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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

morningfog

(18,115 posts) Tue Feb 2, 2016, 12:21 PM Feb 2016

5

A final tally of actual votes (if no errors in reports or math) Hillary (+274): H-69,726; B-69,452

274 more people voted for Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders, out of a total of 171,109 voting.

Those totals arrived at by adding the numbers found here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus-results/iowa

It doesn't get much tighter than that. Hillary did eke out a win, but it is a far, far cry from the 30 points she was up just a couple months ago.On to New Hampshire.

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A final tally of actual votes (if no errors in reports or math) Hillary (+274): H-69,726; B-69,452 (Original Post) morningfog Feb 2016 OP

i guess it wouldn't have made much difference if it was not caucus JI7 Feb 2016 #1

So both got 20,000+ more votes than the leading Repuke candidate? mhatrw Feb 2016 #2

I'd be weary of these results. HerbChestnut Feb 2016 #3

Now think about the possibilities the people who were fooled... TCJ70 Feb 2016 #4

Those results merit a recount by every standard.... ViseGrip Feb 2016 #5

You can't recount a caucus nt firebrand80 Feb 2016 #6

Nonsense. Just call everyone back tonight, and have them do it over... brooklynite Feb 2016 #7

Anything coming from FOX NOISE I take with grain of salt bigdarryl Feb 2016 #8

Where did Fox News get these numbers? Is it the actual vote total? morningfog Feb 2016 #9

JI7

(89,260 posts)

1. i guess it wouldn't have made much difference if it was not caucus

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 12:26 PM

Feb 2016

mhatrw

(10,786 posts)

2. So both got 20,000+ more votes than the leading Repuke candidate?

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:13 PM

Feb 2016

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)

3. I'd be weary of these results.

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:15 PM

Feb 2016

The Democratic Party doesn't usually release actual vote totals for the Iowa Caucuses. I think Bernie's campaign is actively petitioning for them.

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)

4. Now think about the possibilities the people who were fooled...

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:22 PM

Feb 2016

...into compromising their values by voting with their "heads", hadn't.

ViseGrip

(3,133 posts)

5. Those results merit a recount by every standard....

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:24 PM

Feb 2016

firebrand80

(2,760 posts)

6. You can't recount a caucus nt

Reply to ViseGrip (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:25 PM

Feb 2016

brooklynite

(94,673 posts)

7. Nonsense. Just call everyone back tonight, and have them do it over...

Reply to firebrand80 (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:29 PM

Feb 2016

bigdarryl

(13,190 posts)

8. Anything coming from FOX NOISE I take with grain of salt

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:39 PM

Feb 2016

There's nothing on that link posting supposed democratic Party total votes

morningfog

(18,115 posts)

9. Where did Fox News get these numbers? Is it the actual vote total?

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Wed Feb 3, 2016, 01:09 AM

Feb 2016

Reply to this discussion

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»A final tally of actual v...