Hey, gang, this thread has moved to the new diary that I posted on Wednesday morning, May 7. C'mon over!
This is not the place to come for the freshest up-to-the-minute vote totals: I'll just be swiping those from USA Today--plus, because of the time it will take me to enter those raw numbers into my spreadsheet and then bring the delegate projections to this diary, my results will be at least 15-20 minutes behind USA Today by the time I post them.
I’ve posted basic introductory information about the contests in Indiana and North Carolina here. As explained below, there’s plenty more background material about the May 6 primaries in the rest of that diary as well.
Final Results (before moving to the new thread)
Update 30, 10:00 A.M. CDT, Wednesday, May 7: USA Today has posted a few new numbers in the Indiana statewide vote and Indiana district 1. Meanwhile, here’s the final meaningful update from last night:
--
Commenters have urged me to go with the North Carolina Board of Elections numbers in that state, based on the fact that the Board says all 100 North Carolina counties are in. The concern I have is that, when you add up the BoE district results, Obama has 110,000 fewer votes than his listed statewide total, and Clinton 53,700 fewer. I suspect that there is a fair amount more vote-allocating that hasn’t happened in North Carolina yet. (To be fair, USA Today has similar shortfalls--but they don’t purport to have 100% of precincts reporting in any North Carolina district.)
So, annoying though it is (some of the “precincts in” stats are annoyingly low), I’m going to stick with the USA Today numbers. I think it’s clear that the BoE numbers are ahead of USA Today’s, but until we can tell how far they are ahead (and when they’re finished), they aren’t much help.
To see what things look like under both systems, however, I’ve now added a third table below: in addition to the North Carolina table based on USA Today numbers, I’ve thrown in a table based on the North Carolina Board of Elections reports. For whatever it’s worth, the Board’s numbers are two net delegates more favorable for Hillary Clinton. I think there’s good reason to believe that the Board’s numbers are pretty close to the final ones, though.
With 100% of precincts reporting in the statewide totals for both states (though I’m sure there are a handful of provisional ballots, etc., remaining to be counted), Clinton appears to have won Indiana by 1.79%. Obama, by contrast, has won North Carolina--a bigger state--by 15.17%. That explains the approximately 210,000 net gain for Obama in the mythical popular vote race.
In the delegate race, Obama is currently sitting at +15 net pledged delegates (and don’t forget the three add-ons, which he’ll likely win 2-1) for the night.
Meanwhile, the Indiana numbers basically haven’t moved since the media outlets called the state for Clinton. Has USA Today lost interest in updating the Indiana results?
(An “X” in the INF+2N column means that the candidate can’t improve his/her delegate haul from its current projected level without getting more additional votes than there are left to get.)
INDIANA (USA TODAY FIGURES)
Dist | PDels | %In | O% | C% | Dels (O-C) | O INF+2N | C INF+2N |
At large | 16 | 100% | 49.27% | 50.73% | 8-8 | X | X |
PLEO | 9 | " | " | " | 4-5 | X | X |
CD-1 | 6 | 100% | 52.71% | 47.29% | 3-3 | X | X |
2 | 6 | 91% | 48.01% | 51.99% | 3-3 | X | X |
3 | 4 | 37% | 43.52% | 56.48% | 2-2 | 30.14% | 9.55% |
4 | 4 | 98% | 49.37% | 50.63% | 2-2 | X | X |
5 | 4 | 93% | 52.55% | 47.45% | 2-2 | X | X |
6 | 5 | 97% | 41.38% | 58.62% | 2-3 | X | X |
7 | 6 | 95% | 69.62% | 30.38% | 4-2 | X | X |
8 | 6 | 98% | 40.59% | 59.41% | 2-4 | 53.99% | X |
9 | 6 | 100% | 36.64% | 63.36% | 2-4 | X | X |
Totals | 72 | | | | 34-38 | | |
Swing | | | | | C+4 | | |
NORTH CAROLINA (USA TODAY FIGURES)
Dist | PDels | %In | O% | C% | Dels (O-C) | O INF+2N | C INF+2N |
At large | 26 | 100% | 57.52% | 42.48% | 15-11 | X | X |
PLEO | 12 | " | " | " | 7-5 | X | X |
CD-1 | 6 | 91% | 64.09% | 35.91% | 4-2 | X | 63.95% |
2 | 6 | 79% | 51.47% | 48.53% | 3-3 | 32.69% | 46.69% |
3 | 4 | 84% | 46.45% | 53.55% | 2-2 | X | X |
4 | 9 | 56% | 73.69% | 26.31% | 7-2 | 21.92% | 3.33% |
5 | 5 | 87% | 32.58% | 67.42% | 2-3 | X | 19.88% |
6 | 5 | 88% | 47.79% | 52.21% | 2-3 | 18.41% | X |
7 | 6 | 86% | 51.11% | 48.89% | 3-3 | X | X |
8 | 5 | 74% | 59.66% | 40.34% | 3-2 | 39.76 | 37.17 |
9 | 6 | 97% | 56.84% | 43.16% | 3-3 | X | X |
10 | 5 | 89% | 37.28% | 62.72% | 2-3 | X | X |
11 | 6 | 97% | 43.37% | 56.63% | 3-3 | X | X |
12 | 7 | 61% | 81.70% | 18.30% | 6-1 | X | 8.01 |
13 | 7 | 42% | 66.97% | 33.03% | 5-2 | 20.01 | 4.62 |
Totals | 115 | | | | 67-48 | | |
Swing | | | | | O+19 | | |
Those are the USA Today numbers. Below are the ones from the North Carolina Board of Elections. Because there’s no way to calculate INF+2N stats (no “precincts reporting” numbers), the rightmost column instead carries the net change from the USA Today numbers to the Board of Elections numbers. (The Board is reporting larger numbers of votes in every single district, so they certainly do seem to be later in the process.)
NORTH CAROLINA (BOARD OF ELECTIONS FIGURES)
Dist | PDels | %In | O% | C% | Dels (O-C) | Vs. USAT |
At large | 26 | 100% | 57.58% | 42.42% | 15-11 | Even |
PLEO | 12 | " | " | " | 7-5 | Even |
CD-1 | 6 | 100%? | 65.09% | 34.91% | 4-2 | Even |
2 | 6 | 100%? | 59.01% | 40.99% | 4-2 | O+2 |
3 | 4 | 100%? | 44.90% | 55.10% | 2-2 | Even |
4 | 9 | 100%? | 66.68% | 33.32% | 6-3 | C+2 |
5 | 5 | 100%? | 42.49% | 57.51% | 2-3 | Even |
6 | 5 | 100%? | 49.27% | 50.73% | 2-3 | Even |
7 | 6 | 100%? | 48.51% | 51.49% | 3-3 | Even |
8 | 5 | 100%? | 59.16% | 40.84% | 3-2 | Even |
9 | 6 | 100%? | 57.05% | 42.95% | 3-3 | Even |
10 | 5 | 100%? | 37.19% | 62.81% | 2-3 | Even |
11 | 6 | 100%? | 43.27% | 56.73% | 3-3 | Even |
12 | 7 | 100%? | 79.00% | 21.00% | 6-1 | Even |
13 | 7 | 100%? | 64.16% | 35.84% | 4-3 | C+2 |
Totals | 115 | | | | 66-49 | C+2 |
Swing | | | | | O+17 | |
So compared to the USA Today numbers, the Board of Elections numbers show Clinton picking up two net delegates in CDs 4 and 13 and losing two net delegates to Obama in CD 2. (That CD 2 swing is pretty striking: between the USA Today results and the Board of Election results, Obama appears to have picked up 21,835 votes to Clinton’s 5,034. That’s better than 81% of the interim votes for Obama. Then again, he needed that kind of an avalanche to gain in that district--as you can see from the 32.69% INF+2N number for CD 2 in the USA Today table above.)
SUMMARY
As things currently stand in the USA Today results, Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton 101-86 in delegates from the May 6 contests, for a net Obama +15.
Presuming the North Carolina Board of Elections numbers resemble the final tallies for that state, Clinton will close that gap to Obama +13.
Adding the statewide (USA Today) vote totals from Indiana and North Carolina together, Obama leads Clinton by 210,363 votes. This constitutes 41.95% of the “popular vote” lead (501,414) that Obama, according to RealClearPolitics, carried into the May 6 primaries. Note that this number does not include any votes from Florida or Michigan (because the DNC considers those states' primaries to have been illegitimate) or from Iowa, Nevada, Maine, or Washington (because, to RCP's reckoning, popular-vote totals have not been reported for caucuses in those states). I believe the number disregards the Texas caucuses as well.
MORE INFORMATION
If you’d like to know more about any of the districts being contested on May 6, you can consult Wikipedia’s general entries on the Indiana and North Carolina districts. You can also find the individual districts’ Wikipedia entries linked from the district numbers in the tables above.
If Wikipedia’s information is a bit bare-bones for you, try checking the tables of prognosticators’ picks mentioned below. Follow the links (click on the pundits’ names at the top of each table) to the original projection posts and you’ll see that many of them discuss the particulars of individual districts in some detail.
As was the case in my previous delegate-tracker diaries, I’ve put together a fair amount of background material for anyone who wants additional context about the state of the race as the May 6 contests begin. It includes:
To try to make this diary shorter (easier to read ... and to download), I’ve packed all of the above background information into a diary that I posted previously. If any of the above sounds interesting to you, give it a look. The new data, however, are going to be posted here.