Mathematically, Hillary STILL cannot win. She only gained 14 delegates. Voting thresholds.
Relax, everybody. We may lick our wounds today, but once again, the math speaks loudly against Clinton EVER beating Obama in pledged delegates. It's virtually impossible, no matter how much Clinton spins it!
Continuing my previous delegate math post,
Let's look at what REALLY happened last night. I used the most accurate delegate numbers I could find:Vermont: +3 (Obama up 3 delegates over Clinton)
Clinton = 6
Obama = 9
Rhode Island: -5 (Clinton up 5 over Obama)
Clinton = 13
Obama = 8
Ohio: -11 (Clinton up 11, from this Ohio blog and Ohio delegate counter)
Clinton = 76
Obama = 65
Texas Primary: -4 (Clinton up 4, from Texas Secretary of State)
Clinton = 65
Obama = 61
Texas Caucus: +3 (Based on 36% reporting, from straight percentage. Still being counted.)
Clinton = 32
Obama = 35
Texas overall: -1 (Clinton is up only ONE delegate in Texas!)
Congratulations, all you hardworking Texans. You helped Barack squish a 20-point gap into a virtual tie! Clinton did NOT win what she needed in Texas to make any meaningful dent in Obama's lead.
Thus overall, Clinton only gained a net 14 delegates last night. Total. Big deal.
Last night offered more than 1/3 of remaining delegates, 370. Only about 560 remain in the contest. If Obama can show he's not collapsing under the weight of Clinton's assault, there will be no reason for the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters.
Back to Slate's delegate counter, I slightly changed the percentages of last night's votes, to reflect the actual delegates won.
Once again, Obama beats Clinton in pledged delegates, whether she wins ALL remaining 12 contests by 55% or by even 60%:
Finally, we all must read this Daily Kos post below. He says that Slate's delegate counter does not accurately reflect how daunting the math really is for Hillary. She needs to get above a certain threshold of votes in each district, to get awarded a delegate.
But for Clinton to win ONE more delegate in a district, the minimum threshold she needs to get jumps SIGNIFICANTLY.
-----------------------
Slate's delegate calculator sucks, why it's even worse for Clinton than you think:
After today, there are 10 states left, plus Guam and Puerto Rico.
Number of 3 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 4 delegate districts left: 19 (including all 8 in Puerto Rico)
Number of 5 delegate districts left: 21
Number of 6 delegate districts left: 14
Number of 7 delegate districts left: 10
Number of 8 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 9 delegate districts left: 3
Number of 10 delegate districts left: 1 (Montana)
Setting aside Guam with its 4 delegates, there are 11 delegate apportionments based on statewide popular vote totals.
Wyoming - 5 statewide
South Dakota - 6 statewide
Montana - 6 statewide
West Virginia - 10 statewide
Mississippi - 11 statewide
Kentucky - 17 statewide
Oregon - 18 statewide
Puerto Rico - 19 islandwide
Indiana - 25 statewide
North Carolina - 38 statewide
Pennsylvania - 55 statewide
In order to cross all thresholds except the initial break that give you a +2 delegate swing, you need to win by an extra 200/X%, where X = the number of total delegates at stake. Let's see how this works by easy example -
West Virginia and its 10 statewide delegates. 200/10 = 20%. To go from 5-5 to 6-4 there you have to win by over 10% (55-45). But to get ANOTHER +2 you need to add 20% to your win and win by 30% (65-35).
To work through one more example, Indiana and its 25. You start with someone winning 13-12. To get an additional +2 swing (ie, 14-11), you have to win by 200/25%, or 8% even. 54-46 + 1 vote is a 14-11 split. You can also calculate this way: 13.5/25 = .5400. 14.5/25 = .5800 (58-42 is a 16% win).
So, let's look at if Clinton wins every statewide total by 10%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1, giving her the +1 vote benefit of the doubt.
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +1
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +1
Indiana +3
North Carolina +4
Pennsylvania +5
Total +19 delegates (for Clinton).
Do you see how totally impossible it is, and how completely significant Obama's South Carolina and February blowouts were? Remember, Obama beat Clinton by 8% in Iowa (a huge win) and netted only 1 extra pledged delegate.
Now, let's assume, in a very unsurgical way, that this 10% is exactly the margin in all the congressional districts.
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: 0
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1, let's give her the 1 extra vote benefit of the doubt.
Total +36 delegates
Overall total +55 delegates.
And it probably is +58, see below.
Obama currently leads by 160 pledged delegates.
Let me throw in another wrinkle. Let's assume Clinton wins every single remaining district and statewide vote by 16.5% exactly. How does this help her in the districts?
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: +1
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1
Total +37 delegates
She gets only ONE EXTRA DELEGATE from going 10% to 16.5%!
Statewide, 16.5%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +3
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +3
Indiana +5
North Carolina +6
Pennsylvania +9
Total +31 delegates.
TWELVE (maybe six, see below) EXTRA DELEGATES from going 10% to 16.5%!
So the overall total with 16.5% is a mere +68 delegates.
And it probably is only +64, see below.
So with all due respect to Jonathan Alter and all the people who are playing with these numbers, everyone seems to be failing to grasp that it's the BLOWOUTS that matter.
It's blowouts, people.
