Hillary leads Bernie by only 235 - There are 1,400 still up for grabs

[TheDormouse]

Hillary has garnered approximately 235 more pledged delegate votes from primaries and caucuses than Bernie has (1,443 to 1,208).

But a third of the total pledged delegates haven't been taken yet. There are still another 1,400 pledged delegates available from the states and territories that haven't yet voted.

Anyone saying that it's impossible for Bernie to win the nomination isn't being honest.

[onehandle]

1. LOL! nt

[stevenleser]

2. You are making the same argument that Hillary supporters made at this point in 2008

And they had even more of a right to make it since the pledged delegate totals were closer. It didn't matter.

In the Democratic nomination contest with proportionally allocated delegates, leads become insurmountable very quickly. Even a 50-75 delegate lead is hard to make up. Once it reaches triple digits, forget it.

[beedle]

12. No, that is wrong

At this time in 2008 the Pennsylvania primary had just finished. The overall results were:

505 pledged delegates left
Hillary was behind by 129 delegates

------------------------

Today there are 1400 delegates left
Bernie is behind by 235

That means Hillary had about 3.9 times the delegates left as she needed to tie.
Meanwhile Bernie has 5.9 times the delegates left that he needs to tie.

[George II]

17. As I noted elsewhere here, there were 500 less delegates in 2008 than this year. Comparing...

....raw numbers is pointless without normalizing them first.

[beedle]

18. You don't need to 'normalize' the number left vs the number needed to tie.

I thought you Hillary supporters were suppose to understand math?

[George II]

21. I do understand real math, not "Devine/Weaver" math.

[beedle]

22. Obviosuly you failed math

Normalization is simply using a common scale.

The 'common scale' in this case would be the percentage of the remaining needed to reach a tie (or win if you prefer.)

The part where I show the "3.9 times' vs the "5.9 times"? ... unless you're totally unfamiliar with math then you might recognize this is what normalizing the numbers means ... ie. Hillary needed to win approximately 26% (1/3.9) of the remaining delegates where Sanders only needs to win 17% (1/5.9) of the remaining delegates.

There's really nothing complicated about this math, unless of course you have a different meaning for 'math' ... which I would ask you to explain, since I always like a good joke.

[George II]

23. "Obviosuly"?

And you're commenting on my math skills?

Okay, I'll play your game, beedle. How do you arrive at this 17% for Sanders and 26% for Clinton with Clinton ahead by 241 delegates? So you're trying to tell us that the candidate with fewer delegates needs a lower percentage of the remaining delegates to win?

[beedle]

35. That other subject you seem unfamilar with is called History.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying ... I'm saying that the ratio of needed delegates as compared to the total remaining delegates is lower for Sanders than it was for Hillary at this date in 2008.

ie: if I need 100 delegates and there are 1000 delegates left to get, and you need 100 delegates but there are only 500 left to get, you are not in as good a position as I am ... this is the case comparing Sanders and Clinton ... at the same date in 2008, Clinton was not in as good a position as Sanders is now, and yet she decided she needed to stay in the race.

So, the statement made by Steve up-thread, and to which I was responding "And they had even more of a right to make it since the pledged delegate totals were closer" was wrong.

[George II]

39. This is beginning to sound like the Abbott and Costello baseball bit...

why don't you simply give us the actual numbers each candidate needs and what % of the remaining delegates that represents?

Okay, I'll do it for you.

There are 1400 "pledged" delegates remaining, and 2026 are required for a majority of "pledged" delegates.

Hillary Clinton has 1446, Sanders has 1205. So, Clinton needs 580 more delegates, Sanders 821. Of the remaining 1400 pledged delegates, Clinton needs 41% (580/1400) and Sanders needs 59% (821/1400)

True?

[beedle]

42. I see now. You are lousy in Math, History AND reading comprehension.

Here is the original post being responded to.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1826179

It is specifically about the comparison of where Hillary stood in April around this date in 2008 (NOT Hillary in 2016,) with where Sanders currently stands in 2016 at this date.

Anything else you'd like to pretend to not understand before I go to bed?

[George II]

43. Sleep tight, we'll revisit this about 10 PM or so on Tuesday night, when it's even FURTHER....

...from a Sanders win.

[beedle]

45. I accept your apology.

[George II]

46. Not an apology. What gave you that idea?

[beedle]

47. one apology is enough.

you were wrong, you passively admitted as much, I'm a big person and I can move one.

Further groveling for forgiveness is totally unnecessary.

[TheDormouse]

26. Ouch!

[George II]

34. Instead of laughing, why don't you get together with your buddy beedle and figure out....

....how a candidate with less delegates needs a lower % of remaining delegates to win?

As I said, it's "Devine/Weaver" math turned upside down.

[beedle]

40. Once again you are being a Hillary supporter

ie. being purposely stupid.

when comparing where Hillary was in 2008 and Bernie is in 2016 in terms of percentage of remaining delegates needed to win.

Hillary, with 509 remaming delegates and behind 129 delegates needed to win (509/2)+129+ 1 delegates or 384.5 delegates.

Bernie with 1400 remaining delegates and behind 235 delegates needs to win (1400/2)+235+1 delegates or 936 delegates.

so in terms of percent needed to win, Hillary needed on April 24, 2008, 384.5/509 or ~75% of her remaining delegates.
Bernie needs on April 24, 2016 936/1400 or 67% of the remaining delegates.

Either way, using her ratio of needed votes as compared to remaining votes (Bernie for example had a ratio of 17 to 100 or 5.9 times more votes available than the number of votes he is behind ... NOT the same thing as the percentage of votes needed as compared to the votes remaining) or the percentage of votes needed as compared to remaining votes, Bernie is in a better position.

The numbers are here,

Bernie 1400 delegates remaining and is behind by 235 vs
Hilary 505 delegates remaining and was behind by 129

show me your math that shows Hillary was better off than Bernie is now.

[JimDandy]

41. Because the POOL OF DELEGATES remaining is BIGGER

for Sanders than it was for Clinton on this same day and month in 2008, so he needs a smaller % of the pool than she did!

Math...

[Ino]

3. Never give up

[Tarc]

4. #berniemath

With the way proportional delegate allocation works, it is virtually impossible for Sander to make up ground at this point.

If you'd like to try though, might I suggest http://demrace.com ? Show us where he makes up enough pledged delegates, save your link and post it here.

[Gwhittey]

5. Your math is off

You forget to add in z which is the corruption variable into it. Err not corruption I mean voter irregularities.

[TheDormouse]

9. lol

You're right!

[MineralMan]

6. Check in again on Wednesday.

[YouDig]

29. Exactly. It will be a bigger lead and less to go.

[kennetha]

7. which means Bernie has to win 58% of the remaining delegates to tie her.

i.e. he has to beat her 818 - 582 or thereabouts.

[Corporate666]

8. What about the following...

1400 delegates left.

25% of them are up for vote on Tuesday. Hillary is leading in all 3 of the 5 states with polls, in 2 of them by double digits (and those 2 make up 70% of all the delegates up for grabs on Tuesday).

Nobody believes Bernie will catch up in Tuesday, we all know he will fall further behind - the only question is by how much.

There are 1,000 delegates from that point on, 70% of them are from CA and NJ - both states where Bernie is losing.


He will drop out shortly, likely within a week from today. He has no path to the nomination. Hopefully the delusional Sanders supporters will accept this once Sanders loses badly on Tuesday.

A man needs to know when he's beaten.

[TheDormouse]

10. Why do you bother posting this info if you're so convinced of it?

[George II]

16. Perhaps for the same reason you posted the OP?

[TheDormouse]

19. the difference is that the info in the OP is being buried by the media

Who all talk as if Hillary has already won and the election is over.

[George II]

20. Actually the info in the OP is incorrect, but we see similar (correct) info in the media every day.

[TheDormouse]

24. What specifically is incorrect?

[George II]

25. Clinton is currently ahead by 241 delegates, not 235. I gave you the link to the accurate count.

[TheDormouse]

28. because those 6 delegates make all the difference

I bumped the other thread just for you. Did you not see it?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511823882

[Ed Suspicious]

27. You are a corporate devil, now aren't you?

[Logical]

44. He need to keep Hillary left, if that is even possible! Nt

[amborin]

11. Bernie is ahead of where Obama was this time in 2008:

[George II]

15. Sorry, there were 500 less delegates in 2008 than this year. That would give Obama the equivalent..

....of 1050.

Oooops, no matter how you guys slice them and dice them, Sanders comes up short.

[George II]

13. The lead is 241. It will be up to about 275 by midnight Tuesday, with slightly over 1,000 to go.

It's 1446 to 1205 - http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D-PU.phtml

Each week that passes the lead increases and the number of available delegates remaining decreases.

As the saying goes, they're hoping against hope.

[KingFlorez]

14. "Only" isn't a word that should be used

Overcoming such a delegate lead is easier said than done.

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. In 2008, Obama never led by more than about 90 or so delegates.

The proportional system used to divide the delegates means Sanders must win every primary by 58%+.
It also means that Clinton can lose every primary, and as long as Sanders is kept below that 58%+ number in one primary, he can not win.
Now, when you look at the polls in the upcoming primaries this Tuesday, it is clear that Sanders is not gong to come anywhere near his required number. He will lose most of them on Tuesday, and continue losing most of them until the end.
Impossible, no. But he would need a real miracle, and Democrats are just not that much into him to give him a miracle.

[UMTerp01]

31. ...

[still_one]

32. You do understand that delegates are awarded proportionally? That is why it is even more

of an uphill climb for Sanders

[insta8er]

33. Lets forget about it guys, the $hill $upporters are saying that it is over. (sarcasm)

[Beacool]

36. Still pushing this meme?

Keep up the good work.

[Zynx]

37. A third of those are up Tuesday.

Bernie will lose those overwhelmingly.

[AzDar]

38. This primary is rigged... Who KNOWS how many delegates Bernie should have?

[TheDormouse]

49. That's why turnout is so important. It's harder to hide votes when the numbers are massive.

[utopia_basin]

48. Well, the pledged delegates are given proportionally to candidates votes

The fact is, Sanders need to win with a landslide in all the upcoming states..