Big non-metro vote gives Trump a majority in Iowa caucuses

Trump, in red, prevails in caucuses. Haley's share in dark red, DeSantis's in pink. (NBC News projects graph)

Donald Trump's majority win in Monday night's Iowa Republican presidential caucuses was driven by rural and small-city caucus-goers, who have him 57 percent of their votes compared to 47 percent of those in cities and suburbs, according to the entrance poll for news organizations. Overall, Trump got 51 percent. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the second-place finisher, did best in suburbs, getting 27%; former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who finished a close third, did best in cities, with 27%.

Other findings in the poll reflected Trump's rural dominance. He got 55% of white evangelicals, 63% of those with no college degree, and 74% of those who have never been to college. Trump carried every county but Johnson, home to Iowa City and the University of Iowa and the county with "the highest share of voters with bachelor’s degrees of any Iowa county," The Washington Post reports.

Wall Street Journal map, adapted by The Rural Blog; click to enlarge.

UPDATE, Jan. 17: The Wall Street Journal reports, The Republican front-runner saw his biggest improvement over 2016 in counties that reflected his core supporters: older voters, those without a college degree, lower-income voters and evangelicals. . . . One of Trump’s biggest increases in support came in counties with a higher proportion of older voters, growing by an average of nearly 35 points compared with 2016, versus his nearly 27-point increase statewide. Many of those counties are also rural areas, another source of strength for Trump."

Post columnist David Von Drehle writes, "Huge margins among sparse populations gave Trump an appearance of invulnerability. But the closer the race drew to a population center — someplace big enough to have a Costco or a Chick-fil-A — the weaker he appeared. . . . Recent history teaches us that this year’s general election will be won or lost on precisely that ground, not in farm country but in the Chick-fil-A precincts."

Presidential campaigning in Iowa has traditionally been about "championing policies aimed at helping the state’s farm-driven economy. But this year, the Republicans seeking their party’s presidential nomination have largely avoided over-the-top pandering to local priorities — and any such attempts appear not to be as effective as in the past, report Anjali Huynh and Kellen Browning of The New York Times. The main reason is "Trump, who has run in the style of an incumbent, has dominated the state while barely setting foot in it. Though he refers to Iowa farmers in his speeches and talks about how he has poured money into the state, Mr. Trump has eschewed the classic retail politicking that is a mainstay of the caucuses in favor of larger rallies while focusing his message more on national issues. . . . Local issues have instead served more as a differentiator among the candidates competing for second place, rather than part of a winning strategy."