If it's just simple Math, show me the Spreadsheet

[JoeOtterbein]

I have been using basic math spreadsheets since Lotus 1-2-3. If you can show me a spreadsheet that shows how delegates are awarded, state by state, and including the caucuses and "super" delegates, I will know how my vote counted.

If you can't give me the simple math spreadsheet, you have no business throwing shade on my questioning in the primary if my vote counted for anything. And if that is the case, you need to focus on the issues instead of the mysterious "math" of which you speak so highly.

[SidDithers]

1. The Green Papers has a state-by-state breakdown...

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D

Within a state, you can scroll down to see how delegates are apportioned, and the vote totals in each congressional district, with the resulting delegate allocation.

There's your math.

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

3. The link you provided was not state by state or anything I asked.

Why did you link it?

[SidDithers]

4. What state are you in?...nt

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

5. I see hyper links for states separated out. that is not a spreadsheet it is a website

[SidDithers]

7. Yeah, OK. Nevermind...

I get the sense you're not really interested in trying to find an answer.

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

8. I get the sense you are changing the subject

[SidDithers]

11. Here's your spreadsheet...

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

12. I've seen millions of these kind of spreadsheets, none worth a dime of common sense

[hellofromreddit]

2. They just like the way the word sounds.

They've actually got nothing.

[JoeOtterbein]

6. Looks like all they have is dubious websites

[JoePhilly]

9. Forget the spreadsheet, reality will be here to explain it to you in about 2 weeks.

[JoeOtterbein]

10. And what happens if she loses in Nov because your math is incorrect?

[JoePhilly]

13. You clearly suck at math.

You start with a question about the PRIMARY math ... and then want to switch to a discussion of GENERAL ELECTION math.

But I understand why ... you actually do understand the PRIMARY math situation. And it's not in your favor.

[JoeOtterbein]

16. LOL! All I'm asking for is a simple spreadsheet!

Just soooo hard!

[JoePhilly]

22. Again ... there is no need ... reality will provide the answer ...

... you seek in about 2 weeks.

You seem to think that other people should prove to you that the earth is round. Even as you demand that it is flat.

There is no reason to waste time doing the research for you that you are not willing to do for yourself as reality races forward with the answer you seek.

[JoeOtterbein]

25. Again, you cannot answer my question, so why are you still trying so hard to change the subject?

[JoePhilly]

28. Actualy YOU tried to change the subject to the GE.

And I pointed that out.

Now ... you are floundering in a sea of reality.

On June 7th, the "primary math" problem will be resolved such that we won't have to look at estimates of anything.

Let's try this ... if Hillary loses the primary to Bernie ... I'll leave DU forever.

If Hillary wins the primary over Bernie ... you leave forever.

You have about 170 posts ... I have over 26,000.

Two Joes, head to head.

Clearly I'm putting more on the line than you are.

You in, or out?

[JoeOtterbein]

31. Simple math If Hillary loses in Nov because our math is incorrect, we all lose. Big Time

[JoePhilly]

35. Which of us leaves DU when the Dem primary ends ... me or you?

Don't change the discussion to your sad prediction for the GE ... focus on the topic of your OP ... the primary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. I have made that wager... No takers ever!!!

I even made for the general...

[JoeOtterbein]

53. Thanks DSB, I wrote my first DU post in 2001, I will not be stopped now!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Your profile said you joined in 2012.

[JoeOtterbein]

59. Good point! Again the math is WRONG! See the link below, PLEASE EVERYONE READING!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/01/02/010216_faking.html

[JoeOtterbein]

60. WOW! That seemed to silence things a bit!

[JoePhilly]

56. The funny thing is ...

... some of them never actually take the wager ... but they'll act as if they did later.

Take our friend here ... joined in OCT 2012 ... has 180ish posts ... but 140ish of those in the last 90 days.

Humm.

Why did they "leave" after the 2012 General? Illness?

Why come back demanding others do their math homework?

The primary ends soon ... so we'll see if this person takes the wager openly, or decides to just takes it quietly ... until the next primary and GE.

[JoeOtterbein]

61. Actually, PLEASE see my post from 2001!!!!

[JoeOtterbein]

62. Or why does it say 2012 when I added a post in 2001?

PLEASE SEE:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/01/02/010216_faking.html

[JoeOtterbein]

63. Maybe math?

[JoePhilly]

64. Your profile says 2012.

[JoeOtterbein]

66. Again, math can be wrong if not verified. It's ok, really!

[JoePhilly]

67. The math will be verified in about 2 weeks.

Not sure how many times we need to explain this to you.

[JoeOtterbein]

81. Just to be sure Joe, you saw my post from 2001, right? One thing I do not do is lie about myself.

[SidDithers]

17. +1...nt

Sid

[Sancho]

14. You're smart enough to past a table into your favorite spreadsheet...

...and primaries are designed so that your vote may not have "counted". In this case, Hillary will win easily before California polls close.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

State Date ▾ Delegates Clinton Sanders Delegate
Allocation Open/
Closed
(2,382 Needed to Win) - 4763 2293 1536 - -
Delegates Won - 4051 1768 1497
Superdelegates - (712) 525 39
District of Columbia June 14 20 (25) Primary Closed
California June 7 475 (71) Primary Semi-closed
Montana June 7 21 (6) Primary Open
New Jersey June 7 126 (16) Primary Closed
North Dakota June 7 18 (5) Primary Open
New Mexico June 7 34 (9) Primary Closed
South Dakota June 7 20 (5) Primary Semi-open
Puerto Rico June 5 60 (7) Primary Open
Virgin Islands June 4 7 (5) Caucus Closed
Oregon May 17 61 (13) 25 34 Primary Closed
Kentucky May 17 55 (5) 27 27 Primary Closed
West Virginia May 10 29 (8) 11 18 Primary Semi-closed
Guam May 7 7 (5) 4 3 Caucus Closed
Indiana May 3 83 (9) 39 44 Primary Open
Rhode Island April 26 24 (9) 11 13 Primary Semi-closed
Pennsylvania April 26 189 (21) 105 83 Primary Closed
Delaware April 26 21 (10) 12 9 Primary Closed
Connecticut April 26 55 (15) 28 27 Primary Closed
Maryland April 26 95 (23) 61 33 Primary Closed
New York April 19 247 (44) 139 108 Primary Closed
Wyoming April 9 14 (4) 7 7 Caucus Closed
Wisconsin April 5 86 (10) 38 48 Primary Open
Washington March 26 101 (17) 27 74 Caucus Open
Hawaii March 26 25 (9) 8 17 Caucus Semi-closed
Alaska March 26 16 (4) 3 13 Caucus Closed
Utah March 22 33 (4) 6 27 Caucus Semi-open
Idaho March 22 23 (4) 5 18 Caucus Open
Arizona March 22 75 (10) 42 33 Primary Closed
Ohio March 15 143 (16) 81 62 Primary Semi-open
North Carolina March 15 107 (14) 60 47 Primary Semi-closed
Missouri March 15 71 (13) 36 35 Primary Open
Illinois March 15 156 (26) 79 77 Primary Open
Florida March 15 214 (32) 141 73 Primary Closed
Northern Marianas March 12 6 (5) 4 2 N/A N/A
Michigan March 8 130 (17) 63 67 Primary Open
Mississippi March 8 36 (5) 31 5 Primary Open
Maine March 6 25 (5) 8 17 Caucus Closed
Kansas March 5 33 (4) 10 23 Caucus Closed
Nebraska March 5 25 (5) 10 15 Caucus Closed
Louisiana March 5 51 (8) 37 14 Primary Closed
Virginia March 1 95 (15) 62 33 Primary Open
Vermont March 1 16 (10) 0 16 Primary Open
Texas March 1 222 (30) 147 75 Primary Open
Tennessee March 1 67 (9) 44 23 Primary Open
Oklahoma March 1 38 (4) 17 21 Primary Semi-closed
Minnesota March 1 77 (16) 31 46 Caucus Open
Massachusetts March 1 91 (25) 46 45 Primary Semi-closed
Georgia March 1 102 (14) 73 29 Primary Open
Democrats Abroad March 1-8 13 (4) 4 9 Primary Closed
Colorado March 1 66 (13) 25 41 Caucus Closed
Arkansas March 1 32 (5) 22 10 Primary Open
American Samoa March 1 6 (4) 4 2 Caucus Closed
Alabama March 1 53 (7) 44 9 Primary Open
South Carolina February 27 53 (6) 39 14 Primary Open
Nevada February 20 35 (8) 20 15 Caucus Closed
New Hampshire February 9 24 (8) 9 15 Primary Semi-closed
Iowa February 1 44 (8) 23 21 Caucus Semi-open

[JoeOtterbein]

20. Please just a simple spreadsheet! A link to a simple pdf version would be great!

[Sancho]

26. Just go to the link...

paste the delimited table into any program you wish.

[JoeOtterbein]

29. One link to a dubious website is not a comprehensive spreadsheet. let alone one verified by anyone

[Corporate666]

33. Dubious website?

So the numerous reputable news websites reporting delegate counts are "dubious"?

Is the problem that you don't know how to cut-and-paste? Or you think ABC News, CNN, MSNBC, 538, RCP, Green Papers and the other sites reporting delegate numbers are "dubious"?

[JoeOtterbein]

36. Yes all doboius websites, now give me a simple spreadsheet Please!

Be nice if it was verified too!

[JoePhilly]

37. I think he wants you to snail mail him a hard copy.

Notarized by a Bernie Delegate.

[JoeOtterbein]

38. How about little simple spreadsheet?

[JoePhilly]

41. Some one gave you all the data you'd need to import into one.

You complained.

I suspect that if some one sent you a spreadsheet (thus doing your homework for you) you'd demand that they read it to you.

The primary math problem in question is about to go from theoretical, to applied.

[JoeOtterbein]

43. You are complaining to me! I just want a silly little spreadsheet and I can't get one!

[JoePhilly]

45. You sound like a kid in middle school asking for some one else to ...

... do his homework.

The test is in about 2 weeks.

Again ... which Joe is leaving DU forever?

[JoeOtterbein]

46. Which Joe can give me a logical spreadsheet? Such a difficult thing!

[JoePhilly]

57. You could. With the data others have provided you.

But I get it ... math is hard.

Which of us is staying after June 7?

[Renew Deal]

80. You have the information

Convert it to PDF or make one yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016#Schedule_and_results

[JoeOtterbein]

82. Do it MYSELF? UH? How long do you think that will last in NOV????

I want proof the primaries were calculated correctly. We need to know it BEFORE Philly!

[lancer78]

84. They were calculated properly

Your candidate just didn't engage the AA vote and won a total of 26 counties among 8 states in the south.

[JoeOtterbein]

85. So why not verify the elections by an audit? We need to know the verified result BEFORE November!

Because when the GOP cheats in NOV, we WANT to be able to verify it!!!

[lancer78]

86. I am not sure

if primaries are certified by the Secretary of State for a state. I don't think Caucuses are certified.

[JoeOtterbein]

87. Thanks for pointing out ANOTHER problem! You are not alone in being "not sure"!

[Sancho]

40. haha...you've got to be kidding...dubious website???

All Realclearpolitics does is compile accurate and available data.

Someone else already gave you green papers. You can see another version graphically at 538:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/

The numbers are the same...Bernie lost.

[JoeOtterbein]

47. Can we audit their results? It should be simple. We may lose in Nov if the math is wrong.

[Corporate666]

15. Faulty logic results in faulty conclusion

1) A spreadsheet is not the only way to see, understand or prove something. In fact, a spreadsheet is only as good as the data put into it. Your demand for a spreadsheet as proof doesn't actually prove anything. It's just a petulant demand for facts that fit your narrative. But facts are independent of opinions.

2) The results of one state are irrelevant to another. So if someone were to kow-tow to your demand and show you a spreadsheet, the results in (for example) Texas are totally unrelated to whether a vote in New York mattered or not. What determines whether a vote mattered is whether the state is open or closed, caucus or primary, how many delegates they have, and the number of people who turned out. At most, a vote is worth tents of thousandths of a delegate.

3) Your last paragraph is a non-sequitor and a personal incredulity fallacy. Just because you don't understand the numbers unless they are presented to you in the way you demand does not mean that other people's understanding of the math is incorrect or irrelevant.


It's sort of like me saying "if Bernie is unwilling to show me 30+ years of tax returns, he has no business talking about issues until he provides those returns". That fact that I draw a link between the two things doesn't mean a link exists, and just because I demand he provide tax returns before talking about other issues in no way means that talking about other issues is invalid.

[JoeOtterbein]

18. I agree faulty math (logic) equals a faulty spreadsheet, so show me a correct one!

Why do I get tons of meaningless words instead?!!!

[SidDithers]

19. ...

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

21. A secret math code Sid?

[SidDithers]

23. My mistake for ever thinking you were genuinely seeking information...

You're not interested in math, or how delegates are allocated.

That's completely fucking clear.

Sid

[JoeOtterbein]

30. Please do not cuss, it looks bad on us Dems Sid

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. Sid is a credit to this site.

[JoeOtterbein]

51. Cussing is not logical, rude, unnecessary and does not fit with polite discussion on this thread

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. There is nothing wrong with spontaneous moral outrage.

[JoeOtterbein]

55. Yes! and the reason for my post! We must elect the best candidate!

Also, thanks for not cussing!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. We need to elect the candidate who garnered the most votes and pledged delegates.

That's how democracies roll.

[Corporate666]

32. Because everyone recognizes a burden of proof fallacy when they see one

and nobody feels like indulging you.

The data is out there. It's in plenty of easily-readable formats. Demanding that someone take that data and put it in a format you require, otherwise you reject the data is just silly.

Let me illustrate the lunacy of it for you...

"I keep hearing about income inequality. I have been using charts since I was a child. If someone can show me a stacked 3D bar chart with a logarithmic scale showing income inequality in 6 month increments starting in August 1985 and ending in April 2009, then we can talk about income inequality. Until someone can provide that chart, then it's all just talk and you have no business talking about it until you provide that chart!"

See how stupid that sounds? Now imagine how your post sounds. It's juvenile. Sorry.

[JoeOtterbein]

34. Yes we already know the math is "out there"! That is the problem. It could be wrong! We don't know!

[Corporate666]

42. How does putting incorrect (your theory) data in a spreadsheet make it correct?

If you believe the data to be incorrect, putting it in another format achieves nothing.

If you really don't know if the data is correct, and that ABC News, MSNBC, CNN, Fox, NBC News, RCP, 538, Green Papers, Sanders internal tallies, Clinton's internal tallies and the DNC's internal tallies are all incorrect or may be incorrect, then you need to get on the phone with the various states and verify the data yourself. A spreadsheet isn't going to help you anymore than repeating more loudly helps someone understand a language they don't know.

[JoeOtterbein]

44. Simple, any spreadsheet can be verified if correct. Very Important in this election.

[JoeOtterbein]

39. Also 1, 2 & 3, why all the talk about math on DU?

[YouDig]

24. It's very complicated math. Don't worry about it, just wait two weeks.

[JoeOtterbein]

27. Ha! We ALL will be worrying in Nov!

[JoeOtterbein]

50. Bottom Line: We should be able to prove that our elections are verifiable. It will be urgent in Nov.

The GOP will cheat. I know that for a fact from 2000. We need to be ready with the VERIFIED best candidate in Nov. Many polls say that candidate is Bernie. We need to find out IF our primaries were calculated correctly. Without that type of verified numbers before Nov, we will be logically defenseless against the GOP rigging of the election results. And again, I strongly believe the GOP will cheat again in Nov. '16

As of this post, there is no way we can prove our primaries can be verified by an objective third party auditor. That is a problem.

[Recursion]

65. You have an odd faith in spreadsheets (nt)

[JoeOtterbein]

69. No, I have a strong faith in math! Is that wrong?

[Recursion]

71. Spreadsheets aren't "math". Matlab is "math". Or Maxima.

Spreadsheets are what people who pretend to understand math use to gloss over their failings.

OK, that was mean, but at any rate: you're asking for the delegate allocation rules for every state. That would be a silly thing to put in a spreadsheet since it would mostly be text.

[JoeOtterbein]

74. Everyone uses spreadsheets, what is wrong if you say math is important?

[Recursion]

77. The problem is you think "spreadsheets" are "math"

They aren't. Hell, they're generally the least accurate quantitative program on your computer.

But, here:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/events.phtml?s=a

A table (which is a spreadsheet, marked up with HTML) of every state, with links to its allocation rules, and results for the states that have them.

[Recursion]

68. And actually a spreadsheet would be a horrible way to display this information anyways

It's not naturally tabulated data; there's no particular way to normalize it that makes sense, and what your asking is about rules rather than quantities. So, honestly, a spreadsheet is probably the worst way for you to try to understand this. I second the motion above to go to the Green Papers; they describe in detail for every state how the delegates are allocated.

[JoeOtterbein]

72. Rules can be verified by math, it is done all the time, some political campaigns live by them

[Recursion]

73. I really don't think you understand your own question, which may be the problem.

If you want, I can paste the text from the Green Papers into Excel; would that make you feel better?

[JoeOtterbein]

75. No, if you understand the question, send me the spreadsheet, as in my post (see above)

[Recursion]

76. I'm not sure I believe in the Pythagorean theorum: can you show me its spreadsheet?

Also the Poincare Conjecture and Turing's Halting Problem.

[JoeOtterbein]

79. That IS the problem, it's as cryptic as your comment, if only we could see a simple spreadsheet!

Maybe we all could buy into your argument.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

70. RCP

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

[Renew Deal]

78. Here's a spreadsheet

Just below the graph

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016#Schedule_and_results

[JoeOtterbein]

83. Oh great, I have to click a link to wiki (which is easily hacked) & RCP instead of a spreadsheet

from someone like maybe, the DNC or someone who says the math is everything! Are we really supposed to accept just anything?

[Buzz cook]

88. A spread sheet is impossible as you might know

Each state picks its delegates in s different manner. Even those with similar systems, (caucus, primary) work those systems in individual ways.

Surely you are aware of that. But your OP pretends ignorance.

[Matt_R]

89. Chalk it up to state secret.

I'm sure there is a database out there in each state that breaks things down for the candidates. We couldn't afford the cost to build such a database. Oh well life goes on, secrets stay secrets.