In this article I’ve added a lot more references just to confirm what I’ve already advanced in previous articles.
In this case, I’ve studied the five Boroughs of the Big Apple and six Counties (Albany, Erie, Monroe, Oneida, Onondaga, Suffolk) in the State of New York. I’ve worked on Demography, Ethnicity, Religion, Geography, Polls, Surveys, Archives, Databases, etc. I had to greatly simplify my job to make it understandable.
I’ve divided the 11 Counties and I’ve considered the groups that distinguish their population. Specifically, I’ve considered the presence of the White Community, the Hispanics, the African Americans, the Jewish, the Asian Americans, the Native Americans, and ‘Others’. I’ve obtained a first result: Sanders will earn 6 of 11 votes out of New York. I’ve divided the enrolled voters by ethnicity, age, genre, status. I’ve applied to each of them a different turnout.
In New York City I’ve assigned a different turnout for Borough according to welfare state, while outside New York City I’ve performed the same procedure adding geographic features. The Sanders superiority even in NYC is a great result but not too unexpected, given the fact that Manhattan is the only Borough that has the usual features of a metropolis or a Big City, while the other six Boroughs are large residential areas where life flows in a different manner.
I also split the White Community by nationality and I’ve had confirmation of the Clinton supremacy in the Irish, Italian, English minorities, discovering that Clinton’s superiority is estimated approximately at 63% to 37% even if the affluence of these minorities is sometimes lower: from 17% of the Irish Community to the 11% of Italian Community.
I’ve divided, also, the Asian Community in two large families and worked on Chinese and Korean. The Chinese Community is characterized by a turnover of 18% while the Korean Community is characterized by a turnover of 21% which will tend to grow in the future.
The Jewish Community has enrolled 200,000 to the Democratic Party and will help it with a turnout that will exceed 20%. The African American Community is, at the moment, indecisive and it just line up in the coming hours. Currently, his turnout is 13%. While the Hispanic Community has a slightly higher turnout and is openly aligned in favor of Sanders with percentages that will be nearly 75% regards Millenials group in some Boroughs.
I’ve assigned to the candidates different percentages depending on the County. I’ve considered, among other things, the neighboring Counties to other States that possess their own electoral feature, and economic, social, political matters. I’ve worked a lot on past elections and, in particular, I’ve took as a reference point, the Primary in 2008. I’ve worked on turnout, considering that this year, and that of past years, and I’ve decided to work on 37,71% on NYC and 47,67% Outside NYC.
This choice was dictated by the characteristics that New York has matured over time and by the Primaries trend of this year. The choice of the four Counties was random, I made the average of the results of them as well as I made the average of the results of the five-County-Boroughs of New York City.
In the end I’ve added the data and I’ve obtained the result. For individual communities I’ve used specific percentages, attributing to Sanders 65-75% of Hispanic vote, to Clinton the 63% of White Italian and Irish, 50% of Black and White English and 40% of White German, Polish and Russian, while I assigned to Sanders 65-75% of Asians (Chinese and Korean) and 90% by Natives and Jews, except for Manhattan.
It must be said that the total support of the Jewish Community affiliated with the Democrats could be absolutely decisive for the victory of Sanders. The first Jew President of the United States of America could be decided from the Jewish Community.
My study shows that the potential vote for Bernie Sanders starts from a Liberal constituency, earns a lot of votes in the range of Very Liberal voters, and overtakes himself among the Independents enrolled in the Democratic Party. Of course, all ages, ethnics groups and the religious groups tend Liberal, Very Liberal and Independent are magnified in New York. In fact, the 17-29 age groups is Very Liberal or Independent and the same is true for the majority Hispanic, the Asian Americans, the Jewish Community, the Native Americans and the Irreligious.
In poor words, Sanders starts from the same electoral support which have supported Obama in 2008 but, unlike him, he breaks through the electorate Hispanic, Jewish and Asian. Conversely, Sanders is still unable to inherit the entire electorate African Americans. It’s for this reason that I’ve my good reasons for believing that he will earn many more votes than the President in the Big Apple.
After that I’ve worked on ethnics groups, I’ve considered the same Counties, and the same Boroughs. I’ve considered surveys, studies, researches and polls. I’ve also considered the Census data. The result is almost unanimous: Sanders won everywhere except in Manhattan and Onondaga County. I’ve approached the 17-29 age group trying to maintain a ratio of 75% to 25% in favor of Sanders and increasing it in the case of the Bronx and decreasing it for Manhattan and Staten Island.
As regards the 30-44 age I considered appropriate also in this situation polls and exit-polls and, therefore, award it to Sanders with a percentage of 62%. Obviously I swung this percentage depending on the Borough. And I’ve worked in this way for the other two age groups: 45-64, +65.
Even for this job I’ve preferred an approach that would allow me to keep the low turnout considering unlikely that Hillary Clinton will repeat the 2008 result in numbers and not in percentage terms. Indeed, as for the Wisconsin, the result she has given a number of votes slightly lower than the 2008 Primary due to the age of her electorate.
In this way I put together the percentages emerged from every age group, I’ve got the result of the Borough, I’ve added to that the results of the other Boroughs and, finally, I’ve added them to the sum of the Counties, obtaining the number of votes overall and the final percentage for both candidates.
In conclusion, after I’ve assigned the turnout, I’ve assigned to each age group the corroborated percentages, I did the sum of each age group for each candidate and I’ve got the end result.
