The Democratic primary, part 2

Data on white % for Sanders is from CNN’s exit polls.

This is profoundly annoying — there’s exit poll data for only five states below the line, one of which is Sanders’s home state and one of which is an unexplained outlier. How is anyone supposed to run any statistical analysis with this garbage? CBS and NYT are no better.

Is there a way to estimate white % for Sanders in states without exit polling? I don’t know statistics.

A naïve computation of Pearson’s coefficient gives = -0.6653, p = 0.00021. Removing the outliers of Texas, Nevada, and Vermont gives = -0.6971, = 0.00022. Removing Vermont alone gives = -0.6643, p = 0.0003.

Perhaps there are regional effects beyond our mystery coefficient. Looking at states with substantial Southern Baptist populations alone (that is: Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Florida, Arkansas, Texas, Missouri, and Oklahoma), = -0.5729, = 0.051. This is not significant at p < 0.05, but only barely. If we add Maryland, which was founded as a refuge for Catholics and is plurality Catholic today, to make this a measure of the whole South, we get = -0.562, = 0.046.

Before looking at the non-Southern states, remember that we’re missing most of the low end. Pearson’s coefficient is woefully unsuited to this. Southern states don’t have this problem: all but Louisiana have exit poll data, and all but Kentucky (and West Virginia, which would be included by the Southern Baptist metric, and Delaware, which wouldn’t be) have voted. It’s pointless to give Pearson’s coefficient here; I include it in the hope that it motivates someone who does statistics to do a better analysis, or at least find more exit poll data. Non-Southern states: = -0.5124, = 0.061. Non-Southern states minus Texas, Nevada, and Vermont, = -0.1683, = 0.62.

State ??? White % for Sanders Winner
Mississippi 37.3% 31% Clinton
Louisiana 32.4% ??? Clinton
Georgia 31.4% 41% Clinton
Maryland 30.1% 42% Clinton
South Carolina 28.5% 46% Clinton
Alabama 26.4% 38% Clinton
North Carolina 21.6% 52% Clinton
Delaware 20.1% ??? Clinton
Virginia 19.9% 42% Clinton
Tennessee 16.8% 42% Clinton
Florida 15.9% 43% Clinton
Arkansas 15.8% 35% Clinton
New York 15.2% 50% Clinton
Illinois 14.9% 57% Clinton
New Jersey 14.5% N/A N/A
Michigan 14.2% 56% Sanders
Ohio 12.0% 47% Clinton
Texas 11.9% 41% Clinton
Missouri 11.5% 54% Clinton
Pennsylvania 10.8% 47% Clinton
Connecticut 10.3% 50% Clinton
Indiana 9.1% 59% Sanders
Nevada 9.0% 49% Clinton
Kentucky 8.2% N/A N/A
Massachusetts 8.1% 50% Clinton
Oklahoma 8.0% 56% Sanders
Rhode Island 7.5% ??? Sanders
California 6.7% N/A N/A
Kansas 6.2% ??? Sanders
Wisconsin 6.1% 59% Sanders
Minnesota 4.6% ??? Sanders
Nebraska 4.5% ??? Sanders
Colorado 4.3% ??? Sanders
Alaska 4.3% ??? Sanders
Arizona 4.2% ??? Clinton
Washington 3.7% ??? Sanders
West Virginia 3.6% N/A N/A
Hawaii 3.1% ??? Sanders
New Mexico 3.0% N/A N/A
Iowa 2.7% 46% Clinton
Oregon 2.0% N/A N/A
Wyoming 1.3% ??? Sanders
Utah 1.3% ??? Sanders
New Hampshire 1.2% 61% Sanders
South Dakota 1.1% N/A N/A
North Dakota 1.1% N/A N/A
Maine 1.0% ??? Sanders
Idaho 1.0% ??? Sanders
Vermont 0.9% 86% Sanders
Montana 0.7% N/A N/A
Advertisements

2 responses to “The Democratic primary, part 2

  1. Pingback: The Democratic primary, part 2 | Reaction Times

  2. Pingback: The mystery model: 2016 is not 2008 | nydwracu niþgrim, nihtbealwa mæst

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: