Booman Tribune

Can Clinton Win the Popular Vote?

by BooMan
Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 07:59:43 PM EST

Does Clinton have a chance to win the popular vote? Let's find out. But first, let's deal with some preliminaries. Real Clear Politics (RCP) has six ways of counting the popular vote, none of which are entirely fair. But, then, the popular vote isn't a fair measure in any case. If it were, Obama would have spent all his time in cities (where the votes are) rather than campaigning in Alaska and Idaho. RCP has the announced popular vote from every state that has provided those numbers. Obama leads by this measure by 500,000 votes. RCP also estimates that Obama won the combined contests in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington by about 110,000 votes. So, excluding Michigan and Florida, Obama has a popular vote lead of 610,000 votes.

It's not really fair to assume that Obama would have only received 35% of the vote in Florida if he had been permitted to campaign there, but for simplicity we'll give Clinton her full measure of votes from the Sunshine State. That leaves her with a deficit of 316,000 popular votes. What can we do about Michigan?

Clinton received 55% of the vote in Michigan and 'uncommitted' received 40%. But according to the exit polls, the people, if given the option, would have voted:

    Clinton 46%
    Obama 35%
    Edwards 12%

There's no perfect solution for counting the popular vote in Michigan, but the exit polls give us something to work with. With 594,000 votes cast, the exit polls project:

    Clinton 273,146
    Obama 207,900
    Edwards 71,280

This gives Clinton another 65,000 votes. So, based on the best available evidence and a fair determination of the rules, Obama currently has a 251,000 lead in the popular vote.

Looking forward to the upcoming contests, I have used the following methodology. To determine turnout, I have looked at other states with similar populations. For example, North Carolina and Georgia each have 15 electoral college votes, and Kentucky and South Carolina each have eight. I then used either the most recent polling averages (where available) or extrapolated from similar contests in nearby states. I split undecides evenly, giving the edge to the candidate that is favored for odd numbered splits.

So, here goes (I'll leave Guam and Puerto Rico for last).

North Carolina

Expected vote: 1,035,000
Pollster Avg.: Obama 55% Clinton 36%
Projected to: Obama 60% Clinton 40%
Popular Vote: Obama 621,000, Clinton 414,000
Net Advantage: Obama +207,000
Overall: Obama +458,000

Indiana

Expected vote: 930,000
Pollster Avg.: Obama 43% Clinton 49%
Projected to: Obama 47% Clinton 53%
Popular Vote: Obama 437,100, Clinton 492,900
Net Advantage: Clinton +55,800
Overall: Obama +402,200

West Virginia

Expected vote: 250,000
Pollster Avg.: Obama 25% Clinton 46%
Projected to: Obama 39% Clinton 61%
Popular Vote: Obama 97,500 Clinton 152,500
Net Advantage: Clinton +55,000
Overall: Obama +347,200

Kentucky

Expected vote: 540,000
Pollster Avg.: Obama 28% Clinton 60%
Projected to: Obama 34% Clinton 66%
Popular Vote: Obama 183,600, Clinton 356,400
Net Advantage: Clinton +172,800
Overall: Obama +174,400

Oregon

Expected vote: 350,000
Survery USA: Obama 52% Clinton 42%
Projected to: Obama 55% Clinton 45%
Popular Vote: Obama 192,500, Clinton 157,500
Net Advantage: Obama +35,000
Overall: Obama +209,400

South Dakota

Expected vote: 25,000
Pollster Avg.: Obama 46% Clinton 34%
Projected to: Obama 57% Clinton 43%
Popular Vote: Obama 14,250, Clinton 10,750
Net Advantage: Obama +3,500
Overall: Obama +212,900

Montana

Expected vote: 30,000
Pollster Avg.: no polls
Projected to: (based on Wyoming/Idaho) Obama 66% Clinton 34%
Popular Vote: Obama 19,800, Clinton 10,200
Net Advantage: Obama +9,700
Overall: Obama +222,600

So, based on reasonable projections of turnout and outcomes, Obama looks to end this contest with a lead of approximately 225,000 popular votes, excluding Guam and Puerto Rico.

I don't think Guam has enough votes to matter (I understand it is a caucus). So let's focus on Puerto Rico. I have no data to estimate turnout, but I do have a poll.

