Atomic Playboy
Member
What's the logic behind the allotment of delegates per state/territory on the Democrat side? Why does Puerto Rico have more delegates than over half the actual states (individually)?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
To be fair, if Sanders some how magically won the NY primary - Clinton would probably be in full meltdown mode. Sanders winning NY and California would actually make the superdelegates have to reconsider their votes. Also, that would probably mean Sanders would end up taking PA and MD as well if he pulled off NY.
That said...not gonna happen.
That said...not gonna happen.
Could see him taking PA. MD wouldn't happen, though. That would require a meteor to her campaign headquarters.
He has a better chance of winning MD than NY. Hence my comments of "If he wins NY, then something else significant has happened and Clinton is borked".
User 463088
Banned
It didn't make the Supers reconsider their vote in 2008 when Obama lost both, so I don't see why it would here.
I mean, I don't think it'll happen anyway, but still.
I don't know what the specific rules are, but Puerto Rico has over three million people, which is more than a lot of small states.
theprodigy
Member
That's not what 538 or any other forecast says.
Happen to disagree. Losing MD would be like losing a southern state (it's closer demographically to its southern neighbor Virginia than anything). NY is more demographically favorable to him, even if it isn't overall.
Losing NY would be "Hillary in disarray!" chaos. Losing MD would be "Hillary is literally dead" chaos.
The issue at that point was that mathematically and demographically, everyone knew Clinton's campaign was over before NY - hence why no one cared. While that's mostly true in 2016 as well, the catch is this:
If Bernie comes from a 15 percentage point deficit to magically win the state, whatever caused that to happen would almost certainly manifest in PA, MD, and CA, which, if Bernie won all of those, would force the super delegates to have to consider whatever this factor was that caused Clinton to lose all these states in a row. Basically, the exogenous shock that would cause Clinton to lose NY would also probably cause super-delegates to reconsider their own votes. (Something like being indicted, or an emergent issue with the Clinton Foundation, etc etc)
PR would be 29th in population so maybe part of it is just based on state/territory size.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
User 463088
Banned
On the Democratic side, the number of delegates is a function of a number of factors.
population & Democratic party enrollment
average vote cast in last 2 elections for D candidates
Democratic performance in the last few elections
Democratic proportion of state Congressional delegation
following the rules (e.g. not changing date of primary contrary to party's wishes)
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
I'm reading through the transcript (PDF) now. The SG's argument on standing thus far seems disingenuous. It turns on the distinction between the feasibility of Texas changing its law to deny drivers' licenses to DAPA beneficiaries and the legality of that change: In essence, "Texas isn't injured because they can change their law. In a future case, we'd say that's illegal under federal law, but in this case, we're saying they can do it. So there's no injury here."
Uhhhh...
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-york-democratic/
Maryland predictions for Clinton win
Polls Plus: 95%
Polls Only: 89%
New York predictions for Clinton win
Polls Plus: 98%
Polls Only: 96%
Atomic Playboy
Member
Yes, but that's fewer than Connecticut, Alabama, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma and South Carolina, and every single one of those places gets fewer delegates, so it's not solely based on population.
Excellent, thank you.
benicillin
Banned
Gonna guess Clinton wins 56-42, but it doesn't really matter. She's already won and Sanders isn't going to stop campaigning until the convention, so the status quo remains.
eBay Huckster
Member
fwiw, basically the only reason MD's percentages aren't both 99% is the fact that there's been, like, 2 polls in the past month
Because it's further out and hasn't been as frequently polled. New York has her at a 14-point margin polling average. Maryland has her at a 22-point margin. Polls for southern states have frequently underestimated her margins. Maryland is an honorary southern state, demographics-wise.
theprodigy
Member
Look at the "Sanders path to victory" article, New York is Sanders +4, Maryland is Clinton +9 or something to that effect.
User 463088
Banned
Well, California and New York were on Super Tuesday in 2008. Hillary was still very, very much in it, and actually won more of hte popular vote on that day than Obama did.
I disagree with you on Maryland, to begin with. They don't look alike. Maryland looks a lot more like Virginia or North Carolina than it does New York. The Supers will only reconsider their position if Bernie ends up with more pledged delegates....and I don't know that he'd even get enough then to secure the nomination. Hillary only lost about 30 Supers last time. The chances of her losing hundreds because "momentum" is not a great argument, in my opinion. I mean, it's the only argument Bernie has....but it's still not a good one.
She wrasslein' Sanders for her throne?
Um, nope.
New York was at the start of February in 2008, along with California. It was part of the Super Tuesday set of states. Clinton won it (and the majority of the primaries that day), but thanks to her campaign not understanding caucus rules actually lost in delegates.
I posted earlier, but I remain convinced that had New York voted later on in the cycle it would have been closer. She would always have won it, as a sitting senator for the state, but it wasn't until after super Tuesday and the maths sunk in that people started to really consider Obama a potential winner.
EDIT: Damn you Adam!
Those aren't polling estimates, those are how Sanders needs to perform in order to actually hit his delegate targets to beat Clinton in the most "realistic" (that term is used loosely) path.
Ahhh, ok. Though since they are all closed primaries, the straight demographic breakdown of the state isn't as useful as a demographic breakdown of the registered democratic primary voters.
Thequietone
Member
Clinton: 61
Sanders: 39
I'd prefer Clinton: 70 and Bernie: 30 but I know that isn't happening. lol
Sanders: 39
I'd prefer Clinton: 70 and Bernie: 30 but I know that isn't happening. lol
theprodigy
Member
That's exactly my point, Maryland is so unfavorable that even drawing a long-shot path to victory, he still loses the state, so no this is not somehow more favorable to him than New York.
And_Gignac
Member
Clinton 54
Sanders 46
If my witchcraft works:
Sanders 52
Clinton 48
Sanders 46
If my witchcraft works:
Sanders 52
Clinton 48
Ahh my bad, for some reason I thought it was same time in 2008 as it was in 2016. I'm old! I need coffee! Or something like that.
I didn't realize that they hadn't polled Maryland in forever, which is skewing the percentages. Still, we're talking maybe 99% vs 98% (since he's at 98% to win NY with polls plus) - MoE at this point.
It's more of an indicator of how commanding of a lead Clinton has, period. The point I'm probably not making well is that, basically, the only way Clinton loses NY is if something crazy happens to Clinton, and that incident would probably influence all the races and super delegates, not just NY. Basically, an April surprise is the only chance Sanders has at this point. The "momentum" would just be another after effect of Giant Thing That Happened; but said Giant Thing is what would lead to a Bernie victory, not "momentum". (I'm in the Bill Barnwell camp when it comes to momentum)
Lol, yeah, Adam beat you to it. Yeah, my bad, forgot that NY was Super Tuesday last time.
I didn't realize they hadn't polled MD in forever, which is what is leading to the skewed percentages. Reading details, it looks like there is just one poll that is being used (the WaPo poll). That said, MD being "more" favorable to Clinton than Sanders is basically saying she has a 99% chance to win it, because NY's currently at 98%.
Yeah, I was just nitpicking that losing NY would require a slightly lower level of extinction event than losing MD would, even if it's likely they'd both be taken out by whatever meteor we're talking about, here.
For kev
BREAKING: Bernie Sanders campaign is accusing the Clinton camp and DNC of colluding to violate campaign finance law
https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Bernie-2016-Letter-to-DNC-1.pdf
Basically he's getting in trouble with the FEC and so he's trying to act like he's not the one in trouble?
Lol, fair enough. I figure whatever extinction event caused Bernie to win NY in this hypothetical situation would probably cause him to win the other states + super-delegates.
Outdoor Miner
Member
Clinton has the Wiccan vote locked up. Cuz she's a witch.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Bold move for a man with pending FEC violations
RustyNails
Member
His campaign is basically laying the groundwork for NY loss. DNC and Hillary colluded together to deny him victory.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Why do you do that to yourself?
If he does lose by 10-15 points as polling predicts you had better come in and eat your crow.
When you have places like this, utilizing modular construction to build $1,700 studio apartments in Inwood, you know New York is fucked.
He also convinced himself March 15th would be a Sanders blowout. Sometimes you just have to let them touch the stove again.
If you look at the projected vote share for Maryland in Nate's model, she does better there than in New York. The model thinks she'll perform much better in Maryland next week than in New York tomorrow, there's just much more uncertainty because we've gotten like a dozen New York polls within a week or so, and only one or two Maryland polls in the same time frame.
Yeah, I hadn't realized that even though MD is so close (next week); that basically no one has polled it yet.
Macho Madness
Member
I think PPP polled it this weekend.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked