Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET)

[RaphaelDLG]

If Hillary wins this, it proves conclusively beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was robbed by a deeply undemocratic caucus system

[RaphaelDLG]

If Hillary wins this, it proves conclusively beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was robbed by a deeply undemocratic caucus system

Not really. While the "caucus sample" was definitely skewed somewhat toward Bernie, these results will be skewed toward Hillary, and not really accurately reflect the whole electorate. That said, I'll be shocked if she wins.

That was supposed to be sarcasm

[RaphaelDLG]

My comment was sarcastic.

Clearly beauty contest primaries are a larger but substantively different and therefore invalid sample from caucuses.

Typically, binding primaries see about 4x the turnout of caucuses.
However, meaningless beauty contest primaries like this only see around 2x the turnout of caucuses.

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

[RaphaelDLG]

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

[RaphaelDLG]

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.

The people who get the ballot in the mail are disproportionately likely to be Clinton supporters

[RaphaelDLG]

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.

The people who get the ballot in the mail are disproportionately likely to be Clinton supporters

Lol.  The entire state votes by mail.

So every single adult washington state resident regardless of party registration gets sent one ballot to their home address giving them an option to vote democrat or republican and mail it back in?

[RaphaelDLG]

The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.

The people who get the ballot in the mail are disproportionately likely to be Clinton supporters

Lol.  The entire state votes by mail.

So every single adult washington state resident regardless of party registration gets sent one ballot to their home address giving them an option to vote democrat or republican and mail it back in?

Every registered voter gets sent a ballot, yes.  There is no party registration.*

*When I registered in 08 you could write in a party if you wanted to do so, so I put 'Democratic party.'  But when you receive the primary ballot, you declare then and there whether you are voting in the Dem or GOP primary.

You have to be a registered voter to get sent a ballot without requesting one, though right?, and 80% of Washington state's voters are registered (which btw is pretty impressive), which would favor Hillary, unlike the caucus-system, which has same day registration.

Also, the people likely to be living at their permanent address where the ballot would get sent are more likely to be Hillary supporters.

Not to mention the lack of advertising Sanders did for this and the relative lack of political experience/awareness/regularity of commitment of his young supporters.

[RaphaelDLG]

You have to be a registered voter to get sent a ballot without requesting one, though right?, and 80% of Washington state's voters are registered (which btw is pretty impressive), which would favor Hillary, unlike the caucus-system, which has same day registration.

Erm... if you're suggesting that Sanders will do worse in the primary than the caucus, then, sure.  But to say that Clinton is 'favored' among registered voters would suggest that she'll win this primary... and frankly, I'd be shocked.

After all, there are plenty of 'soft' Sanders supporters who didn't make it to the caucus.

There's no way she'll win, but I'll bet she'll do significantly better because of the different sample of people likely to participate.

[RaphaelDLG]

Caucuses are bad relative to binding primaries, but you're officially a moron if you think that that beauty contest primaries are better than caucuses.

The turnout for this one is much better than Nebraska's but you'd still expect it to approach 900,000 to match the normal 4:1 binding primary:caucus ratio.

[RaphaelDLG]

Yes, as those have delegates at stake.

Again, that's a pretty poor excuse. They were sent a ballot and all they had to do is mail it.
And I don't see why they were less motivated to do it than Clinton supporters.

I'm not saying they chose well or excusing their actions, I'm simply offering an explanation for at least some of the difference between the results. Also, for those who change addresses a lot, it's not quite that simple. I explained a bit more about that above.

How many people fall in that subcategory? A thousand? Two thousand?
The fact is that proof that caucuses are a mockery of democracy has reached critical mass.
Thankfully two states have already abolished them (Maine, Minnesota) and let's hope that by 2020 any state that still employs them will be punished accordingly.   

His explanation as to why (the shifting addresses, the lack of residence at permanent addresses) an age gap exists made sense - but of course, you weren't listening.

To that I'd add that a LOT more of Sanders' voters are first-time/unregistered voters.

Yes, 130,000+ of them were already registered from the caucus, but remember because of time constraints caucus:binding primary ratio of participation is typically 1:4.

Yet you didn't have 520,000+ people vote for Sanders in this beauty contest.  Even if we assume his supporters are over-represented in caucuses, I still think he would have gotten significantly more of his people to come out in a binding primary where he ran a campaign/voter drive, and I don't really think that's debatable.