More Math - What Hillary needs to win the popular vote

[TheDoorbellRang]

There has been a lot of talk about what will happen if Obama wins the most pledged delegates but Hillary wins the popular vote, but no one (that I know of) has offered any mathematical constructs showing the margins she will need to surpass Obama in the popular vote. Let's crunch some numbers.

There are 11 remaining races: MS, PA, OR, MT, SD, IN, KY, WV, NC, GM, and PR. All are primaries. The Green Papers has the popular votes from the 2004 primary season for all of the above except Puerto Rico, who had a caucus that year and ended up cancelling even that. This year PR is having a primary, but since there is no data from previous years I have left them out of my equations.

The total popular vote from 2004 in the abovementioned states (excluding PR, as noted) is 2,231,107. How, then, can we guesstimate how many will actually vote in 2008? We can assume that the turnout will be much larger than in 2004, but by how much? The local level of interest in these races can be assumed to be as great as the level of interest in the other post-Super Tuesday races, when it became clear that nothing was decided, as opposed to past primary seasons when there was usually a presumptive nominee early on.

So.

What was the 2004 popular vote in the most recent races vs. 2008? I took OH, TX, RI, VT, WI, VA, MD, and DC as a point of comparison. In 2004, total popular vote for these was 4,044,062 (per The Green Papers). In 2008, the total popular vote was 8,396,818 (per Real Clear Politics). Thus we had a little over twice the number of voters. So in the remaining races (excluding PR), we can guesstimate anywhere from twice 2,231,107 -- 4,462,214 -- to a generous thrice 2,231,107 -- 6,693,321.

If twice the regular numbers turn out, Clinton must win by 57-43% to bypass Obama.

If thrice the regular numbers turn out, Clinton must win by 55-45% to bypass Obama.

But what if there's a redo of Florida and Michigan? This is Clinton's best chance of a catch up in popular vote:

Using the methodology as above but adding FL and MI to the mix:

If twice the regular numbers turn out, Clinton must win by a little less than 55-45% to bypass Obama.

If thrice the regular numbers turn out, Clinton must win by a little more than 53-47% to bypass Obama.

Even if four times the regular numbers turn out, Clinton still must win by almost 52.5-47.5% to bypass Obama.

Does anyone think Clinton will maintain this percentage against Obama thruout the remaining races to win the popular vote?

[Cali_Democrat]

1. No. The only way Hillary can take the nomination is using super delegates

Of course they would have to thwart the will of the people and Hillary has no problem with that. They won't go for it. She is done. Thats why I think she should drop out for the good of the party.

[MagsDem]

2. It's also the only way Obama can win, too

But Obama supporters don't like to hear that.

[scheming daemons]

3. I don't mind it at all.... but I know (and you do too, deep down) that the SDs will go with the PDs

[MagsDem]

13. Only if they are stupid

Because picking a candidate that can only get 80% of the dem vote, based on consistent exit polling data, is just dumb. 20% of dem voters prefer McCain over Obama.

[loveangelc]

23. He gets more than enough Independents to overcome that if that is true.

[KAZ]

26. Yeah, we're all just stupid, and you are all knowing.

You're getting old.

[malik flavors]

46. and clinton loses the youth, indie, and A-A vote, so I think they're about even

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Of course, but theres a big difference

- He would have won more states

- He would have more pledged delegates

- He will probably lead in the popular vote

[PseudoIntellect]

6. Wow. Who do you think has more of a chance?

Someone ahead by 150 PD and needing only maybe 30% of the final SDs, or someone who might need 70% of the SD and is down by 150 PDs. Clearly, the one who is way behind, right?

[MagsDem]

15. If they are smart they will vote for HRC

She is more experienced, has more support in the blue states we need to stay blue, can beat McCain in OH and FL, and she has done about 100x more for the party than he ever has or will.

[krawhitham]

20. What experience?

Sleeping in the same bed as a President does not make you qualified to be one

[loveangelc]

25. But she loses Wisconsin, Iowa, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, etc etc etc

such a stupid argument you have to make. I guess it's all that you have though...:(

[stop the bleeding]

7. Mommy is the sky blue?

he just has a better lead, hence he needs less supers than HRC does.

[krawhitham]

16. English must not be your 1st language

thwart the will of the people


Or do vote against what the people want


If the SD mirror PD, He wins

If they go against the will of the people, She wins

[TheDoorbellRang]

10. Well, maybe now we'll hear less about how important the popular vote is.

And we can start seeing more threads stressing how important national polls are compared to pledged delegates and the popular vote.

[annie1]

39. what about barack not standing up to the pressure? what the polls say now...

may not stand up to the next few weeks. she's 140 behind and there are 600 more dels to go not counting FLA and MI. and they are NOT thwarting the will of the people if she wins the popular vote.

[TheDoorbellRang]

43. Even in the best case scenario she has to win by 5% over Obama

And it will be worse after tonite's MS results come in. Her odds of coming out on top in the popular vote are better than her odds with the delegates, where she needs to win by at least 16% in the remaining races. The popular vote argument is moot anyway, since the decision is by delegate count. I merely presented the math above to squelch any idea that she could pull ahead in popular vote.

