US News: 8.9 million voted in California Primary. So why is the vote count only 5.4 million???

[reformist2]

First, here's the story on the 8.9 million people who voted:

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-06-10/86m-people-estimated-to-have-voted-in-ca-primary

Now, here's the latest vote totals: Only 3.8 million votes cast on the Dems side, and 1.6 million on the Repug side:

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/maps/president/party/democratic/

That's only 5.4 million votes. where did the 3.5 million other votes go???

[justiceischeap]

1. State issue races. nt

[JoePhilly]

2. Hillary hid them.

[BootinUp]

19. Jerry Brown helped her.

[Thinkingabout]

3. They are still counting and more delegates to be awarded.

[Hav]

4. There were more races

The original post forgot the Republican race at first but there were also other races with of course lower numbers.
You also ask what happened to the 3.5 million missing votes but the article also said that 2.4 have still to be certified and suddenly the number isn't that big anymore. Further, there were also those without party preference. If I remember correctly, an article concerning absentee ballots mentioned that not even 20% of those without party preference requested ballots for presidential primaries.

[reformist2]

8. 2.4 million votes "still have to be certified"? That's a LOT of votes still not counted.

[onenote]

14. most votes cast in CA are by mail

They can be counted if they're post marked by election day and received within three days thereafter.

Hard to count a vote until its received. And hard on poll workers to manage an in-person election and simultaneously count millions of mail ballots.

[Hav]

16. True, we can all agree that it takes quite long

to count all the vote by mail votes for such a large state. I merely tried to answer your question where all the missing votes (more than 3 millions) are.

[peace13]

11. Seems like the starting place is number of ballots voted with Dem candidates.

The Rethugs have nothing to do with the ballot count for Bernie and Hill.

[Hav]

15. I don't know whether I understood you correctly

But the OP mentioned the 8.9 million which is the estimated total number of votes cast. That number does include repubs, any other race, people who didn't participate at all in choosing a presidential nominee and votes that still have to be certified.

[randome]

5. Maybe the other votes were from Independents who were too righteous to help select a President.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[NCTraveler]

6. Aren't you throwing out the vote of one of our fine DUers with this?

Didn't Nadine vote for issues and not for Presidential preference. This is not a hit on Nadine in any way. I'm using it more as a real world example.

[reformist2]

9. I'm sure it happens, but I'd be surprised if more than 10% skipped the main attraction.

[NCTraveler]

12. Where do you get the 10% from?

That is a sizable number. It's not like '08 when we had a lot of enthusiasm. Clinton garnered little enthusiasm on poll day and Sanders supporters showed even less.

[Recursion]

7. So here's what's so frustrating about proportional allocation

Honestly it doesn't really matter what happened to them: they're going to wind up roughly like the already-counted ballots are. There might be 1 or 2 delegate allocations that switch, but in the scheme of things it just doesn't matter.

Clinton received a much larger share of the vote in California than Sanders, and she will continue to receive a much larger share of the vote as these ballots are counted (conceivably it could tighten, but the uncounted ballots are mail-ins which heavily favor Clinton anyways, and in fact her lead has expanded since the state race was "called&quot .

If we want to go to a winner-take-all system (and I'm sympathetic to that, since it's how the Electoral College works) that would be different, but the state parties don't want to do that because it would make most candidates ignore most states.

[still_one]

10. About 2/3 of those are vote-by-mail ballots, Alex Padilla reported. The previous polling indicated

that those voting by mail were favoring Hillary.

The vote by mail ballots will be counted if they arrive up to three days after the election. This was all made very clear in the voter pamphlet that was sent out to every registered voter

[onenote]

13. 2.5 not yet counted. 1 million in other presidential primaries and non-presidential primary voters

Its not hard to figure out.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2171619

[bigwillq]

17. They were wiped. With a cloth.

[Zynx]

18. A fair number still need to be counted. However, it's unlikely that they will overturn the result.

More likely that they'll confirm it.

[MyNameGoesHere]

20. No matter how many times the Alamo story is told

In the end, like Sanders California campaign, it was a massacre. Nothing will change that even the few votes he might pick up.

[hedda_foil]

21. It probably wouldn't change the presidential primary winner, but could affect down ballot races.