Puerto Rico

Expected vote: Unknown
Pollster Avg.: Obama 42% Clinton 50%
Projected to: Obama 46% Clinton 54%
If a million people vote, Clinton will get 120,000 net votes (540,000-460,000) out of Puerto Rico. To win the popular vote she would need 2 million people to vote and that would give her a victory of approximately 15,000 votes.

The total population of Puerto Rico is approximately 4 million. And that includes children and felons and people that align with the Republican Party. It seems out of the realm of possibility that 2 million people will vote in the Democratic primary. But, based on this analysis, that's what Clinton would need to even pull even in the popular vote.

So...no...Hillary Clinton cannot win the popular vote even by winning Indiana, and West Virginia and Kentucky in blowouts. She would have to do all that and significantly outperform in Oregon and North Carolina, and win very big in a very high turnout Puerto Rico primary, to even have a chance at tying the popular vote. It's over.



Display:
It's over.

Is it "over" in the same sense that last night was gonna be a "nail biter"?

by Ed J on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 08:43:56 PM EST
Maybe.  You do the math.
by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 09:19:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
so let me ask a few stupid ones.

My first stupid; are you alone in doing the math?

I think not b/c Other progressive blogs are on the same page - maybe some superDs too.

to my second stupid, actually not just me but Matt Yglesias and Megan McArdle The Atlantic:

Why are the remaining Super delegates afraid?

As Matt points out, they undoubtedly already know which way they're going to go, so why are they subjecting us all to this painful ordeal?

Working theories:

  1. They are afraid of retaliation by a vengeful Senator Clinton

  2. They are afraid that she will somehow get the nomination, and retaliate from the Oval Office

  3. They need the Clintons to fundraise for the general

  4. No one wants to be the guy who put the last nail in the Clinton campaign's coffin.

Collective action problems: not just for economists any more.

McArdle stops me with this

My question is if the media really is an all-powerful force shaping the debate, why can't we band together and tell everyone that the race is over, thus making it true? Where's the vast media conspiracy when you need it?

Ya think the media is all-powerful and will band together?  

That'll be the day pigs fly. First the media chortled, prayed that these primaries will never end. Follow the money...ratings.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 12:00:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There's a diary up over on Big Orange arguing that Obama needs commitments from only 43 currently uncommitted superdelegates to clinch (or in his terminology, "cinch") the nomination. The diary makes certain highly pessimistic assumptions about the outcome of the last few contests, but if Obama performs better than this guy's projections, the number of supers needed goes down. His math is on the page so you can play with it to fit your own projections.

Of course I would like to see a lot more than that. I would like to see 143. I'd like to see 243. I would like to see enough that, in the words of the master, there is no manner of doubt, no probable, possible, shadow of doubt, no possible doubt whatever.

The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -- Ambassador Kosh

by Omir the Storyteller (omir.the.storyteller -CAT- gmail -DOG- com) on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 01:24:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They need the Clintons to fundraise for the general

yeah, cause everybody needs someone whose campaign is $10 million in debt to fundraise for them.

by CabinGirl on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 06:55:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
go figure.

On Tuesday, Obama requested his at home phone bankers to swing to GOTV for MS-01 candidate Childers, that the race there was also important, not just focus on PA.

spineless critters. No wonder we face such challenges with legislators.

 

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 09:11:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
that figure, does not include her self loan of $5 million

hurting for cash - $10.3 million as at March 30 plus the PA primary expenditures in April.

at link provided, scroll past all the other tid bits on McCain, Pelosi, Obama.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 08:17:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think anyone should even be entertaining the possibility of counting Michigan.  Even Rendell let that one go.

Beyond that, this sounds about right, give or take a bit.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.

by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 09:51:08 PM EST
well, if there is an argument to be made that Clinton won the popular vote, it is going to include Michigan and Florida, but it's also got to include the caucus states that didn't report a popular vote number.

As for it being fair, of course it's not fair.  Caucuses diminish turnout, which hurt Obama's numbers.  

by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 09:57:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I know.  The whole thing is silly.  I'll stand by my prediction, though: She'll go all the way to the convention.  I maintain that she'd rather destroy Obama's shot in November, and take her chances with Dems in 2012, than concede.  I'm not even sure the superdelegates moving against her could change that, as she might well go and try to flip pledged delegates.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:04:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
she's certainly tenacious.  She doesn't have any reputation left though.
by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:29:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
When has a destroyed reputation ever stopped a Clinton?

