538: Why Clinton Won Ohio After Losing Michigan

Exit poll results are coming back and telling us a bit more about why Clinton won in Ohio and not in Michigan — her victory can be boiled down to her performance with white voters, older voters, and voters who are concerned about trade issues.

In Michigan, Sanders won white voters, but in Ohio, Clinton won them, 51 percent to 48 percent, and that seems to have made a difference. Her support with black voters in the state also remained strong — she won them 68 percent to 30 percent — but that was less an overwhelming win of the demographic than her record in other states.

It’s well-known that Sanders performs well with young people — there were fewer youths (ah, the youths) in Ohio. Sixty-two percent of Ohio’s electorate was 45 and older.

The last leg of the Clinton victory triangle is that she won on the all-important-in-the-Rust Belt trade question: Voters who said trade with other countries takes away U.S. jobs supported her, 53 percent to 46 percent. Sanders won that bloc in Michigan, 56 percent to 41 percent. It’s not quite clear what happened in the intervening week — our Andrew Flowers noted during the last Democratic debate that the Vermont senator seemed to be hammering the anti-NAFTA message less than usual, but it might also just be that Michigan was an aberration.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/march-15-primaries-ohio-florida-results-presidential-election-2016/