Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

One of the 99

(2,280 posts)
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:50 AM Apr 2016

Just some math: NY primary.

After reading some threads that contend that Bernie lost the NY primary because of voter suppression. I decided to do some investigating. So far there is an active investigation as to why 126,000 Democrats were removed from the rolls in Brooklyn.

The final results of the primary were:
Clinton - 1,054,083
Bernie - 763,469

If you assume that every single one of the 126,000 in Brooklyn were intending to vote for Bernie, the revised result would be:
Clinton - 1,054,083
Bernie - 889,469

Unfortunately, Bernie still loses. However, what if similar voter purges occurred in at least 2 of NYC's other 4 boroughs and just haven't been reported. Then the result would be:

Clinton - 1,054,083
Bernie - 1,141,469

And Bernie wins. I do realize that there is currently no evidence to suggest that there was a similar purge in any other borough but Brooklyn so this is just supposition on my part.

38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Just some math: NY primary. (Original Post) One of the 99 Apr 2016 OP
The only thing you have demonstrated is that you can subtract DrDan Apr 2016 #1
What if the Earth had two moons? How would that have affected the outcome? Squinch Apr 2016 #2
It would always be high tide! Agschmid Apr 2016 #7
Does that affect the momentum? I think it would. Squinch Apr 2016 #32
It most certainly does. Agschmid Apr 2016 #35
#BernieMath ... in no way connected to reality n/t SFnomad Apr 2016 #3
Assuming every one of the voters removed were voting for Bernie, and NOTHING supports that notion. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #4
However... What if I just make a bunch of stuff up. Agschmid Apr 2016 #5
It's been painfully obvious by now that they are very bad at basic math.....LOL Trust Buster Apr 2016 #6
Is the satire??? Walk away Apr 2016 #8
First those are not the final numbers. Absentees and affidavits don't get counted till May. hrmjustin Apr 2016 #9
Do you have data showing that? Wilms Apr 2016 #13
I know several people at County Headquarters and their preliminary findings are hrmjustin Apr 2016 #14
OK. "I know" lots of people too. Wilms Apr 2016 #15
Gwe won't get that until May. hrmjustin Apr 2016 #16
I agree this was done on purpose. Wilms Apr 2016 #23
When they get it mapped out by neighborhood we will be able to tell. hrmjustin Apr 2016 #26
There is a map of neighborhoods and how they voted on the NYT. Zynx Apr 2016 #22
OK. You're my new best friend. Wilms Apr 2016 #25
Very strong suspicion: It's widely dispersed and since Hillary won NYC anyway that means she lost Zynx Apr 2016 #27
May well be. And I don't know that we'd ever be sure. Wilms Apr 2016 #33
That's not math,that's wishful thinking. nt sufrommich Apr 2016 #10
The underlying assumption that those were all Codeine Apr 2016 #11
Explain to me how they magically identified every Sanders supporter? seabeyond Apr 2016 #12
I'm not claiming that One of the 99 Apr 2016 #17
Would you agree that it's an obviously false assumption? N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2016 #18
It's just an assumption. One of the 99 Apr 2016 #29
May I repeat the question you just didn't answer, please: Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2016 #30
It's an assumption. One of the 99 Apr 2016 #36
It's also a deliberate attempt to mislead, it seems. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2016 #37
Seriously? Another lie is fabricated to smear Clinton. Really, not claiming anything. Clinton STOLE seabeyond Apr 2016 #20
That would be assuming the absurdity that every one of those was a Sanders supporter. Zynx Apr 2016 #19
The evidence, facts would suggest Clinton lost out on more votes. To spin it Sanders could have won seabeyond Apr 2016 #21
Lol Dem2 Apr 2016 #24
I think what the OP is trying to say is that there was very little hedgehog Apr 2016 #28
20% of Dem voters had to file affidavit ballots in one ED on Long Island Dems to Win Apr 2016 #31
You're assuming, of course, that the polling officials could read everyone's mind and furiously... George II Apr 2016 #34
"I'm gonig to pretend that every invalidated voter is a Sanders voter" Tarc Apr 2016 #38

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
7. It would always be high tide!
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 09:58 AM
Apr 2016

Well maybe...

Depends on the moons, the gravitational pull, the rotation, the speed of revolution.

You know "stuff".

It's easier to just say "It's always high tide".

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
9. First those are not the final numbers. Absentees and affidavits don't get counted till May.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:14 AM
Apr 2016

Second it is likely most of those 120,000 would voted Clinton. We know this because Brooklyn was solid for Clinton and a large majority of the problems happened in Clinton neighborhoods.

This was no accident.

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
13. Do you have data showing that?
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:24 AM
Apr 2016

I've been interested in precinct level data.

You say that Brooklyn was solid for HRC, then qualify "Clinton neighborhoods". Which are the Clinton neighborhoods, which are Bernie's, and how did you determine that?

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
14. I know several people at County Headquarters and their preliminary findings are
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:32 AM
Apr 2016

that African Americans neighborhoods were hit the hardest. Hillary won African American neighborhoods by larhe margins here.

No I have no link.but I can tell you where I am from In Brooklyn Sanders won and we didn't have the problems they had in northern, central, and eastern Brooklyn. We didn't have as many affidavit ballots or complaints. I know this because on Election day I was campaigning and thd local dem clubx were monitoring affidavit ballits in the area.

This was done on purpose.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
16. Gwe won't get that until May.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:45 AM
Apr 2016

It takes 9 days till they can open the Absentees and Affidavits.

I will tell you that the courts need to step in and get those affidavits counted.


The BOE is claiming it was an error on their part. No one believes that.


This was done on purpose.

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
23. I agree this was done on purpose.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:56 AM
Apr 2016

It's hard to believe otherwise. Who did it, with aim to hurt whom, is still open in my book. But it does stink.

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
25. OK. You're my new best friend.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:58 AM
Apr 2016

Thanks for this.

I'd love to see a map of the purge laid over this one!

Zynx

(21,328 posts)
27. Very strong suspicion: It's widely dispersed and since Hillary won NYC anyway that means she lost
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:00 AM
Apr 2016

voters on net.

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
33. May well be. And I don't know that we'd ever be sure.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:33 PM
Apr 2016

But if the areas where the millennials are well represented took a big hit....

 

Codeine

(25,586 posts)
11. The underlying assumption that those were all
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:18 AM
Apr 2016

or even largely Sanders votes is so inherently flawed as to be absolutely laughable.

Poll aggregation had Clinton at about 15 points ahead. She won by 16 points. Despite some glitches it looks like things went about as expected.

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)
30. May I repeat the question you just didn't answer, please:
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:23 AM
Apr 2016

Would you agree that it's an obviously false assumption?

I'm aware that you presented your post as a hypothetical "if A then B", without any reference to the truth or falsehood of A.

And, as far as that goes, it's a correct syllogism.

But, in general, when we present a syllogism, we're tacitly implying that we think that there is at least some chance that the major premise is correct. In this case, would you agree that that is not the case, and that while the syllogism is technically correct, A and B are both clearly false?
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
20. Seriously? Another lie is fabricated to smear Clinton. Really, not claiming anything. Clinton STOLE
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:54 AM
Apr 2016

NY!!!!

Zynx

(21,328 posts)
19. That would be assuming the absurdity that every one of those was a Sanders supporter.
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:53 AM
Apr 2016

Very very very unlikely. In fact, I bet a fairly considerable amount of money that these voters leaned Hillary on average.

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
21. The evidence, facts would suggest Clinton lost out on more votes. To spin it Sanders could have won
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:55 AM
Apr 2016

with those votes is an absurdity. Just reiterating what you stated. I find this bet of story telling totally fascinating.

hedgehog

(36,286 posts)
28. I think what the OP is trying to say is that there was very little
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 11:00 AM
Apr 2016

motivation for either campaign to play with the election rolls. It wouldn't have made any difference to the final results.

I have read elsewhere that part of the problem was someone not following established procedure in purging the rolls of people who have moved or died. IMHO, Incompetence beats conspiracy as the cause.

 

Dems to Win

(2,161 posts)
31. 20% of Dem voters had to file affidavit ballots in one ED on Long Island
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:03 PM
Apr 2016
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511796132

The problems extended far beyond Brooklyn and NYC, though officials are trying to pretend it is just Brooklyn that needs to be investigated.

So corrupt. Something smells in NY.

George II

(67,782 posts)
34. You're assuming, of course, that the polling officials could read everyone's mind and furiously...
Sat Apr 23, 2016, 12:33 PM
Apr 2016

...crossed off the names of all the people who they perceived as Sanders voters.

Reminder, the previous "purge", which was sensible and lawful, was of about 60,000 voters so this year the purge was only 60,000 over similar and customary "purges".

All of this speculation on the part of people is generally done without looking into exact reasons why voters are "purged" - i.e., people no longer living at their registered addresses, people no longer living, period, people who hadn't voted in a long time - New York isn't the only state where inactive voters are removed from the voting lists, and other very valid and logical reasons.

Tarc

(10,472 posts)
38. "I'm gonig to pretend that every invalidated voter is a Sanders voter"
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 08:41 AM
Apr 2016

"and them I'm going to pretend that what happened there happened everywhere, on the same scale".

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Just some math: NY primar...