why doesn't the candidate with the most votes have the most delegates?

[jg10003]

I'm sure this has been covered on DU before, but I missed it. Right now with 67% precincts in Sanders has more votes but Buttigieg has more delegates. I don't understand.

[George II]

1. Districts.

[Fresh_Start]

2. at each individual precinct the delegates are allocated

and not all precincts are weighed equally

[Fresh_Start]

6. image two equal sized districts

which both have the same number of voters

but twice as many people showed up to caucus in one district as the other.
The caucus votes are weighted half as much since there were more people attending but there weren't more voters (delegates) to allocate

[KPN]

10. Yay. An explanation that makes sense, but

is only as sensible as the electoral college.

[jg10003]

11. thanks, that's a good explanation

[KPN]

7. How are they weighted? Hard to understand

this.

[Fresh_Start]

12. image two equal sized districts with the same number of delegates to allocate

but one district has 2x as many people caucusing

the individual caucus votes will count less because they are representing fewer actual people

district A 10,000 voters, 4 delegates, 100 caucusees. each caucusee = 4/100 of delegate

district B 10,000 voters, 4 delegates, 200 caucusees. each caucusee = 4/200 of a delegate

[jg10003]

15. got it. it's very much like the electoral college, results are weighted

In favor of precincts with fewer people.

[Fresh_Start]

16. no, that is the wrong conclusion

from this data.

There is a fair representation problem....but that is not what this is demonstrating.
The number of delegates per district is NOT decided by the caucus.

The caucus merely allocates the number of delegates which were already assigned to the district.

[jg10003]

17. ok, got it (I think)

[KPN]

18. Thanks. Now it makes sense -- at least as far as how

it works. So caucuses really are a double edged sword. Interesting.

[Hav]

3. Others have compared it to the electoral college

Some win precincts with larger margins, some win more precincts.

[KPN]

19. And neither necessarily amounts to the most

supporters/votes overall.

[Odoreida]

4. Because the votes are in fact for delegates, not directly for candidates ...

... so it can legitimately break that way.

Same sort of business as the electoral college in miniature.

[elleng]

5. Weighting, based on who knows what.

[Mike Nelson]

8. I think people...

... can change their votes, if their first choice isn't "viable" - and then there is a proportional thing. Also, if you live in Iowa and just want to vote, you can't.. you have to "caucus" instead. I hope states doing this have time to change!

[left-of-center2012]

9. My interpretation of what CNN said ...

Sanders had a lot of young people show up in precints with college towns, and fewer in other areas.

So he got a higher ‘person count’ state wide.

But Pete won more precincts by having representation in more precincts than Bernie.

[KPN]

20. That sounds like it in a nutshell. Or you could describe it as Buttigieg had a better ground game

overall and in more districts/precincts.

[Xipe Totec]

13. Because math. nt

[squirecam]

14. Lol

Nt