Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Response to Her Sister (Reply #1)

LAS14

(13,783 posts)
3. The very best explanation I've heard...
Tue May 24, 2016, 08:15 PM
May 2016

... is a John Oliver bit. I read it today, but I don't know how to search for it. The OP points out that the math explanation comes around minute 12.2.

George II

(67,782 posts)
6. Since you guys flattered me by remembering that post back in April (and calling it "magnificent"..
Tue May 24, 2016, 08:36 PM
May 2016

.....thanks so much!) I figured I'm obligated to update those numbers.

So, using the same formulas, and ignoring the relatively tiny Guam, American Samoa, etc. caucuses, here are the updated numbers.

Caucus "popular votes":

Clinton 1,188,623, Sanders 2,155,134 - Sanders has 966,511 more votes.

Primary popular votes:

Clinton 12,909,137, Sanders 9,734,368 - Clinton has 3,174,769 more votes.

Total votes:

Clinton 14,097,760, Sanders 11,889,502 - Clinton has 2,208,258 more votes.

Clinton has 54% of the popular vote, Sanders 46%. Pledged delegate-wise, the % are identical!

The only caveat in this is that as pointed out the first time, caucus turnout is less than half the normal primary turnout, so the gap is even higher (i.e., more than 2.2M votes)

lunamagica

(9,967 posts)
7. Well, it was magnificent. I alredy used on a reply from someone saying that Hillary
Wed May 25, 2016, 07:14 AM
May 2016

being ahead by mlillions was a myth which had been debunked. HA!

Than;s for the updated analysis!

George II

(67,782 posts)
8. That's pretty much going to be the totals for caucuses. There's only one left, North Dakota...
Wed May 25, 2016, 08:31 AM
May 2016

...where only about 60,000 people will show up. I'm guessing that will be a very big win for Sanders, it's an open caucus so the Trump/republican voters have nothing to really vote for, so are probably already scheming to vote for Sanders. Even if it's 70/30 that will be 42,000 to 18,000, a difference of 24,000.

LiberalFighter

(50,942 posts)
9. George have you looked at The Green Papers?
Wed May 25, 2016, 10:45 AM
May 2016

It looks like they have popular votes for all caucuses except for Wyoming. Wyoming only shows state convention delegate numbers.

Their numbers put totals at Sanders: 675,115 and Clinton: 400,072. (Includes Wyoming votes as delegates - Sanders: 156 -- Clinton: 124)


This shows that about 7,000 showed up to vote in the Wyoming caucus. So split is about 3,900 to 3,100.

George II

(67,782 posts)
10. Thanks. I looked at them a couple of months ago they just had....
Wed May 25, 2016, 07:20 PM
May 2016

....the local convention delegate counts for some states, or estimates (i.e., for Iowa they have "delegatesX100" for the presumed popular vote). So, I ignored them because they may not be accurate. Instead I did my very liberal calculations which probably way overestimate the real number of voters but still show a couple of million more votes for Clinton vs. Sanders.

At least the order of magnitude is in the "ballpark".

LiberalFighter

(50,942 posts)
11. That is what I saw a month or two also. But apparently they updated it.
Wed May 25, 2016, 08:26 PM
May 2016

Also, news reports confirmed those numbers.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»There was a magnificent p...