18 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Published Sunday, Jan. 13, 2008 | 11:10 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2008 | 10:15 a.m.
Are you wondering how those suddenly controversial at-large precincts on the Strip will affect Jan. 19 Democratic caucus? Could they dominate the statewide results? Or are they really going to be a modest bump in the overall results?
My colleagues and I say reports of the at-large's influence are greatly exaggerated in today's story.
But here's the math formula so you can see for yourself. Just grab a calculator, try to channel high school math, and away we go.
First, make your best guess on what turnout will be in the at-large precincts on the Strip (assuming they survive the legal challenge filed Friday). Now divide your guess by 9, making the assumption that turnout will be equal among the nine sites.
We'll call that number X, and it represents how many people will show up at each Las Vegas Boulevard site.
Then plug X into this formula of how many delegates are awarded to each precinct depending on caucus turnout, as laid out in the state Democratic Party rules.
If X is not greater than 400, divide it by 5.
If X is between 401 and 600, divide it by 8.
If X is between 601 and 800 divide it by 10.
If X is between 801 and 1400 divide it by 15.
If X is between 1401 and 2000 divide it by 20.
If X is between 2001 and 3000 divide it by 30.
If X is between 3001 and 4000 divide it by 35.
If X is above 4000 divide it by 50.
Call this new number Y. It is the number of delegates at each at-large caucus site.
Now multiply Y by 9, and that's resulting total number of delegates created on the Strip. Call that number Z.
Still with us?
Now take Z and add it to 10,446, which is the total number of delegates elsewhere in the state. This new number is ZZ.
Divide Z by ZZ. Multiply by 100.
Voila!
That's the percent of delegates these at-large precincts will contribute to the state's total.
So here's our math (the algebra teacher at our public school would be so proud).
We took a robust prediction of 10,000 people showing up to the Strip at-large caucus sites this coming Saturday. We divide that by 9, and get 1,111-and-change showing up to each at-large precinct on Saturday.
Now plug 1,111 into the handy-dandy formula provided by the state: 1,111 divided by 15 = 74-and-change. Round down to 74.
That means that given our scenario, 1,111 people will show up at each of 9 caucus locations. And each caucus location will get 74 delegates.
Now multiply the 74 by 9. We get 666. That's the total delegates from the at-large precincts.
What percent is that of the total delegates? Well, there are 10,446 delegates elsewhere in the state. So by doing the last step, it equals a little less than 6 percent.
Whether those extra Strip delegates will be enough to change the outcome of the caucus remains to be seen, of course.
To clarify a reader's misunderstanding, Schwartz notes:
As in Iowa, the results that will be reported in Nevada's caucus will be the percent of delegates each candidate won - not the number of individuals caucusing for each candidate.
So in Iowa, Sen. Barack Obama got 38 percent of the delegates, Edwards got 30 percent and Clinton 29 percent.
OK, you must be proud of your math calculations.
There are two (well, three) questions here that you do not answer:
1. Did the Culinary union get the Nevada State Democratic Party to increase the delegate clout of its 9 precincts on the Strip, or not, and does it?
2. Will the votes (of all people who show up Jan. 19) being counted at all of the caucus sites be totaled up together, and sent to Carson City, and the winner of the Nevada caucuses announced, based on the gross number of people voting, like was done at the Iowa caucuses?
The answers to both questions is yes. So, you cute math here is, well, just cute. Thank you.
Oh, and this must be hard for you all at the Sun, which has always slavishly supported the Culinary union, since the Hank Greenspun days.
Silly me. Trying to get white, 20 something, working class graduates of Green Valley High School and Foothill High School to attend a Democratic Party caucus.
Most of them work on Saturday, either at the Sunset Galleria, nearby stores, or at the many telephone call centers in Henderson and Paradise Valley. They're struggling to pay the rent, and cannot afford to take time off from work to attend a caucus.
Frankly, I'm pissed as hell that there are no "at large" caucus sites in Henderson, to allow these young native Nevadans' voices to be heard.
These "at large caucus sites" on the Strip inherently violate the Equal Protection Clause in the Nevada Constitution and the U. S. Constitution. But then, again why should I expect the egomaniacal jerks who arranged for them to be created to care about civil rights for people other than their own narrow constituency?
I wish Nevada would pass an employer sanction law, like Arizona's, taking away the business licenses of employers (like the casinos) who do not bother to check to see if their employees' documents are counterfeit. Of course, that would be too much to ask. The Culinary Union's 60,000 member ranks might lose a few members.
Frankly, there's no one in the Nevada Democratic Party who gives a rat's patootie about the white working class students who graduate from our local high schools. It's no wonder they do not vote, or vote Republican.
I agree with your numbers, and thought the Culinary would bring 10K to caucus, but this race will be determined by 5%...and HRC's fire wall just backfired. Great reporting and Ralston is finally earning his hype.
If these "at-large caucus sites" violate the Equal Protection Clause, then we have the clearest proof that the Clintons originally planned to rig the caucus, as they were arrogantly sure that the union would endorse them, regardless of her anti-union record. They fell into their own trap and you have no reason to sympathise with them. Imagine if Republicans had done the same thing to Democrats, how would you feel?
If Hillary Clinton cannot win Barack Obama without cheating, why bother to nominate her? In the recent CNN survey, her negatives were HIGHEST at 54%, while Obama is 15% more electable than her. Youths, new voters and Independents are voting for Obama, not her. She comes with a huge baggage. Why waste time with her, only to be disappointed in Novemebr?
See how her dirty tricks are causing division within the party:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail...
I love how you folks think all these people are coming out Saturday.
Playoffs, video poker tourney, real estate deals, gassy...I'm just not gettin' the vibe of huge voter interest in this.
Perhaps everyone needs a 'chill pill' and remember come Sunday Democrats must be in a position to work together to win in November.
There are BIG policy issues at stake and we can ill-afford to destroy one another. In fact, we will all need each other to save our land from more of the past 8-years!
Urge DEMOCRATS to participate, NOT eviscerate each other!
I still think the lawsuit is petty. Teachers don't work on Saturdays and neither do most state, county and city employees.
We look like fools disenfranchising people who work for the private sector in gaming, mining and other industries that pay taxes.
My understanding was that only about 4000 ??? people voted in the last Democratic caucuses in Nevada. A very small number. If 10,000 came out to those 9 precincts and only 4,000 came out elsewhere, would those at large precincts still only get 6% of the delegates? Then, one has to wonder, if the whole caucus process isn't arcane and undemocratic? Seemingly, the rules were designed to disenfranchise people. It could easily be done by ballot instead and still have caucus delegates go on to further votes.
The biggest problem is that the workers will be voting in a location where their union bosses will be able to see their vote. once the union came out in support of a candidate, the all large precints became untenable.
Sorry, Sun meisters, I still don't buy your math. Six percent? Come on.
If only about 400, or 10 percent of the voters at each of the 9 Strip precincts show up, that could represent 80 delegates for each one, or (80 times 9) 720 delegates out of the about 7,200 alloted for Clark County. That's a hefty 10 percent right there.
But if the Culinary turns out just 20 percent of the voters in those Strip precincts, they could win about 1,450 delegates, or about 20 percent.
That is far and away a significant number, a magnified one that other areas of Nevada don't get.
If that proves the winning difference for Obama, you will have a big, big dispute...
what the heck is your point? Are you trying to Distract the readers from the campaign, because that is what it looks like to me.
According to the rules set out by the Democratic Party, the threshold for having an at large precinct location was 4000 workers who might caucus and couldn't get to their home precint. That is the only number that can be used in court. 4000 caucus goers per precinct divided by 30, as the rules state, times 9 sites is 1197 delegates. 1197/10446 other delegates is 11.5% a significant amount of delegates selected in a manner that can easily be called intimidating and certainly not by any standard be considered neutral. The only number that could be used in the law suit is 4000 per precinct because we dont know how many will turn out.
Thanks for the facts. It is very scary when Presidential Campaigns twist the truth to fit their needs. Like Clinton flyers saying Obama is doing a TRILLION dollar tax increase! (another lie) Do they ever STOP? Does America want an Administration that behaves so deceitfully? Back to the '90's you go...wonder who the Intern will be this time round? Glad it won't be MY Daughter. The Clintons seem morally bankrupt. That is my opinion.
Mathmatically speaking, caucusing is not a very democratic way of selecting a candidate that represents who the people truly want. Nevada should have a true presedential democratic primary that is open to all registered voters.
Here's one good idea for disenfranchised democrats: attend the Republican caucuses and vote for Ron Paul, the only anti-war Republican. That way, regardless of whether Hillary or Obama wins the democratic nominee, at least there will be two anti-war candidates who can fix this country!
I believe the rules set forth by the democratic party are that only business that employ more than 4000 employees may hold an at-large caucus..not 4000 caucus goers. Will 36,000 out of the 60'000 members of the culinary union employees show up on saturday? Will they be divided evenly between caucuses? Will they all vote with the union or will some who dissent choose not to participate? Before we throw numbers into the argument we need to keep in mind that they are only "what if's". The math was created that way to be fair to those in the service industry. 10'446 is the amount of total delegates up for grabs throughout Nevada except for those potential delegates in the at-large caucuses. Those who can't make it home will have no choice who their delegates go to. This way they are still able to have a significant voice in the process. It becomes even less UNfair when you consider that they are increasing the amount of total delegates up for grabs, thereby making it harder to obtain a majority. This is how I see it anyway, please feel free to point out any flaws.
slbk:
With 4000 caucus goers per site, you need to divide by 35, not 30. Also, you need to divide by (10446 + # of delegates from at large sites), as opposed to just 10,446.
The result would then be 8.95%.
Regards,
Jude
Nvblogger:
I don’t think that the at-large delegates take away from the other delegates awarded, so you would have to add the at-large delegates to the number of other delegates to arrive at the number you should divide by. Also, in the calculation of a turnout of 800 per site, you would then need to divide by 10, not 5. This would still result in 720 delegates, not 1,450. As a percent of total delegates awarded, either way you wind up with 6.44%.