West Virginia specific discussion of vote share and mathematics behind impact on delegate allocation of its 29 Delegates. This is part of mathematics of delegate allocation notes in the series of Delegate Mathematics stories. Statewide West Virginia Democratic Party is affiliated with and participates in Presidential Nomination with National Democratic Party umbrella.
Basic Data: West Virginia has 29 delegates available. There are 3 Congressional Districts. So including state-wide allocations PLEO (Party Leaders and Elected Officials) and at-large delegates, there are 5 different delegate allocation units. Number of delegates available in each are as follows: 7 from CD1, CD2 and 6 from CD3. Additionally 3 PLEOs and 6 At-large delegates allocated from state-wide results. With 3 out of 5 allocation units having an odd number of delegates small opportunity for delegate advantages exist.
Primary Election Information: Primary ballot/vote is scheduled for 10 May 2016. It is a semi-open primary. Participation is open to Democrats and unaffiliated.
Same day registration is not available. Voter registration deadline is 19th April for the primary. There is still time to register to vote in General Election.
Comfortable web portal at West Virginia State Government website at http://www.sos.wv.gov/elections/Pages/default.aspx is nicely laid out and easy to find information. FAQ at http://www.sos.wv.gov/elections/current/Pages/VoterFAQs.aspx is very good and helpful. My favourite bit is the FAQ section that specifically says “How can I help other people to register to vote”. These little touches are beautiful things.
The West Virginia Democratic Party website is well laid out under the generic wrapper here at http://www.wvdems.org/. Easy on the eyes and definitely feels a lot more welcoming than some other state party websites.
Voter ID Laws: West Virginia has very relaxed requirements regarding voter id. ID might be required for first time voters at a particular polling station. Provisional ballots can still be cast. Although it probably is better to take advantage of early voting. Voting access is a lot more accommodating towards students, shift workers and other groups that have harder time voting. For that extra touch explicitly inclusion of Voting access for homeless.
Most notably West Virginia has recently passed legislation for automatic voter registration on DMV visit.
Early or Absentee Voting In Person: In person early voting is available from (21 days before election including weekends) 27th April to 7th May. The weekend availability is again a nice touch.
Absentee Voting by Mail: A very inclusive Absentee voting by mail is available to qualifying voters with valid/acceptable reasons. There are many reasons that qualify including attending school/work hour patterns etc etc. http://www.sos.wv.gov/elections/Vote/absentee/Pages/Absentee-by-Mail.aspx
Double Barrel Primary: Presidential Primary coincides with state/local primary and local elections. Local primaries include State Senate seats (one half in each district), State House seats, US House seats, statewide offices (Governor, AG etc etc) are also up for primary and general election. Oh And many many many Judges.
Voter turnout is going to be a bit higher than normal.
Congressional District Based Delegate Allocation Triggers: (See table below). 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 (increase) in number of delegates awarded. The triggers for congressional districts based allocations are listed below. With two districts having odd number of delegates, there are good opportunities for advantages.
{For those interested the DNC formula for fair apportionment, rounded up d=DxM/T, where d= delegates earned, D=total number of Delegates available to be earned, M = Candidates votes, T = Total valid votes}
Delegates ACquired
Out of available
|
6 del
CD3
|
7 del
CD1 CD2
|
Delegate Allocation Triggers
1 del |
15 |
15 |
2 del |
25 |
21.4 |
3 DEL |
41.7 |
35.7 |
4 del |
58.4 |
50 |
5 del |
75 |
64.3 |
6 del |
85 |
78.6 |
7 del |
|
85 |
For 6 Delegates at CD3 : 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. Expecting some heavy campaign here for those lucrative advantage breaks. Otherwise we are looking at a straight 3-3 split.
For 7 Delegates at CD1 CD2 : First two delegates are cheap at 15% and 21.4%. 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. To maintain competitiveness, each campaign should be aiming to maintain at least 35.7% vote share and retain a 3 delegates and then slug it out for final odd delegate for an advantage by crossing 50%. These 3 districts will provide an opportunity to gain delegate advantages.
Delegate Allocations Based On State-Wide Results: Statewide results work towards two different category of delegates; 6 At-Large delegates and 3 pledged PLEO delegates. Statewide winner will only get delegate advantage if the vote share exceeds the trigger for additional delegate. Due to large(ish?) number of delegates small changes are enough to trigger additional delegate allocations.
