KEY INFO: * Statistics of the 2008 Democratic Elections *

[Jayling]

Hiya folks!

So often we're bombarded with selective numbers and misinformation pertaining to the election. We're going to hear a lot more about how Obama has won sooo many states, is ahead in this and that -- and with this long lull between elections it's going to get even worse.

The news media plus supporters of Obama, even some Supers, are jumping on the 'she should step-down' bandwagon yet again, and it's going to escalate ten-fold during this next month.

So, to help us see some important truths, those that we can use when blogging, writing letters, or calling, I made a Statistics page (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html) that shows a much different picture than we're being pummeled with.

I hope you all can use it in your daily Hilly jaunts and pass it along too.

http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html

I'm so dang tired of being filled with the hyper-bole that the media and opponents spout - it gets my research-blood boiling!

[tcbwriter]

I think you were posting this at the same time I was re-posting mine! Yours is much more detailed than mine though; you include an analysis of the delegate votes. I especially like your "talking points" about the evils of caucuses. I am in complete agreement and hope we can all work to change the system for future elections.

[BTW - I haven't a clue how to make a fancy webpage like you did; maybe you can explain to me sometime? :o

[Soaring Eagle]

Thanks Jayling. This just goes to prove that Howard Dean needs me and everyone in Michigan come the general election! Howard Dean, counts us now or count us out in November!

[Jayling]

Great minds think alike! :)

Folks, we're going to be facing some rough storms up ahead and it's important for us to arm ourselves with facts. And these detailed facts may be crucial in our arguments. There's probably more we'll need also.

Gird yourselves for battle, Warriors -- we fight alongside our Madame President!

[lanesharon]

You have to look at the states that have been won in the primary and the Electoral College breakout. This is a selling point for the SuperD's. If we can show them that our candidate can win the blue and purple states, then she looks much more 'electable' in the GE. So, look here:
http://florida-delegates.com/elect-col.xls

[Jayling]

Sharon, that's exactly what I've done, plus more. Not sure what else you may mean. Did you scroll through the whole page? It has a lot of stats on it.

[PuppyDogMom]

Jayling: This is fabulous! How do we distribute it far and wide?

[Jayling]

Jayling: This is fabulous! How do we distribute it far and wide?
Thanks, pup!

You can post a link to the Stats page when blogging if you hear numbers being spouted that are out in left field, or whenever you feel it can fit into the conversation. Or if you call folks, you can refer back to that page to let people know how tight this election truly is, and how much better Hillary is actually doing in the much-needed Swing states.

Here's the link again:
http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html

I think we're going to have to be diligent in our facts from here on out, as it's gonna get hot from all the pundits & O supporters spouting bloated numbers, misinformation and half-truths.

There's some intriguing information there, especially pertaining to the must-win Swing states and how well our Lady has done so far. For instance (doing a quicky copy/paste):

If 'any' Democrat will win the predominately Blue states in November 2008, that's 248 Electoral Votes out of 270 needed
22 more Electoral Votes are needed to win the Presidency

13 of 15 Swing state Elections held to date
Hillary has won 8 out of 11 Swing states / Obama has won 3 out of 11
73% for Hillary / Obama has 27%

Total Electoral votes in those Swing States:
88 for Hillary / 27 for Obama

Hillary is also favored to win Kentucky & West Virginia
This will give her 10 of the 13 Swing states

She will have won 77% of the much needed Swing states, 13 out of 15

Links to the sources used are included also :)

[CGP]

Moving back to main room...

[Ohio mom]

thank you so much Jayling...you work so hard on these for us...It's very much appreciated!!!:)

[Mom4Hillary]

Thank you, Jayling, for sharing your compilation of these statistics. I needed them today given how depressed I'm getting due to DNC big whigs sh***ing on HRC. I'm afraid the average Jane and Joe will think it's useless to cast their vote for Hillary in the upcoming Pennsylvania primary since the DNC is going to make sure she loses -- no matter what the voters say or do. I plan to join other Hillary supporters tonight at a local phone bank and will do what I can to inform the average voter.

[hillary4change]

I have an idea for FREE advertising live from New York on the Today show. Paid for by G.E and Protest the unfair and biased coverage swaying people to vote Obama as the winner has been announced by the DNC & MSNBC!! I wonder if they would have the guts to interview anyone standing in the crowd holding signs???

[Alessandro Machi]

Moving back to main room...

Ah, that's why I hadn't noticed it before.

[Carolyn]

Thanks Jayling! This is fantastic and worth the hard work - I just posted it in the NY Times - not that she needs support here, but hopefully people in other states read it, too

[Alessandro Machi]

Lets Match up States with similar populations but different voting methods.

I'd like to find 11 states that had primaries whose populations match up with 11 states that had caucuses. I'd like to then compare how the delegates were allocated.

[Alessandro Machi]

Lets Match up States with similar populations but different voting methods.

I'd like to find 11 states that had primaries whose populations match up with 11 states that had caucuses. I'd like to then compare how the delegates were allocated.

Or, lets compare states with similar populations which Obama won, however lets make it a comparison between the caucus states and the primary states with similar populations.

My concern is that the caucus states allow for wilder fluctuations towards whom the mini delegates go to, yet if a similarly wild fluctuation were to happen amongst the super delegates there would be an uproar. I find this hypocritical as it gives more power to the mini-delegates than the super-delegates because the all of the mini-delegates have already been selected.

[Jayling]

Another Statistics page comes your way! :)

This one is the differences between the Florida Primaries from 2000 to 2008 (http://www.diversityj.com/Florida2000to2008.html), both Democrat and Republican.

Hopefully, these Florida Stats will have some eye-opening revelations for folks. Wake up, Supers, the numbers tell a hell-of-a story!

By the way, thanks so much for your words of encouragement, it means a great deal. And sorry for not popping in here sooner. I kinda get caught up in numbers *snick

[CGP]

Another Statistics page comes your way! :)

This one is the differences between the Florida Primaries from 2000 to 2008 (http://www.diversityj.com/Florida2000to2008.html), both Democrat and Republican.

Hopefully, these Florida Stats will have some eye-opening revelations for folks. Wake up, Supers, the numbers tell a hell-of-a story!

By the way, thanks so much for your words of encouragement, it means a great deal. And sorry for not popping in here sooner. I kinda get caught up in numbers *snick

Please distribute!

Very powerful info!

[Jayling]

Okies, there hasn't been very many views so maybe all the globs of numbers were a bit too much, though they're very much needed for factual information. So, I went and made a whole bunch of pretty, colorful graphs to make the Stats pages much easier to follow.

I sure hope you all like it, but more than that, I hope you can use them! There is just so much useful info that shows the true light of what's going on, it boggles the mind.

Here's a sample:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotes.jpg
And this:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/ElectoralTotalsAll.jpg

Plus tons more! Please check them out and use them in your daily Hillary journeys :)

Electoral Vote States Won (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectoralVoteStates.html)
Florida Primary Stats from 2008 to 2000 (http://www.diversityj.com/Florida2000to2008.html)
Primary vs. Caucus Stats (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html)

[samkm]

Jayling, You are so good! We love you!! And, the numbers help!
Pls send it to HRC! I hope we have a way to do that!

[joeysky18]

Jayling, great work!

I like the bar chart very much. Very interesting.
Pictures say a lot more than numbers.

[mjoynaples]

Great minds think alike! :)

Folks, we're going to be facing some rough storms up ahead and it's important for us to arm ourselves with facts. And these detailed facts may be crucial in our arguments. There's probably more we'll need also.

Gird yourselves for battle, Warriors -- we fight alongside our Madame President!


REALLY APPRECIATE THIS Jayling and this is the kind of news I want to listen too... trying to stay away from the others and it is sad to see how many just buy into it... talk about mind control....

thanks again! great work... Hillary all the way to the WHITE HOUSE!:

[samkm]

Jayling, honestly, you deserve to be an advisor on the national team. You are quite that good! I am just blown looking at how much you have digested, condensed and made this so understandable.. I am already on Voting Pref page.

[Jayling]

You're all so kind! Thank you so much :o

Hey, Sudhakm, I can't thank you enough for sending these Stat sheets out to the folks that you already have -- I rely on you!

I've been totally engrossed in this and haven't had the time to send to Hillary's tip site, any Supers, or whoever could best use them. So I'm really appreciative of the help in spreading the truth of numbers :)

[joeysky18]

You're all so kind! Thank you so much :o

Hey, Sudhakm, I can't thank you enough for sending these Stat sheets out to the folks that you already have -- I rely on you!

I've been totally engrossed in this and haven't had the time to send to Hillary's tip site, any Supers, or whoever could best use them. So I'm really appreciative of the help in spreading the truth of numbers :)

I have sent the link to your website to many blog. Do you want me to dig your work too? Dig.com is Obama land. And I'm not sure we want them to see our strategic work. I'll send the link to tips and HillaryResponder.

[Ohio mom]

Jayling you are amazing..thanks for putting all of this stuff into laymen's terms..Thanks!!!:)

[Amy Dugan]

great bar chart
when was the data released to the press?

[druidmary]

http://hillaryisourchoice.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php?board=18.0

[ginamc]

Thank you so much for this info. I was attempting to put these stats together. Yes, the b.s. that is thrown out daily from the so-called media, get on my last good, research, wonk, truth-oriented nerve! :)

[eeslaomd]

thanks jayling! this is great info to pass on. i'm sending these stats to all my contacts now.

[Jayling]

And another page has gone up!

This one is short and sweet -- it shows the extremely important Swing States Primaries Popular Votes (http://www.diversityj.com/SwingStatePrimaryVotes.html), of who won what and by how much.

This may be a good visual for some undecided Super Delegates. The Dems can't win the White House without winning these Swing blue-weather states.

http://www.diversityj.com/images/SwingPrimaryPVnoTotal.jpg

The truth and wishes of the majority of The People are on every page. The numbers and graphs tell their story.

[Amy Dugan]

rumor has it that many superdelegates stayed neutral because of hillary's ohio win (double digits even though outspent 4:1) and the significance of this battleground state in determining the last election for president. ohio kept her alive. latest poll (another thread) showing mccain vs dem match ups confers OH, PA, FL importance in the fall and hillary can beat him more than obama can

[blueskygal]

Jayling you are AWESOME! i love the stats myself because they do not lie! what do you do for a living??

[leahchamblee]

It seems as if I have seen a statistic for percentages by demographics. Wasn't there one that showed racial density impacted this?
IE integrated areas, blacks voted more Hillary, non integrated more Obama?

Thanks

[Viktoriya]

Thanks,
I am going to forward link to everybody :)

[lanesharon]

It seems as if I have seen a statistic for percentages by demographics.


I can tell you that by just looking at the maps on CNN, by state, Obama is picking up more metropolitan areas.

[samkm]

yes, this has always been the case.

If you go to these links
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/TX.html
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/OH.html (change the state code to get other states, for most of them)

and scroll down till you see the map.. Then you click on"Margin of Victory" tab.. you can see that it is VERY SPOTTY victory:
- METROPOLITAN DOWNTOWN
- COLLEGE TOWN

That's it. AND BY BIG MARGINS. It is the margins there that gave him the lead in any state. It is the aggressiveness of his people in caucuses and some of the tactics they have employed and the small window of time that is impossible for the demographics of a spreadout population that is mostly working at the caucus times or taking care of children that seems to have given him the lead in caucuses.

So, his $$ spend is highly focused in population concentrated areas. He is doing the same thing in PA and NC.

For HRC, it is easier to target this population in Fall campaign.

It is near impossible to get the wide coverage needed to target the outskirts if the strategy is media game! His media strategy does not scale up well, I think. (just an opinion of a mktg professional)

To me, TX (primary + caucus) is Hillary's "prove-it" case.. where she can show exactly how she can get more G.E. votes in caucus states. Compare the maps of margin of victory in TX for primary v. caucus. There are differences in the counties within the triangle of the three major college cities: Dallas, Austin, San Antonnio.

Dont compare to the size of the circles on the right.. the scale fo the radius for GOP does not map to the DEMs side.. but you can match the locations with some idea of relative strength. You can see that HRC would do very well in MANY more counties v. McCain. Major PLUS.

[Amy Dugan]

in ohio, obama only won 5 counties out of 88 counties which were in Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, and Cleveland.

[samkm]

This is the case nationwide, except possibly DC and VA which have predominant population that was either black or believed in "different type of politics" without understanding what exactly it is all about.

The reason for the higher delegates is that the # of delegates is somewhat correlated with population.

The concentration of the few counties means that Hillary can spend her money VERY effectively come Fall.


In case I didnt say it before... I am totally hooked to these #'s.. AND I BOW AND BOW AND BOW DOWN TO JAYLING!!! I am HOOKED to your sites! You are too good!! How do you do it? My God, you are awesome Jayling!

[brussell]

Jayling - Awesome, awesome, awesome!

These stats and your "Brief Credential Summary of the 2008 Democratic Presidential Candidate Nominees" seem like good candidates for digging. I posted in the back room about Obama's Digg operation but haven't gotten any responses yet...

[suerw]

Hiya folks!

So, to help us see some important truths, those that we can use when blogging, writing letters, or calling, I made a Statistics page (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html) that shows a much different picture than we're being pummeled with.

I hope you all can use it in your daily Hilly jaunts and pass it along too.

http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html

I'm so dang tired of being filled with the hyper-bole that the media and opponents spout - it gets my research-blood boiling!
Outstanding. Yes, this info will be very helpful.

