If Clinton Is So Sure She Will Win, Why Does She Need To Mislead Us About The Popular Vote?

[Gregorian]

&feature=em-uploademail

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. Incorrect

The Pinocchio Test

Despite the suspicions of the Sanders supporter, the fact that caucus results are not included in the popular vote tally does not appear to make much of a difference in the final result. Despite overwhelming victories in caucus states such as Washington and Maine, Sanders gains only about 130,000 votes. That means Clinton is ahead by 2.4 million votes, rather than 2.5 million votes. Given rounding — and the fact that caucus numbers are only estimates — the difference is slight enough that Clinton’s claim, made before the Wisconsin vote, earns a rare Geppetto Checkmark.

Geppetto Checkmark




https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/06/is-hillary-clinton-really-ahead-of-bernie-sanders-by-2-5-million-votes/

She has only increased her op vote lead since the publishing of that article, by approximately 500,000 votes.

Taniel ?@Taniel May 19
2/ We do have estimates for overall turnout & count of precinct delegates candidates win at caucuses. So we can *estimate* raw voting counts
24 retweets 30 likes
Reply Retweet 24
Like 30
More

Follow

Taniel
?@Taniel
3/ Clinton's (2-person-vote) lead in the known popular vote is 56.6/43.4. After including these estimates from IA/NV/AK/WA/ME/WY: 56.1/43.9.


https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/733374726119247875

[Henhouse]

3. K&R

Bookmarking....were going to need that for the next few weeks...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. It's math . It can be duplicated.

Either the findings are essentially accurate or they aren't.

[Juicy_Bellows]

2. Step aside Katy Perry, new theme song:

[Henhouse]

4. Katy Perry...."I'm with Her"..

[Juicy_Bellows]

6. Good for her, I'll stick with Maynard.

[That Guy 888]

12. Wow a celebrity! I'm changing my vote to her!1!

[SFnomad]

7. Which Nebraska votes do you want to count? The caucus or the primary?

Caucus: Clinton 14,340 - Sanders 19,120
Primary: Clinton 41,819 - Sanders 36,691

One thing Nebraska makes clear ... caucuses are anti-democratic and disenfranchise voters. Both Clinton and Sanders each got more votes in the primary then the total number of votes in the caucus combined.

[demwing]

8. It's her nature

www.democraticunderground.com/12511531181

[onenote]

9. This has been debunked repeatedly.

Shaun King's analysis is farcical. He seems bothered by the fact that the published popular vote totals don't reflect that there are 7.2 million people living in Washington State and Bernie got more than 70 percent in the caucus there.

Now someone who engaged in critical thinking might ask -- what difference does it make that Washington State has 71 million people. After all, many of them aren't even of voting age and millions more didn't participate in the caucus by choice. And if the total population of the state should somehow be taken into account in figuring popular votes (although that's a bizarre notion), then I guess Clinton should be credit for a lot of the 19.5 million people who live in New York, even though many of them aren't eligible to vote and/or didn't vote.

The reality is that the number of participants in the Washington State caucus was estimated to be 230,000 and Bernie got the support of approximately 72 percent. So it is possible to add a number to the reported popular vote totals. (And after Washington State has its non-binding primary next week, there will be those numbers to consider).

Shaun King could have figured this out. But he's just a propagandist, not someone actually interested in facts.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. FIXED

Now someone who engaged in critical thinking might ask -- what difference does it make that Washington State has 71 million people. After all, many of them aren't even of voting age and millions more didn't participate in the caucus by choice. And if the total population of the state should somehow be taken into account in figuring popular votes (although that's a bizarre notion), then I guess Clinton should be credit for a lot of the 28 million people who live in Texas, even though many of them aren't eligible to vote and/or didn't vote.


BTW, if 08 is any indicator, the WA primary will be a lot closer!

[eastwestdem]

10. Really, that is what you are worried about? Not only has your argument been made and disproven,

you are talking about the caucuses, which had relatively low numbers anyway. Surely, if you are a self-respecting Hillary-hater, can think of some other Benghazi-like attack? I'm disappointed in the opposition today, just not up to par.