Let's talk about actual votes. The actual # of people voting for Bernie vs Hillary

[jillan]

New Hampshire - 300 of 300 Precincts Reporting - 100%


Sanders, Bernie Dem 151,573
Clinton, Hillary Dem 95,242
________________________________
Difference 53,361 more people voted for Bernie in NH than Hillary
that's more than the total of votes the 2nd place GOP candidate received in total (Kasich - 44907 total votes)

#FeelTheBern

http://www.wmur.com/politics/2016-full-new-hampshire-presidential-primary-election-results/37649066

[n8dogg83]

1. Add to that the fact that Bernie got more votes than the total votes of Donald Trump and Kasich

COMBINED!! So tell me again who is more electable!

[Mufaddal]

2. MSNBC still reporting Bernie at 60%, but it's 61% now.

A full 23 point lead.

Bernie Sanders 152,292 votes (--) 60.9%
Hillary Clinton 94,834 votes (-57,458) 37.9%

http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/

[jillan]

3. My figures were taken from New Hampshire with 100% votes counted.

[Mufaddal]

4. Mine too!

Not sure what's up with the difference.

[jillan]

5. Hmmmm. That is interesting.

[Mufaddal]

6. Maybe the precincts are all in but they are still technically counting up the last of the votes?

Only thing I can think of that might address the discrepancy. It's really weird. NY Times had a different number earlier as well.

[hoosierlib]

7. And he likely had more votes in Iowa...

And onlly lost because Clinton's support was spread out across the state...

[draa]

8. There's something else that was pointed out on DU today.

She received about 20k less votes in 2016 as she received in 2008. And that's with only 2 candidates this cycle instead of the 3 from 2008.

She should have picked up some of Edwards voters but she didn't. Worse yet, she lost some of her own instead.

There was about 15k less voters this year but still, if Clinton was as strong as everyone claims she wouldn't have lost 20k votes.