An interesting odd/even effect:
Although no official count was available early Wednesday, state Democratic party officials predict that Clinton will get 20 to 30 more delegates when all results are in. Because of the relatively close finish, they are likely to split delegates in most of the congressional districts with an even number of delegates, while Clinton will pick up an extra delegate in districts that offer an odd number.
So did the campaign's know about this effect and spend more money and put in more effort in districts with an odd number of delegates? Is that even the correct strategy?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Was the Iowa Caucus outcome determined by a coin flip?
We have seen several reports that Hillary Clinton won the Iowa Caucus by a coin toss, or by six coin tosses. Or some other number. We've also seen reports that six delegates were awarded to Clinton on the basis of coin tosses, implying that of…
Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are viable candidates to win the Democratic nomination to run for President of the United States.
There are polls and pundits to which we may refer to make a guess as to who will win. Or, we could ignore all that, and let the process play out and see what…
This post was written in two parts, pre-primary and post-primary. To see the result and a discussion of what they mean, skip down to the last part of the post, where I'll discuss why Tuesday's results may mean that Sanders could win the primary.
Pre-Primary
As already discussed, Clinton is likely…
As you know, I developed a simple model for projecting future primary outcomes in the Democratic party. This model is based on the ethnic mix in each state, among Democratic Party voters. The model attributes a likely voting choice to theoretical primary goers or causers based on previous…
I've heard that they did take this into account, although not from any particularly reputable sources.
However, it's the correct strategy if, if neither candidate made a particular effort in the given district, it would break evenly. But a four-delegate district that is "naturally" at 62% for one candidate and 38% for the other would be just as much in play.
I suspect the campaigns know this -- they've got people whose job it is to think about this sort of thing -- but the mainstream media doesn't want to try to explain it because they believe (perhaps correctly) that people's eyes would just glaze over.
I've heard from reputable sources that they definitely do think about this in their strategy.
BTW in the end I think Obama won the delegate count. I gather his team's strategy was always about maximising the deegate count as opposed to the popular vote.
The whole damn system is crazy...