Popular vote w/caucus: BO ~7.959M, HC ~7.876M

I have been googling around and they're really harder to find than you might think. All I want to know is, what are the popular totals for Clinton, Obama, Specific Other, and Uncommitted, INCLUDING CAUCUSES.

Multiplying vote numbers by percentages is fine.

I know, everybody says it's about the delegates. And I'm not claiming thats 100% anti-democratic - delegate totals tend to weight by population, not by voters, and that is good in many ways (corrects for the greater hassle of a caucus, for example, or for the open/closed primary difference). But if you want one, simple, unbiased number of who is REALLY winning and by how much, then you can't beat popular totals.

update: using the numbers from SloMoDem, total totals:

What	BO	HC
Actual votes	8527901	9061767
Add MI uncommitted to BO	8765663	9061767
No FL, MI	7958860	7876408

50.26% - 49.74%. Obviously both would be below 50 if you counted Edwards etc.

•  I don't think official totals are ever released.

  That's how it was for Iowa and Nevada, at least.

  by Michiganliberal on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:58:11 PM PDT

  •  OK, but at least the number of people voting?

    then you could multiply the percentages.

    Diary updated.

    by homunq on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:02:41 PM PDT

    •  Here are some amounts for caucus turnout:

      Iowa: 239,000
      Nevada: 117,599
      Alaska: Actual votes in here: Obama 6471, Clinton 2130
      American Samoa: Clinton: 163, Obama: 121 in "record turnout."
      Colorado: Close to 200,000 total. Which means that the totals on CNN are probably votes instead of state delegates.
      Idaho: 22,000+. So CNN totals are probably votes instead of delegate totals.
      Kansas: 37,000+. So again, looks like CNN has votes. They could just say that and make this a lot easier and quicker...
      Minnesota: 200,000+... Again, CNN has vote totals.
      New Mexico: Caucus in name only, conducted as a primary.
      North Dakota: ~20,000. Again, vote totals are online.

      by Michiganliberal on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:31:35 PM PDT

      •  Total votes from caucus states

        Iowa estimate (percentage multiplied by turnout):
        Obama - 89828
        Clinton - 70429
        Obama total is probably underestimated since his strongholds were in the city, which had much less delegates than rural areas.
        Nevada estimate:
        Clinton - 59635
        Obama - 53153
        Obama total is probably overestimated since his strongholds here were in the rural areas, which (I assume) had more delegates than urban areas.

        So, to simplify matters, I'll assume they cancel out.

        Super Tuesday states (actual total):
        Obama - 283062
        Clinton - 129297

        Total:
        Obama - 426043
        Clinton - 252879

        The margin's a bit larger than SloMoDem's estimate.

        by Michiganliberal on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:43:05 PM PDT

        •  Exit polls?

          Due to delegate bias, I think that these would be a better count.

          by homunq on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:49:05 PM PDT

          •  Probably no.

            Exit polls don't show the rearranging of support that happens during a caucus. In the Iowa exit polls, Edwards got 3rd; he received ~14% in the Nevada exit polls, and fell under the 15% bar in quite a few areas.

            by Michiganliberal on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:57:17 PM PDT

        •  I fell off the bottom.

          I think these numbers are important, if you want to take them up and do a diary where you present primary totals, caucus totals, and totals for the three, be my guest. To add up the latest primary totals, I just cut and pasted from CNN's "by candidate" totals, it makes a mess but the important numbers are all in the same column so you can do a sum.

          by homunq on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:57:52 PM PDT

•  I do, sort of...

  I was  working on a diary that I scrapped...

  The problem is that some states don't release "raw" results (Iowa, and Nevada). So I estimated them by percentage of state delegates (not awarded delegates), multiplied by caucus turnout.

  I get a total of 416,000 for Obama and 275,000 for HRC; a 50% advantage for O.

  by SloMoDem on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:04:47 PM PDT

  •  The point I was trying to make...

    In the diary that I scrapped was about electibility and the advantage that Obama has in terms of "solid" support.  That  is,that  caucus-goers have to sacrifice a lot more in terms  of time and effort just to get out  and vote. Among those who are willing to go the extra mile, Obama wins by far (at least, as indicated by caucus support)

    by SloMoDem on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:07:06 PM PDT

    •  It would be great to write that diary

      Keep the analysis short and snappy, and add up the numbers for us. Thanks.

      by homunq on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:11:21 PM PDT

•  Now that I actually have some numbers, tip jar.

  What, nobody for Tufte?

  by homunq on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:42:53 PM PDT

•  Good luck getting the number of attendees

  at the caucuses.  That is why the popular vote really doesn't mean much in the primary.

  by Yoshimi on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:44:26 PM PDT