New York specific discussion of vote share and mathematics behind impact on delegate allocation of its 247 Delegates. This is part of mathematics of delegate allocation notes in the series of Delegate Mathematics stories. This delegate heavy state will be important for any campaign that is still running a primary competition. This is written with the assumption that Bernie Sanders will still be competing. Statewide New York Democratic Party is affiliated with and particpates in Presidential Nomination with National Democratic Party.
Basic Data: New York has 247 delegates available. There are 27 Congressional Districts. So including state-wide allocations PLEO and at-large delegates, there are 29 different delegate allocation units. All congressional district delegates are allocated in 5,6 or 7. Number of delegates available in each are as follows: 5 from CD11 CD19 CD22 CD23 and 7 from CD3 CD7 CD14 CD20 CD26. 6 from all the rest. Additionally 30 PLEOs and 54 At-large delegates allocated from state-wide results. With 9 districts falling in odd (5 or 7 delegate) allocations, the immediate benefits of crossing 50% threshold in each of those districts are comparatively small.
Primary Election Information: Primary ballot/vote is scheduled for 19th April 2016. New York operates a closed primary. participation is open only to registered members of the Democratic Party.
Same day registration is not available. Deadlines (By mail: postmarked no later than March 25th ) In person: March 25th. more information more information for voters and registrations here http://www.elections.ny.gov/ and here http://www.elections.ny.gov/VotingRegister.html and heaps of questions and answers here http://www.elections.ny.gov/FAQ.html
To participate in primary, party affiliation must be declared/stated in the registration.
Voter ID Laws: Surprisingly, currently there seems to be no requirement for Voter Identification at election. Only needed during the registration. {If anyone has alternative information please drop me a note by kosmail. I find it unusual that there is no restrictive ID laws. perhaps i have been reading about too many republican dominated states. I could not find anything on state election website either}. Thank you Its the Supreme Court Stupid.
Congressional District Based Delegate Allocation Triggers: (See table below). A total of only 163 delegates are allocated on district basis. Due to proportional representation formula being used to allocate delegates from various districts, the number of delegates each candidate wins changes at certain specific percentage levels. Crossing/going past the vote percentages at those levels triggers a change in number of delegates awarded. The triggers for congressional districts based allocations are listed below. Districts with same number of available delegates are grouped.
Delegates Acquired
Out of available
|
5 del
cd11 CD19
CD22 CD23
|
6 del
aLL tHE rEST
18 of them
|
7 del
cd3 cd7 cd14
cd20 cd26
|
Delegate Allocation Triggers
1 del |
15 |
15 |
15 |
2 del |
30 |
25 |
21.4 |
3 del |
50 |
41.7 |
35.7 |
4 del |
70 |
58.4 |
50 |
5 del |
85 |
75 |
64.3 |
6 del |
|
85 |
78.6 |
7 del |
|
|
85 |
For 5 Delegates at CD11 CD19 CD22 CD23: First delegate acquired at 15%, second delegate at 30.%. Third delegate trigger is nicely balanced at 50%. Fourth delegate costs a whopping 70%. This 70% votes are needed to get a 4-1 split might be a bit too demanding. These district become very crucial as they break just with small % hovering at 50%, a whole delegate is available. Goal for any Campaign is to cross the 50% and obtain a 3-2 split in their favour. Successfully breaking these districts will give a delegate advantage straight away. These 5 delegate awarding districts will be contributing to delegate advantages. Campaign activity might be a bit more heavy here.
For 6 Delegates at All the others not 5 or 7: Within the whole range of 41.7 — 58.3 the delegate split will be straight 3-3. Interesting points are at 41.7%. and 58.3%, if candidates are hovering around either of these mark, then some extra effort would break the district 4-2 split. For an advantage a candidate has all the incentive to break it 4-2split with 58.3% votes. Otherwise we are looking at a straight 3-3 split. There are 18 districts in this category. Big advanatges can only be made at 58.3% or higher levels.
For 7 Delegates at CD3 CD7 CD14 CD20 CD26 : Within the range of 35.7% — 50% the 3 delegates each will be allocated. The fight for the 7th delegate is again precariously balanced at 50% marker to make the overall break 4-3 split. To achieve a 5-2 split votes need to be at 64.3% or higher.
Delegate Allocations Based On State-Wide Results: Statewide results work towards two different category of delegates; 30 PLEOs and 54 At-Large delegates. The large numbers of delegates available also means that even a smaller movement in support/vote level would result in delegate advantages in these categories.
For 30 Pledged PLEOs (Party Leaders and Elected Officials): (See table below.) Because of a large number of available delegates, the incremental steps are fairly small. The extra delegates achieving triggers are listed below. I am including only a range of a few interesting trigger points. State-wide vote share is more likely to between 35% and 65% band for both. Crossing the viability of 15% gives 5 delegates. Each subsequent 3.3% votes translates to 1 additional delegate.
Between the very narrow band of 48.4%-51.7% range delegates will split even (15-15). An advantage can easily be achieved at support levels of just least 51.7%. In the table below, interesting range triggers for PLEOs are listed. Corresponding At-Large delegates at that level are also listed for comparison. A separate table further down is just for at-large delegates.
Vote Share% |
15 |
35 |
38.4 |
41.7 |
45 |
48.4 |
51.7 |
55 |
58.4 |
61.7 |
65 |
68.4 |
71.7 |
75 |
78.4 |
Delegate Allocation Triggers PLEOS
PLEO (30) |
5 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
Corresponding
At-Large (54)
|
8 |
19 |
20 |
23 |
24 |
26 |
28 |
30 |
32 |
33 |
35 |
37 |
39 |
41 |
42 |
For 54 Statewide (at-large) delegates: (See table below). Because of a large number of available delegates, the incremental steps are fairly small. Some of the extra delegates achieving triggers are listed below. Roughly 1.9% votes translates to 1 delegate. Reaching 15% threshold gives a starting point of 8 delegates. Ninth delegate is cheap at 15.8%. Subsequently every 1.9% gives an extra delegate.
Between the very narrow band of 49.1%-51.0% range delegates will split even (27-27). An advantage can easily be achieved at support levels of just least 51.7%. In the table below, interesting range triggers for at-large delegates are listed. Corresponding PLEO delegates at that level are also listed for comparison. A separate table further up is just for PLEO delegates. The table is very big, so you might have to scroll along the bottom bar of table to view the percentage range you are interested in.
Vote Share % |
15 |
15.8 |
34.3 |
36.2 |
38 |
39.9 |
41.7 |
43.6 |
45.4 |
47.3 |
49.1 |
51 |
52.8 |
54.7 |
56.4 |
58.4 |
60.2 |
62.1 |
63.9 |
65.8 |
67.6 |
69.5 |
71.3 |
73.2 |
75 |
76.9 |
78.8 |
Delegate Allocation Triggers At-Large
At Large (54) |
8 |
9 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
32 |
33 |
34 |
35 |
36 |
37 |
38 |
39 |
40 |
41 |
42 |
43 |
Corresponding
PLEO (30)
|
5 |
5 |
10 |
11 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
14 |
15 |
15 |
16 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
18 |
19 |
19 |
20 |
20 |
21 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
23 |
24 |
The corresponding numbers in each table are listed so that we do not have to hunt around for matching delegate number from different categories.
Where are the interesting numbers?: Trigger at 50% in 5 delegate and 7 delegate districts are basic stuff of whoever has more gets one extra. There are only nine of these.
Taking into account the congressional districts based allocations as well as the statewide results, the most interesting triggers for congressional districts are in 6 delegate districts which need 58.4% for favourable split. Since there are 18 districts in this category, an advantage of (4-2) here instantly means 36 delegate advantage. At the same time 58.4% is also trigger for statewide results in both categories. So this has a bigger impact.
Lets see the numbers at 58.4% then:: We end up with (32-18) at-large and (18-12) PLEOs. Supposing similar support levels at the Congressional district levels, we end up with all 6 delegate districts breaking in (4-2) split favour, while 5 delegate districts break in (3-2) and 7 delegate districts in (4-3). So numbers from district would be (104-59). Total for state breaking (154-93). This gives an advantage of 61 delegates to the winner.
Lets see them numbers for 60%-40%: The numbers at 60%-40% vote shares are identical to 58.4% numbers. No extra triggers exist between 58.4% and 60% for any delegate advantages. Next big impact trigger is at 64.3% when 7 delegate districts give an extra delegate.
Lets see them blow out numbers for 65%-35%: In this case the actual changes are not very much even though vote share is up by +5%. We end up with (35-19) at-large and (20-10) PLEOs. An uptick of 5 delegates in this category. Supposing similar support levels at the Congressional district levels, we end up with all 6 delegate districts still breaking in (4-2) split favour, while 5 delegate districts still break in (3-2) and 7 delegate districts in (5-2). We pick up extra 5 delegates there. So numbers would be (109-54). Total for state breaking (164-83). This gives a delegate advantage of 71 delegates. Just 10 more than previous scenario.
How does it compare to a small difference 55%-45%: In this case the, 5 delegate districts still break (3-2), 6 delegates break even (3-3), and 7 delegate districts break (4-3). In district based delegates advantages are of 9 delegates from odd numbered delegate awarding which needs just 50% for that extra one. From the state-wide results PLEO(17-13) and at-large(30-24). All combined for the split of almost even (133-114).
A quick summary, 50% = (128-119), 55%=(133-114), 58.4% = (154-93), 60% = (154-93), 65% = (164-83)
Naturally there will probably be some districts where a candidate performs better and crosses an extra trigger point for a delegate as the actual vote share will vary between districts.
Next bit is my personal opinion: As I wanted to get the basic mathematics data out quickly, I have not yet gone through each district data to form any major opinion. Some people were interested in seeing the numbers faster. This being the home-base of Hillary Clinton, home state of Senators Schumer and Gillibrand. State Clinton represented in Senate previously, also home of the election machines of not only Clinton but also of the Cuomo electioneering engine. People behind Clinton including {my fingers hurt typing the whole new york list} so i will apologise and only mention Charlie Rangel and Steve Israel (this is not in anyway downplaying anyone else). I expect Clinton to have a major sweep in the state.
All the financial sector donation bashing probably not going to go down very well with all the individual donors who happen to be working in financial institutions. (Not the big earning directors, but all the people working in no-so-glamorous-not-so-big-news-jobs in financial sector companies). Many people conflate the donations with the company the donor happens to be working for. They are not the same things. But the donors themselves, and the people who have voted Clinton into the office in two elections, people who voted for Clinton in 3 primaries are most likely going to vote for Clinton in similar numbers.
District by district perhaps some other time I can add later (or perhaps write just an opinion piece story separately later).
For a recovery by Bernie Sanders those 58.4% barriers in 6 delegate districts become critical to recoup at least some of the losses so far.
However my own estimate (as good as the American Rockets for taking people to space station) is Clinton blow out with over 58.4% causing a massive (154-93) split in favour.
Personal opinion district by district commentary added: Having looked through the each district an accommodation of a better performance from Sanders as a result has to be made. As some people have pointed out Sanders would be expected to perform well in up state New York. I will assume that at face value and accept the logic even though Clinton focused her senate run based on the same up state New York giving her robust performance for election.
Additionally just out of pure personal bias on my part I am assuming: for the Clinton advantages focused mostly around higher percentage of AA in Democrats, and Sanders advantages in Republican held districts and lower AA percentages in Democrats. Sanders another advantages in districts 19,20,21,22 for next door neighbour effect from Vermont. Sanders an advantage amongst white Hispanics. No disadvantage amongst Hispanics in general. The teachers union which tried to primary Cuomo governor making a bigger positive turnout for Sanders.
I end up with most 6 delegate districts breaking even. The districts where I expect an advantage to pile on one side or other as:
Clinton advantages in these districts. Some are 6 delegate districts but the trigger for them is 58.4% which given the composition of the districts and the enrolled Democrats in them, I expect Clinton will achieve easily. CD2 (4-2); CD3 (4-3); CD4 (4-2); CD5 (4-2); CD6 (4-2); CD7 (4-3); CD8 (4-2); CD9 (4-2); CD13 (4-2); CD14 (4-3); CD15 (4-2); CD16 (4-2); CD26 (4-3)
Sanders advantages in CD19 (2-3); CD20 (3-4); CD21 (2-4); CD22 (2-3); CD23 (2-3); CD27 (2-4). Many are 5 delegate districts and a couple 6 delegate districts. Sanders would easily achieve the advantages in these districts.
Even split in all these 6 delegate districts CD1 (3-3); CD10 (3-3); CD11 (3-3); CD12 (3-3); CD17 (3-3); CD18 (3-3); CD24 (3-3); CD25 (3-3);
Out of the district based allocations of 163 delegates, overall giving (Clinton 89-Sanders 74) . Slightly more in favour of Sanders than most other people have projected.
Previously covered states are all listed with the individual state links in this single document. I will be updating it as and when new states get done: All-Links-Collection-Delegate-Mathematics-Series-2016-Democratic-Primary
The results for this series of stories are tracked here. Democratic-Primary-Pledged-Delegates-Results-Tracker-Delegate-Mathematics
Enjoy and hopefully you will have spotted where you might tip the balance personally and like to campaign or make that extra push for your preferred candidate.
Please remember to contest state party posts at whatever level you find appropriate for your spare time.
Today's shout outs to all Kossacks who are already preparing for the 2017 and 2018 elections.
super fantastic read from Thinking Fella here http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/2/1494619/-Colorado-State-Open-Thread-My-Experience-as-a-Precinct-Captain-amp-Caucus-Leader please share your experiences.
Meanwhile I invite you to pass a few moments with http://www.dailykos.com/news/Nepal
Read More