I attach to this article regarding ‘LSP Poll’ a brief analysis of Google Trends Data captured during the hours preceding and subsequent to the Democratic Debate held last night in Brooklyn.
The methodology to be used to create reliable data in these cases is as follows: 1. It must first of all seek the eventual possibility of the electorate that it go to access the network; 2. It’s necessary to divide the electorate poorer, or more unfortunate for geographical reasons in different groups (age, ethnicity, status, genre, etc.); 3. It’s essential to have the percentages of which enjoys the candidate from these groups; 4. It’s very important to calibrate the amount of research done by the electorate X against the candidate Y; 5. Finally, we must add the share of research involving candidates at odds of missing voters because of the aforementioned reasons.
In this moment, the first five questions that voters are asking themselves are as follows: 1. How long are Bernie Sanders’ rallies? (I want to go to Bernie rallies but I’m afraid for the during); 2. Where Bernie Sanders will speak next? (I want to go to Bernie rallies); 3. Will Bernie Sanders win New York? (Broadcasters manipulate Bernie Sanders eligibility); 4. How many states Sanders has won? (Broadcaster misinform population) ; 5. Why is Bernie Sanders unelectable? (Broacasters manipulation is too strong) 1. How many Delegates does Hillary Clinton have (Clinton supporters are anxiouses)?; 2. How many states Hillary has won? (Clinton supporters are anxiouses and misinformed); 3. Who is Hillary Clinton? (Maybe people don’t know the former Secretary of State); 4. Where is Hillary Clinton today? (Cause Sanders rallies are very important, Clinton supporters ask theirselves when Clinton will do a rally in Sanders style); 5. How tall is Hillary Clinton? (Probably, Clinton supporters don’t have other important questions)
While the issues that concern the two candidates are the following:
Hillary Clinton: 1. Abortion (The theme is dear to Republicans and Conservative voters); 2. Immigration (The theme is dear to Republicans and Conservative voters); 3. Guns (This should be a Liberal concern or a Liberal instance); 4. Education (It’s an argument dear to the Liberal); 5. Taxes (It’s a Republican electorate concern and an omen of what Democratic).
Bernie Sanders: 1. Guns (This question was read by Sanders and there was the endorsement of the NRA; 2. Immigration (The Independent-leaning- electorate is interested in the question); 3. Abortion (For this issue the same reasoning to issue 2); 4. Education (Clinton voters evaluate the educational provision of Sanders); 5. taxes (Clinton voters and Independents are afraid that Sanders increase taxes and evaluate Sanders positions).Over the past 30 days, during the last week and especially on the last day from Washington Square Park rally, the result in percentage terms matured awarded – but only approximately – 53.52% to Bernie Sanders and 46.48% to Hillary Clinton.
And I carry the following chart based on the national search interest in the Democratic Candidates using the same methodology.
The result of the approximate value is as follows: 54.9% Sanders, Clinton 45.1%
In the last hours I kept my hard work on New York. I worked on six Counties of the State and on the usual Five Boroughs of the Big Apple.
In the last days the result has changed little because of Washington Square Rally, the Dem Debate in Brooklyn and the invitation received from Bernie Sanders by Pope Francis.
These events have allowed Sanders to grow in the performance by about 2-3 percentage points. Today the Senator of Vermont, in my view, and in contrast with other pollsters, leads Clinton in New York with 54.7%. I achieved this by working on the ‘LSP CAWI POLL’ that I started on 14 April and that got 25,000 views.
In fact, many readers have preferred to read the article related to the ‘LSP CAWI POLL’ without voting. I believed that the abstainers were in the part Clinton voters. The result of the CAWI awarded 54.66% to Sanders and 45.34% to Clinton.
I’ve worked on Google Trends Data getting stunning results both in New York and for the National (which I hope I can talk later). Methodology is the aforementioned and the result in this case was assigned 54,9% to Sanders and 45.1% to Clinton.
Along with other tools used during these hours, I brought together the work and got the final result following a methodology that distinguishes me in the past five years. I finally weighed my work and I gave them a specific value. In doing so I decided to give 3.33 value of 10 to the ‘LSP Survey’, 3.33 value of 10 to ‘LSP CAWI POLL’ and 3.33 value on 10 to the ‘Google Trends and Google News Lab searches’.
Lastly, I moved the outcome of the Poll according to Clinton’s value in media surveys. In fact, Marist poll apart, she’s in sharp decline and the trend has shifted to 50%. This trend has led me to move away from its value, given the propensity of the majority of the American pollsters to assign 50% +1 of the votes without study the strength of the Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders.
These pollsters lose reliability cause follow the laws of communication and marketing which tend to detect a candidate X in the lead without detecting the candidate Y: this is an impossible thing to do and favourishes candidate X. And for this reason, stronger than my Italian experience, in a Country second to none in the polls, I felt plausible bias to favourish Clinton.
I conclude by saying that it’s all too easy to monitor Clinton to 50-53%, giving her 10-20 points ahead on the opponent, and avoid at the same time bad impressions on the Election Day.
A pollster who’s responsible to record a margin of 20 percentage points between two candidates, risks at the same time to record a score of 60 to 40. The pollster should be wrong of 7 points percentages if X wins by a margin greater then 53%, but don’t be mistaken against Y because he didn’t register its electoral performance.
For my part, I take my responsibilities because I take attention only to my professionalism.