2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Superdelegates do not have to listen to the Voters in their States [View all]unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)kinda hard to know the true voter count of a state when only one name is on the ballot.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/clinton-and-the-popular-vote/
The political Web site Real Clear Politics has an excellent tally, with links to official reports from state election authorities. Those show that even counting Clintons win in Florida, where the two were on the ballot but did not campaign due to the states violation of party rules, Obama beat Clinton in the popular vote by 41,622 votes a small margin, only 0.1 percent. Obamas margin grows to 151,844 votes, or 0.4 percent, when estimates are included for Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington, which did not release official totals of popular votes.
Only by counting Michigan, where Clintons name was on the ballot but Obamas was not, can Clinton claim to have won more votes. Counting only officially reported results, Michigan puts Clintons total ahead nationally by 286,687 votes or 0.8 percent. Once estimated votes from the four non-reporting states are included, the margin becomes less significant: 176,465 votes, or 0.5 percent. And if Michigans "uncommited" votes were accorded to Obama, hed have a 61,703-vote lead (0.2 percent), counting estimates from the non-reporting states.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/seating-floridas-and-michigans-delegates/#