Yes, Clinton is winning the popular vote — by a wide margin

[Cali_Democrat]

Writer and activist Shaun King has a prolific presence on social media and an outspoken passion for Bernie Sanders. King appeared in Sanders's Spike Lee-directed promotional video that came out shortly before the New York primary, and he has consistently advocated for the senator from Vermont on Twitter for months.

On Thursday, he used Twitter to vent about something that frustrated him: Hillary Clinton's assertion that she leads the Democratic primary by 3 million votes, a figure that he says is inaccurate and overstated.

It isn't.

<...>

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/19/yes-hillary-clinton-is-winning-the-popular-vote-by-a-wide-margin/

[Uponthegears]

1. WP tripe

Kessler's analysis is tripe.

Sean's point is that not taking into account that caucuses involve fewer voters than do primaries grossly underestimates the number of votes a caucus winner would have received IF the state had held a primary instead.

Now Kessler is free to question whether you can legitimately make that extrapolation (in fact, I would tend to agree that you can't) BUT what he does instead is to estimate the number of CAUCUS VOTERS and then act like he's addressed the issue raised by Mr. King. That, my friend, is a LIE.

[Bill USA]

2. good post. here's some more from the Post article. (A distinction without (much) of a difference)

The idea that the popular vote totals are flawed because caucuses aren't included has been floating around for a while. The point of questioning the sum is obvious: To question the extent to which Democratic voters (and independents voting in Democratic contests, who usually favor Sanders) have preferred Clinton as the party's nominee.

This has been floating around so long, in fact, The Post's fact-checkers looked at this issue at the beginning of April. Did Clinton at that point actually lead by 2.5 million votes, as she claimed? No, she didn't.

She led by 2.4 million votes.

The Post's Glenn Kessler arrived at that figure by taking estimates of how many people came out to vote in caucus contests and applying the final vote margin to that population. This is admittedly imprecise, as King notes, since in some caucuses (like Iowa's) voter preferences can and do change. Kessler's total included Washington, despite King's insistence — and in Washington, he figured that Sanders had the support of 167,201 voters to Clinton's 62,330. Despite that, still a 2.4 million advantage for Clinton.

[Meteor Man]

6. Glenn Kessler's Math

Kessler arrived at his totals by making estimates.

Estimate is a mathematical term for guess work.

[Dem2]

11. Those good at it can make a living out of estimating

The error is small computed to the large margins in question.

[UMTerp01]

3. I'm so sick of #BernieMath

Like seriously....I was just about to post this Washington Post article point out that yes, Clinton is winning the popular vote. I guess this is there attempt to try to go to the convention by using "BernieMath" to say in fact he has more votes. No. Accept that more people chose Senator Clinton. Accept that Sanders has done an AMAZING job of getting his message across to many people, but that in the end he will come up a little bit short. This is just beyond silly season now. I'm so sick of this f*cking election cycle. I just want November to hurry up and get here so I can vote.

[eastwestdem]

4. Just because the Sandroids can't do math does not change any of the facts. nt

[uponit7771]

5. #BernVictims are #FeelingTheButtHurt

[randome]

7. Until every damned bird on the planet votes, we can't be sure of ANYTHING!!!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Ohioblue22]

8. Stop looking for heroes, be one . Good advice to the Bernie bros

[morningfog]

10. You seem to be against the people of each state voting?

[randome]

12. Hardly. But when one candidate leads this much over another...

...the last person/state voting has to realize that their vote actually doesn't make any difference. I see the point that the more votes/delegates gets, the more leverage he may have at the convention so in that respect, it does make a difference, just not in the overall outcome.

It's those who think that Sanders can actually win this outright and, at the same time, do everything they can to trash-talk our leading candidate, who are deserving of scorn.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[The Second Stone]

9. But we want to count each caucus delegate as thousands of individual votes

so that we can continue in our fantasy! Be my guest.