Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Sunday, February 23, 2025
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 604)
Uncategorized

2016 Maryland Republican Primary

38 Delegates: Winner-Take-All Closed Primary (April 26, 2016)

Total delegates include 10 base at-large, 24 for the 8 congressional districts, 3 party and 1 bonus. Read delegate allocation rules below polling table.

[election_2016_polls]

Old Line State Polling Data

[wpdatatable id=59]

Latest 2016 Maryland Republican Primary polls and aggregate average. All 38 delegates in The Old Line State sent to the Republican National Convention are allocated to presidential candidates based on the results of the winner-take-all Maryland Republican Primary. [Resolutions 2., 3., and 4.]

  • 24 district delegates are to be allocated to presidential contenders based on the primary results in each of the 8 congressional districts: each congressional district is assigned 3 National Convention delegates and the presidential contender receiving the greatest number of votes in that district will receive all 3 of that district’s National Convention delegates. The National Convention District delegates are directly elected on the primary ballot. Each voter chooses up to 3 delegates and the 3 highest vote getters are elected.
  • 14 at-large delegates (10 base at-large delegates plus 1 bonus delegates plus 3 RNC delegates) are to be allocated to the presidential contender receiving the greatest number of votes in the primary statewide.

[ssbp]

2016 Maryland Republican Primary 38 Delegates: Winner-Take-All Closed Primary (April

Opinion

Terry-Hulk-Hogan-Gawker

Hulk Hogan, whose real name is Terry Bollea, testifies in court on Tuesday during his trial against Gawker Media, in St Petersburg, Fla. (Photo: John Pendygraft/AP)

If you’ve been following Hulk Hogan’s successful suit against Gawker or Donald Trump’s rumble with a gossip writer, you may have come across some missing people. Both stories lean on “love” triangles in which one of the sides, the woman, is of so little consequence she’s rarely even named.

The men may act with warped motives, but they star in their sordid dramas. By contrast, the women are virtually inanimate objects. They are unthinking hockey pucks being passed among boys to score points against other boys. Doesn’t the alleged source of discord rate at least an honorable mention — or dishonorable one? We’ll take either.

In the Hogan case, Gawker posted a secretly recorded video of the wrestler having sex with the wife of a friend. It was a setup by the friend, a radio personality named Bubba the Love Sponge. A jury awarded Hogan $115 million in damages for the violation of his privacy.

In the course of the reportage, we learn Hulk’s real name, Terry Bollea. We are told that Bubba’s name at birth was Todd Alan Clem. As for Mrs. Love Sponge, much of the commentary leaves her name out altogether. It is Heather Clem, for the record.

It happens that Heather was a real player here, in cahoots with her (now estranged) husband to cash in on Hogan’s public humiliation. She wasn’t tricked into playing the co-starring role in the racy video. So give her credit — for something.

In Trump world, women get passed around like canapes at a cocktail party. When the woman has an incensed male partner, the coverage of the conflict portrays the men as giant elk locking horns in Rocky Mountain National Park. As for the woman they’re allegedly fighting over, she could have moved to Antarctica for all anyone seems to care.

The case of Trump vs. gossip writer A.J. Benza is a notable example. While Benza was on a radio show, Trump called in to announce: “I’ve been successful with your girlfriend. … While you were getting onto the plane to go to California thinking she was your girlfriend, she was someplace that you wouldn’t have been very happy with.”

Benza retaliated with “I can’t wait till your little daughter gets a little older for me.” It was on that level.

Who was the girlfriend? I Googled so that you don’t have to. She’s a model named Kara Young.

Trump did not abduct Young. She joined him of her own volition. And lest you, gentle readers, think we’re being judgmental, let us opine that it would take a sturdy woman to pair with the likes of Benza.

So she, too, should rank as an active player here deserving pity, condemnation or congratulations — but definitely recognition.

In the Italian operatic tradition, Young would have been strangled by now. But then again, the woman doesn’t matter here. Benza had eyes only for Trump’s throat. He went so far as to enlist his cheating partner in his counterattacks, saying Young told him that Trump wears hair plugs. Aha, so The Donald isn’t the hairy beast he pretends to be.

Trump’s bragging of sexual conquests reeks of insecurity and desperation. His attacks on women’s appearance are more pathetic than insulting. I swear, I almost feel sorry for him.

But I don’t feel very sorry for the men he mortifies. They chose Trump girls.

There are good women out there. There are party girls who don’t care. And there are bad women as most of us would define “bad.” Point is, when they are part of the story, they should all be put in it.

