Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 15, 2024, 10:09:58 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET)  (Read 28237 times)
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« on: March 26, 2016, 11:44:08 AM »

Anyone know why Sanders' odds on Betfair for winning Alaska have crashed? Are there results somewhere or what?

https://www.betfairpredicts.com/

The odds are 100-0 Clinton wins.
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2016, 12:20:02 PM »

https://twitter.com/KIRO7Seattle/status/713761089578786818

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just scrolling through #WAcaucus on Twitter. Everything I see points towards large turnout.
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2016, 03:17:33 PM »

It looks like something's completely wrong with Betfair right now. It's showing 100-0 Clinton wins in both Alaska and Washington... did it crash and default to Clinton wins?

https://www.betfairpredicts.com/
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2016, 03:22:31 PM »

Also, the NYT results map shows Wahkiakum county went 17-2 Sanders with one precinct. If this is so, how did Clinton get anything out of that area? She would have been under the threshold in that one precinct. How does this work?
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2016, 03:29:39 PM »

https://twitter.com/cali_liberal/status/713811394852835328

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's over 98% for Sanders... but only from one precinct, so worthless.

Interesting to look at #WAcaucus on Twitter though.
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2016, 03:33:21 PM »

https://twitter.com/cali_liberal/status/713811394852835328

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's over 98% for Sanders... but only from one precinct, so worthless.

Interesting to look at #WAcaucus on Twitter though.

There are only 17 caucus locations in King County so its hardly 'worthless'.

Meh, probably popular vote though, and like others said, there are multiple precincts in one delegate site. With preregistration alone at 150,000 it means nearly nothing.
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2016, 07:57:37 PM »

For the anti-caucus crowd, if you got your way and caucuses were done away with, would you make an exception for Iowa?  There is a lot of tradition there, and they do a good job managing it.

No. No exceptions. I've participated in the Iowa caucuses. And though going to the county and district conventions was kind of fun and interesting to a political junkie like m'self, in the end, the terrible starting process is not worth it.

Not to mention the fact that even though the Iowa caucus was well run it only had a turnout of 15.7% of those eligible to vote. Overall, in 2008, 29% of those eligible across the country voted, so even one of the best run caucuses in the nation couldn't break that very low threshold.
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2016, 08:54:33 PM »

Are we ever going to be able to get a geographic breakdown of Alaska?

The Guardian is now posting results by state house districts.

So is HuffPo:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-03-26

Looks like the NYT is doing it too. I personally prefer their map to the others.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alaska
Logged
Sorenroy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,701
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -5.91

P P
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2016, 01:44:30 AM »

Sanders finished just under 80% in Alaska in terms of actual votes. Just over 80% in terms of delegates.

Would love to know where you are getting that information. Are actual popular vote numbers released somewhere?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 12 queries.