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 08:12:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
NYT, Thursday April 24, 2008

Again Patrick Healy, NY Times, the paper that endorsed Clinton and, then after PA results, unendorsed her takes another shot...this time at HRC's crowing over her PA win: (via The Hatman)

NOTE TO HILLARY: Stop the Crowing and Struting

Assessing Strength of Contenders in Swing States

Reflecting on her victory in the Pennsylvania primary, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday neatly summed up the chief political rationale of her enduring candidacy.

"I won the states that we have to win -- Ohio, now Pennsylvania," Mrs. Clinton said on CNN about her successes over Senator Barack Obama, in one of her six appearances on morning news shows. "It's very hard to imagine a Democrat getting to the White House without winning those states."

Mrs. Clinton says her popularity among blue-collar workers, women and Hispanics makes her the candidate to beat Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, in the swing states that decide presidential races. Along with Ohio and Pennsylvania, she also cites her success in Michigan and Florida -- even though the Democratic Party disqualified those contests, and Mr. Obama was not on the Michigan ballot -- to claim an edge in crucial battlegrounds.

Yet for all of her primary night celebrations in the populous states, exit polling and independent political analysts offer evidence that Mr. Obama could do just as well as Mrs. Clinton among blocs of voters with whom he now runs behind. Obama advisers say he also appears well-positioned to win swing states and believe he would have a strong shot at winning traditional Republican states like Virginia.

According to surveys of Pennsylvania voters leaving the polls on Tuesday, Mr. Obama would draw majorities of support from lower-income voters and less-educated ones -- just as Mrs. Clinton would against Mr. McCain, even though those voters have favored her over Mr. Obama in the primaries.

(emphasis mine)

Again it's a Hillary over-reach.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:41:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Say Clinton doesn't get the nomination and all this drama is for 2012.  Who's gonna want to go through this shit again?  Not me, that's for damn sure.  


Blogging While Brown Convention Atlanta, GA July 25-27, 2008
by fabooj (fabooj [at} mail [dot} com) on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:54:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, but she knows that if the vote is overturned to give her the nod this year, she'll lose in November, and possibly in a landslide.  She'd be unlikely to win the nod in 2012 if she destroyed Obama, but she'd at least have a shot at it, so I think she'd take her chances.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 08:04:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Here's my solution for Michigan.  Run another primary election there, with only Obama's name on the ballot this time.

Whaddya say, Hillary?

by eagleye on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:27:38 PM EST
well, my point is that it doesn't really matter whether we give her Michigan or not.
by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:30:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I listened in on an interview with certain officials Police and city people  getting organized for the Democratic Party Convention in Denver - crowd control and protesters, just in case shades of 1968 become real.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"
by idredit on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:46:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
they won't.  People are apathetic.
by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
memories of the chicago convention, circa 68 is driving some pretty strange activities ...it's becoming a bone of contention here:

Denver Police Stocking Up...

The Denver Police Department is using taxpayer money to buy new security equipment in preparation for the Democratic National Convention in August but is refusing to disclose exactly what the purchases are, saying that revealing the information would be "contrary to the public interest."

While the Denver City Council has already allocated approximately $5 million of the $50 million in federal funds provided by Congress for national security, the police department is buying equipment on the local level through the city's routine purchasing process, which in some cases can bypass city council approval, according to public officials.
.
.
.
Colorado Confidential sent an open records request to the Denver Police Department in March, seeking any and all purchase orders, award papers, and contracts regarding security equipment for the convention. A response from the city's Department of Safety (the parent organization for the police department) denied the request and stated that such information would disclose "tactical information" that is not in the public interest.

The denial of purchasing information drew criticism from the Colorado American Civil Liberties Union and demonstrators planning to protest during the convention.
.
.
.
Denver City Councilman Doug Linkhart, chairman of the council's Safety Committee, said that transparency will continue to be an issue, even when the city council appropriates federal security funds.