[Artists4Hillary]

It's the swing states that matter. The red states will vote red, the blue states blue, no matter who is the nominee. Good to see Hillary carries the swing states.

However, a lot rests on how IN and NC go. Even Hillary said IN will decide this election. I don't know, but I hope not. She has to win or come very close to winning IN. Or she'll have to seriously think about making a decision, but I do hope she sticks it out all the way.

[Jayling]

Thanks again for the pats, folks!

The Popular Vote numbers have been updated after Massachusetts Secretary of State adjusted their totals. It came out +594 additional more votes for Clinton and -207 for Obama.

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotes.jpg

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesNoFLMI.jpg

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesPrimaries.jpg

Reminder: The popular votes in Michigan and Florida have already been certified by election officials in both states, and officially tallied by the two Secretary of States.

Nobody can take these Votes away from The People -- not the media, not the supporters, not the Party Officials, not any Party Boss -- these votes belong to the people and have already been cast, counted, and certified.

Another note -- the DNC stripped the Delegates -- they cannot mess with the Votes of The People.

In just 13 days, the total Popular Votes for both the Caucus & Primaries tallied together (with FL & MI of course) will be in the + column for Hillary. Which is where it stood for a long time until Mississippi. Just a long wait in between the primaries.

:)

[Linda C]

We can look at all of the statistics.
But we need to get out the support in PA.

We also need to push that the "health care story told" was true and a full constant correction needs to be made over and over again until it is heard.

We need to demand that journalist take the responsibility to check their own sources before they post any story. I beleive the "health care story" inaccurately reported as false did much damage to Hillary's credibility. In other words...She was Swift Boated", by so called professional journalists.

HuffPo still had the inaccurate accusation listed on their site yesterday when I checked.

[Jayling]

We can look at all of the statistics.
But we need to get out the support in PA.

We also need to push that the "health care story told" was true and a full constant correction needs to be made over and over again until it is heard.

We need to demand that journalist take the responsibility to check their own sources before they post any story. I beleive the "health care story" inaccurately reported as false did much damage to Hillary's credibility. In other words...She was Swift Boated", by so called professional journalists.

HuffPo still had the inaccurate accusation listed on their site yesterday when I checked.

That's why it's important to have the true stats at our fingertips -- to counter the the false ones.

Facts and stats to back up our talk -- as we watch our Lady's back :)

Statistics Page (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html)

[goldie21]

This article points out that if the democratic party ran the primary in the same manner as the republicans - winner takes all - Hillary would be leading. Perhaps nothing new to us but nice to read.

[goldie21]

This article points out that if the democratic party ran the primary in the same manner as the republicans - winner takes all - Hillary would be leading. Perhaps nothing new to us but nice to read.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/07/hillary/

[eebaltimore]

Jayling, this statistical info is amazing. Can you send this to all of the superdelegates? It's really powerful proof of Hillary's strength.

[Morgan]

This article points out that if the democratic party ran the primary in the same manner as the republicans - winner takes all - Hillary would be leading. Perhaps nothing new to us but nice to read.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/07/hillary/

Quote:
"If the Democrats ran their nominating process the way we run our general elections, Sen. Hillary Clinton would have a commanding lead in the delegate count, one that will only grow more commanding after the next round of primaries, and all questions about which of the two Democratic contenders is more electable would be moot."

[OkieforHRC2008]

Could you put the difference in the people who are able to vote in the general election vs. caucuses? I really loved the details you presented. :)

~~OkieforHRC2008

[suerw]

Hiya folks!

So, to help us see some important truths, those that we can use when blogging, writing letters, or calling, I made a Statistics page (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html) that shows a much different picture than we're being pummeled with.

I hope you all can use it in your daily Hilly jaunts and pass it along too.


This may not be the correct thread for my question, but it comes closest. I may try submitting a new thread on the topic, hoping that some of the more experienced campaign observers here will address the subject.
What is puzzling me (myself a college educated person with a post-graduate degree) is why polls consistently show that Barack Obama polls higher among college educated voters? Assuming that not all the polls reflect manipulated data, it's difficult to see the reason. Hillary Clinton's campaign has addressed issues with substantive plans. Her approach has been a more reasoned approach. This is not to say she lacks warmth and compassion because she certainly shows far more genuine warmth and caring than Barack Obama. But fact remains, she should appeal more to thinking, reasoning voters than her opponent. If the polls have any validity, I'm not only puzzled, but disappointed in a significant portion of college educated people in the country. Why aren't more of these people analyzing the facts, listening critically to both candidates and perceiving the major differences in their approaches? Why are many of the more highly educated voters not realizing who really has "solutions" rather than "just words." Why are they not seeing the important questions regarding Barack Obama's judgement and character?
I'm at a loss to understand this phenomenon. Unless all reports of voter preferences for this demographic are complete fabrications.

[lanesharon]

Tonight in the PA exit polls, he only scored high with 18-24 year olds. So, is the 'college-educated' vote from those who are very young, in college, or very recently graduated; and not the college-educated who have worked a little in the 'real' world? There is a big difference.

[AlexG]

http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html

Great page, Jayling!!!

Thanks!

[Jayling]

http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html

Great page, Jayling!!!

Thanks!
Oh, hang on, those numbers shall be-a changin'!

I have to wait until all the results are in from the Secretary of State office before updating the numbers.

Looking forward to the new Graphs that will be coming!

[Dragonet]

Oh, hang on, those numbers shall be-a changin'!

I have to wait until all the results are in from the Secretary of State office before updating the numbers.

Looking forward to the new Graphs that will be coming!

I'm not that good with numbers, but I just did a quick check of the primary contests since 3/4.

Now that Obama is beginning to be "vetted" it looks to me that in just those last 7 contests she is ahead by 40 delegates and 502,120 in the popular vote. To me that is an important change that needs to be looked at.

[Jayling]

Still waiting for the final numbers to come in from PA before updating the Stats pages, but do have an Electoral Vote map that is very interesting:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/ElectoralMap2.jpg

I'll eventually get this map up on the Electoral States Won (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectoralVoteStates.html) page too.

[eyedoc333]

Still waiting for the final numbers to come in from PA before updating the Stats pages, but do have an Electoral Vote map that is very interesting:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/ElectoralMap2.jpg

I'll eventually get this map up on the Electoral States Won (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectoralVoteStates.html) page too.

Wow! The Superdelegates need to see this map!

[gepenny]

I have been on the phone with many states and if some of the states that had earlier primarys were voting now we would see a very different picture remember not alot of the negative stuff about Obama came out after those primaries. Many people have told me they would vote different now too bad we cant have a do over. We just need to help our gal as much as possible going forward. Go Hillary Go

[v4hill]

YouTube - Hillary takes the lead!!!

[Alessandro Machi]

Still waiting for the final numbers to come in from PA before updating the Stats pages, but do have an Electoral Vote map that is very interesting:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/ElectoralMap2.jpg

I'll eventually get this map up on the Electoral States Won (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectoralVoteStates.html) page too.

My very first first blog article back in March came up with a similar number/prediction.

lol, if you have time, I would be interested in seeing how the delegates were doled out as compared to popular vote. I think what we will find is a huge shift from the caucus states votes that unfairly pulled the election and all the publicity Obama's way. By unfairly I mean caucuses which use 88% less voters to select each delegate.

I plan on reviewing the Obama 11 state winning streak to see if the amount of delegates he received versus the total votes cast were out of whack.

[Jayling]

The map is very telling, isn't it? Especially getting a look at the Electoral numbers for those states.

Anyway, I'm disappointed for not having the main Election Results (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectionResults2008Primary.html) page and the others which reference popular vote numbers updated yet. I've been keeping a close eye on the Pennsylvania Secretary of State's results webpage over the last 24 hours, and the numbers have been too inconsistent. The numbers have been moving forward, but then backwards - they'll add some in then take away again. It's a bit messy right now.

And since it takes such an immense amount of time to change so many entries and pages, plus the graphs, I've been holding off until something more stable comes in from the Pennsylvania SoS.

The only page which has Pennsylvania included so far is the Spreadsheet Version (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectionResultsSpreadsheet.html), since that's very easy and quick to change with these ever-changing numbers.

A preliminary with the current numbers that includes Florida & Michigan -- Clinton has +103,067 more Popular Votes. She takes the lead once again. Without Florida & Michigan , she is behind by -520,014. But none of us, not the news pundits, nor the news media, nor the DNC, has the right to take away those votes. The Secretary of States from both FL & MI have already counted all the ballots and officially certified the Election results.

I want our Graphs! Hurry up, Pennsylvania SoS :)

[joeysky18]

But none of us, not the news pundits, nor the news media, nor the DNC, has the right to take away those votes. The Secretary of States from both FL & MI have already counted all the ballots and officially certified the Election results.


Yes, Dean can try to strip the pledged delegate. But he can't dismiss the popular vote.

[samkm]

I called DNC and asked what about the FL and MI, and the John guy on the other side of the phone said, there were no plans to count the votes. I said, now THAT is what I call not democratic. There were radio ads and greater than life size props etc. He said the candidates did not really canvass. I said in today's day and age the voters searched and found the information and went to great lengths to go and vote. The people must be represented or the party is a sham.. He said he would pass it along.

All, call DNC and ask for the votes to be counted in, in both FL and MI. This is too important.

[Jayling]

Pennsylvania's numbers (http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/ElectionsInformation.aspx?FunctionID=12&ElectionID=27) have stabilized a bit, and there is only 1 outstanding District that has yet to report (Philadelphia County). So, with 99.99% of the votes in, the tally in PA is:

Clinton: 1,245,911
Obama: 1,037,953
Difference: +207,958 for Clinton

And a temporary graph until the final numbers come in -- Totals in all elections held to date:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesBoth3.jpg

Clinton once again takes the lead in the total Popular Votes from all the elections held so far, as of 4/22/08.

:)

[joeysky18]

Jayling, have you put that beautiful map in you website?

[Alessandro Machi]

I'd like to make this topic a one two punch by putting a link to my topic about
the caucus states exaggerated influence on the democratic race, something that the news media refuses to address.

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?p=70067#post70067

[Musicdude]

What about the totals for one vote per person primaries excluding caucuses? Or did I miss it?

And was there a separate graph, or figures, somewhere for a winner take all scenario in delegate count?

I also like that Electoral Vote count. :)

[Alessandro Machi]

What about the totals for one vote per person primaries excluding caucuses? Or did I miss it?

And was there a separate graph, or figures, somewhere for a winner take all scenario in delegate count?

I also like that Electoral Vote count. :)

for what it's worth, I think Obama has about a 350,000 vote total edge in the caucuses out of a million caucus votes. The problem is those million votes selected 502 delegates, or about 2 thousand voters per delegate selected.

A huge reduction of approximately 88% per delegate selected as compared to the primaries.

[CGP]

I think Alessandro's argument is the most compelling.

HOW IS THIS FAIR?

Hillary Clinton wins PA by more than 200,000 votes with more than 2 million people voting.
She gets only 10 more delegates than Obama for this win.

Hillary Clinton wins NJ by more than 100,000 votes with more than 1 million people voting.
She gets only 11 more delegates than Obama for this win.

MEANWHILE...

Barack Obama wins WY in a caucus were just over 3,000 votes were cast.
He gets 9 more delegates than Clinton for this win.

Barack Obama wins Idaho in a caucus were just over 16,000 votes were cast.
He gets 12 more delegates than Clinton for this win.

COMPLETELY UNJUST, UNFAIR & ILLOGICAL!!!

So Obama's win in Idaho (16,000 votes cast) provided him with a bigger net delegate gain than Hillary's wins in either PA (2 million votes cast) or NJ (1 million votes cast). Complete insanity!

Now it's clear why the Obama campaign targeted the caucuses - they provided a vehicle through which to inflate his perceived popularity and make it appear as though he had more support than he really did...Undemocratic features of caucuses:

1) Bully tactics can be used to pressure people into a particular corner

2) Voter turnout is extremely low with access difficulties for older people and those who are working

3) More delegates awarded proportionally per voter than in primaries

[Alessandro Machi]

I think Alessandro's argument is the most compelling.

HOW IS THIS FAIR?

Hillary Clinton wins PA by more than 200,000 votes with more than 2 million people voting.
She gets only 10 more delegates than Obama for this win.

Hillary Clinton wins NJ by more than 100,000 votes with more than 1 million people voting.
She gets only 11 more delegates than Obama for this win.

MEANWHILE...

Barack Obama wins WY in a caucus were just over 3,000 votes were cast.
He gets 9 more delegates than Clinton for this win.

Barack Obama wins Idaho in a caucus were just over 16,000 votes were cast.
He gets 12 more delegates than Clinton for this win.

COMPLETELY UNJUST, UNFAIR & ILLOGICAL!!!

So Obama's win in Idaho (16,000 votes cast) provided him with a bigger net delegate gain than Hillary's wins in either PA (2 million votes cast) or NJ (1 million votes cast). Complete insanity!

Now it's clear why the Obama campaign targeted the caucuses - they provided a vehicle through which to inflate his perceived popularity and make it appear as though he had more support than he really did...Undemocratic features of caucuses:

1) Bully tactics can be used to pressure people into a particular corner

2) Voter turnout is extremely low with access difficulties for older people and those who are working

3) More delegates awarded proportionally per voter than in primaries

Thanks Murray. For those who disagree, look to the state of Washington. Obama wins the caucus by a 68-31% margin and picks up 53 delegates to Hillary's 28. But then just 10 days later with Obama getting a lot of great national publicity, the non binding primary is held in Washington and Obama only gets 50 percent to Hillary's 49.6 percent! But the delegate split does not change, Obama still gets his original 53 delegates, Hillary only gets 25.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What has happened is the classic, the person reacting to bullying tactics (Hillary) getting "caught" reacting to the real bully, Obama's camp demanding Hillary give up two months ago.

Because Barrack Obama got a free pass on the caucuses, everybody looks at Hillary's reaction to Obama saying "get out of the race Hillary" as Hillary turning vicious. No way. It was Obama overplaying his caucus victories and creating a false "no way Hillary can win and have it be fair" scenario two months ago that has inundated and manipulated the media, the "pundits", and the democratic higher ups.

The democratic higher ups need to say to Obama, "You gained a somewhat inflated advantage in the caucus states. Even though your caucus state wins appear to be statistically bloated, as long as you, Obama, agree that the superdelegates DO NOT have to vote the way the delegates voted, then the playing field, although still tilted towards Obama (no Michigan and Florida votes counting and two months of portraying Hillary as the vicious one), it at least becomes somewhat fair again coming down the stretch, and would be the right and noble thing to do.

This does not guarantee a Hillary win as the superdelegates have already been manipulated by false numbers and negative campaigning against the Clinton side as only caring about herself and not the party, but at least it creates a fairer and balanced chance for both candidates to state their claim to the superdelegates without this cloud hanging over the superdelegate heads that they MUST vote as the delegates have voted.

[CGP]

Obama, you gained a somewhat inflated advantage in the caucus states. Even though your caucus state wins appear to be statistically bloated, as long as you, Obama, agree that the superdelegates DO NOT have to vote the way the delegates voted, then the playing field, although still tilted towards Obama (no Michigan and Florida votes counting), it at least becomes somewhat fair again coming down the stretch and is the right and noble thing to do.

This does not guarantee a Hillary win as the superdelegates have already been manipulated by false numbers, but at least it creates a fair and balanced chance for both candidates to state their claim to the superdelegates without this cloud hanging over their heads that they MUST vote as the delegates have voted.

Problem is that neither he nor anyone in his campaign have come out and said yes, superdelegates can vote any way they like - as per the rules. In contrast, both he and his surrogates and his supporters have actively supported the LIE that SD have to vote as per their state.

[Jayling]

All the Statistic pages (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html) are up to date now with the Pennsylvania election results included. There are some stunning graphs that tell a hell-of-a story just by themselves. Since the numbers can be overwhelming, though needed with sources cited, the graphs help tremendously and can be eye-awakening.

Just to get an idea of the current numbers, here's a little snapshot:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable.jpg

And of course, I can't leave this thread without my favorite graph:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesBoth3.jpg

Oh, and Joey, the pretty map is now on the Electoral Vote (http://www.diversityj.com/ElectoralVoteStates.html) pages :)

Okies, I'm about to fall over here, so nitey nite.

[Patricia GA]

Murray you were so well spoken during the demonstration. I sure wish the media would interview you so you could speak to the people. You are an asset and I am thankful your voice is being heard here in the forum. And Jayling's numbers tell us so much more than what the media does. I once again say I am so thankful I found the forum!

[Disfranchised]

This political year has been very eye opening. The question is why the super delegates can't see what we can see so obviously. In November winner takes it all! I was just looking at the new chart put out by AP as the road to the white house. http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Chart-shows-popular-vote-state-2004-general-election-and-key/photo//080426/480/181bc0c7ae76474bbe1467fb30d3998a//s:/ap/20080427/ap_on_el_pr/road_to270;_ylt=ApSwmGyHI6BBwm6Q5LnB0v9h24cA

Seems to me the only way for A Democrat to get there will be through the swing states and those of us living in swing states especially the two swing states that are being disfranchised/disenfranchised at the moment we know how it will go in November already.

[CGP]

Murray you were so well spoken during the demonstration. I sure wish the media would interview you so you could speak to the people. You are an asset and I am thankful your voice is being heard here in the forum. And Jayling's numbers tell us so much more than what the media does. I once again say I am so thankful I found the forum!

Such kind words - thanks Patricia. :)

[hillarymyhero]

Well, exactly this was the picture in my mind. I believe that Dems should have winner take all . This is really fair. Hillary is winner by all means and by all statistics. Dems election system is messed up. It needs to be clarified.

[PA_Voter]

I think your summaries are great and think (if it's not there) it might be good to pull the Washington State info in, showing caucuses actually misrepresenting the "will of the people" in 2008. Not sure if thegreenpapers.com has the data there or not but it's a great visual to explain what happens between Caucuses and Primaries.

Here's another article I was just reading that prompted me to come back to your post and add the aforementioned comment:

http://alessandromachi.blogspot.com/2008/04/deconstructing-barrack-obamas-caucus.html

[CGP]

I think your summaries are great and think (if it's not there) it might be good to pull the Washington State info in, showing caucuses actually misrepresenting the "will of the people" in 2008. Not sure if thegreenpapers.com has the data there or not but it's a great visual to explain what happens between Caucuses and Primaries.

Here's another article I was just reading that prompted me to come back to your post and add the aforementioned comment:

http://alessandromachi.blogspot.com/2008/04/deconstructing-barrack-obamas-caucus.html

The Washington case is a stunning example of the ABSURD and UNJUST nature of caucuses. From the above article this:


More proof is available that caucus states have unfairly skewed delegates to Obama's side. In Washington state, Barrack Obama won the caucus vote by a stunning 68% to 31% margin. 10 days later, Washington state held a non-binding primary. The much higher voter turnout resulted in a virtual tie between Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton. From 68%/31% to 50%/49.6%, yet Barrack Obama received 53 delegates, Hillary Clinton only 25 delegates.

[Alessandro Machi]

The Washington case is a stunning example of the ABSURD and UNJUST nature of caucuses. From the above article this:

Another Irony, some in Washington are complaining about the double vote, but what a wonderful tool it is to see if the caucus votes are at all in line with the will of the states populace as a whole.

[Jayling]

Some new popular vote numbers have come in from Pennsylvania as the PA Secretary of State updated their totals from last week -- giving Hillary 6,157 more votes.

Here's the latest totals as of 5/2/08:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable2.jpg

And the Popular Vote totals from both the Primary & Caucus, with and without FL & MI:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesBoth4.jpg

And a very interesting one from just the Primary Democratic & Swing States (no caucus):
http://www.diversityj.com/images/BlueSwingSWPV2.jpg

The Popular Vote totals will change periodically as the Secretary of State offices update their numbers. Several states like Ohio & PA still don't have certified election results yet.

[Jayling]

After Tuesday's Primary election for North Carolina and Indiana, here's the current totals. (numbers taken from the Secretary of State offices).
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable3.jpg

As I've mentioned before, the Popular Vote totals swing back and forth from election to election. Obama is currently ahead in popular votes by 88,889 votes. This will highly likely change back to the + column for Clinton next Tuesday with West Virginia's election of which she is favored to win.

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesBoth5.jpg

North Carolina results (http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/NC/1875/3985/en/md.html?cid=100) as of 7am 5/7/08, from the NC Secretary of State office. All 100 counties reported:

Clinton: 660,747 (41.47%)
Obama: 897,017 (56.30%)
Others: 35,571 (2.23%)
Total: 1,593,335
Clinton -236,270

-----

Indiana results (http://www.in.gov/apps/sos/primary/sos_primary08?page=district&countyID=1&partyID=1&officeID=36&districtID=937&districtshortviewID=937&candidate=) as of 1am 5/7/08, from the IN Secretary of State office. Not all counties reported as of 1am:

Clinton: 511,618 (51.96%)
Obama: 473,112 (48.04%)
Total: 984,730
Clinton +38,506

As most folks here know by now, I won't use the numbers from the biased news media, only the ballots counted by the official representatives at the Secretary of State offices. This is why you'll see a lower count for Indiana here, and also higher for NC.

[mjoynaples]

So now what... is it just the horrid BIASED sickening media that are trying to force her out? that identified Bill as lookin depressed last night? and she was looking for VP? OH PLEASE give me the real Spin not that bologna... and any thoughts on why IN didn't do it better for her? I mean for me a win is a win but it sounds like it needed to be more??? not getting that...

thanks for your efforts Jayling it makes such a difference to see it this way!:)

[hills]

Jayling, do the delegates include Florida and Michigan

[Jayling]

May 8th, 2008

2008 Democratic Primaries by County

Of the 32 State Primary elections held to date, there were 2,014 counties involved. Senator Clinton won the majority of the counties: 1,279 to 735. That’s 64% of all counties in Clinton’s favor, 36% for Senator Obama, but she only received 47% of the popular vote whereas he received 53%.

An interesting observation emerges for 2 States, Missouri a Swing State, and North Carolina, a Red State, where the winner of the majority of the State loses the popular vote:

Missouri has 115 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 109 out of 115 / Obama won 6
Clinton won 95% of the State / Obama won 5%

Obama won the State of Missouri with 49% of the vote / 48% for Clinton

-----

North Carolina has 100 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 55 out of 100 / Obama won 45
Clinton won 55% of the State / Obama won 45%

Obama won the State of North Carolina with 56% of the vote / 42% for Clinton

-----

Another interesting disparity arises in quite a few States where winning the majority of a State by over 20-45% garners a much lower popular vote percentile. The few scattered large metropolitan cities tend to hold more weight than the entire state itself:


Arizona has 15 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 13 out of 15 / Obama won 2
Clinton won 87% of the State but only received 50% of the popular vote

Arkansas has 75 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 72 out of 75 / Obama won 3
Clinton won 96% of the State but only received 73% of the popular vote

Florida has 67 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 58 out of 67 / Obama won 9
Clinton won 87% of the State but only received 50% of the popular vote

Illinois has 102 counties
Clinton won 14 / Obama won the majority, 88 out of 102
Obama won 86% of the State but only received 65% of the popular vote

Indiana has 92 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 83 out of 92 / Obama won 9
Clinton won 90% of the State but only received 51% of the popular vote

New Jersey has 21 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 16 out of 21 / Obama won 5
Clinton won 76% of the State but only received 54% of the popular vote

New Mexico has 33 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 27 out of 33 / Obama won 6
Clinton won 82% of the State but only received 49% of the popular vote

New York has 62 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 61 out of 62 / Obama won 1
Clinton won 98% of the State but only received 57% of the popular vote

Ohio has 88 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 83 out of 88 / Obama won 5
Clinton won 94% of the State but only received 54% of the popular vote

Oklahoma has 77 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 76 out of 77 / Obama won 1
Clinton won 99% of the State but only received 55% of the popular vote

Pennsylvania has 67 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 60 out of 67 / Obama won 7
Clinton won 90% of the State but only received 55% of the popular vote

South Carolina has 46 counties
Clinton won 2 / Obama won the majority of counties, 44 out of 46
Obama won 96% of the State but only received 55% of the popular vote

Tennessee has 95 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 87 out of 95 / Obama won 8
Clinton won 92% of the State but only received 54% of the popular vote

Texas has 254 counties
Clinton won the majority of counties, 230 out of 254 / Obama won 24
Clinton won 91% of the State but only received 51% of the popular vote

Wisconsin has 72 counties
Clinton won 10 / Obama won the majority of counties, 62 out of 72
Obama won 86% of the State but only received 58% of the popular vote


Of those 17 Primary State elections where the few big cities appear to fall disproportionately against the majority of the entire State, Senator Clinton won the whole of the States by extremely large margins.

By winning the majority of the 2,014 counties in those 32 States, 1,279 to 735 (64% to 36%), during a close, hard-fought Primary season which has a lower turnout than a General Election, it appears that Senator Clinton is the favorite within the larger portion of those States.

(source information gathered from the official election results at the Secretary of State offices)

[Jayling]

The current Popular Vote and Delegate Count as of 8am, 5/11/08, with Florida & Michigan:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable4.jpg

Without Florida & Michigan:
-748,735 (-2.39%) Total Votes / -162 Total Pledged / -162.5 Total Delegates

2,025 Total Delegates Needed / 2,208 (or 2209) with FL & MI

Neither Candidate can reach 2,025 without Super Delegates
217 Pledged left in remaining elections / 248 Supers haven't endorsed yet (282 Supers with FL & MI)

and I'm still searching for that lone missing Dele to make 2209! :)

[CGP]

I love the details! I am a big fan of stats/figures from a long way back!!! (oh, and very competitive too ;) )

[Patricia GA]

Thank you for reporting the lastest numbers without spin. ((((((JAYLING))))))

[CGP]

((((((JAYLING))))))
Without Spin!

Looks like a cool logo?!? :cool:

[Kbentleyis]

A couple of weeks ago, Fox had a political analyst that I'm not familiar with and he said: If Clinton comes under 100 pledged delegates to Obama, the DNC will have to declare a "tie." Then they are free from stress to stay pledged to their original candidate. They can use this in justifying their defection and choose the stronger and most electable candidate.

[Texas Mike]

Thanks Jayling for that great primary statistics website. A couple suggestions to make it even better.
1. Please correct a couple of state abbreviation spellings: NE not NB, and I am not sure what state AS is. This will make the site a little more persuasive.
2. The total voters in Michigan: Does this include giving the undecideds to Obama (which seems fair to me, although I would value your thought on this).
Thanks,
- Texas Mike

[Jayling]

Thanks Jayling for that great primary statistics website. A couple suggestions to make it even better.
1. Please correct a couple of state abbreviation spellings: NE not NB, and I am not sure what state AS is. This will make the site a little more persuasive.
2. The total voters in Michigan: Does this include giving the undecideds to Obama (which seems fair to me, although I would value your thought on this).
Thanks,
- Texas Mike
Nebraska has been corrected to NE. The 'AS' is the abbreviation (http://www.usps.com/ncsc/lookups/abbr_state.txt) for American Samoa.

In reference to the popular votes for Michigan -- Mike, it's not up to us to divvy up the popular votes from the people of Michigan. The numbers that are recorded by GreenPapers, US Election Atlas, and myself, are directly from the MI Secretary of State office (http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/election/results/08PPR/01000000.html). Nobody has the right to guess or estimate with the officially certified ballots -- they've already been tallied by election officials.

Several candidates chose to take their names off the ballot. It's impossible to determine exactly which people in Michigan may have voted their Uncommitted for one or the other, or even as true Uncommitted. It's not up to us to guess the Uncommitted Michigan voters intents. That's messing with officially certified ballots which is something I won't partake in.

The officially certified results for the Democratic Primary are:
Clinton: 328,309
Uncommitted: 238,168
Kucinich: 21,715
Dodd: 3,845
Gravel: 2,361
Total: 594,398

[Lodi]

A couple of weeks ago, Fox had a political analyst that I'm not familiar with and he said: If Clinton comes under 100 pledged delegates to Obama, the DNC will have to declare a "tie." Then they are free from stress to stay pledged to their original candidate. They can use this in justifying their defection and choose the stronger and most electable candidate.

I wanted to bump this comment so we'll remember it if need be and push for this outcome! Wish to God John Edwards would back Hillary and give her his votes!!!!!!!!!

P.S.: Jayling: You're awesome!!!!!!

[Texas Mike]

I see how the tallies you report are objective. Thank you also for mentioning MI Uncommitted: 238,168. So from a political perspective my opinion is it would be good for Hillary Clinton to win the popular vote by more than that.

[hills]

How do I find out how many republicans voted for Obama in North Carolina and Indiana?

[Jayling]

How do I find out how many republicans voted for Obama in North Carolina and Indiana?
Hills, there's no way to determine how many republicans voted for either candidate through the Secretary of State election results statistics. There isn't a breakdown for something like that.

Media exit polling is probably the only way to get any numbers -- those that aren't comprehensive, accurate, or encompass the whole electorate. In other words, not reliable.

J.

[SantaCruzen]

http://www.diversityj.com/images/WinnerTakeAll3.jpg
http://www.diversityj.com/images/WinnerTakeAll3.jpg

Okay, so it seems that MI&FL will get counted at some point. I have read that if they do, and they will by all accounts (read that BO is stumping in FL?) then the rules state that the total Delegate count is 2028? Yes?

From months of this reading, it seems that the Pleged Delegates and the SuperDelegates can actually change their vote at the Cenvention? Yes?

Can we start to get comparisons and contrasts with this data map and the official Power Point Presentation HRC is outlining to SuperAutoDelegates?

P.S. they are automaticall super I guess.

[Jayling]

Okay, so it seems that MI&FL will get counted at some point. I have read that if they do, and they will by all accounts (read that BO is stumping in FL?) then the rules state that the total Delegate count is 2028? Yes?


Cruz, the number for the total Delegate count would be 2209, but that would be with a full delegation from Michigan and Florida. If either of those states get penalized, it's hard to know exactly what the new number would be for a candidate to win the nomination.

[CGP]

Cruz, the number for the total Delegate count would be 2209, but that would be with a full delegation from Michigan and Florida. If either of those states get penalized, it's hard to know exactly what the new number would be for a candidate to win the nomination.

I am running with 2209 regardlesss! See, the avatar! ;)

[samkm]

It is now DNC's fault if they dont give FL and MI their full voice. It is not Hillary's fault, nor the voters'.

2209 delegates it is, with full democracy for FL and MI.

[Jayling]

After Hillary's thrashing of Obama in West Virginia yesterday, here's where the current numbers stand:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable5.jpg

And the Delegates with the possible Michigan Proposal:
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable6.jpg

None of the graphics are updated yet, but each table (http://www.diversityj.com/Statistics2008Primary.html) is current. I'm late in getting to bed! So will have to take care of those later. :)

J.

[Alessandro Machi]

Thanks Murray. For those who disagree, look to the state of Washington. Obama wins the caucus by a 68-31% margin and picks up 53 delegates to Hillary's 28. But then just 10 days later with Obama getting a lot of great national publicity, the non binding primary is held in Washington and Obama only gets 50 percent to Hillary's 49.6 percent! But the delegate split does not change, Obama still gets his original 53 delegates, Hillary only gets 25.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What has happened is the classic, the person reacting to bullying tactics (Hillary) getting "caught" reacting to the real bully, Obama's camp demanding Hillary give up two months ago.

Because Barrack Obama got a free pass on the caucuses, everybody looks at Hillary's reaction to Obama saying "get out of the race Hillary" as Hillary turning vicious. No way. It was Obama overplaying his caucus victories and creating a false "no way Hillary can win and have it be fair" scenario two months ago that has inundated and manipulated the media, the "pundits", and the democratic higher ups.

The democratic higher ups need to say to Obama, "You gained a somewhat inflated advantage in the caucus states. Even though your caucus state wins appear to be statistically bloated, as long as you, Obama, agree that the superdelegates DO NOT have to vote the way the delegates voted, then the playing field, although still tilted towards Obama (no Michigan and Florida votes counting and two months of portraying Hillary as the vicious one), it at least becomes somewhat fair again coming down the stretch, and would be the right and noble thing to do.

This does not guarantee a Hillary win as the superdelegates have already been manipulated by false numbers and negative campaigning against the Clinton side as only caring about herself and not the party, but at least it creates a fairer and balanced chance for both candidates to state their claim to the superdelegates without this cloud hanging over the superdelegate heads that they MUST vote as the delegates have voted.

I was slightly off on my Washington State numbers. Apparently the vote was something like 50% to 47%. I think I got my number from the internet but it may have been updated after I looked at it, or maybe I looked at the wrong section. However, a 3% difference is still a LOT closer than 68%-31%, and apparently I now have to investigate what is going on in Nebraska.

[ScottVA]

Let's face it.... Caucuses are MAJOR FRAUD ZONES! Bambi and his cronies figured that out going into this primary season and quickly capitalized on it. That's an Axelrod trick!

The DNC should make the entire thing in every State be a Primary and no splitting but winner take all like the GOP. We wouldn't be in this mess if we had that sort of thing. Just because someone felt they got shafted (McGovern) 30+ years ago they went and changed the rules to suit cry babies! Well LOOK we have another cry baby Bambi back for the 2008 season!

[marcelmarcel]

Good comprehensive chart of earned delegates.

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/info-CAUCUS08-sort.html

Primary states: Obama ahead by 7 delegates
Caucus states: Obama ahead by 145


Primary Payoffs
Sen. Obama has gained much of his delegate advantage in caucuses
During the current Democratic presidential campaign, 19 states and territories have held caucuses, and Hillary Clinton has won only three. In contrast, Barack Obama built his nearly insurmountable delegate lead mainly by focusing on caucuses in small, Republican states. As a result, Sen. Obama has won an average 9,965 votes for every delegate earned, while Sen. Clinton has won 10,575 votes for each delegate. Below, track the results state by state.

[suerw]

Let's face it.... Caucuses are MAJOR FRAUD ZONES! Bambi and his cronies figured that out going into this primary season and quickly capitalized on it. That's an Axelrod trick!

The DNC should make the entire thing in every State be a Primary and no splitting but winner take all like the GOP. We wouldn't be in this mess if we had that sort of thing. Just because someone felt they got shafted (McGovern) 30+ years ago they went and changed the rules to suit cry babies! Well LOOK we have another cry baby Bambi back for the 2008 season!

I so agree with you. All states should hold primaries, not caucuses. Like you say, caucuses are too easy to manipulate. Also, many voters simply cannot get to a caucus. In Kansas the nearest caucus to where my cousins live was 90 miles away.

[Jayling]

And here's the latest Stats on the votes:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PopularVotesMay17th.jpg

A bit more in-depth. Hillary leads in the Primary Popular Votes, the Primary Pledged, and the total Popular Votes (with FL & MI):
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable8.jpg

And here's how it looks for the Delegates by using the January results for Florida, and using the 69/59 Michigan proposal (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5igrYLRrHG3P6lIbs2E7pSH0bxhvgD90H73KG0):
http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable8a.jpg

[lynfreedom]

what a difference the joke of caucus makes

[Alessandro Machi]

How do I find out how many republicans voted for Obama in North Carolina and Indiana?

Just ask the "pundits" and they'll tell you that every last one of em voted for Hillary Clinton. (saracasm alert, sarcasm alert).

[EngCindy]

My political radar, which is far from anything more than suspicion, is:

Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, Obama will roll out more superdelegates. If I read this correct, he has 1979 delegates.; ( from Jaylings popular vote comparison above.)

So, Kentucky has 55 ? Oregon has 55 ? Someone please correct the actual numbers.

Anyway, if he gets beat in Kentucky, as he did in W.V., he would pick up 8 or nine delegates. Oregon, on the other hand, if split evenly, would net him 28, 29 ? A ten point spread would of course, mean more.

So, for the sake of discussion, he picks up 40 pledged delegates Tuesday.
1979 + 40 = 2019 He would only need 6 supers between now and then, to go over
the magical, though improper number, of 2025 ?

We now need to dig in deeper. We have known for quite awhile, that this was an uphill battle. Hillary keeps fighting, so DO we !


I also have suspicions that May 31 is the "real" fight. If this damn party does not recognize Florida and Michigan, are we sunk ? There is alot of time between June and August.....we must fight on ! The numbers will be whatever they are. We will present our best case; as I believe Bill Clinton is one of the Best Political Minds of our times; and, Lanny Davis is the instrument. I do not want Hillary ever recognizing Obama as the presumptive nominee. We must continue on to the Convention. If she ever recognized, then I believe it would weaken her; when the obvious bombs come out against Obama, she would benefit by being the nominee, but one that is chosen by default, do you see ?

We must increase our numbers; at the protest rally, at the "protest vote"; should always suppport Hillary and never give in to defeat. The buyers remorse is real and we can exploit it. Onward and upward.....Our fight will continue until November, as we are what is right in this country, and, God help us, we MUST prevail !

[Jayling]

Cindy, I posted this in another thread. I think this is the way he's going to claim victory:

According to an article yesterday (unknown how reliable it is) that someone posted, his victory will be done by claiming he finally reached the majority out of all the Pledged delegates. (still flipping the bird at FL & MI, of course - they don't count in this equation!)

Currently, he has 49.57% out of the 3,253 Pledged Delegates, Clinton has 44.41%. A 5% difference. After next Tuesday, he'll finally hit the halfway mark.

By estimates, he may finally have around 50.46%~51.08% of the Pledged Delegates. Hillary will possibly be around 46.10%.

So, that's possibly the way it's going to be spun next Tuesday, and pounded into the Nation's mind, over and over and over again. The man will reach the halfway mark out of all the Pledged!

yoi...

There might be a way for him to include FL & MI to achieve this halfway point in Pledged, and that's if they count the January results as is for Florida and they go with the 69/59 Michigan split proposal. He just might get around 50.18% of the 3566 Pledged then.

Such bull and hype.

[Jayling]

As the voters head to the Polls today -- here's where we stand right now:

http://www.diversityj.com/images/PVtable9.jpg

Gooooo Kentucky!
Gooooo Oregon!

Bring it on home now...

[RachachaSharon]

Thanks, Jayling. As always, far more informative than the rest.

[Ace]

edit

[Hillarysmygirl08]

I loved reading all this information I get so much more information from the blogs then I do reading the MSM oh yes thats right I dont read them anymore nor do I watch them just Fox for me from now on

[seawave]

I was slightly off on my Washington State numbers. Apparently the vote was something like 50% to 47%. I think I got my number from the internet but it may have been updated after I looked at it, or maybe I looked at the wrong section. However, a 3% difference is still a LOT closer than 68%-31%, and apparently I now have to investigate what is going on in Nebraska.

There were many things going on in the State of Washington. Seattle is in King County. Tacoma is in Pierce County Both counties did not have mail-in ballots for the primary whereas Clark County the home of Vancouver WA right across the river from Portland Oregon did. Mass transit in Portland is great. They have an efficient light rail system. Many Vancouver and outlying residents work in Portland. The point I am making is that BO and his group knew they could use this to their advantage. They knew that the caucus was not representative of the people. Many registered voters did not vote in the primary because they knew it would not count at all. It was easier to mail in a ballot than it was to go vote on election Tuesday. Many King county and Pierce county voters did not vote. King and Pierce counties are home to traffic jams since we have them every weekday as people struggle to manipulate the freeways. The last thing people wanted to do after fighting traffic is try to go to the voting booth to cast a ballot in an election that did not count. Many were angry that their vote would not count. So the primary is not even a good indicator of how many would have voted for Hillary. The big win for BO might have been a big loss if the primary was counted and not the caucus. It is a clear example of how the DNC wants BO. If they had cared about the people in WA they would have counted the primary and said no to counting the caucus. Many did not realize the primary would not be counted until the results of the caucus was reported. We were given a token pat on the head and allowed to vote in a primary that had no meaning. They not the voters chose to count the caucus as it was in their power to do so. Also the head of the DNC in WA supports BO.