Democrats after Iowa: the head versus the heart
Iowa Democrats feel the Bern and Presidential election in Iowa, 2016
This article covering the 2016 presidential election was written outside the scope of Ballotpedia's encyclopedic coverage and does not fall under our neutrality policy or style guidelines. It is preserved as it was originally written. For our encyclopedic coverage of the 2016 election, click here.
 Date: November 8, 2016 |
Winner: Donald Trump (R) Hillary Clinton (D) • Jill Stein (G) • Gary Johnson (L) • Vice presidential candidates |
Important dates • Nominating process • Ballotpedia's 2016 Battleground Poll • Polls • Debates • Presidential election by state • Ratings and scorecards |
2028 • 2024 • 2020 • 2016 Have you subscribed yet?
Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew.
|
February 2, 2016
James A. Barnes is a member of the CNN Decision Desk and he helped to project the Democratic and Republican winners in Iowa.
In the wake of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s whisker-thin victory over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominating contest looks like a choice between heads and hearts of the party rank-and-file.
That contrast was on full display in how Iowa Democratic caucus-goers responded to the question on the television networks’ entrance poll: “Which one of these four candidate qualities mattered most in deciding whom to support today?” (The “entrance poll,” is the networks’ survey of a representative sampling of Iowa voters as they entered their caucus sites.)
Among Democrats who chose the option “can win in November,” Clinton was the choice of 77 percent and Sanders was favored by 17 percent. And among those who cited “has the right experience,” Clinton swamped Sanders by a margin of nearly 10-to-1: 88 percent to nine percent.
But for those Democrats who said the candidate quality “cares about people like me” mattered most in determining who they were supporting, Sanders won by more than a three-to-one margin, 74 percent to 22 percent. Democrats who wanted a candidate who was “honest and trustworthy” said they were supporting Sanders by more than an eight-to-one margin.
And those four options split Democratic caucus-goers right down the middle: 48 percent picked one of those first two candidate qualities, and 50 percent picked one of the second two qualities. Sanders has been reluctant to attack Clinton on her character, but perceptions among Democrats that she has a “compassion gap” or a “trust deficit” are potential openings he might be able to exploit. Clinton and her surrogates will no doubt continue to extol her experience and ability to win a general election in contrast to Sanders. Indeed, at his campaign rallies the Vermonter now regularly recites poll findings that he would defeat potential Republican nominees by margins just as great, if not greater, than Clinton would in a general election.
The other yawning divide in the Democratic nominating contest is the huge age gap between Sanders and Clinton supporters. Among the youngest cohort of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers, those aged 17-to-29, Sanders defeated Clinton by an overwhelming six-to-one margin. Put another way, in the 2008 Democratic caucuses the entrance poll found she won 11 percent of the youth vote in a field of seven Democratic contenders. Four years later, in a field of just three candidates, Clinton could only muster only 14 percent support among this age cohort while Sanders received the backing of 84 percent.
But Sanders may face the greater generational challenge, because Clinton swamped him among older Democrats in Iowa who tend to make up a larger share of the primary and caucus electorate. In Iowa, less than one-in-five Democratic caucus-goers were in the 17-to-29 cohort, while almost three-in-ten were seniors, 65 years old or older. Sanders managed to win only about one-quarter of these voters while Clinton captured almost seven-out-of-ten. Likewise, middle-aged Democrats, those 45-to-64 years old, made up more than a third, or a plurality, of the Democratic caucus electorate and Clinton carried this group over Sanders, 58 percent to 35 percent.
Still, Clinton’s youth gap could be troubling sign for her in the fall campaign. One of the assets Democrats have in a presidential election is a larger turnout of younger voters than in midterm elections. Barack Obama’s victories in 2008 and 2012 were fueled in no small part by the enthusiasm of younger voters and party strategists maintain that that advantage will return again in 2016, no matter who their nominee is. Clinton needs to show that she can excite younger voters in upcoming primaries—and she well may when states with younger minority voters start to hold their contests—in order to dispel concerns that she can’t draw the support of millennial voters the way Obama did.
If the Democratic contest does become a protracted struggle, there are few better politicians who can grind out a win than Clinton. Although she lost the 2008 nomination contest to Obama, Clinton displayed considerable tenacity in that race all the way to its final primaries. But that’s hardly the race that most pundits expected just over three months ago when Clinton was riding high after a strong first debate and an effective performance before a hostile congressional committee investigating the terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
For election and demographic information by county, please click on the below maps.
| Color Key |
|---|
| Winning candidate |
| Bernie Sanders |
| Hillary Clinton |
James A. Barnes is a senior writer for Ballotpedia and co-author of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics. He has conducted elite opinion surveys for National Journal, CNN and the on-line polling firm, YouGov.
See also
- Iowa Democrats feel the Bern
- Cruz wins Iowa the old-fashioned way
- Presidential election in Iowa, 2016
- Presidential Nominating Index: Clinton rules, but Sanders also rising
- Presidential Nominating Index: GOP elites tilt to Trump
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
- 2016 presidential candidate ratings and scorecards
- Presidential election, 2016/Straw polls
