Below is the chart I’ve used as part of my New York projection. It includes per capita income data per county, Facebook Primary data (not adjusted to USPD here) from February 29 and as updated, the number of registered Democrats per county along with how many voted in 2008 for Obama versus Clinton, and racialized data from the U.S. Census by county.

FiveThirtyEight’s Facebook Primary was updated today (April 18). My Facebook Primary (USPD Adjusted) model, calculates the percentage difference between the percentage of Clinton’s and Sanders’ average “likes” nation wide and their average “likes” in a particular county. USPD stands for United States Percentage Difference.

So for the first entry, New York (Manhattan), Clinton held down 24% of the “likes” there as of February 29, or 200% above her average “likes” at that point in The Facebook Primary across the United States. Sanders was at +15%, but since as of February 29 he was averaging 23% of “likes” nationwide, this is just a 62% gain. Clinton 200 USPD – Sanders 62 USPD suggests a significant Clinton victory. The April 18 update now has Clinton at 9% nationwide and 27% in Manhattan for a +18 increase over her national average, keeping her at a 200 USPD score. Sanders now has a raw +17 in New York County for a 68% increase over his nationwide 25% share of the likes. A small increase over his February 29th score, but not enough to flip it into his favor or into the even column, especially since African Americans make up 18% of Manhattan and have consistently voted for Clinton as a block by 30% or more. As Sanders’ share of the “likes” gets up into the 50% or 60% range in some cities, counties, and zip-codes, a strict comparison with Clinton’s USPD is less helpful since her starting point is 9% rather than 25%.

As can be seen, and as with Manhattan, there has been relatively little movement in any of the suburbs or Upstate counties. Most of what little movement there has been is probably explainable by the shift up in nationwide scores for Clinton and Sanders by +1 and +2 respectively. I have only slightly changed my call for very few of them accordingly. Sanders, however, appears to have gained significant ground in the other four boroughs, particularly in Kings (Brooklyn). I have moved Richmond (Staten Island) and Brooklyn into Edge Clinton range. This means that I think a small win for Clinton is likely (five points or less), but an upset by Sanders is also possible, as is a more decisive win by Clinton.

In previous races, I have found that where there are fewer than 2,500 votes in a county, especially less than 1,000, the model is somewhat less accurate.

Key:

C = Clinton

S = Sanders

E = Even

EC = Even, Edge Clinton

ES = Even, Edge Sanders

(The bolded EC, ES, or E’s in the “Call” column are where I have downgraded Sanders’ chances somewhat because of a percentage of African Americans over 10 in a particular county. The italicized EC’s and the like are where I have downgraded Clinton or Sanders chances after the April 18th update. That involves just a very few counties already likely to be somewhat close.)

B = Black

A = Asian

L = Latino

W = White

I = Indigenous

vt = states touching Vermont

~vt = states near Vermont

Adapted from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_locations_by_per_capita_income

*The percentages here add up to 116%. This is as they are found at http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/map/INC110213/36005

NY Voter Data

http://www.elections.ny.gov/EnrollmentCounty.html