Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


The Numbers: West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon and Beyond

Bookmark and Share

While there has been no doubt for more than a month that Barack Obama would win the pledged delegate count in the race for the Democratic nomination, a higher than projected turnout in West Virginia's primary padded Hillary Clinton's victory and thus made a larger dent in her popular vote deficit.

  • A total of 352,000+ West Virginians voted in the Democratic primary Tuesday night. That is 46.6 percent of that state's total vote in the 2004 presidential election (755,887 votes)—higher than the 40 percent average Democratic primary turnout of states in the region.
  • Clinton's 41-point victory margin thus elevated her net popular vote gain on Obama by nearly 150,000 votes.
  • As a result, Obama now leads Clinton by approximately 411,000 votes overall—excluding Michigan, but including all other primaries, caucuses, and the votes in U.S. territories. If Michigan is included in the vote total, Obama's lead decreases to about 83,000 votes.
  • Clinton now leads in the "Electoral College math" by a 283 to 217 margin over Obama, once again excluding Michigan.
  • In an interesting note about the importance of primary rules and procedures, if the Democrats had instituted the "winner-take-all" system that was implemented in several of the Republican primaries, Hillary Clinton would actually lead Barack Obama in the delegate count tied to election results 1,688 to 1,376 (excluding Florida and Michigan).

Looking ahead to next Tuesday's contests, Oregon and Kentucky had a virtually identical number of voters in the 2004 presidential election: 1.84 million in Oregon and 1.80 million in Kentucky.

  • According to recent polls, Obama is currently leading Clinton by approximately a dozen points in Oregon. If that holds, and voters turn out at the rate of 45 percent of that general election, Obama will gain 99,000 votes on Clinton in that state.
  • But Clinton is beating Obama by approximately 30 points according to polls coming out of Kentucky. If that margin holds, and voters turn out at a 45 percent rate of the 2004 election, Clinton will gain 243,000 votes back.
  • That means Clinton is projected to make a net gain of 144,000 votes on Obama on May 20th—about the same net gain she made in West Virginia yesterday. This would reduce Obama's popular vote lead to 267,000 excluding Michigan (and put Clinton up by 61,000 if Michigan is included).

Would Clinton be able to make up this quarter of a million-vote deficit by June 3rd? Quite likely, once Puerto Rico votes, where some pundits are estimating Clinton could take 60 to 70 percent of the vote.

In view of what happened in the 2000 election and the numerous references Democrats made to Al Gore's popular vote victory that election year, what an interesting twist it would be heading into the convention when Democratic Party leaders and Obama supporters lobby against using the popular vote in deciding its nominee, as they lobby for the less democratic metric of delegates and superdelegates that its rules require.

Previous post: Live Blog: West Virginia Primary
Next post: Iowans Outlook on America Bleakest in 10 Years

1 Comment


  • what an interesting twist it would be heading into the convention when Democratic Party leaders and Obama supporters lobby against using the popular vote

    Is this more compelling than Clinton's argument that pledged delegates are free to switch their allegiances any time they please?

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting