Delegates Projected Winner in Cali

[AGirl]

Clinton 2,132,166 52% 199 Winner


Obama 1,735,105 42% 151


Edwards 170,013 4% 0


http://abcnews.go.com/politics/elections/state?state=CA&ref=ipb

[Blue_State_Elitist]

1. Isn't that a bigger difference than has been projected?

[AGirl]

3. I don't know but she sure got alot of votes

[calteacherguy]

7. And Obama sure got a lot of votes, too.

:hi:

[ClintonTyree]

15. But, but....

I thought the Shriver, Kennedy, Oprah etc. endorsements were supposed to give Obama the WIN? AT least that's what I read here at DU the last few days before Super Tuesday. :shrug: California was definitely going into the Obama win column. Obama was AHEAD in the polls.
What happened?

[billbuckhead]

2. And to think Zogby threw away his career to help Obama beat Hillary in CA

and it didn't help!

[ruggerson]

4. Don't worry he's got a timeshare next to Drudge's miami beach condo

all bought and paid for

[tandem5]

5. I know did you read his little note on his site:

"About California: Some of you may have noticed our pre-election polling differed from the actual results. It appears that we underestimated Hispanic turnout and overestimated the importance of younger Hispanic voters. We also overestimated turnout among African-American voters. Those of you who have been following our work know that we have gotten 13 out of 17 races right this year, and so many others over the years. This does happen."

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1447

Oopsies.

[billbuckhead]

6. Zogby pressed the wrong button!

It's unbelievable. The known to prejudiced against Hillary pollster, was inspired by the redeemer to push the wrong button.

[JackORoses]

8. we'll see what happens when 700,000 uncounted Independent votes in LA come into play

that's 20% of the vote

[tandem5]

9. lot of numbers being thrown around, but

I don't think that 700k number is accurate... also a lot of absentees have still yet to be counted which could be good news for Clinton.

Some reading:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-vote7feb07,1,1380058.story

http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_8191258

[trashcanistanista]

10. Thanks for the articles. It sheds some light on what

happened in LA. I hope it wasn't widespread and I expect in their efforts to count the DTS's voting Dem, they have to count all the Dem ballots and extrapolate the leftovers and attribute those to the DTS's. It is not impossible to do with paper ballots and I think it can be resolved so that most of the votes count. A lot of work, but it is doable.

[tandem5]

11. yeah, voter intent will be much clearer than a dimpled chad nt

[johnnydrama]

12. i don't understand

can't they just program the machines to not care if the first bubble is filled in and recount it.

Seems to me, if something is filled in under a candidates name, they should count the vote.

[trashcanistanista]

14. No, the bubble is on the voter sign in sheet. They make the decision

when they sign their name on the precinct registration log. Then they get the exact same Dem ballot as other Dems (if they ask for it). So you can't tell by examining the ballots, they are identical. Only the ballots go into the machines.

[trashcanistanista]

13. Yes and they could also examine the precincts

where dts voters were given the correct info and get an estimate of the percentage of DTS voters who requested Dem ballots. I think there would be a consistency of this throughout the state. I think it would be a very high percentage like 90-98% (my guess}, so a statistical analysis would be good too. There are a lot of possibilities with paper ballots!!:-)