|
by BooMan
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:
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:
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 Indiana
Expected vote: 930,000 West Virginia
Expected vote: 250,000 Kentucky
Expected vote: 540,000 Oregon
Expected vote: 350,000 South Dakota
Expected vote: 25,000 Montana
Expected vote: 30,000 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 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.
Can Clinton Win the Popular Vote? | 27 comments (27 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Can Clinton Win the Popular Vote? | 27 comments (27 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
|
Login
We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris
|
||||||||||
Booman Tribune Homepage admin@boomantribune.com powered by Scoop
More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.
|
||||||||||||
© 2007 Booman Tribune