2008, points out .
鈥淪till, enough of them got behind Sanders that they were able to boost his performance significantly 鈥� and send him off to New Hampshire in a strong way,鈥� writes Ms. Kliff.
Sanders is the polling leader in upcoming New Hampshire, but after that he faces a tough slog. Nevada, South Carolina, and other upcoming primaries feature far more minority and moderate voters, who skew Hillary Clinton鈥檚 way.
But his Iowa dominance with young voters shows how he has tapped into a real strain of discontent in a core Democratic constituency. The Clinton campaign clearly underestimated Sanders, and is lucky to escape Iowa with a virtual tie it can portray as a victory.
Sanders speaks to young people鈥檚 feelings that their own futures are at stake in the election, writes left-leaning Greg Sargent at his . Mrs. Clinton has yet to demonstrate an ability to do the same thing.
鈥淪o another lesson for Clinton may be that she needs to speak more effectively to these voters 鈥� and that this could matter in November, because it raises questions as to whether she can sufficiently energize them in Obama-like numbers,鈥� writes Mr. Sargent.