[stop the bleeding]

5. Is PR included in these figures?

:spank:you gotta love math.

to answer your question: Hell no

*sarcasm* for the PR part

[TheDoorbellRang]

14. Hillary lucked out with Puerto Rico

They justed switched from a caucus to a primary in early March. And it used to be winner take all (63 delegates!) based on who the governor favored. Their governor's an Obama supporter. :D

[stop the bleeding]

19. I may be wrong but I believe

that the governor can still switch the D's to Obama, now you want to talk about scandalous? Especially if PR is worth something by then, which it will IMO.

[TheDoorbellRang]

21. Heads would explode all over GD-P

:rofl:

[covertura]

32. link? n/t

[TheDoorbellRang]

34. Here 'tis

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/PR-D.phtml

[ExtraGriz]

33. actually your wrong

the party elders control the government down in puerto rico not the governor....and the clintons are very much loved down there....why do you think they switched to a primary system all of a sudden?

[TheDoorbellRang]

35. I need to read up on the situation there

But it's not hard to guess there was some pressure to switch over to a primary from a caucus. Do you know of any good sources for the situation there as it stands now?

[Pirate Smile]

8. One big point about Michigan. Some of the popular vote totals include the numbers

from the Michigan primary in their popular vote totals which means Clinton gets a lot of votes and Obama gets 0, zilch, nada. That wont be the case in a redo.

Michigan:

Clinton +328,309

Obama 0

The redo will help him in the popular vote totals.

[K Gardner]

9. Really good point, hadn't thought about that.

[stop the bleeding]

11. uh oh great point

:beer:

[Johnny__Motown]

12. Odds are he will win Michigan in a redo, that makes it even harder on her in Florida

[MagsDem]

17. Not a chance in hell he would win MI

.... in a redo. They have the same demographic as OH and PA.

[skipos]

24. Yeah, I remember hearing that about Wisconsin too

and then Obama crushed her by 17%.

Hillary pulling 55% against no one wasn't very impressive. She may win, but it won't be by much. It especially won't be by the big double digit margin she needs to get the pledged delegate lead.

[Quixote1818]

27. Polls have them tied up in MI right now. 41 to 41. nt

[PseudoIntellect]

29. and not WI and IL?

Btw, they're EVEN in the polls right now in Michigan. Proof that Hillary wouldn't make up many delegates by redoing both states.

[Johnny__Motown]

36. I live here. trust me He will win... and no the Demographics are not the same as Ohio

Southern Ohio is almost a southern state (I also lived in Columbus Ohio for a while)

You have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

Add to that the fact that Grandholm is so unpopular, and she is a Clinton wanna-be. People will vote against Hillary just to spite her.

Last point. Even with Hillary the only major candidate on the ballot she barely broke 50%

She has no chance what so ever in a redo

[loveangelc]

41. you don't think the spin that hillary "cares" about michigan is resonating?

[onenote]

40. actually Michigan doesn't have the same demographic as PA

For example, Michigan has a significantly higher African American population (14.3%) than either Pennsylvania (10.7%) It also has fewer people over the age of 65 than Pennsylvania (15.2%). And it has fewer women (50.8%) than Pennsylvania (51.4 %). While those demographic differences may not be enough to give Obama the win, they are certain to make it closer than PA will be.

As for Ohio, the numbers are closer, but Michigan still has more African Americans and fewer women.

[TheDoorbellRang]

18. I used the popular vote total without MI and FL in the original premise

Since I think it's most likely they will either remain excluded or re-do their races.

I'll leave it to a Clinton supporter to crunch the numbers using FL and MI results as they stand if they think it'll happen.

[loveangelc]

22. 55-45 in MI and FL or in the remaining contests?

[TheDoorbellRang]

30. 55-45 in all the remaining contests including FL and MI re-dos

if turn out is twice what it was in 2004 in all the above.

[TheZug]

28. If she doesn't win the popular vote, then the popular vote must be sexist.

[DrFunkenstein]

31. Caucuses Are Meant to Calibrate a Candidate's Organizational Strength, Not Vote Count

There is a legitimate reason why some state level Democrats chose to conduct a caucus rather than a primary. This is not a general election. It is a matter of Party politics and the Party chooses how it wants to measure the relative support of a candidate.

It is blatantly unfair to suggest that the people who are forced to stand around for hours to endure the contest should have their delegates lose legitimacy.

[Medusa]

37. It is also a good way to bring in workers to the party

that's how I first got involved in party politics almost 30 years ago.

[TheDoorbellRang]

38. This is an argument for those trying to stress the importance of the popular vote

over delegate count. I am totally with you in regards to the caucus. But there have been mutterings all over GD-P ever since Texas that the super D's should be considering the popular vote over delegate count -- which as you rightly point out discounts the caucus states.

I merely wanted to show how unlikely it is that Clinton could even "win" the popular vote so we can move on to the next argument for Clinton's nomination, which would be how important national polls are over pledged delegates and the popular vote. ;-)

[rosesaylavee]

42. Lots of good information here.

Thanks for taking the time to crunch numbers for those of us who are math-impaired.

:hi:

K & R

[TheDoorbellRang]

44. Thanks, rosie!

:hi:

[Bright Eyes]

45. She needs to go back in time, and do the opposite of what she's doing now.

Or maybe go to an alternate dimension.