Democratic Grand Finale Tuesday results thread (1st polls close @8pm ET)

[Landslide Lyndon]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points.

And if my dick had a nail it would be a finger.

[IceSpear]

Hillary officially has more votes than she got in 2008. Bernie also has more than Obama got.

[Fusionmunster]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points. Clinton would have the nomination still, but there would be that sour taste of the final day, eapecially because I think SD and perhaps NM would be narrowly Bernie without the AP's help, leaving her with only NJ.

And I, pardon my french, honestly think that's malarky. I really don't think the AP discouraged half a million Californian Sanders supporters from voting with their announcement.

Also, quite frankly, I really believe Hillary was actually hurt in New Mexico as a result of the APs announcement, not helped.

[Xing]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points. Clinton would have the nomination still, but there would be that sour taste of the final day, eapecially because I think SD and perhaps NM would be narrowly Bernie without the AP's help, leaving her with only NJ.

And I, pardon my french, honestly think that's malarky. I really don't think the AP discouraged half a million Californian Sanders supporters from voting with their announcement.

Also, quite frankly, I really believe Hillary was actually hurt in New Mexico as a result of the APs announcement, not helped.

I agree that Sanders wouldn't have won California even if AP hadn't called the nomination for Clinton (whether or not it would've been closer is debatable.) But why would the call hurt her specifically in New Mexico, and not other states?

[Fusionmunster]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points. Clinton would have the nomination still, but there would be that sour taste of the final day, eapecially because I think SD and perhaps NM would be narrowly Bernie without the AP's help, leaving her with only NJ.

And I, pardon my french, honestly think that's malarky. I really don't think the AP discouraged half a million Californian Sanders supporters from voting with their announcement.

Also, quite frankly, I really believe Hillary was actually hurt in New Mexico as a result of the APs announcement, not helped.

I agree that Sanders wouldn't have won California even if AP hadn't called the nomination for Clinton (whether or not it would've been closer is debatable.) But why would the call hurt her specifically in New Mexico, and not other states?

Just an unsubstantiated assumption going by Hillary's apparent underperformance.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points. Clinton would have the nomination still, but there would be that sour taste of the final day, eapecially because I think SD and perhaps NM would be narrowly Bernie without the AP's help, leaving her with only NJ.

And I, pardon my french, honestly think that's malarky. I really don't think the AP discouraged half a million Californian Sanders supporters from voting with their announcement.

Also, quite frankly, I really believe Hillary was actually hurt in New Mexico as a result of the APs announcement, not helped.

I agree that Sanders wouldn't have won California even if AP hadn't called the nomination for Clinton (whether or not it would've been closer is debatable.) But why would the call hurt her specifically in New Mexico, and not other states?

I also mentioned the condition of CA having had same day registration in order to flip it, not just the AP. But the AP being fair alone would have flipped SD/NM.

[Fusionmunster]

Clinton 54% - 2,625,017
Sanders 45.1% - 2,196,528

Honestly, I think that if CA had same-day registration and the media had decided to actually be neutral like they're supposed to and not call the race based on coercing supers (and shame on the supers who endorsed June 6 too), Bernie would have won CA by 1-3 points. Clinton would have the nomination still, but there would be that sour taste of the final day, eapecially because I think SD and perhaps NM would be narrowly Bernie without the AP's help, leaving her with only NJ.

And I, pardon my french, honestly think that's malarky. I really don't think the AP discouraged half a million Californian Sanders supporters from voting with their announcement.

Also, quite frankly, I really believe Hillary was actually hurt in New Mexico as a result of the APs announcement, not helped.

I agree that Sanders wouldn't have won California even if AP hadn't called the nomination for Clinton (whether or not it would've been closer is debatable.) But why would the call hurt her specifically in New Mexico, and not other states?

I also mentioned the condition of CA having had same day registration in order to flip it, not just the AP. But the AP being fair alone would have flipped SD/NM.

And that I disagree with.

[BundouYMB]

Anyone who thinks the AP call had any effect whatsoever on the race is completely deluded.

a). The media had already effectively been discussing the race as if it was over -- because it was. Do you really think several news outlets declaring her the "presumptive nominee" is anything but an extremely minor, likely unnoticeable, technicality to the 99% of people who don't follow politics closely?

b). "Momentum", i.e. how likely it looked each candidate would win, had zero effect in previous contests. Even when the race was being discussed as effectively over after the CT/PA/DE/MD/RI results Sanders still beat his polls in Indiana.

c). Why would an announcement that Clinton clinched be more likely to effect one set of supporters over the other to begin with? There is zero evidence that it would & it doesn't even make sense on a facile level that it would.

d). Setting aside how these hypothetical discouraged voters would vote, is there even the slightest bit of circumstantial evidence that any voters were discouraged? Turnout in the primary is actually going to be higher than in 2008 when counting is done, and in 2008 the CA primary was held on Super Tuesday, when the Presidential nomination race was as competitive as could be.

Oh, but I'm suuuuuure if only the AP hadn't officially called a race that everyone already knew was over I'm sure another 1,000,000 people would have found their way to the polls and voted 80-20 Sanders. I'm sure.

[NOVA Green]

So another huge dump of outstanding Democratic ballots, almost 100k additional votes counted within the past 24 hours (55-45 Bernie).

These are overwhelmingly provisional ballots, and are heavily from Socal with some smaller numbers from Bay Area counties.

1.) LA County- 35.2k Dem Votes (57-43 Bernie). Almost exclusively Provisional Ballots, but assuming update times are accurate there are likely another 100k Dem Provisional ballots outstanding.

2. Contra Costa- 11.1k Dem Votes (58-42 Bernie). All provisional ballots, and the last Bay Area County with votes outstanding. They haven't updated their numbers since 6/16 but looks like there are some Provisional ballots outstanding.

3.) Marin- 9.2k Dem Votes (46-54 Hillary). Appears to be all provisionals and the last of the outstanding vote. Notable as one of the only county in the state where Hillary appears to have won provisional ballots.

4.) San Bernadino- 8.2k Dem Votes (60-40 Bernie). A few late VbMs but predominately provisionals. Appears to be a chunk of provisional ballots left.

5.) San Mateo- 8.2k Dem Votes (37-63 Hillary). Looks to be a mix of late VbMs and provisionals, with some provisionals yet to be counted. Again, one of the only places in the Bay Area where Hillary appears to be leading among these votes.

6.) Ventura- 6.8k Dem Votes (63-37 Bernie). All Provisionals and a chunk remaining.

7.) Orange/ Sacramento / San Diego- about 3,2k each with roughly 2:1 in Orange/SD and 52-48 Bernie in Sac and all Provisionals, with varying amounts of outstanding votes, but likely a significant number in the latter. Riverside 1.7k Dem votes (57-43 Bernie).

8.) Fresno 2.4k Dem (66-34 Bernie) all Provos. Madera 2.2k Dem (56-44 Bernie), San Benito 1.8k Dem (52-48 Bernie). These are all heavily Latino Central Valley counties that went overwhelmingly Hillary.

I'll need to look at these numbers further to recalibrate estimated final margins, but the race is *finally* starting to wind down as part of the spectacle that is the four week California vote counting cycle.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Count updated to:

Clinton 53.9% - 2,632,238
Sanders 45.2% - 2,203,663

Standing by my prediction of a 53-46 final margin.

[Gass3268]

I don't think there is enough left to flip them, but Orange and Ventura counties are getting pretty close.

Hillary officially has more votes than she got in 2008. Bernie also has more than Obama got.

But muh depressed Democratic turnout...

The results out of California in November are going to be glorious. I love it that every presidential year the Democrats gain 2-3 seats, the almost lose them in midterms, but by the next presidential year there are couple more seats ready to flip. It's beautiful to watch.

[IceSpear]

CA-02 has flipped to Hillary thanks to Marin, but it'll flip back to Bernie once Humboldt and Mendocino come in.

Interestingly, Bernie has won CA-34 (Xavier Becerra's district, a potential VP choice) and CA-46 (Loretta Sanchez's district.)

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I don't think there is enough left to flip them, but Orange and Ventura counties are getting pretty close.

Hillary officially has more votes than she got in 2008. Bernie also has more than Obama got.

But muh depressed Democratic turnout...

The results out of California in November are going to be glorious. I love it that every presidential year the Democrats gain 2-3 seats, the almost lose them in midterms, but by the next presidential year there are couple more seats ready to flip. It's beautiful to watch.

If the pattern holds this year, I guess Knight and Denham fall - they were both under 50% in the jungle. Valadao is probably safe, he got 55%, and while Issa was surprisingly weak, the reality is he is very rich and can outspend his opponent - who doesn't even have a wikipedia page - by very large proportions.

[Gass3268]

I don't think there is enough left to flip them, but Orange and Ventura counties are getting pretty close.

Hillary officially has more votes than she got in 2008. Bernie also has more than Obama got.

But muh depressed Democratic turnout...

The results out of California in November are going to be glorious. I love it that every presidential year the Democrats gain 2-3 seats, the almost lose them in midterms, but by the next presidential year there are couple more seats ready to flip. It's beautiful to watch.

If the pattern holds this year, I guess Knight and Denham fall - they were both under 50% in the jungle. Valadao is probably safe, he got 55%, and while Issa was surprisingly weak, the reality is he is very rich and can outspend his opponent - who doesn't even have a wikipedia page - by very large proportions.

Agreed, if anything it probably means that Issa should be a prime target for 2020. Similar to how everyone was kinda looking at Knight for 2016.

[Holmes]

Valadao probably won't lose, but I wouldn't sleep on him either. There's a chance.

[NOVA Green]

I don't think there is enough left to flip them, but Orange and Ventura counties are getting pretty close.

Doesn't look like enough votes out to flip either, regardless of Bernie's strong performance among provisional ballots in both counties.

Ventura is a 4.5k gap with 1.2k Provisional outstanding and OC is a ~15k vote gap and honestly I would be a bit surprised if there's much if anything out there.

I could potentially see El Dorado and Sutter counties flipping, assuming the unprocessed ballot report is current, and it looks like Sutter classified most provisionals as "other" for some weird reason.

Other than that, we have several counties with no updates since election day (Sonoma and Placer), where there is the potential for flips.

Sonoma really feels like a likely flip, considering the ED margins, and the major margin shift in Napa & Yolo. The main question is will it act more like Marin or Wine Country/ North Coast.

Placer seems like an unlikely flip, considering the ED % margin spread, but with only a 4.5k vote margin and some 39.4k Late VbMs and 4.4k Provisionals, it certainly isn't outside the realm of possibility. Many of these are likely Republican ballots in a heavily Republican County. Hillary only got 47.7% in '08, and in order for it to flip it would require something slightly greater than a Napa like swing from ED (+6%).

San Diego County is mathematically possible to flip with a 24k vote spread and 45k provisionals, but this would require an extremely unlikely scenario of virtually all of the provisionals being valid Dem ballots and Bernie winning 75% of them. Needless to say, final margins will probably be more like  (48-52 Hillary).

Did I miss any other potential county flips?

[NOVA Green]

Count updated to:

Clinton 53.9% - 2,632,238
Sanders 45.2% - 2,203,663

Standing by my prediction of a 53-46 final margin.

Ok--- for fun I'll use a slightly more conservative model and call it a +7.5% Clinton so roughly something like (45.8-53.3% Hillary).

This assumes that Sonoma and Placer County Dem VbMs ~44k will only go (52-48 Bernie). LA County provisionals (80-100k Dem) will continue only (57-43 Bernie), only 55% of outstanding Central Valley votes will be valid Dem ballots and only break 55-57% Bernie, North Coast will be 70% Dem and break 65-70% Bernie, San Diego/Riverside/San Bernadino provisionals will break about 60% Dem averaging 60% Bernie, relatively constant with the trending, and Sac Provisionals will be a rough split (53-47 Bernie), and there will be a little extra change for Bernie elsewhere along with another 4.5k vote gain on Hillary from Santa Cruz/ SLO/ Monterey and Santa Barbara combined.

[Sbane]

So I haven't been following the count that closely lately. Looked at the results by congressional district and CD-46 flipped! That is not a district I would have expected Bernie to do well in, not to mention actually win.

[NOVA Green]

So I haven't been following the count that closely lately. Looked at the results by congressional district and CD-46 flipped! That is not a district I would have expected Bernie to do well in, not to mention actually win.

Still looking at the CD numbers now that we're finally starting to get some real numbers from SoCal, but its actually not that surprising considering what we have seen elsewhere in some of the heavily Latino working-class urban communities in the state.

For example, Inner Mission in SF was (57-43 Bernie) on ED with early votes+ Same Day. Watsonville in SC County (49-51 ED), East LA (44-56 Hillary on ED), San Jose City in general good ED numbers...

Even if we look at heavily Latino Central Valley Counties and the huge swings from ED votes, there appears to be a huge  swing from '08 Clinton margins among Latinos.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me to see Bernie actually having performed better among Latinos than Anglos overall in Cali considering the age/class gap, and what is essentially two different political coalitions built from the '08 Obama/Clinton and '16 Bernie/Hillary campaigns.

That's probably a future study for Poly-Sci students working on their Masters or PhD studies, and in the meantime, in the absence of exit polls, we'll need to settle for gradually sifting through the raw data of precinct reports, Census Data, etc...

Edited to change "Would surprise me to wouldn't surprise me"

[Sbane]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

Any clue as to how Asians voted?

[NOVA Green]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

Okay--- this might well be correct, unfortunately we don't have any exit polling data to work off of, so what do you see to make such a definitive statement?

Curious and not argumentative... just working towards the further pursuit of knowledge through data...

[NOVA Green]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

Any clue as to how Asians voted?

No real idea about SoCal, but it does appear that Obama did better in '08 among Asian-American communities in Sunset, and heavily Asian-American parts of Silicon Valley in Santa Clara County...

Wouldn't be surprised if the Asian-American and Latino vote in Oakland is what caused the city to vote narrowly Bernie, but again no precinct level data at this point to truly break down ethnic demographics  by neighborhood, and even the LA County city level data has not been updated since ED, so much data lacking.

However, it does appear that upper-income Asian-Americans in both the South Bay & Peninsula in the Bay Area and in SoCal voted like their neighbors overwhelmingly for Clinton. Meanwhile more middle-class Asian-American communities in places like Santa Clara and Milipitas appear to have moved away from Clinton versus '08 numbers.

[NOVA Green]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

Looking at some of the CD results, I would not be surprised if Whites and Latinos voted fairly similarly in Southern California. That is something the polls were picking up on.

Yeah looking at places like CD-46 (Anaheim and Santa Ana) and CD-40 which is 87% Latino (East LA, Downey, Huntington Park, etc...) where Bernie got 47% and 43% respectively so far, it really seems like, at least within the larger Metro areas there wasn't that much of an ethnic divide and more age/income divide.

I'm seeing similar results looking at Santa Clara County county precinct numbers where in the South Bay  it's not really looking like there were significant differences in votes based upon ethnicity, but greater correlation between "Middle-Class" versus "Wealthy" areas in voting patterns.

I thought this was what we talked about right after the election, where I commented on CD-46 in particular.... is there something new you are picking up on?

[Sbane]

Even if Bernie did better among Anglos than Latinos in the state as a whole, he definitely didn't in the Bay Area and Southern California.

Okay--- this might well be correct, unfortunately we don't have any exit polling data to work off of, so what do you see to make such a definitive statement?

Curious and not argumentative... just working towards the further pursuit of knowledge through data...

Hillary doing better in CD-14 and 18 than 17 and 19 for example. CD-13 obviously. In SoCal you have CD-34 vs CD-33. CD-46 as mentioned. CD 29 vs CD 30. Also note that I am not saying that Bernie did better than Hillary among Latinos in the Bay Area and SoCal, just that he didn't do worse. I am saying that it was a tie.

Also, I know we already talked about it. Just astounded Bernie actually ended up winning CD-46.