NV Caucus Results Thread (doors close at 2 CT)

[Adam Griffin]

RIP Pete's Campaign

[Adam Griffin]

I whipped up a composite map of 2012-2016 elections, splitting the state into 15 equally-sized districts based on the average Democratic vote (i.e. each district has approximately 100k potential Democratic voters).

It's important to remember that around 90% of the Democratic vote exists in the denser portions of Clark and Washoe. That one dark green district that covers the vast, vast majority of the state is only 1/15 of the likely Democratic vote - so unless one candidate is just running away with it in these communities, it's not a big deal or indicative of anything.

[Adam Griffin]

Moderate and conservative voters in NV:

[Adam Griffin]

Bernie will still destroy, but these transfers are utterly horrendous for him lol

What results are you looking at to make a uniform declaration on that?

[Adam Griffin]

Bernie will still destroy, but these transfers are utterly horrendous for him lol

What results are you looking at to make a uniform declaration on that?

You and I both know that people are really only going to be paying attention to the CCD's.

You're still making a declaration about next to none of the vote. And honestly, people won't be unless this turns into an IA-like situation that takes forever.

[Adam Griffin]

[Adam Griffin]

Okay, I have the answer to the discrepancy between first and final round votes.

https://twitter.com/baseballot/status/1231331562366607364?s=19

Same thing happened in IA for what it's worth.

[Adam Griffin]

Why are Latinos so pro-Bernie? Does anyone have a serious answer besides tHeY aRe DiSpRoPoRtIoNaTeLy YoUnG? That's not enough to explain these numbers. This is like Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton with the Black vote.

At least if we want to compare to the historical minority core of the Democratic Party (black voters):

Like black voters, they have a tendency to defer to candidates who are establishment and/or who have high name-recognition.

Unlike black voters, many have grown up in immigrant households with parents and grandparents who come from highly class-conscious societies.

But the age thing really is most of it this time. Even in 2016, a significant chunk of current Latino primary voters weren't participating. Trump (in the 2016 general and then in 2018) really mobilized a large number of new Latino voters. My county is one-third Latino and had twice the raw Latino turnout in 2016 compared to 2012, and more than twice that in 2018 compared to 2014 (after adjusting for the higher overall turnout). I wouldn't be surprised if there are twice as many Latinos ages 18-35 voting in this year's national primary compared to 4 years ago.

[Adam Griffin]

CNN's now showing popular vote, but just the raw vote (no percentages). LOL.

[Adam Griffin]

The Rat is on TV trying to declare victory through vague platitudes again!

Attacking the guy who beat him 3:1; also his Spanish is terrible

[Adam Griffin]

Literally all this guy is doing is talking about how awful the guy is who's beating him 3:1

What the Democratic Party is getting ready to do to the Snail Rat

[Adam Griffin]

There is no way in hell I will vote for Bernie if he is the Dem nominee, even if I am somehow living in a battleground state by then

Somebody like you voting for the Democratic Party means it has long since died, intellectually and otherwise.

[Adam Griffin]

I would vote to reelect a professional and well behaved Trump

All you (or anybody in your party) needed to say really

[Adam Griffin]

Of course the real issue was Sanders voters not showing up or throwing away their votes on Jill Stein, letting Trump win with a minority.

Hillary Clinton lost despite having the most votes because of the electoral college, not because of Sanders or third party voters. In a sensible and democratic election system, Clinton would have been President, and she did not need a single additional vote for that to be the case.

Um no Clinton didnt win a majority of the popular vote. The Right Bloc in 2016 had more votes than the Left bloc did

How many times do people have to tell you that multiple candidates aren't some magical chimera you get to count as one entity?

[Adam Griffin]

There is no way in hell I will vote for Bernie if he is the Dem nominee, even if I am somehow living in a battleground state by then

Somebody like you voting for the Democratic Party means it has long since died, intellectually and otherwise.

So OSR should vote straight Republican and refuse to even consider Bernie?
Should I do the same since I obviously am in Fake Democrat territory?

1) He's not considering Bernie
2) He absolutely should (because is not nor ever has been considering doing anything else)
3) Do what you want: online comments aren't going to change your voting behaviors, so if you end up coddling Republicans, you were always going to do so (though frankly I am skeptical you are even of legal voting age)

[Adam Griffin]

I would vote to reelect a professional and well behaved Trump

All you (or anybody in your party) needed to say really

That Trump wouldn't insult our allies every day , lash out on twitter every day, do what he did with Ukraine etc.


I like Trump's economic policies , his judicial record, and on immigration he isnt much different than first term Obama anyway

Again, all you needed to say: "I'm a Republican [but Trump is a meanie and I will vote for him while pretending to be 'concerned' anyway]" doesn't require a caveat or explanation. You're identical to everybody else in your party, so just embrace it and stop trying to think of yourself as holier-than-thou. Maybe you'll change your mind when the GOP starts rounding up all the rich Indians because they swung 10 points to the Democrats in 2020 or whatever.

[Adam Griffin]

3-0 #undefeated

Pete won Iowa by the measure that's been used for as long as I've been alive. This was the first year the Iowa Caucus even announced the popular vote.

Buttigieg won by the measure that is used to select the winner. Therefore, he is the winner. You can disagree with the measure that is used to select the winner, but that doesn't change the facts.

Congratulations to Sanders on his two victories. I sincerely congratulate him and his supporters on an achievement many never thought possible, but it is very offensive to see Sanders supporters claim a victory he didn't achieve. Especially when that victory was achieved by a gay man.

I wish Sanders and supporters would drop this particular spin. He has won two of the first three contests, he is the clear front runner, and he is very likely to get the Democratic nomination. Isn't that enough without taking away something from someone who won it fair and square?

As a gay man I'm offended by your offense.

As a gay man, I have every right to be offended by it.

According to the logic among many in this thread, straights won 74% of the delegates and so they're the real winners. :thonk:

[Adam Griffin]

Literally every "tweet" or "report" marty mentions on an election day has turned out to be false or made-up: this has been the case for years. Why are people still falling for it?

[Adam Griffin]

Bernie knows he's gonna win: look how neat his hair is tonight

[Adam Griffin]

I'm not thrilled about Bernie winning

But Pete...my god he is smarmy.

All efforts must be put in to defeat No Policy Pete and Xerox Mike.

"I WON"

[Adam Griffin]

Why did CNN and Co. project a winner already, if only 4% of the votes are counted ?

11%. 11%. How many times do people have to say this. CNN has the most up-to-date count.

Also, probably something to do with the votes showing what the exit polls did: Sanders winning by 20-25 points in the final round.

[Adam Griffin]

Do we know if a proportionate share of the early vote has been counted? Obviously precincts outstanding doesn't necessarily equal percentage of vote outstanding, but is there any reason to believe a greater share of EV than ED remains (since the way it was counted/collected was different)?