Bernie Sanders is leading Clinton in New York. It’s a miracle or simply he’s taking advantage of a Clinton negative moment? Both things.
Clinton passed a million votes in 2008 and easily won. Today with a million votes you can also lose. What’s the reason? The reason is that, then as now, Clinton is weak among minorities, despite the victory against Obama, while Sanders really like to Hispanics and begins to taste too much to the African-American Community.
Unfortunately for him, Obama made only a full tank of African-Americans. He lost heavily in the Bronx, Queens, and also in Brooklyn. These boroughs have a Hispanic majority and then they chose or Clinton or to abstain. In fact, the turnout was not very high.
Sanders, for obvious reasons, doesn’t have the same problems of Obama. He can speak to the hearts of all Americans except the high-middle-class and upper-class because they vote for Clinton.
Senator of Vermont instead may rely on the: Hispanics votes that be overturned the outcome of the 2008 elections in the boroughs, African American votes, Asian Minority votes and Italian Americans votes, who believe in Pope Francis and know that their spiritual leader rooting for Bernie Sanders.
Nowadays the turnover of black voters will not reach the levels of 2008, but will be better than in other States. Sanders now has more black votes than Clinton in New York. Until yesterday, the average African American who voted for him were 2.2% of the general population compared to 2.5% for Clinton. Today Clinton can count on barely 2%, while Sanders has the 5-7%.
Unlike in South, Hispanics in North East will support Sanders participating in the total turnout of 19 April with a 7.5% of the entire community. In New York there are also many Asian and even the Big Apple will support Bernie.
What remains to Clinton? The rich white and Protestant vote that it will not lose its privileges, perhaps, in the past years gained with her husband Bill.
Well, unfortunately for her, today, compared to 2008, missing its electorate the Hispanics, the Italian Americans, Asians. And, to make matters worse, the turnout will increase further because the registered Democratic voters increased by half a million, and because the Independents increased by more than a hundred thousand votes.
Sanders won mathematically and logically, adding 500,000 new Democrats voters and 100,000 new Independent voters to the result of Obama in 2008 and, by subtracting a part of him some black-voters, who will remain at home, and adding, on the other hand, very Hispanic voters (which, consequently, must be subtracted from Clinton, as well as the Italian-American and Asian voters).
My current projection ends with a simple unscientific calculation: Clinton, losing 10% of turnover, down from about 100,000 votes, obtains 961.200 votes, while Sanders, gaining 500,000 new Democrat-voters, 100,000 new Independent-voters, gets 1,351,000 votes, equal to 58.43%. Clinton will get 41.57%.
Sanders will gain 144 Pledged Delegates, Clinton 103.