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

    Which States Have the Longest and Shortest Election Day Voting Hours?

    Residents in some North Dakota towns have less than half as many hours to cast their ballots as those in New York State.

    Political Crumbs

    No 100-Year Curse for Roberts

    Defeating his Tea Party primary challenger Milton Wolf with just 48.1 percent of the vote, Pat Roberts narrowly escaped becoming the first elected U.S. Senator from Kansas to lose a renomination bid in 100 years. The last - and so far only - elected U.S. Senator to lose a Kansas primary was one-term Republican Joseph Bristow in 1914. Bristow was defeated by former U.S. Senator Charles Curtis who went on to win three terms before becoming Herbert Hoover's running mate in 1928. Only one other U.S. Senator from the Sunflower State has lost a primary since the passage of the 17th Amendment: Sheila Frahm in 1996. Frahm was appointed to fill Bob Dole's seat earlier that year and finished 13.2 points behind Sam Brownback in the three-candidate primary field. Overall, incumbent senators from Kansas have won 29 times against two defeats in the direct vote era. (Curtis also lost a primary in 1912 to Walter Stubbs, one year before the nation moved to direct elections).


    The Second Time Around

    Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


    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