(KOS) Counting all the votes, Obama still leads

[RiverStone]

Since the Clinton campaign wants to count unsanctioned contests and include their votes into the popular vote tally ("I've gotten the most votes ever!"), here are a couple more unsanctioned contests that could be thrown into the tally:

Nebraska: Obama +2,663
Washington: Obama +36,015
Idaho: Obama +7,869

Those are all from non-binding primaries conducted in those caucus states. Combined, they'd add 46,547 votes for Obama if we were stupid enough to think that votes that don't matter actually count.

But that's not all the votes that were cast for either Obama or Clinton this year. There's the Texas caucuses, which aren't counted in any popular vote tallies. But since every vote matters to Clinton, and she's claiming that she's gotten more votes cast for her than any other Democrat in a primary, then of course we have to be intellectually consistent and, well, count every vote.

There are no official tallies of caucus turnout, but estimates range from 900,000 to 1.2 million. Let's be nice and go with the lower estimate, 900K. Obama won the caucuses 56-44. That 12-point spread is another 120,000 108,000-vote gain for Obama.

That means that tallying EVERY single contest this cycle, even the ones that didn't count (since that's the Clinton standard), gives Obama an extra 154,547 votes.

more:

http://www.dailykos.com/

[AtomicKitten]

1. Even RBC committee members say anonymously whatever they decide on Saturday

it will not be enough for Clinton and Obama will be the nominee. And then we can finally leave this protracted primary behind and move on to the GE.

[4themind]

2. Seems like he didn't count nevada for clinton

but regardless, the superdelegates in their "independent" judgement want to find out who will be better between the two candidates to face McCain, a popular vote tally is only useful toward that goal only as much as it gives us information on the relative strength of the candidates. The situation in MI does not do that, regardless of the reason for it. The people who voted for hillary do not matter more than those who were not given a choice for obama/biden//richardson/edwards, and it gives insufficient data to make comparisons between two candidates, hence I think it will be disregarded by and large by these superdelegates. Remember the currency of the convention are pledged delegates or superdelegates, the "popular vote" along with any other criteria are only valid if the super delegates deem it useful in their analysis.(assuming that hillary's pipedream of pledged delegates switching en masse are not determinative of the outcome