What Democrats Learned from the Iowa Caucus

It is quite evident that Democrats under 45 believe their future is literally on the line this election

The Iowa Caucus doesn’t always pick the eventually Democratic nominee, but that doesn’t mean we can’t look to the exit polls to better understand where Americans (or at least Iowans) are coming from.

While a narrow victory may have been handed to Clinton, despite the numerous flipping of coins to decide the winners, the race should be considered a virtual tie. Whether a tie favors Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Sanders is open to interpretation.

I’m more interested in pointing out some important demographic leanings that may have started in Iowa, but may just turn out to be a continuous trend throughout the primary season. If these patterns hold true throughout, we’re in for one hell of a race.

Most of us who follow politics on a regular basis already know some of these voter tendencies. The youth and poor vote will go to Sanders, the elderly and wealthy vote will go to Clinton, etc. etc. But I don’t think anyone realized the scope in differences.

Voters aged 17 to 29 backed Bernie Sanders by an enormous 84%, a higher difference than Obama/Clinton back in 2008. The 30 to 44 bracket also belonged to Bernie, 58% to Clinton’s 37%. Hillary on the other hand destroyed Bernie with the senior citizen vote, 69% to 26%. Remember the voting majority in America is now 45 and up.

The other big divide can be found in family income. Exit polls show that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to vote for Clinton. No surprise here given Bernie’s disdain for wealth inequality and rigged financial system and Clinton’s historical indifference to it.

One thing that surprised me a little was who got the dumb vote. Hillary Clinton beat out Bernie 58% to 39% among those who failed to advance beyond a high school education. It’s as if you can say Sanders got the educated poor vote, while Clinton won the uneducated wealthy vote…

To touch on the age gap a little more, I think it’s important to note why the different age groups support their candidates with such vigor. The Baby Boomers may have given us Woodstock, but they also ended up giving us Reaganomics. A cancerous economic theory that has lived on in the United States (and elsewhere) for 35 years.

Thanks to Reagan, the Bush family, the Clinton’s, and to a lesser extent, Obama, middle class Americans have seen virtually all of the economic advances of the Twentieth century disappear. Hillary, along with liberals her age, prefer Barack Obama’s status-quo rather than real economic change.

It is why you now see such a high degree of youth supporting Bernie Sanders. Clinton’s supporters are, for the most part, happily retired or about to be. Bernie’s supporters on the other hand, don’t know if they’ll ever be able to retire period. I can’t imagine a worse feeling than being in your early twenties, being saddled with student debt and thinking you’ll have to work to the grave in order to live.

It’s clear that Bernie’s young progressive supporters are pissed, especially after Obama’s promises did not pan out. They also know they may never get another chance. A candidate like Mr. Sanders comes around once in a generation (and is elected once in a century). The only problem he faces, as mentioned above, is that there are more supporters among Hillary’s age demographic.

Two more things I’d like to mention quickly. Among Democrats in Iowa, 83% believe Bernie is the most honest and trustworthy to Hillary’s 10%. A massive difference. Except when it comes to electability, Iowans believe Hillary to be the candidate most electable, 77% to 17%.

If you are one of those Democrats who believe Bernie Sanders is less electable than Hillary Clinton, I suggest you watch this: