Yesterday, Bernie won a grand total of 230,000 votes across three states --EDITED

[Yavin4]

So, I have edited my post to include the updated attendance totals for each state from Saturday. There were a total of 286,564 votes cast. Bernie won on average of 80% of the vote in each state to give him 230,000 votes yesterday.

As a contrast, Hillary won over 1 million votes in Florida alone.

My point still stands. This is his HUUUUGGGEEE momentum? 230,000 votes in total across 3 states????


Total Turnout
WA: 244,548
HI: 32,000
AK: 10,016

Links:
Democrats likely set caucus attendance record
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Democrats-likely-set-caucus-attendance-record-1264684.php

Democratic officials in Hawaii said that more than 32,000 votes were cast.

http://patch.com/us/across-america/hawaii-democratic-caucus-2016-live-results-0

http://www.alaskademocrats.org/

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/54bee0c9e4b0441ce96c4681/t/56f7547e27d4bdeb601fa43f/1459049599932/Alaska+2016+Democratic+Presidential+Caucus+Results+%281%29.pdf

[ThePhilosopher04]

1. Your numbers are way off.

[Yavin4]

3. I updated my post to include results from each state

Show me where I'm wrong.

[MadBadger]

5. In Washington, 230K people voted

You are using delegates.

[Yavin4]

9. So, the NY Times is wrong?

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/washington

[MadBadger]

14. From the Washington Democratic Party

You really only think 19K people voted in Washington? C'mon

https://twitter.com/jamalraad/status/713964220249812992

[noamnety]

20. The times is correct - but you are misreading it.

NYT: "In Washington, party officials estimated more than 200,000 people participated on Saturday."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us/politics/election-results.html?_r=0

[Cal Carpenter]

8. Those are delegates, not votes. n/t

[Yavin4]

11. From the NY Times site

Democratic Caucuses

Sanders has won Washington, according to A.P.
CANDIDATES VOTE PCT. DELEGATES
Bernie Sanders
19,159 72.7%
25
Hillary Clinton 7,140 27.1
9
Other 46 0.2
—
26,345 votes, 100% reporting (72 of 72 precincts)

Winner called by A.P.

[Cal Carpenter]

16. Updated

Just edited this because I was wrong about the header - I see now that header is for the last column.

Regardless, those are counts of precinct delegates, not popular votes.

[PotatoChip]

31. Alaska is using state delegates won for their numbers.

This is from your Alaska link.

*Vote totals for the Alaska Democratic Party are state convention delegates won.

[libtodeath]

2. What is your point,the process has been endorsed by the Democratic party

You think those people dont matter?

[Yavin4]

7. They do, but those numbers don't compare to the 1 million Floridians who voted for Hillary

when you're talking about the voice of the Democratic party.

[libtodeath]

35. Were you saying the same after Iowa?

[Aerows]

59. I do believe the

"Hillary won by a landslide in Iowa" people are a tad depressed today.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. Yavin4 2008 was a very different Yavin4....

CUT THE BULLSHIT WITH THE POPULAR VOTE MEME!!!!

The popular vote DOES NOT MATTER in primary elections. It's about delegates, NOT THE DAMN POPULAR VOTE. WHY?

1. Several states are caucus states so the popular vote is not applicable, and if anyone cries about caucus states, then where was this crying 2 years ago or 4 years ago or whenever. You don't get to cry about the rules of the game AFTER YOU'VE LOST.

2. If the damn popular vote mattered, then why not milk the large states for more votes and screw the smaller states. Heck, a campaign can just stay in New York, Texas, Florida, and California and win going away.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6066316

[JonLeibowitz]

77. Simply fascinating. This is one of the leser instances of that crime though....

[MattP]

4. It had to be more than that

[Skid Rogue]

17. I've been trying to...

figure this out since last night.

Does that honestly mean that less than 600 people voted in the AK caucus?

[Blue_In_AK]

23. Over 10,000 people voted in Alaska,

5,000 in Anchorage alone.

[Skid Rogue]

26. That makes more sense. Thanks.

[bravenak]

6. Might be why he is so far behind that the media cannot focus on his wins.

We only had one caucus site in our city. It was over capacity. It is nearly impossible to catch up and nobody can stop talking about that part.

[Bluenorthwest]

33. The OP is not correct about anything including the abrreviation for Alaska.

nt

[libtodeath]

37. ...

[TheCowsCameHome]

46. Yeah, right.

Maybe someone will fall for that theory.

[bravenak]

48. .

[DisgustipatedinCA]

10. Taunts are mostly meaningless at this point. The delegate numbers tell a story.

The story is that it's tough for Sanders, but certainly not impossible. You can count how many acres Hillary has won if you'd like, but delegate math says Bernie Sanders can get the nomination.

[Cal Carpenter]

12. I highly recommend editing your thread title

Otherwise it looks like you are deliberately spreading misinformation.

[pkdu]

13. Slightly more than that. Those are AK delegate counts not voters..see here

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/54bee0c9e4b0441ce96c4681/t/56f7547e27d4bdeb601fa43f/1459049599932/Alaska+2016+Democratic+Presidential+Caucus+Results+%281%29.pdf

[noamnety]

15. You aren't reading the info correctly.

From your first link: "Vote totals for the Alaska Democratic Party are state convention delegates won."

They are not the number of individuals voting.

[cureautismnow]

18. Those are caucus precinct delegates.

Look at 2008 in Washington when they held a primary after a caucus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Democratic_caucuses,_2008

Almost 700K voted. Do you actually think only around 26K people voted in all of Washington state yesterday?

[Blue_In_AK]

19. Alaska is not Alabama.

Just FYI.

[Bluenorthwest]

29. That was my favorite of the many errors in the OP, that was like the punchline error.

nt

[Califonz]

21. Please stop

My ignore list can't take much more of this!

[ram2008]

22. Please learn how caucuses work before spreading misinformation next time

Those are delegate 'votes' not raw totals.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Which is a lot more than Hillary did.

*Gloat*

[hobbit709]

25. Memo must have gone out. This is the second OP coming from Camp Bansalot with almost identical

wording.

[RazBerryBeret]

30. Camp Bansalot

Love that! ...coming from one of the banned!

[SMC22307]

76. "Camp Bansalot"

Welcome to the new and improved DU.

[Blue_In_AK]

27. Those are delegate counts

In Alaska those delegates are the ones who will go to the state convention and determine how the national delegates from Alaska are divvied up.

[suffragette]

52. Thank you. I tried to explain more clearly why this is inaccurate below.

This is like comparing the number of votes in a state to the number of representatives elected in the state.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. So entirely incorrect, so deeply absurd and really you should be chagrined to post such balderdash.

Your own common sense should tell you that is not correct. You are the second Hillary supporter I have seen say this and it's astonishing.

[lunamagica]

32. Thanks for putting it all in perspective

Last edited Sun Mar 27, 2016, 03:58 PM - Edit history (1)

[jeff47]

38. Actually, the OP got everything in their post wrong, including the abbreviation for Alaska.

Those are precinct delegate counts, not total votes.

[jeff47]

34. Those are delegate counts, not votes. You also blew it on the abbreviation for Alaska.

And speaking of Alaska, you are trying to say only 600 people voted in the entire state. More than 5,000 voted in Anchorage alone.

[Karma13612]

47. Oh, ok, whew, I thought

Those totals looked low for actual votes!

And I see you caught the misspelled abbreviation as well!

[femmedem]

36. Please delete this misinformation! Numerous people have explained that you are incorrect.

It's one thing to make a mistake--no biggie--but it's another to let it stand. It's obvious that some people still believe you because they aren't reading the responses, just the OP.

[Motown_Johnny]

39. My god.. please delete. You look so terribly stupid.

These were caucuses. You are counting delegates, not votes.




http://www.ktva.com/alaska-democrats-choose-sanders-in-caucus-record-turnout-reported-997/

^snip^

Alaska Democrats choose Sanders in caucus, record turnout reported


In 2008, roughly 2,500 people turned out to the Anchorage caucus. This year, that number was at least 5,000 – possibly more – according to Jake Hamburg from the Alaska Democratic Party.


With 15 of 40 districts reporting, the Alaska Democratic Party said Sanders lead the caucus with 79 percent of the vote in a preliminary release.

“He seems like an honest man and he’d actually do what he says he plans on doing,” said Sanders supporter and first-time voter Wade VonHeeder.



Edit to add: The people who reced this OP look stupid too.

[Yavin4]

40. Take it up with the NY Times

I posted what they reported.

[Motown_Johnny]

41. NO, you said they were votes. They were delegates.

You simply got it wrong.

[MadBadger]

42. I'm a Hillary supporter and I'm telling you, you are wrong. And you seem to be ignoring me

Again:

https://twitter.com/jamalraad/status/713964220249812992

[Live Bait]

55. Makes you question your vote for April 5th, doesn't it?

I really hope Wisconsin goes back its LaFolette roots and deliver the votes to Bernie.

[MadBadger]

61. Because of what some random Clinton voter says on the internet?

No chance.

I also vote in the NJ Primary

[Motown_Johnny]

43. There is a * next to the word "Votes"

And below that it says

^snip^

*Vote totals for the Alaska Democratic Party are state convention delegates won.



Your response to my post makes you look even more stupid.

[Cal Carpenter]

45. You'd be better off spending your time changing your thread title

rather than arguing with people and doubling down on what is obviously incorrect. Otherwise, you look like a liar deliberately spreading misinformation.

[Karma13612]

44. Minor point, but worth noting when comparing states,

The abbreviation for Alaska is AK, not AL

AL is for Alabama.

[suffragette]

49. That's the issue with comparing raw votes and delegate votes as if they count up the same

And it keeps happening in all the threads about total number of votes.

It's apples and oranges, really.

The places with primaries have raw vote totals, so the raw number of people who voted.

The places with caucuses have delegate totals, so the member of delegates chosen by the people to represent them, but the number of the people voting isn't mentioned.

From WA Dems Communications Director
Jamal Raad
@jamalraad
14h
All results are now in. At least 230,000 Washington Democrats participated in our 2016 precinct caucuses. #waelex #wacaucus

But voting numbers reported from caucuses tend to be the number of delegates selected to represent, NOT the raw numbers of people participating and voting for them. It's counting the representatives, not the votes of all the people who elected them.

That is what the numbers reported for states which caucused appear so unusually low and why the total raw votes (which don't count the the actual numbers of people who participated and voted for their representatives).

That's why looking at the vote totals for all states is misleading. It's severely undercounting those who are using the representative system of caucuses.

[TeddyR]

50. I don't understand why

Hillary or Bernie supporters keep trying to belittle wins. A win is a win. And ultimately the popular vote doesn't matter. Hillary can win every single vote cast in Florida and still lose the nomination to Bernie or the GE to Trump/Kasich/Cruz. The entire premise of this post is silly.

[TheCowsCameHome]

51. ....And two people voted over 21,000 times!

Can you believe that kind of corruption still exists?

[hellofromreddit]

53. Odd way to go about things

Saying something that is obviously not true is a mistake and is understandable. But insisting it is not a mistake (or that it is the fault of others) when the error is pointed out to you is just plain lying.

What are you gaining by lying in this way?

[ucrdem]

54. This has been alerted on for inaccuracies.

Will post results if possible. I voted to leave and give the OP time to figure out the confusion.
......................................
Results: 2-5 leave

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Sun Mar 27, 2016, 02:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yesterday, Bernie won a grand total of 43,119 votes across three states
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511587420

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This post is inappropriate because it is wildly inaccurate. Numerous people have politely informed the OP, but the OP won't delete it.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 27, 2016, 02:42 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Eventually, the OP will be either self-deleted or revised. Let's give the poster time to figure out what to do next as whatever the outcome s/he is sure to be a subject of merciless derision from a certain faction. Meanwhile leave it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post's inaccuracy may be inappropriate, but I vote to leave it stand because of the numerous polite corrections. Most people read more than the OP on a thread, and thus would see this.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Numerous people have pointed out the fallacies in the post. I think that's enough.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: False info.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is an abuse of the alert system. I am a Bernie supporter, but, come on! If this poster has posted inaccurate (or propaganda-ized spin, then refute it with facts and links proving them wrong. Use the alert system for TOS violations.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ok, it's inaccurate - but as you said numerous people have politely informed the OP. They are not a news source. I am a Bernie supporter but we don't need to alert on this mess.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: First rule of "Data Club" - use valid data.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[cannabis_flower]

64. I was number 6

[truedelphi]

81. It is now three hours later than the alert.

And yet the person posting the OP has not bothered to take it down.

Goes to show exactly the type of person that is supporting Hillary.

If a candidate doesn't care about Truth, why would the supporter?

[CentralCoaster]

56. Um. More than 539 people voted in Alaska. Maybe you should just self delete this OP.

You are confusing state convention delegates with the raw vote between caucus states and primary states.

Just go ahead and self delete, do a little homework, then post a new thread about it.

[PatrickforO]

57. Those are delegates. Over 230,000 people in WA voted. Based on the percentages in your post,

this means that over 167,500 people in WA voted Bernie. (Myself, I think it was that bird...)

On a serious note, if Bernie does the same kind of thing in Cali, it will make up for FL, won't it?

As Mike Shanahan used to tell the Bronco players when they were behind, "Lot's of football left to play, guys...lots of football!"

[Hoyt]

58. I think the Alaska, Wash votes are off, but still -- some cities have had more votes than total of

those 3 states. Does put it all in perspective.

[kiva]

60. Please continue posting here.

I think it's important that DU remain inviting to everyone, even the politically and logic and critically thinking and abbreviation challenged. And props to you for figuring out how to put in those blue linky things.

[JimDandy]

71. LOL

[FuzzyRabbit]

62. You are comparing apples to automobiles

Florida had a statewide primary election where everyone could vote.

AK, WA, and HI had local precinct party caucuses, where only party members participate.

Going to the caucus is not the same going to vote, which usually takes only a few minutes. Check in time for my precinct caucus started at 9:00, and we finished earlier than most, at shortly after 11:00, as we are a small precinct and needed little discussion. Larger precincts took more time. So you see, caucusing requires much more time and effort than voting in a primary election.

[cannabis_flower]

63. You were alerted on - I was number 6 - but get a clue

On Sun Mar 27, 2016, 02:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yesterday, Bernie won a grand total of 43,119 votes across three states
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511587420

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This post is inappropriate because it is wildly inaccurate. Numerous people have politely informed the OP, but the OP won't delete it.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 27, 2016, 02:42 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Eventually, the OP will be either self-deleted or revised. Let's give the poster time to figure out what to do next as whatever the outcome s/he is sure to be a subject of merciless derision from a certain faction. Meanwhile leave it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post's inaccuracy may be inappropriate, but I vote to leave it stand because of the numerous polite corrections. Most people read more than the OP on a thread, and thus would see this.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Numerous people have pointed out the fallacies in the post. I think that's enough.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: False info.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is an abuse of the alert system. I am a Bernie supporter, but, come on! If this poster has posted inaccurate (or propaganda-ized spin, then refute it with facts and links proving them wrong. Use the alert system for TOS violations.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ok, it's inaccurate - but as you said numerous people have politely informed the OP. They are not a news source. I am a Bernie supporter but we don't need to alert on this mess.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: First rule of "Data Club" - use valid data.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Codeine]

65. Dude, self-delete.

You're not helping.

[Agschmid]

66. You should either self delete or edit your OP it's very misleading.

[opiate69]

67. Alabama caucused yesterday? Well, whatdoyaknow?

[TheCowsCameHome]

68. X-post this to Free Republic

They might fall for it.

[angrychair]

69. Your ignorance is stunning

Read a little more before creating an OP this ridiculous.
You really think only ~26,000 people voted in a blue state the size of Washington?!?!?
Over 230,000 choose a presidential preference yesterday in Washington. I take great offense to any attempt at belittling the significance of yesterday or the amazing effort put forth by supporters of Bernie Sanders to get him a win in Washington.

As a first-time in a Caucus, first time as a PCC for my precinct, in felt like they were all in my precinct.....ROFL.

[islandmkl]

72. WTFevery...you are not only mathematically challenged...but also

severely limited in your ability to make astute conclusions based on you faulty math...

why would you even waste your time?...one would hope, in the effort to support your candidate, that you would do better....

of course, that was not your goal...

[Number23]

74. AK is the correct abbreviation for Alaska. AL is Alabama

And it would be interesting to know exactly how many votes he won yesterday vs. Clinton.

[Motown_Johnny]

75. Will you please delete? You have been proven wrong.

What you are calling votes in Alaska are actually delegates and it says so at your link.

This thread is beneath the dignity of any progressive web site.

[truedelphi]

82. And initially, before 1pm PST, Bernie Supporters voted not to

Hide the OP, as they wanted to give the poster more time to rectify their ignorant and totally non-factual remarks.

However the clock is ticking...

[deathrind]

78. That's one way...

To parse yesterday's results. Another way would be that Bernie swept all 3 States by an overwhelming majority.

[JackRiddler]

79. Can you please correct these numbers?

If you see the corrections and don't respond, it turns into a LIE.

[tabasco]

80. Either severe ignorance or deception is the genesis of this post.

Only the OP knows for sure, I suppose.

Either way, the post should be deleted.

[TeeYiYi]

83. Well, Gavin4, it must have been a slow day...

What? Your name is Yavin4? Oops, I'm sorry. I'll correct my mistake...

TYY

[beachbumbob]

84. So now sanders is only 2 MILLION votes behind Hillary???

Yep...is over taking her at breath taking speed..a momentum changer..

[TDale313]

85. You know this is just a flat-out lie, right?

You've been told you're reading it wrong, and how you're reading it wrong and still insist on spreading not even plausibly believable misinformation. Not that I expect much better.

[Bluenorthwest]

87. I can't believe you have let this OP remain.

It defines the intellectual level of Clinton camp discourse. It's just amazingly shameless.

[HooptieWagon]

88. Wow, utter ignorance from a Hillarian.

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

Despite having been politely suggested you correct or delete your OP, you insist on leaving the ignorance on display. Heckuva job, Brownie!

[Yavin4]

89. Edited my OP

My point still stands.

[Barack_America]

91. Are you population shaming these states?

We can't all be CA, you know.

[morningfog]

93. Not really,lol.

[morningfog]

92. Such small numbers, so many delegates, and Hillary fell flat on her face.

Some front runner we have.