If you've been following Hulk Hogan's successful

Opinion

Hillary-Clinton-Andrew-Cuomo-Minimum-Wage-Rally

Hillary Clinton and Gov. Andrew Cuomo celebrate the passing of New York’s $15 minimum wage at the Javits Center. (Photo: AP)

What if the latest craze among the big-government crowd in both major political parties is to use the power of government to force employers to pay some of their employees more than their services are worth to the employers?

What if this represents an intrusion by government into the employer-employee relationship? What if this consists of the government’s effectively saying that it knows the financial worth of employees’ services better than the employers and the employees do?

What if the minimum wage, now on the verge of being raised to $15 per hour everywhere in the land, is really the government’s using threats of ruin and force to transfer wealth? What if the $15-per-hour figure is based on a political compromise rather than on free market forces or economic realities?

What if these wealth transfers will have profound unintended economic consequences and will negatively affect everyone?

What if one of the politically intended consequences is that the employees whose salaries will rise will show gratitude not to their employers, who will be paying them more than they earn, by working better but to the politicians who will have forced the employers to pay them more by voting for those politicians?

What if the right of an employee to sell labor by going to work and the right of an employer to purchase that labor by paying a salary are part of the natural right to exchange goods and services, which the Constitution was written to protect? What if during America’s most prosperous periods, that right was protected by the courts?

What if there are clauses in the Constitution that protect that right but the modern courts have ignored them? What if the Constitution prohibits the government from interfering with freely entered-into contracts but the government does so anyway? What if the courts have approved this?

What if the Constitution prohibits the government from taking property from people without charging them with wrongdoing and proving the charge to a jury but the government does so anyway? What if the courts have declined to interfere with all this theft?

What if it is none of the government’s business how an employer and an employee decide on salary? What if the employer and the employee know far more about the worth of the employee’s services and the needs of the employer than the politicians in the government do?

What if the government has fundamental misunderstandings of the way businesses earn money, create wealth and pay salaries? What if the government’s mindset is stuck on the governmental economic model? What if that model has no competition, guaranteed revenue and no creation of wealth?

What if that governmental mindset is one of control and central planning rather than appealing to the needs of consumers by providing goods and services better, faster and more cheaply than the competition? What if the government has no need to be better, faster and cheaper because taxpayers are forced to pay it for services they often don’t use and the government has no competition?

What if forcing employers to pay employees more than their services are worth results in higher prices for the goods and services the employers produce? What if the effect of the minimum wage rise is to transfer wealth not from employers to employees but from consumers to employees? What if the rising prices of goods and services, caused by the forced increase in wages, put some of those goods and services beyond the reach of some folks who rely upon them?

What if the folks who can no longer afford some goods and services on which they have come to rely are the very same people whom the politicians have boasted they are helping by the increase in the minimum wage? What if the politicians who have done this do not know what they are talking about? What if they believe they can use minimum wage increases to bribe the poor for votes — just as they bribe the wealthy with bailouts and the middle class with tax cuts?

What if there are other unintended consequences to the governmental imposition of a minimum wage? What if, rather than pay employees more than they are worth, employers stop employing some of them? What if this results in higher unemployment? What if the rise in the minimum wage has the unintended consequence of harming the folks it is supposed to help?

What if the poor are better off being gainfully employed and earning less than $15 an hour, with an opportunity for advancement, than not working, earning nothing and relying on welfare? What if that welfare burden adds to already overtaxed state budgets?

What if states raise taxes to care for the newly unemployed? What if the newly unemployed lose the self-esteem they once enjoyed when they were gainfully employed?

What if all this came about not because of market forces, such as supply and demand, and not because people worked harder and produced more but because of lawless, greedy politicians — heedless of basic economics — who think they can write any law, regulate any behavior and tax any event without adverse consequences?

What if the politicians who caused this did so just to win the votes of those they promised to help? What if these politicians only helped themselves? What if the minimum wage increase is a fraud? What do we do about it?

Judge Andrew Napolitano: What if the minimum

Elections

Donald Trump Will Probably Erase Poor Wisconsin Performance in New York

Ted-Cruz-Wisconsin-Victory-Speech

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz gives his victory speech in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on Tuesday April 5, 2016. (Photo: Reuters/Kamil Krzaczynski)

Without a doubt, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz won a decisive victory in the Wisconsin Republican primary on Tuesday night, beating Donald Trump 48.1% to 35.1%. Ohio Gov. John Kasich won just 14.1% of the vote in a state he previously said was a good fit for his campaign.

While the margin of victory might have been surprising to those who follow polls, Sen. Cruz’s win was predicted and expected by those who follow demographics. Most pundits have focused on Mr. Trump’s “Worst Week” to explain the outcome, but truthfully we have enough demographic data from previous contests at this point in this point in the cycle to expect The Donald would receive roughly 35%.

That said, the race wasn’t without some surprises.

With 99% of the precincts reporting, Sen. Cruz won 48.1% of the vote, far more than the 25% to 30% he won in the four Wisconsin border states. That surge was fueled by his performance among certain demographic groups that he thus far has shown no ability to win. Put more bluntly, he showed signs of expanding what is his rather limited base of support.

STATE TRUMP CRUZ KASICH
Iowa 24.3% 27.6% 1.9%
Minnesota 24.3 29.0 5.8
Michigan 36.5 24.9 24.3
Illinois 38.8 30.3 19.7
Wisconsin* 34.0 49.3 14.3

Nevertheless, the Wisconsin Republican primary was more likely a speed bump than a “turning point” in the Republican nomination, as the Texas senator suggested in his victory speech in Milwaukee. Aside from the fact we have no data to support a natural appeal among these voters, what we do have supports the theory that Wisconsin really may be a special case.

We won’t reiterate everything, but unanimous support from influential local talk radio, as well as the endorsement and on-loan GOTV machine from popular Gov. Scott Walker, which was built from having to win 3 statewide elections in 4 years, is estimated to have contribute roughly 10 percentage points to Sen. Cruz’s margin. Sure, there are states remaining that will be favorable to him out West, but that multi-layered level of support will no longer be the case, ever again.

Now, Sen. Cruz is now moving into unfriendly territory and, if Gov. Kasich continues to fade as he did in Wisconsin, demographic and polling data alike indicate the front-runner’s delegate haul could actually increase. The opposite could happen, as well, but as high as 8 in 10 supporters of Gov. Kasich say Mr. Trump is their top second choice. That numbers depends on the state, but consider where the battle for delegates is headed at this point in the Republican nomination.

Mr. Trump leads on the PPD average of New York Republican Primary polls by 36.5% with more than 50%. If those numbers hold, he is poised to potentially take all of the states 95 delegates and more than make up for Tuesday night. The Empire State, Mr. Trump’s home state, votes on April 19 and two weeks is a very long time in politics to sustain momentum.

The next big contest comes on April 26 in Pennsylvania. There are 712 delegates up for grabs in the Keystone State “Loophole Primary” contest, where Mr. Trump leads on the PPD average by double-digits and is at nearly 50% of the vote in some surveys. In the short-term, that may change in response to Wisconsin. But in two week, if Mr. Trump takes New York overwhelmingly (it’s just a matter of the margin), the narrative will shift again.

Remember, Sen. Cruz only won his home state with roughly 43.8% of the vote, not an impressive margin of victory even considering the number of candidates in the race. Gov. Kasich also failed to win a majority in his state, though he won with 46.8% and topped Sen. Cruz. If Mr. Trump wins a majority, which the PPD Election Projection Model (and others) fully expects him to do, the results will (or should) be a big story moving into Pennsylvania.

The bottom line is that it is dangerous to read to much into the results of one night before supporting data is available to back up those assumptions. Demographics are demographics, which is why we constantly argue (correctly) that pre-Labor Day general election polling is absolutely meaningless and without predictive value. Our suspicion–actually, it’s a bit more than just a suspicion–is that Sen. Cruz, his supporters and the Republican Establishment should cherish the moment while it lasts.

Since he outperformed our model’s expectations on Tuesday, we still project Donald J. Trump will have roughly 1,192 delegates by the time the votes are counted on June 7, when the final contests are held. Worth noting, a recent [content_tooltip id=”37972″ title=”SurveyUSA Poll”] that broke down support by region, suggests we may be underestimating his haul in California and, while he’d still be 45 delegates short of a majority, it’s a very doable number.

Considering who he just put in charge of the delegate hunt between June 7 and July 18, he still is favored to put together the 1,237 delegates needed to clinch the nomination on the first ballot at the convention in Cincinnati. Worth noting, as well, is that the irony and uncertainty of the process remains if Mr. Trump fails to put together the remaining delegates in this scenario. His post-Wisconsin statement may have been combative and brash, but it’s absolutely true.

The party has no intention of allowing him to win on a ballot, either. He is merely a means to an end, or a delegate denier in an effort to deny Mr. Trump an outright majority of delegates. But I digress.

Ted Cruz won a decisive victory over

Opinion

Thomas-Sowell

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

The presidential election prospects for the Democrats are so bad this year that only the Republicans can save them — as Republicans have saved them before.

Will a Supreme Court without a single Protestant justice rule that an “under-representation” of any group is evidence of discrimination?

Here is a trick question: What percentage of American households have incomes in the top 10 percent? Answer: 51 percent of American households are in the top 10 percent in income at some point in the course of a lifetime — usually in their older years. Those who want us to envy and resent the top 10 percent are urging half of us to envy and resent ourselves.

His Super Bowl win gave retiring quarterback Peyton Manning his record 200th victory. But it may also have benefitted losing young quarterback Cam Newton, by giving him a very sobering experience after his exhilarating 17 and 1 season. Over the course of his career, Cam Newton may become an even greater quarterback than he would have been without this setback early in his career.

According to the Washington Post, record numbers of college students say that they plan to engage in protests. Our educational system may not teach students much math or science, but students learn from gutless academic administrators that mob rule is the way to get what you want — and to silence those who disagree with you.

Many Americans were not only saddened but angry that Iran publicized photographs of captured American sailors weeping. But do you think that Reverend Jeremiah Wright was saddened and angry? What about his 20-year disciple in the White House? Let us not forget that President Obama voluntarily humbled himself — and America — by bowing to foreign leaders.

People who are willing to consider virtually any conceivable excuse for criminals’ acts cut no slack at all for decisions that police have to make in a split second, at the risk of their lives. For some people, it is not enough that cops put themselves at risk to protect the rest of us. They want cops to risk their lives for the sake of handling criminals more gently.

What are the chances that the world’s greatest violinist would make a good quarterback? Or that the world’s greatest quarterback would make a good violinist? Why then would anyone think that a successful businessman would make a good president — especially when he is demonstrating almost daily why he would not?

Many people, including Senator Bernie Sanders, repeat incessantly that the economic system is “rigged” by the rich — without providing either specifics or evidence. The latest figures I have seen show that the 400 richest people in the world have recently lost $19 billion on net balance. If they have rigged the system, they have certainly done a very incompetent job of it.

If you listen carefully to what Senator Marco Rubio says, he is not for instant amnesty. He is for amnesty on the installment plan, though of course he would not call it that. Does anyone who knows anything about politics seriously believe that “legalization” of illegal immigrants will end that issue, without turning into citizenship over time?

At last we have reached the point where we can say, “Next year this time, Obama will not be president.” But the disasters he leaves behind will plague us for years to come. And some of those disasters may strike even before he is gone.

Some countries in Europe have sealed their borders against refugees from the Middle East, as the Soviet Union once sealed its borders against people getting in or getting out. But somehow it is said by some to be impossible to seal our border with Mexico.

When the Whigs could not get their act together on the crucial issue of their day — slavery — that led some Whigs to leave the party and form the Republican party, with Lincoln as its candidate for president. Today’s Republican party has repeatedly failed to get its act together on immigration. That has produced the current divisiveness that may threaten them with the fate of the Whigs.

Historians of the future, when they look back on our times, may be completely baffled when trying to understand how Western civilization welcomed vast numbers of people hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization, people who had been taught that they have a right to kill those who do not share their beliefs.
[mybooktable book=”wealth-poverty-and-politics-an-international-perspective” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

Thomas Sowell gives his random thoughts on

Opinion

John Stossel Hosts Libertarian Presidential Forum

Libertarian presidential

Libertarian presidential candidates Gary Johnson, John McAfee and Austin Petersen discuss the top issues concerning voters. (Photo: FOX Business Network)

“Should a Jewish baker be forced to bake a cake for a Nazi wedding?”

I asked that strange but important question during last week’s debate between three Libertarian presidential candidates. You can see the second hour of that debate Friday, on my Fox Business Network TV show.

If you’re disappointed by Democrats’ and Republicans’ eagerness to limit your freedom, I urge you to check out the libertarians.

Presidential candidate Austin Petersen, founder of LibertarianRepublic.com, says individuals should be free to discriminate — for example, refuse to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple if gay marriage violates their beliefs.

Libertarian presidential candidate, and former New Mexico governor, Gary Johnson, wasn’t willing to go that far. It’s a reminder libertarians don’t always see eye to eye.

“If we discriminate on the basis of religion,” said Johnson, “you’re going to find a whole class of people discriminated against. … So it’s harm to others.”

Many people agree, but the debate over the Nazi wedding cake is a reminder that laws with good intentions often have bad consequences. If sellers can’t decide to whom they will sell, they may be forced to participate in activities they consider immoral.

Without freedom, people can’t reveal their true preferences and show us where they stand. I’d like to know which businesses bigots run.

Petersen was quick to add that he would never buy anything from a shop that refused to serve gays. “I would stand outside these people’s store and I would encourage a boycott.”

Most libertarians argue that it isn’t government’s job to tell people how to conduct private business. As Petersen put it, “Government is not supposed to make us into better people. That’s not what the United States was founded on. The United States was founded so that we could be whatever we wanted.”

Some of us may want to be jerks. As long as we do it with our own bodies and our own property, that’s part of freedom, say most libertarians.

The other candidate in the forum, software entrepreneur John McAfee, found a middle ground. He pointed out that whether we allow a business to discriminate may depend on whether consumers have options, as consumers usually do.

“If you’re the only baker in town, it may be a problem,” he said, but normally, “no one is forcing you to buy anything.”

The free market gives people choices. There are lots of bakers, but just one government. That’s why government must never discriminate, but if private businesses cannot, does “private” have real meaning? What about freedom of association?

Most businesses eagerly take money from gay customers — or Muslims or transgender people or people of a different race. A few won’t. That’s part of the diversity of a free country, and a beauty of a free market is that customers punish bigoted businesses.

All three Libertarian Party candidates understand that. But tune in and see what you think.

Petersen was the only candidate of the three to call himself “pro-life.” But on abortion, as with cakes, he wants people to find solutions without involving government.

“The president has no authority to enact laws on abortion,” he said. If Petersen were president, he said he would “try and find every non-coercive measure that we can to end abortion. And there are options. Ending the federal war on drugs would allow women to purchase birth control over the counter.”

But like his libertarian opponents, he would not send government in to make these decisions. Gov. Johnson said, “I do not think it is the federal government’s job or the state government’s job to interfere in this process.” McAfee said, “A woman’s right to her own body is one of the fundamental issues in this country.”

Sometimes libertarians sound like conservatives, sometimes like liberals. Unlike conservatives and liberals, however, libertarians stick to the idea of keeping government out of our business. Government is force, and life is better when people are left free to make their own choices.
If we didn’t try to use government to boss each other around, think how much more pleasant, and free, life would be.

John Stossel reviews the recent Libertarian Presidential

Elections

Ted-Cruz-Carly-Fiorina-WI

Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, right, is seen here on Monday, March 28, 2016, with former Republican candidate and Hewlitt-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina in Rothschild, Wisconsin. (Photo: AP)

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has won the Wisconsin Republican Primary, defeating New York businessman and front-runner Donald J. Trump in the winner-take-most state. Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who Sen. Cruz began to target as well in the final weeks, will come in a distant third.

The Republican Establishment and talk radio chose to make their stand in The Badger State local talk radio lined up against Mr. Trump in unanimity. Charlie Sykes, Jeff Wagner of WTMJ, and Mark Belling, Vicki McKenna and Jay Weber of WISN have been in the tank for Sen. Cruz, which has disproportionately impacted regions of the state that typically hand him large margins of victory.

Add an endorsement from the popular Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Gov. Kasich, who appeals to many of the same voters as Mr. Trump, and it equals a deficit. The Donald himself acknowledged as much this week.

“In certain areas — the city areas — I’m not doing well,” Mr. Trump told voters at a rally in Racine. “I’m not doing well because nobody knows my message. They were given misinformation.”

Indeed, Mr. Trump has performed above average in Rust Belt states slightly similiar to Wisconsin, but exit polls showed the electorate resembled Iowa more, where Sen. Cruz won. Mr. Trump’s populist message of “fair” trade played only with roughly 30% of Republican primary voters in Wisconsin and his economic message struggled to break through amid a series of controversies, some of which were self-inflicted.

But Sen. Cruz and his supporters who reluctantly lined up behind him to stop Mr. Trump from clinching the nomination are hoping The Badger State marks the beginning of the end for the New York businessman.

“Tonight is a turning point. It’s a rallying cry,” Sen. Cruz said in his victory speech in Milwaukee. “And the people have a choice.”

He touted his past wins and raising some $2 million dollars on the day of the contest.

“Four very different states — Utah, Colorado, North Dakota, Wisconsin,” he added. “Four victories.”

With the exception of Wisconsin, the states are actually quite similiar in demographics and process. But what was also consistent was the outside help he received from PACs and anti-Trump supporters across the board. The Club for Growth PAC spent $1.4 million in ads in support of Sen. Cruz, even endorsing for the first time ever.

“Tonight marks a major pivot in the GOP race away from Donald Trump and toward Ted Cruz,” said Club for Growth Action President David McIntosh.” Not long ago, Wisconsin was Donald Trump’s to lose. He had a big lead in Wisconsin, but, with the help of a $1 million Club for Growth ad buy, an excellent campaign by Ted Cruz, and Governor Scott Walker’s strong endorsement, Trump lost. The door is now closing on Trump’s chance to get to 1,237.”

“Sen. Cruz tonight showed signs of expanding what was his rather limited base of support previously,” said PPD’s senior political analyst Richard Baris. “He won 43% of the non-evangelical vote tonight in Wisconsin, according to exit polls, beating Trump at 37% and Kasich at 17%. But Wisconsin really is a special case and Sen. Cruz is now moving to unfavorable territory.”

There are 42 delegates at stake in Wisconsin, with 23 of them being allocated to the winner of the statewide vote. The remaining delegates are allocated based on the vote in congressional districts. According to the PPD Election Projection Model, while the win in Wisconsin was big and denies Mr. Trump delegates, Sen. Cruz still has a very steep hill to climb moving forward.

Mr. Trump leads on the PPD average of New York Republican Primary polls by 36.5% with more than 50%. If those numbers hold, he is poised to potentially take all of the states 95 delegates and more than make up for Tuesday night. The Empire State, Mr. Trump’s home state, votes on April 19.

The next big contest comes on April 26 in Pennsylvania. There are 712 delegates up for grabs in the Keystone State “Loophole Primary” contest, where Mr. Trump leads on the PPD average by double-digits with nearly 50% of the vote.

Candidate Popular
Vote		 Delegate Votes
Soft
Pledged		 Soft
Unpledged		 Soft
Total		 Hard Total
Cruz, Rafael Edward “Ted” 527,067  48.25% 36  85.71%   36  85.71% 36  85.71%
Trump, Donald John, Sr. 383,604  35.12% 6  14.29%   6  14.29% 6  14.29%
Kasich, John Richard 153,509  14.05%        
Rubio, Marco A. 10,469   0.96%        
Carson, Benjamin Solomon “Ben”, Sr. 5,563   0.51%        
Bush, John Ellis “Jeb” 3,109   0.28%        
Paul, Randal H. “Rand” 2,476   0.23%        
Uncommitted 2,267   0.21%        
Huckabee, Michael Dale “Mike” 1,414   0.13%        
Christie, Christopher James “Chris” 1,302   0.12%        
Fiorina, Carleton Sneed “Carly” 809   0.07%        
Santorum, Richard John “Rick” 512   0.05%        
Gilmore, James Stuart “Jim”, III 241   0.02%        
Total 1,092,342 100.00% 42 100.00%   42 100.00% 42 100.00%

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has won the

Elections

Bernie-Sanders-Michigan

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt, acknowledges the crowd after speaking at a rally at the Macomb Community College, Saturday, March 5, 2016, in Warren, Mich. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)

Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders has defeated frontrunner Hillary Clinton in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary, marking the sixth contest win in a row. Sen. Sanders won 71% of independents compared to 29% for Mrs. Clinton. However, Mrs. Clinton leads 53% to 47% among Democrats, a far larger block of the electorate.

But the honest and trustworthy issue continued to plagued the former secretary of state. Four in 10 Democratic primary voters in The Badger State say Mrs. Clinton is not honest and trustworthy, while 9 in 10 who say the opposite of Sanders. That’s among Sanders’ highest honesty ratings in any primary to date, even approaching his rating in his home state of Vermont.

However, despite his recent success, Sen. Sanders is still the clear underdog for the Democratic nomination. Mrs. Clinton has won large majorities in Southern states and the party’s nomination process is proportional. It’s all about the margin of victory and pledged superdelegates are overwhelmingly favoring Mrs. Clinton–469 to 31.

Candidate Popular
Vote		 Delegate Votes
Soft
Pledged		 Soft
Unpledged		 Soft
Total		 Hard Total
Sanders, Bernard “Bernie” 563,134  56.53% 45  52.33%   45  46.88% 45  46.88%
Clinton, Hillary Diane Rodham 429,761  43.14% 36  41.86% 4  40.00% 40  41.67% 36  37.50%
O’Malley, Martin Joseph 1,819   0.18%        
Uncommitted 1,447   0.15%       10  10.42%
(available)   5   5.81% 6  60.00% 11  11.46% 5   5.21%
Total 996,161 100.00% 86 100.00% 10 100.00% 96 100.00% 96 100.00%

Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders has defeated

Polls

WISCONSIN REPUBLICAN PRIMARY EXIT POLLS UPDATED BY THE MINUTE

Trump-Cruz-Kasich-AP

Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump, left, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, center, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, right. (Photos: AP/Associated Press)

Preliminary Wisconsin Republican Primary exit polls show more than half (56%) say the candidate who gets the most votes should get the nomination. Four in 10 (42%) say they favor a contested convention this summer, agreeing that delegates should pick whichever nominee they think best.

Not surprisingly, the Wisconsin Republican Primary exit polls show a deep division on this question between Donald J. Trump’s supporters, who overwhelmingly oppose a contested convention, and those supporting Texas Sen. Ted Cruz or Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Ban on Muslim Immigration

As we have seen in other states throughout the Republican primary season, there’s widespread support (7 in 10) for Mr. Trump’s proposal to ban immigration from non-U.S. Muslims until they can be effectively screened. Mr. Trump has won 47% of these voters on average in previous states, while Sen. Cruz has won 28%. However, the Texas senator has been closer to the front-runner among these voters in some recent contests, notably in North Carolina and Missouri.

Still, Sen. Cruz lost both states in tight races to Mr. Trump.

Deportation

More than six in 10 Wisconsin Republican Primary voters think illegal immigrants should be offered a path to legal status, which could be the highest of any state this year. Thus far, the 59% in Virginia was the highest measured. Only a third said they support deporting illegal immigrants, far fewer than in previous primaries. Voters who support deportation have backed Mr. Trump in previous primaries.

Sen. Cruz beat Mr. Trump in North Carolina, Missouri and Illinois among the larger group that favors a path to legal status, and Gov. Kasich won them in Ohio, the only state he has won.

Values Voters

While roughly a third of Wisconsin Republican Primary voters say it’s most important to them that a candidate shares their values, nearly as many say they want someone who will “bring needed change” above all. Thus far, Sen. Cruz has won 40% of values voters juxtaposed to 20% for Gov. Kasich and 12% for Mr. Trump. In previous contests, Mr. Trump has won an average 46% of voters who say “needed change” is more important, while 23% went for Sen. Cruz and 12% for Gov. Kasich.

Religious, Ideological Demographics

In the preliminary Wisconsin Republican Primary exit polls, roughly 3 in 10 say they’re “very” conservative and 4 in 10 self-identified as evangelical, which is roughly the historical norm for The Badger State. Sen. Cruz has won an average 41% of“very” conservative voters to date and 33% of evangelicals. On the flip side, he’s won just 18% from non-evangelicals, making his path forward extremely difficult.

Evangelicals, who are flocking to Sen. Cruz, have been less of a share of the electorate in Wisconsin than in other state primaries. In preliminary exit poll results, roughly a third said they are very conservative, which could be the most ever in exit polls going back to 1976. Roughly 4 in 10 Wisconsin Republican Primary voters say they are evangelical, a bloc Mr. Trump has won in the past, which is significantly less than the average (59%) in 2016.

Fifty-three percent said they were supporting Sen. Cruz, while 35% were going for Mr. Trump. Only 11% said they were backing Ohio Gov. John Kasich. However, Mr. Trump is leading among independent with 43% to 38% for Cruz.

Change Agent “Outsider” Factor

Nearly half of Wisconsin Republican voters want someone with political experience in politics, close to the high this election cycle. In previous states, Mr. Trump has won only 7% of these voters, while 33% went for Sen. Cruz and 24% for Gov. Kasich. Still, about half of voters instead say they’d like the next president to be someone from “outside the political establishment.” Mr. Trump has previously won two-thirds of the “outsider” vote.

Still, Sen. Cruz is carrying 48% to 37% among voters “angry” with the federal government.

Late Deciders

Four in 10 Wisconsin Republican Primary voters say they made up their minds less than a month ago, which is on track to mirror previous primaries. Meanwhile, six in 10 say they decided in the last month. Mr. Trump has dominated among early deciders in previous contests, effectively winning the debate over the past 8 months. However, among late deciders either Sen. Cruz, Gov. Kasich or others who have since dropped out have typically done better, outside of Florida and a few other states.

Preliminary Wisconsin Republican Primary exit polls show

Polls

WISCONSIN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY EXIT POLLS UPDATED BY THE MINUTE

Hillary-Clinton-Bernie-Sanders-Getty

Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, left, and Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, right. (Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images; Joshua Lott/Getty Images)

According to early Wisconsin Democratic Primary exit polls, voters say Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders is more inspirational but see Hillary Clinton as more electable. The question highlights one of the divisions within the Democratic Party, which is often less cited than on the Republican side of the aisle.

Democratic primary voters in Wisconsin say Mrs. Clinton has a better chance to beat Republican front-runner Donald J. Trump in November. It’s a result that captures the division between the Democratic candidates.

Sen. Sanders is winning 71% of independents compared to 29% for Mrs. Clinton. However, Mrs. Clinton leads 53% to 47% among Democrats, a far larger block of the electorate.

Enthusiasm Gap

While Republicans are breaking turnout records across the country, Sen. Sanders continues to generate the most excitement. About three-quarters of Wisconsin Democratic Primary voters are “excited” or “optimistic” about the prospect of a Sanders presidency. However, excitement for Sen. Sanders twice as high than it is for Clinton.

Honest & Trustworthy

Four in 10 Democratic primary voters in The Badger State say Mrs. Clinton is not honest and trustworthy, while 9 in 10 who say the opposite of Sanders. That’s among Sanders’ highest honesty ratings in any primary to date, even approaching his rating in his home state of Vermont.

Race

Whites represent more than 8 in 10 voters in preliminary Wisconsin Democratic Primary exit poll results, far more than the 60% they’ve averaged across the 2016 contests, thus far. Nonwhites make up fewer than 2 in 10 voters in the state–including just 1 in 10 who are blacks–far below their average levels this year, 40% and 26%, respectively.

That’s obviously good news for the socialist senator from Vermont.

In previous contests, whites have voted 50% to 48% for Sen. Sanders juxtaposed to 72% to 26% for Mrs. Clinton among nonwhites. Sen. Sanders won whites in North Carolina, Missouri, Illinois and Michigan, though he actually lost them in Ohio, Florida and Mississippi.

Ideology

According to preliminary Wisconsin Democratic Primary exit polls, two-thirds say they’re liberals, including a quarter who say they’re “very” liberal. These results are on track to break previous records in Wisconsin Democratic primaries dating back to 1976. In 2008, when Barack Obama defeated Mrs. Clinton, only 46% were liberal and 16% were very liberal.

Not surprisingly, Sen. Sanders has done far better among liberals than he has with moderates and conservatives. However, only a quarter of Wisconsin Democratic Primary voters say they’re moderates, which is on track to be a record low and well below the 40% measured in 2008.

Age

Sen. Sanders has dominated among young voters in previous contests, winning 70% of voters between the ages 18 to 29, while Mrs. Clinton won 73% of seniors. Thus far, this demographic has accounted for 17% of the vote so far in 2016, which could end up the highest in Democratic primaries since 1976, up from 14% in 2008, 9% in 2004 and 8% in 2000. However, they make up only a little more than 1 in 10 Wisconsin Democratic Primary voters in preliminary exit poll results.

Partisanship

Still, mainstream Democrats account for 7 in 10 voters in the preliminary Wisconsin Democratic Primary exit poll results, up from 62% in 2008. That, too, is on track to set a record in the state. While it would appear from the electorate’s ideology that Sen. Sanders has the edge, this could prove to be a boon for Mrs. Clinton.

The former secretary of state has performed done better with moderate Democrats in primaries to date, while Sen. Sanders has thumped her among independents.

Trade

Sen. Sanders hammered the issue of trade ahead of the Wisconsin Democratic Primary and continued to do so at campaign events in Pennsylvania. He won a surprise victory in Michigan on the issue, marking the worst polling debacle since the 1984 Democratic New Hampshire Primary. Trade helped him make Missouri and Illinois much closer than expect, but Mrs. Clinton blunted that momentum in Ohio.

In Wisconsin, more than 4 in 10 say trade takes away more American jobs, while fewer than 4 in 10 think it creates more jobs.

Realistic Policies

Voters think Mrs. Clinton’s policy proposals are more realistic than those proposed by Sen. Sanders’ policies (three-quarters vs. nearly two-thirds), but that gap is smaller than it’s been in previous primaries (76 vs. 57 percent). It’s similar to recent states – Michigan, Missouri and Illinois – where Sanders has fought closely with Clinton.

Commander-in-Chief

Despite Clinton’s far more extensive foreign policy resume, about as many think Sanders would be a better commander in chief as say so about Clinton.

According to early Wisconsin Democratic Primary exit polls say

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe