Reply #20: Well let's see [View All]

[dmallind]

the words are plain enough obviously. I'm a bit of a stats guy but no pollster but it's obvious they are the strongest supporters - the ones most driven to vote for candidate X, agreed?

This is not an attempt to say "this is what happened" but simply an example of the rather deceiving difference between those numbers.

Let's say Clinton got 100% of her strong AND weak support, because of GOTV efforts, the perception she was behind and needed the help, and last minute sympathetic responses.

We know what her vote count was, right? 112166

So let's say that the last CNN poll was also spot on and that's 29% of the likely Dem caucus voters.

so that would put (again this is absolutely not what happened, since neither of course was 29% for Hillary, but at the time of the poll, it's what would be implied) the total Dem likely voter pool at 112166/.29 or 386,779.

Now at the time of that last CNN poll Obama was weell ahead with 39% of them, which means he had, again at teh time of the poll, an implied support of 150,843 likely primary voters.

But his support was weaker, and much less impetus to vote on their side as he looked like a gimme. His 77% should have given him 116K or so and a narrow victory but NOW you have to add in the male/female ratio with late break to the symapthetic HRC, and the independent drain, and the age differential, and it's not exactly a huge step to his real vote total.

In short, his support was weaker and less driven.