Look to Illinois.

A QZ article notes that if political observers want to get an idea of the country's next president, look to Illinois. My comments are added below with emphasis in bold.

Critics say the US presidential primary system is disproportionately influenced by early voting contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The influence wielded by these races is little more than a happy accident. New Hampshire only lost its first-state-to-vote status in 1972, when a lack of hotel rooms in Des Moines forced Iowa officials to move their election to the front of the pack. Nevertheless, Iowans and New Hampshirites often set the tone for the rest of the primaries: elevating winners, bestowing momentum, and winnowing out the weakest campaigns.

This gives a small fraction of the US population an exorbitant amount of power in selecting the future commander-in-chief. And neither of these states are particularly reflective of the national electorate, socially or economically.

I believe this is the most insightful paragraph in the entire article.

But if you want a real understanding of what America likes in a president, look beyond Iowa and New Hampshire to the great state of Illinois.

Along with California and New York, Illinois almost always casts its 21 electoral votes for the Democratic candidate in general elections. That said, internally, Illinois is quite diverse. It recently elected a Republican governor, boasts one of the country’s most notable centrist Republican senators, and its state legislature bursts with conservative lawmakers—representing a constituency anchored in the agricultural south; far from bustling, blue Chicago.

Illinoisans have also selected the eventual party nominees every election year since 1988, when Democrats opted for their congressman, Paul Simon, over Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis.

Illinois is also a microcosm of the nation. Quartz looked at the demographic data for all 50 US states and compared them to national averages. Illinois has by far the most in common with the country at large, according to 2014 census data:

Demographic data	US	IL
Median age (years)	37.4	37
% pop. between 20 and 34 years	20.6	20.7
% pop. aged 65+	13.7	13.2
% pop. that is female	50.8	50.9
Average household size	2.63 people	2.63 people
% men currently married	50.2	49.9
% women currently married	46.7	46.2
% families w/ children under 18	29.2	29.5
% pop. that are veterans	8.7	7.1
% pop. w/ a disability	12.3	10.6
% pop. that is foreign born	13.10	13.95
% pop. that speaks English at home	79.1	77.5
% pop. that is white	73.8	72.5
% pop. that is black	12.6	14.4
% pop. that is Hispanic/Latino	16.9	16.3
% pop. that is Asian	5	4.9
% pop. that is Native American	0.8	0.2
% pop. that IDs as “other race”	4.7	5.8
% pop. that is mixed-race	2.9	2.2
Unemployment rate	5.8	6.6
% workers employed by gov.	14.6	12.8
% workers in agriculture/nat. resources	2	1.1
Median household income	$53,482	$57,166
% households receiving Social Security	29.3	27
% households receiving food stamps/SNAP	13	12.5
% pop. health-insured	85.8	87.7
% pop. below poverty line	15.6	14.4
Median home value	$175,700	$175,500
Median gross apartment rent/month	$920	$903
% pop. w/ at least a BA	18.3	12.5
% pop. attending religious services weekly*	36	34

I will admit, how close these numbers are is rather fascinating if not a little creepy. I consider myself an amateur sociologist, and damn, this is some great social data.

Fewer Illinoisans receive Social Security and food stamp/SNAP benefits than the average American, and a smaller proportion live under the poverty line. That said, the unemployment rate is almost a full percentage point higher than the national average.

Points of particularly significant similarity include the median age, and percentages of adults aged between 20 and 34 years (major Bernie Sanders supporters) and 65 or older (Hillary Clinton’s camp). It’s also worth noting how startlingly parallel the racial demographics break down—Illinois’s African-American, Latino, Asian-American, and other minority communities are quite proportionate to their numbers nationwide.

In many ways, Illinois is a miniature version of America. A perfect RINO in Senator Kirk. Machine Politics. A bustling, sorta-Alpha city in Chicago, with small towns, farmland and small cities once you exit Chicagoland where religion is more important than said area, and where hunting game, guns and the American flag are done, carried and waved with support and reverence. Average state universities save for its flagship; top privates in U of C and Northwestern, with Notre Dame a stone throw away in South Bend, Indiana. Solid LACs as well. The state is also more interested in professional sports, with high school basketball rivaling Indiana's Hoosier passion. Out of all the cities, I do find Chicago a bit more libertarian than say NYC, LA and SF and bit more saner when it comes to liberalism (SF in just stupid liberal; NYC is corporate liberal; LA is debauch liberal). In terms of Seattle & Portland's coffee, Chicago has a growing scene of micro-breweries. Also Chicago is more of a tea city than a coffee city.

I'll also add that the electorate can be rather stupid, constantly voting (D) while complaining about political corruption. Every now and then they might get fed up enough, get some oxygen to their brain, and vote for someone not in the political system -- even if he's a white multi-millionaire in Bruce Rauner (a calmer, more cordial version of The Donald?). But vote for an actual conservative as Junior Senator? Leave that to Big 'Ol Texas. Illinois loves their RINOs for their upper chamber.