You got the quick answer but it is not very accurate in this field. They are all proportional but with a relatively high threshold to get delegates of 15%.* That same threshold applies to both congressional district delegates and statewide delegates. Most of the delegates are awarded in the districts. Small numbers of delegates in each district give the winner a touch of an advantage thanks to rounding rules. How many delegates a district gets varies based on previous voting patterns so where a candidate wins matters too.
Overall candidates that break threshold suck up extra delegates compared to a simple proportional system. It is not just the winner that benefits, though. In a field this big the result doesn’t necessarily look proportional. It is a proportional-ish system that is the same in every state though. It is not at all like the RNC rules that allow later states considerable latitude in what rules they use for delegate allocation.
If not candidate gets at least 15% the threshold is 10% below the winner.
With the primary season rapidly moving toward end-game, I hope someone can explain to me what happened.
Governor is the most logical stepping-stone to the Presidency; 4 of the last 7 Presidents were Governors. Inslee and Hickenlooper both tossed their hat into the ring. Perhaps neither was particularly charismatic, but they both seemed competent, good-spirited, and quite capable of playing the role of Generic-Democrat-who-can-Beat-Trump.
Yet both Governors dropped out long ago. Why? Unable to attract big donor money? Why not? Were the big donors looking for pizazz, for the razzle-dazzle? A woman? The gay wunderkind who wants to leap-frog from small-town mayor to the big job? Wow!!?? Castro and Booker were also well-qualified — were they, like the Governors, too bland?
And whom did we end up with? Setting aside the billionaires, the unelectable gay and the has-been Biden, we have three Senators to choose from: the one who has plans to spend $30 trillion; the one who isn’t sure what his plans cost except that it’s a lot more than $30 trillion; and Klobuchar.
Klobuchar is the only normal moderate still standing, but is she really a better choice than Inslee, Hickenlooper or Booker? (And, like them, she’s fading fast.)
Before the primary season, some pundits thought Trump could be beaten by “Generic Democrat.” But … except for Klobuchar all the generic democrats have been kicked off the stage!
In a crowd of over two dozen candidates, you had to have some way of standing out to attract support. Plenty of governors and Senators were running, so holding those offices didn’t suffice.
‘Generic’ and ‘standout’ are pretty much opposites.
Answering my own question, I think a big part of the problem is that Biden “sucked up too much of the oxygen” in the “Moderate Lane.”
I was one warning about this — Joe was past his “Sell By” date and one way or another, his candidacy was a huge risk. Just comparing Joe’s speech pattern in 2019 with 2009 should have made the deterioration clear. “I told you so.” Everybody should have listened to me!
It’s baffled me too. I have long thought Booker was the best bet. For those who wanted a generic but competent white guy, someone like Hickenlooper looked good. I think either of them would beat Trump.
So what happened? Here is my guess. 30% of the voters are low-information moderates; they have been attracted to Biden’s name recognition and lately by Bloomberg’s massive ad spends.
20% of voters are high-information moderates. Some of them wanted a woman. Others were attracted to Pete the boy wonder who is sharper and more articulate than practically everyone else and also probably benefits from the corporate/gay Democratic donor networks. They were put off by Biden’s weak debate performances.
I think the key now is convince the high-information moderates that Biden is the best bet to beat Bernie and they need to switch from Pete/Amy to him.
I was supporting Biden with my fingers crossed until he flung “Liar … Fat” at a potential supporter in Ohio(?). I’m only 70 but am sadly watching my own brain deteriorate. I’m afraid Biden will end up a laughing-stock. :o
Inslee and Hickenlooper were dull (and Hick came across as a bit strange). The states they came from may have impeded the ability to raise money - Washington and Colorado aren’t the biggest or richest states. Democratic pundits had been warning for years that because of all the losses in Governors races over the last decade the Democrats had a ‘thin bench’. Which governor would really have a shot?
Castro killed himself in the debate - he went too aggressive and too mean and really turned off a ton of folk. Booker just never gained traction and I’m not sure why. It’s possible its because Booker positioned himself between the progressive and moderate lane and found that no one else really wanted to follow him there.
I would like to read an article from someone knowledgeable about black voters why Booker never gained traction with them. As a Rhodes scholar he could have made money in a hundred ways but he chose instead to work for the people of Newark. It’s an inspiring story which should resonate with anyone but I would have thought would resonate especially with black voters. I am wondering whether his bachelor status hurt him with them but like I said I would like an analysis by someone who actually understands this stuff.
So part of it is African-Americans went all in on Biden. And Booker had some questions regarding how authentic he was - the “I am Sparticus” moment at the Kavanaugh hearing damaged that reputation. I know quite a few people (non black voters though) who questioned whether he was doing things just to get elected - though those people don’t ask the same questions of Buttigieg.
Well, I’ve done my civic duty – I’ve filled in my (mail-in) ballot for Super Tuesday primary. And I hate it.
I opened it up with every intention of voting for one or the other of my two faves: Mayor Pete or Senator Amy. But the Specter of Electability loomed too large, and I just couldn’t do it. I couldn’t shake the feeling that vote for Pete was guaranteeing the nomination of Bernie, which in turn guarantees the re-election of Trump, which is too horrible to contemplate. I hope I’m wrong in all aspects of this.
That was indeed helpful. Besides Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, the key states are likely to be Arizona, Florida, and North Carolina — and the piece describes why Sanders has liabilities specific to each of several of these states (Bloomberg has some, too, but not as badly).
I think Ohio is, or should be, in play, too. Trump has rarely broken 50% here in the polls. Hillary lost by almost 9%, true, but her husband carried the state by pluralities and Obama with outright majorities, twice each. And no Republican has ever won the White House without carrying the Buckeye State.
Hillary Clinton also lost the union household vote in Ohio. Ohio just is not going to be close for any Democrat that does that. There is a lot of room for that to snap back. Even just being closer to normal margins puts the state back into play.
Here in California, I just saw a Steyer ad that took on Bloomberg over his redline comments and stop and frisk. First time I’ve seen an ad in this cycle that actually attacked another candidate.
For many of us, she’s the very best of the candidates, by far.)