Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
538 has flipped Ohio and Iowa to Clinton.
Landslide territory.
|
True, but that is largely based on the model's assumptions about how the national vote will be distributed state by state.
Iowa has not been polled since the debate. The last reputable poll there was by Quinnipiac, between Sept. 13-21, and it showed Trump ahead by 7 points--this was at a time when Hillary's nationwide numbers were also in the toilet, but she still had about a 1-2 point lead.
I think it's reasonable to assume that Iowa will tilt ever so slightly republican relative to the national average, in part because of a high number of non-college educated white voters. Iowa is a very "white" state: non-Hispanic whites make up 61% of the US population, but in Iowa they are 85%. It is the sixth "whitest" state by that measure. Iowa ranks 34th in the US for population with at least a college degree, at right around 25%.
There is also a significant rural population in Iowa. Iowa has roughly 3 million people, of whom about The biggest urban centres are Des Moines and Cedar Rapids, and they make up just under 750,000 (if memory serves) The urban centres (especially the "college towns" like Ames and Iowa City) tend to be liberal, but they are kind of a drop in the bucket when most of the voters are in rural areas.
Add to that the Chuck Grassley factor--a popular incumbent republican senator running for re-election--and you have a recipe for Iowa going republican this year.
With that said, I very much hope Iowa goes for Clinton. It's my old stomping grounds, and I hate to see them vote for an orange clown who has temper tantrums worse than my 5 year old's. But I don't get a vote, so I just have to watch from the sidelines and hope. But the above may explain somewhat why Iowa has been polling slightly more republican than a lot of swing states this cycle.