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

[Xing]

As I said earlier, it'll probably be 73-28, so +45 for Bernie.

Greenpapers is showing 74-27 when Sanders was @ 72.57.

Edit - It will 74-27. 100% in & Sanders @ 72.7%, Clinton down to 27.1%, others - 0.2%. He has got late boost from king's where his vote share from 65 odd has increased to 67.3. Pierce increased to 73.3 as well - Likely some 75% odd Bernie precincts report.

I heard 72.7% or something was the mark required for the extra delegate!

Well, I stand corrected, then. +47 will almost certainly be Bernie's biggest gain from a single state. He'd have to win CA by double digits to beat that.

[Xing]

Well, looks like it's time to go to bed.

[Xing]

Sanders won Hawaii in a landslide too!? B-b-b-but I thought minorities hated that racist old coot!

The sweep is complete! Glorious day for Sanders!

[Xing]

Sanders won Hawaii in a landslide too!? B-b-b-but I thought minorities hated that racist old coot!

The sweep is complete! Glorious day for Sanders!

He also appears to have won Alaska Natives.

In Washington, he won Asians in Seattle and Latinos in Yakima.
 

I'll just say that all three groups were probably barely present at the caucus sites.

[citation needed]

[Xing]

Here's the citation:

In 2008, white caucus voters in Yakima County outnumbered Hispanic voters 83%-15%.

Precinct 1930 and 1932, "both one of the most Asian areas of Seattle," have whites outnumbering Asian as registered voters by a margin of 58%-23% (in other words, under a quarter Asian).  That are definitely way more Asian precincts in Seattle than these two, but nonetheless, the Asian population is way underrepresented among voters and even moreso among caucus attendees.  When it comes to 2008 caucusgoers, whites outnumbered Asians in these two precincts by a margin of 85% to 6%.

The point I'm making: be wary of extreme mismatches between an area's demographic make-up (especially when it's self-reported by some randomer) and the actual turnout of the vote you're looking at.  Maybe minority turnout was up huge in these areas since 2008 -- but I think it's much more likely that the caucusgoers there were overwhelmingly white.

Since those aren't 2016 statistics, we still can't be sure that they apply to this year. The point is, some minorities did turn out, and, based on Sanders' sweeping win, were probably solidly for Sanders. Also, I doubt that caucusgoers in Hawaii were overwhelmingly white, considering the demographics of the state.

[Xing]

Hey I have a question for you guys. How different do you think the results in Oregon will be from Washington? Washington was an open caucus in an Obama 68% state. Oregon is a closed primary in an Obama 58% state. Will Clinton get under 60% in Oregon? I feel like Oregon results shouldn't differ by more than 20 points from it's neighbors Idaho and Washington, but since it's so different in rules then Clinton may do substantially better (while still losing probably).

Do you mean will Sanders do worse than 60%? It think Sanders has potential to improve on Obama's numbers in Oregon, since he's very popular there, as well. He won't do quite as well as he did in Washington, since it's a closed primary, but I could see him winning 62-38 or so.

[Xing]

Sanders won Hawaii in a landslide too!? B-b-b-but I thought minorities hated that racist old coot!
The sweep is complete! Glorious day for Sanders!

He also appears to have won Alaska Natives.

In Washington, he won Asians in Seattle and Latinos in Yakima.

I have heard very, very little of anyone or any major news outlet describing Sanders as a "racist old coot."
Or anything related to racism, bigotry, etc.
trump yes .... Sanders no.
I'm quite shocked to see your statement here.

I was being facetious, but there is this idea promoted by some that the Sanders campaign only cares about white people, and that obviously only white people vote for him.