Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Showing Original Post only (View all)Hillary Is Not Ahead By 3 Million Votes [View all]
This was a Shaun King story at The Daily News. (still can't get links to work)
(Shaun Kings story is posted at caucus 99%)
In 12 states where Bernie won, they held caucuses in which individual votes are not tallied in the same way as they are in closed primaries.
For instance, in Washington state, which has nearly 7.1 million people, Bernie won 72.7% of the vote there, but not one single vote is counted toward the numbers where Clinton claims a 3 million vote lead over him.
In Alaska, Bernie won 81% of the vote, but not a single vote is counted toward this tally that the Clinton campaign leans on so heavily. The same is true for Maine. There, Bernie won by 29%, but because all three are caucus states, the vote tallies aren't even included.
It is not possible to tally total votes cast. Bernie could very well be leading in total primary votes cast if it were possible to tally votes in caucus states.
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Common sense would tell you King's analysis is nonsensical... it doesn't even pass the eye test.
DemocratSinceBirth
May 2016
#18
it is intense, total desperation as it implodes before our eyes, they are in total desperado mode
amborin
May 2016
#65
Did you even read the article? He offers no facts refuting that Bernie got ZERO votes in Washington
pdsimdars
May 2016
#72
Whatever you read was likely wrong. As a PCO, my precinct and all the others locally set records
floriduck
May 2016
#37
It was high compared to other caucuses, but caucus turnout is miserable in general.
LisaM
May 2016
#51
For what it's worth, I'd Ike to do away with caucuses too. I'd prefer vote by mail.
floriduck
May 2016
#62
I might agree with you if he had an actual plans to accomplish his promises.
eastwestdem
May 2016
#70
The census is based on mathematical assumptions. Your and his arguments are obscurantist.
DemocratSinceBirth
May 2016
#20
Yeah, flat earthers deny the validity of inferential and descriptive statistics.
DemocratSinceBirth
May 2016
#25
The Nobel Prize winner has a firmer understanding of economics than the Vermont independent.
DemocratSinceBirth
May 2016
#33
No but they do report how many voted. You can do guess work based on results.
hrmjustin
May 2016
#28
A caucus vote count does not go by the population, if so the primary states would go by their
Thinkingabout
May 2016
#53