"We're going to try and be as open as possible," said Linkhart. "But there will be some things even I and the mayor's office don't know."
.
.
.
colorado confidential

and denver's mayor, as well as colo's gov are demoRATs...give's one pause, eh.

l was contemplating applying for media credentials as a photog... if hillary gets the SD, smoke filled room anointment, which is not beyond the realm of possibilites given the general direction of the primaries, it could very well get ugly.

l'm taking a pass on the gig...the mtns are nice in august.

lTMF'sA...the revolution will not be televised...Peace

by dada on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 11:18:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
that interview I mentioned upthread..protesters will not be allowed within 3 miles of the Convention site.

Yeah, as you noted, it's quite the contriversy.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 11:26:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
First off, thank you for your great work in PA.  Many good things came out of it. The media is useless is the biggest thing I learned.

But, I would have anyway, but you charged me up for working in Indiana.

Don't doubt your polling, but Obama will win Indiana.  He will carry middle to the top and Hillary will get her KKK vote in Southern Indiana.

The vote will be big enough in Indianapolis, they don't ask for street money, combined with the college towns and bigger town in the north, it will be enough.

Southern Indiana should just join Kentucky.

Patriotism and religion, like whiskey, is best used in moderation. Mark Twain

by skeeters2525 on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:48:12 PM EST
is it like a rule that everyone hates the southern part of their state?  Or the northern?  Whatever.
by BooMan on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:53:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It seems the only thing Bay Area and LA can agree upon is that San Diego and Sacramento "don't really count" and the eastern parts of the state (that would be almost anything 40 minutes east of LA or SF is filled with scary one-toothed survivalist types.  Except Palm Springs.  They have more teeth. ;P  

Blogging While Brown Convention Atlanta, GA July 25-27, 2008
by fabooj (fabooj [at} mail [dot} com) on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 10:58:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think every state is like that to one degree or another, although eastern Cal has, I've heard, a special species of winger.  It also seems to be the case that the rural survivalist types are especially bad when they're in the shadow of one of the massive cities.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to you country.
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 08:10:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This reminds me of fans of the losing team in a football game counting offensive production in total yards. As I've said before, unless you're specifically trying to insult the states who use caucuses, it's absurd to cite a popular vote figure as if we have a national primary.

There was a study by a professor recently which showed that Obama's strength is underestimated because of his superior performance in caucus states. The logic is simple -- the higher participation that comes with primaries would have translated into a greater margin of victory, as measured in total votes.

Many people have erroneously assumed that the type of election process used was the sole reason for Obama's victories over Clinton rather than Clinton's weakness in states that use caucuses.

ad bellum purificandum - Kenneth Burke

by colinski on Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 at 11:17:31 PM EST
She can win. Not the popular vote, but the nomination. The string of victories Ohio,Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia will create the momentum arguement. "People were favoring Obama but the momentum has changed to Clinton. The earlier voters would vote Clinton now if they could do over." This might sway enough super-delegates along with seating MI and FL to give her the nomination.

Of course, by winning this way ahe loses the black vote in November. A black friend estimates no more than 30% for Hillary. McCain becomes the next President along with  a "consensus" majority in the House and Senate.

by The Voice In The Wilderness on Thu Apr 24th, 2008 at 12:31:46 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]
Menu
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

My contribution: $





Proud member of

The Liberal Blog Network

a FeedBurner Network


Advertise in The Liberal Blog Network

Subscribe to this network

A-List Blogger

Find textbooks at Alibris!

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Learn the real story behind the WMD in Iraq:

The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism
by Ron Suskind

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

DaveW recommends:

I Am a Strange Loop
by Douglas Hofstadter

Need some laughs?

I Am America (and So Can You!)
by Stephen Colbert

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End
by Peter W. Galbraith

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES

Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos
by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.


SOTW-120x90
Download Sleeper Cell on iTunes (Better than "24") Download Weeds on iTunes (Hilarious 1/2-hour adult comedy starring Mary-Louise Parker) Download Late Nite with Conan O'Brien on iTunes
John Belushi - SNL
Download South Park on iTunes
Verve Vault

James Hunter - People Gonna Talk:
James Hunter - People Gonna Talk
icon


Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")



Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)


Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)


"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen


The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review


BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual

$79.95 * Sale: $59.95


Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)


The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!


The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan


Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----


Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review


Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey


1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus



Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"


Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)


The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids

by Madeline Levine


Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com

:





We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Alibris - Books You Thought You'd Never Find
Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:
www.Patagonia.com



Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

A-List Blogger

Blogarama - The Blog Directory

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Listed on BlogShares

© 2007 Booman Tribune