SANDERS LEADS CLINTON OVER 2-TO-1 IN CALIFORNIA

[silvershadow]

SANDERS LEADS CLINTON OVER 2-TO-1 IN CALIFORNIA

Posted on May 8, 2016 by thepoliticalanalyzer

The following meticulous study considers the surprising number of New Voters who have registered to the Democratic Party and who have chosen to remain Unaffiliated.

In the opinion of the Secretariat of State and of some recently published studies, there was an increase of 185% of the members from January 2016, and to make matters worse, they are almost always Hispanics (in some counties the Hispanic Youth represents 98 % of New Voters). [1 ]

To carry out the analysis I considered Californians Census Data 2010, the Californian Secretary of State Data, to study the Past Elections and the Last Primaries I took as reference points The Green Papers and Dave Leip, to study the vote by ethnicity I studied multiple studies simultaneously to extrapolate exacts data: Gallup, UC Davis, Public Policy Polling, Pew Research. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

After collecting the material I have assigned the value of the parameters for each ethnic group and age group, matching the results. Finally I assigned the turnout for ethnicity, age, county and Party Affiliation.

more: https://thepoliticalanalyzer.com/2016/05/08/sanders-leads-clinton-over-2-to-1-in-california/

[eridani]

1. Not sure you can really trust this--be suspicious of all polls, even the favorable ones n/t

[silvershadow]

2. I post this stuff just as I find them. I don't trust any poll, or even election for that matter. nt

[eridani]

3. Good point. I'd really like to see Sanders go after election integrity issue a lot more n/t

[silvershadow]

4. There won't be any until we get rid of those electronic machines with corporate-

controlled software.

[eridani]

5. Meanwhile, it is very useful to push for many more audits

In 2004, there was a very close race for governor, which the Dem candidate won by 0.02%. This required a statewide mandatory recount. All three candidates (there was a Libertarian running also) had a small number of votes added to their machine totals. This is what you would expect from scanners, which sometimes undercount for the same reason your printer occasionally picks up more than one sheet.

I favor scanners with both open software and much more extensive auditing than most counties now perform. As David Dill once said, "It is not enough that elections be accurate. We have to know that they are accurate, and we don't."

[retrowire]

6. let's hope that lead increases! nt

[Donkees]

7. In the opinion of the "Secretariat of State" (Horse Race?)