I just did an interesting analysis. Primaries and caucuses are difficult to combine meaningfully, because they all follow different rules about who can vote, how they vote, and therefore what proportion of people vote. Some people like to invoke total “votes” for Clinton and Sanders, and that’s not really a meaningful measure due to these variations. So I took the proportions obtained for each state so far, and expanded them to apply to the actual populations of the states (estimated from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population ).
The raw result from this isn’t all that interesting – the raw proportion of “vote equivalents”, for lack of a better term, isn’t much different (Clinton has about 58% of the “votes” by the normal reasoning, and about 57% of “vote equivalents” after scaling).
The interesting part comes when you split the results by which candidate they supported in the 2012 election. In states that voted for Romney, Clinton leads with 62.5% in “vote equivalents”. In states that voted for Obama, Sanders leads with nearly 52% in “vote equivalents”.
I’m not going to claim anything meaningful about this – after all, the biggest states to vote for Obama, California and New York, haven’t voted yet (and of the next two, Illinois and Pennsylvania, only one has voted), while the biggest ones to vote for Romney, being Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina, have all voted. So while the Romney-side numbers are pretty solid, the Obama-side numbers are very tentative… and if opinion polls for California, New York, and Pennsylvania (all of which are closed or semi-closed primaries – which have favoured Clinton anyway) are anywhere near accurate, the numbers are going to swing strongly in Clinton’s favour.
I am getting a salary of 6700 dollars each week. Over a year ago I was in a horrible condition ,,pdg jobless and no bank credit . Thanks to one of my friends who showed me a way where I was able to gather myself and making average of 58 d/h. So it can change your life as it has changed mine. Why not try this.
Wow, those FFA jackets are a blast from my past !
I attended the 1974 Future Farmers of America convention in Kanas City Missouri
…Back when no guns were allowed. ;) Thanks for that William.
I am getting a salary of 6600 dollars each week. Over a year ago I was in a horrible condition , jobless and no bank credit ..osa Thanks to one of my friends who showed me a way where I was able to gather myself and making average of 58 d/h. So it can change your life as it has changed mine. Why not try this.
Glen March 28th, 2016 at 11:03
I just did an interesting analysis. Primaries and caucuses are difficult to combine meaningfully, because they all follow different rules about who can vote, how they vote, and therefore what proportion of people vote. Some people like to invoke total “votes” for Clinton and Sanders, and that’s not really a meaningful measure due to these variations. So I took the proportions obtained for each state so far, and expanded them to apply to the actual populations of the states (estimated from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population ).
The raw result from this isn’t all that interesting – the raw proportion of “vote equivalents”, for lack of a better term, isn’t much different (Clinton has about 58% of the “votes” by the normal reasoning, and about 57% of “vote equivalents” after scaling).
The interesting part comes when you split the results by which candidate they supported in the 2012 election. In states that voted for Romney, Clinton leads with 62.5% in “vote equivalents”. In states that voted for Obama, Sanders leads with nearly 52% in “vote equivalents”.
I’m not going to claim anything meaningful about this – after all, the biggest states to vote for Obama, California and New York, haven’t voted yet (and of the next two, Illinois and Pennsylvania, only one has voted), while the biggest ones to vote for Romney, being Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina, have all voted. So while the Romney-side numbers are pretty solid, the Obama-side numbers are very tentative… and if opinion polls for California, New York, and Pennsylvania (all of which are closed or semi-closed primaries – which have favoured Clinton anyway) are anywhere near accurate, the numbers are going to swing strongly in Clinton’s favour.
But it’s interesting, so I thought I’d share it.
DogsRgoodpeople March 29th, 2016 at 02:29
okie dokie mokie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBZJlVeEVeI
StoneyCurtisll March 29th, 2016 at 02:57
It’s a beach bongo party~!
StoneyCurtisll March 29th, 2016 at 14:47
Funny stuff….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1WtkwWsQyA
Hirightnow March 29th, 2016 at 17:18
And more than a bit alarming.
StoneyCurtisll March 29th, 2016 at 20:38
Absolutely.
tracey marie March 29th, 2016 at 17:29
that was funny and sad.
StoneyCurtisll March 29th, 2016 at 20:38
Indeed…
Lauren Stephenson March 30th, 2016 at 04:46
I am getting a salary of 6700 dollars each week. Over a year ago I was in a horrible condition ,,pdg jobless and no bank credit . Thanks to one of my friends who showed me a way where I was able to gather myself and making average of 58 d/h. So it can change your life as it has changed mine. Why not try this.
Look here for details
ttb..
William March 30th, 2016 at 08:58
https://www.facebook.com/trollspodcast/videos/825080480935197/
oldfart March 30th, 2016 at 11:56
Wow, those FFA jackets are a blast from my past !
I attended the 1974 Future Farmers of America convention in Kanas City Missouri
…Back when no guns were allowed. ;) Thanks for that William.
William March 30th, 2016 at 13:10
You’re welcome.
Catherine Gans March 31st, 2016 at 03:15
I am getting a salary of 6600 dollars each week. Over a year ago I was in a horrible condition , jobless and no bank credit ..osa Thanks to one of my friends who showed me a way where I was able to gather myself and making average of 58 d/h. So it can change your life as it has changed mine. Why not try this.
Look here for details
qqm..