Why do CNN, MSNBC and RealClearPolitics all have different democratic delegate results?

[awaysidetraveler]

CNN's count puts HRC at 1157 delegates to Obama's 1145. They claim that Obama has 989 elected delegates to HRC's 923.

They also claim that HRC has 234 superdelegates to Obama's 156.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D

According to MSNBC, Obama has 958 to HRC's 904 elected delegates. Thankfully, they don't post the superdelegate results, which I believe to be misrepresentative and confusing.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914

According to realclearpolitics, HRC has 1138 and Obama is winning with 1144.

They claim that Obama has 140 superdelegates, while HRC has 213. Also, they claim that Obama has 1004 pledged delegates, while HRC has only 925.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

Shouldn't all these sources be giving us the exact same numbers?

I suspect that this shuffling of superdelegates is diminishing the respectability of our democratic party. It just seems shady.

And I can't help but wonder: What reason could there possibly be for this mathematical confusion in the media?


(CBS shows Obama in the lead. http://election.cbsnews.com/campaign2008/d_delegateScorecard.shtml, as well)

[Thrill]

1. Clinton News Network

[awaysidetraveler]

2. Yeah, the superdelegate math is depressing.

Whatever one might say about their positive faith in the superdelegates, it seems clear that many are supporting HRC despite the election results in their own states. This is plainly undemocratic. Superdelegates should reflect the will of voters in their constituency, if they are to back any candidate at all. Why all this wavering in the superdelegate math? Why even include the superdelegates in the count, which put HRC a hundred delegates up from the start? Isn't that just stacking the deck?

[SteppingRazor]

6. The reason for the superdelegate math varying slightly:

Say a SD says, "I support Hillary Clinton, but I also like Barack Obama." Some outlets will call that a SD going for Clinton. Others will say that one;s still undecided.

[awaysidetraveler]

11. Jesus... these guys in media land just kind of take a hit on the bong and keep on adding? n/t

[SteppingRazor]

13. More or less.

:)

[tekisui]

3. CBS shows Obama with lead:

http://election.cbsnews.com/campaign2008/d_delegateScorecard.shtml

CNN did endorse Clinton....

[awaysidetraveler]

7. Thanks, I updated this thread to include your link. You think it's CNN's math spin?

I mean, I guess it follows. How do you spin math, though?

[SteppingRazor]

4. All of these numbers are estimates...

Based on how each candidate did in each congressional district, total number of statewide delegates, etc. We won't know exact, official numbers until after state conventions. There's no great, dark conspiracy in the media behind the confusion over these numbers. It's just that every media outlet has it's own people doing the estimating.

[awaysidetraveler]

8. I've also done the estimates, and I come up with different results than they do.

The math is simple enough. You take the percentage of voters going for each candidate, and you multiply it by the number of delegates in the state. You round up or down a little, and that way you end up one or two off. Still... these numbers are way, way further off than all of that. I can't make my estimates match theirs.

How are they doing the math?

[SteppingRazor]

10. You've over-simplified the delegate selection process.

Some delegates are awarded based on who won a particular district. Others are awarded based on who won the state, and the levels vary from state to state.

[awaysidetraveler]

14. Okay, now that's interesting. So I would need an equation for each state?

Also, don't they have those equations? I mean, isn't that information out there and available?

[SteppingRazor]

19. I'm not sure, to tell you the truth.

I guess you'd have to check with all the state parties. Certainly, the media organizations that do these estimates have the various formulas, and they're plugging in their estimates, crunching the numbers, and coming up with the most accurate predictions they can.

Remember, regardless of how a media organization may feel about any candidate, they want to be right far more than they want to help anyone. Credibility is all they have, and they have less and less of it these days. So being the place that best-estimates the delegate count means more than helping anyone.

[mohc]

5. Very few of the states

Have released "hard" numbers. Meaning while the voting has completed, we will not the final tally of delegates until they release the actual delegate slate. Most of the numbers we see are "soft" projections. The various news agencies look at the public vote totals and try to project delegate counts based on those numbers. A page at The Green Papers shows you the counts here, with the current hard count currently just 147-142 for Clinton. In the next several months the states will be holding their conventions at the delegate counts will become official.

[awaysidetraveler]

9. Yeah, but the estimates they're giving aren't just a little different here or there.

Estimating votes isn't really very difficult math. You just take the percentage of voters and multiply it against the existing delegates in the state. Going state by state, you end up with the elected votes.

Also how are they counting superdelegates? Or I should say, how are they miscounting them so meticulously and continually?

[Baconfoot]

12. Except that's not how it's done everywhere. In some states it really is district by district. N/T

[awaysidetraveler]

18. So where can I get the equation? n/t

[mohc]

17. Well

First on the pledged delegates, for example CNN vs CBS has a net 6 delegate swing in Georgia from Obama to Clinton (meaning Clinton nets 6 on CNN). Several other swings add up over the various states. The reason is because of district delegates. In district after district the selection of the last delegate is often too close to call, and there are 435 districts (plus more districts in the territories which do not have House members).

Superdelegate listing is in no way official. The organizations basically just look for a public record of an endorsement, if they find one they list the delegate in one column or another. The superdelegate listing will never really be final until the actual convention vote.

[awaysidetraveler]

20. Thanks, that's comprehensive. So posting the superdelegate results is irresponsible reporting.

Okay, that follows. Thanks a bunch.

[frazzled]

15. The NYT is not counting delegates from most caucuses

They are not counting 271 delegates from "non-binding contests, like many caucuses"--which puts Hillary significantly ahead in their chart today (1043 to Obama's 921, including superdelegates).

That is a totally new one on me.

[awaysidetraveler]

22. And, they also support HRC, like CNN does. How do they justify not counting caucus results? n/t

[RL3AO]

16. The exact number of delegates are not known.

For example in Minnesota, Feb 5 elected people to go to the county caucus. People from the county caucus will be elected to go to the eight congressional district meetings where something like half of MNs delegates will be awarded. Then people from that will go to the state convention, where the rest of the national delegates will be awarded. As you can see, the hard numbers are not available.

[SoCalDem]

21. That's a clever way to re-enforce the idea of how "fluid' the situation is..

They should ONLY list the delegates actually won in the real elections..

The "sooooper-doooooper-pooooper-scooooper delegates" should be held aside as a 796 number...perhaps with a percentage of how they break..

The way some list the results reminds me of the PPT in action on bad NYSE days.. market drops, and miraculously the PPT steps in with just enough to calm the jitters...

and to put the brakes on winners of states, by showing that the other person who's not winning, is actually still winning without people in primaries helping out by voting.. The SDP-SDs fill up the delegate glass with just enough to appear even or slightly ahead...might work to demoralize future voters in prinmaries who might feel like their efforts at turnout are futile, since the other person always has extra cards under the table to add to the losing hand....

[awaysidetraveler]

23. Smart... yeah, they're playing it like a rigged market. Funny post. n/t