All but 6 remaining congressional districts are either 4, 5, 6, or 7 delegate districts. There are 64 total districts in this range. Here are the magic numbers:4 delegates - 25%+ [she needs to win by this margin] to get from 2-2 to 3-1
5 delegates - 40%+ to get from 3-2 to 4-1
6 delegates - 16.7%+ to get from 3-3 to 4-2
7 delegates - 28.6%+ to get from 4-3 to 5-2
THOSE are the relevant numbers to break out of the incredibly rosy +55 delegate pickup if we absurdly assume that Clinton wins every remaining contest by 55-45 margins. [Continued]
Continuing my previous delegate math post,
Let's look at what REALLY happened last night. I used the most accurate delegate numbers I could find:Vermont: +3 (Obama up 3 delegates over Clinton)
Clinton = 6
Obama = 9
Rhode Island: -5 (Clinton up 5 over Obama)
Clinton = 13
Obama = 8
Ohio: -11 (Clinton up 11, from this Ohio blog and Ohio delegate counter)
Clinton = 76
Obama = 65
Texas Primary: -4 (Clinton up 4, from Texas Secretary of State)
Clinton = 65
Obama = 61
Texas Caucus: +3 (Based on 36% reporting, from straight percentage. Still being counted.)
Clinton = 32
Obama = 35
Texas overall: -1 (Clinton is up only ONE delegate in Texas!)
Congratulations, all you hardworking Texans. You helped Barack squish a 20-point gap into a virtual tie! Clinton did NOT win what she needed in Texas to make any meaningful dent in Obama's lead.
Thus overall, Clinton only gained a net 14 delegates last night. Total. Big deal.
Last night offered more than 1/3 of remaining delegates, 370. Only about 560 remain in the contest. If Obama can show he's not collapsing under the weight of Clinton's assault, there will be no reason for the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters.
Back to Slate's delegate counter, I slightly changed the percentages of last night's votes, to reflect the actual delegates won.
Once again, Obama beats Clinton in pledged delegates, whether she wins ALL remaining 12 contests by 55% or by even 60%:
Finally, we all must read this Daily Kos post below. He says that Slate's delegate counter does not accurately reflect how daunting the math really is for Hillary. She needs to get above a certain threshold of votes in each district, to get awarded a delegate.
But for Clinton to win ONE more delegate in a district, the minimum threshold she needs to get jumps SIGNIFICANTLY.
-----------------------
Slate's delegate calculator sucks, why it's even worse for Clinton than you think:
After today, there are 10 states left, plus Guam and Puerto Rico.
Number of 3 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 4 delegate districts left: 19 (including all 8 in Puerto Rico)
Number of 5 delegate districts left: 21
Number of 6 delegate districts left: 14
Number of 7 delegate districts left: 10
Number of 8 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 9 delegate districts left: 3
Number of 10 delegate districts left: 1 (Montana)
Setting aside Guam with its 4 delegates, there are 11 delegate apportionments based on statewide popular vote totals.
Wyoming - 5 statewide
South Dakota - 6 statewide
Montana - 6 statewide
West Virginia - 10 statewide
Mississippi - 11 statewide
Kentucky - 17 statewide
Oregon - 18 statewide
Puerto Rico - 19 islandwide
Indiana - 25 statewide
North Carolina - 38 statewide
Pennsylvania - 55 statewide
In order to cross all thresholds except the initial break that give you a +2 delegate swing, you need to win by an extra 200/X%, where X = the number of total delegates at stake. Let's see how this works by easy example -
West Virginia and its 10 statewide delegates. 200/10 = 20%. To go from 5-5 to 6-4 there you have to win by over 10% (55-45). But to get ANOTHER +2 you need to add 20% to your win and win by 30% (65-35).
To work through one more example, Indiana and its 25. You start with someone winning 13-12. To get an additional +2 swing (ie, 14-11), you have to win by 200/25%, or 8% even. 54-46 + 1 vote is a 14-11 split. You can also calculate this way: 13.5/25 = .5400. 14.5/25 = .5800 (58-42 is a 16% win).
So, let's look at if Clinton wins every statewide total by 10%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1, giving her the +1 vote benefit of the doubt.
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +1
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +1
Indiana +3
North Carolina +4
Pennsylvania +5
Total +19 delegates (for Clinton).
Do you see how totally impossible it is, and how completely significant Obama's South Carolina and February blowouts were? Remember, Obama beat Clinton by 8% in Iowa (a huge win) and netted only 1 extra pledged delegate.
Now, let's assume, in a very unsurgical way, that this 10% is exactly the margin in all the congressional districts.
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: 0
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1, let's give her the 1 extra vote benefit of the doubt.
Total +36 delegates
Overall total +55 delegates.
And it probably is +58, see below.
Obama currently leads by 160 pledged delegates.
Let me throw in another wrinkle. Let's assume Clinton wins every single remaining district and statewide vote by 16.5% exactly. How does this help her in the districts?
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: +1
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1
Total +37 delegates
She gets only ONE EXTRA DELEGATE from going 10% to 16.5%!
Statewide, 16.5%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +3
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +3
Indiana +5
North Carolina +6
Pennsylvania +9
Total +31 delegates.
TWELVE (maybe six, see below) EXTRA DELEGATES from going 10% to 16.5%!
So the overall total with 16.5% is a mere +68 delegates.
And it probably is only +64, see below.
So with all due respect to Jonathan Alter and all the people who are playing with these numbers, everyone seems to be failing to grasp that it's the BLOWOUTS that matter.
It's blowouts, people.
All but 6 remaining congressional districts are either 4, 5, 6, or 7 delegate districts. There are 64 total districts in this range. Here are the magic numbers:4 delegates - 25%+ [she needs to win by this margin] to get from 2-2 to 3-1
5 delegates - 40%+ to get from 3-2 to 4-1
6 delegates - 16.7%+ to get from 3-3 to 4-2
7 delegates - 28.6%+ to get from 4-3 to 5-2
THOSE are the relevant numbers to break out of the incredibly rosy +55 delegate pickup if we absurdly assume that Clinton wins every remaining contest by 55-45 margins. [Continued]