The four tables below show all triggers together with corresponding delegate numbers in each category. The triggers are all listed together with corresponding number of delegates in each category at that trigger point. {Counter-intuitive mathematics at play here. While 6 is exactly 2 times 3, the trigger points however do not line up neatly with each other.}
Vote Share% |
15 |
16.7 |
25 |
41.7 |
50 |
58.4 |
75 |
83.4 |
85 |
Triggers and State-wide Delegates for Vote% Share
PLEOs (3) |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
At-Large Del(6)
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
For 3 Pledged PLEOs: Roughly 33.3% votes translate to 1 delegate. Viability threshold here is 16.7%. At the viability only 1 Delegate is acquired. Second is balanced at 50%. Third is prohibitively expensive at 83.4%. Crossing the 50% boundary gives delegate advantage with (2-1) split. Statewide winner will have 1 delegate advantage.
For 6 Delegates State-wide (at-large): (See tables above.) Because of a low number of available delegates, the incremental steps are very large. The extra delegates achieving triggers are listed above. Roughly 16.7% votes translates to 1 delegate. Crossing 15% threshold gives a starting point of 1 delegate. Second delegate is expensive at 25%. Subsequently every 16.7% gives an extra delegate. Between 41.7% and 58.4% delegates are split evenly (3-3). A delegate advantage in this category is only achieved at 58.4% which gives (4-2) split.
Taking all statewide the triggers combined, there are very few percentage points which award extra delegates. The trigger points are spread out thinly. There are not any clusters of close together triggers. Substantial margin is needed to achieve advantages. In state-wide allocations, just crossing 50% (resulting in equal 2+3 vs 1+3) compared with 5% extra votes at 55% still yields same as there are no triggers in that range. Advantage only at 58.4% awarding (2+4 vs 1+2) giving 3 more delegates to winner than the runner up.
Some Casual Scenarios: With so much interest in margins and delegate acquiring numbers, I thought I would add a few numbers and save interested people the hassle of having to do too much detailed mathematics on the fly.
All calculations in the next bit, based on uniform distribution of votes (ie. same proportion of votes in all districts). Vote share percentages based on relative vote share of two candidates. Implied assumptions, there are two qualifying candidates, all others receive less than qualifying (aka viability threshold) votes.
For anyone who wants to verify the numbers:
Step by step, for each state, for each allocation unit ( each district, PLEO, at-large),
delegates_acquired = rounded value of (total_delegates_available x (decimal_vote_share))
where, decimal_vote_share = votes_for_candidate/total_valid_votes
Viability_threshold = higher value of {100/(2 x total_delegates_available) or 15}
Where are the interesting numbers?: Trigger at 50% in 3 and 7 delegate awarding allocation units, are basic stuff of whoever has more gets one extra. There are 3 of these (2 districts and one statewide results).
Taking into account the congressional districts based allocations as well as the statewide results, there are not any big impact triggers. Small triggers at 58.4% and 64.3% and 75% and 78.6% where each trigger shifts two delegates from one candidate to other. Statewide at-large delegate triggers coincide with CD3 triggers as both award 6 delegates. The advantages arise from odd number delegate awarding districts at 50%.
Lets See Some Interesting Numbers:
Scraping past 50%: districts (3+8) statewide (2+3). Total 16 vs 13
Scraping past 58.4%: districts (4+8) statewide (2+4). Total 18 vs 11
Scraping past 64.3%: districts (4+10) statewide (2+4). Total 20 vs 9
Scraping past 75%: districts (5+10) statewide (2+5). Total 22 vs 7
Scraping past 78.6%: districts (5+12) statewide (2+5). Total 24 vs 5
Scraping past 83.4%: districts (5+12) statewide (3+5). Total 25 vs 4
Scraping past 85%: districts (6+14) statewide (3+6). Total 29 vs 0
{Uniform distribution is only useful for gauging the levels of supports needed and having something to get a feel about what results would look like. It is normal to see pockets of support or votes for a specific candidate in certain districts or areas. In these cases where a substantial chunk of support is in specific districts then there will be balanced by lower share in other districts. In those districts the triggers for extra delegates might not have been not crossed. Thus overall gain in delegates will be smaller than in uniform performance.}
Next (Rest of) bit is my personal opinion: {Warning: May Contain Nuts and Lumps of Coal.}
Background: Currently Republican dominated state house, Republican majority state senate and Republican Lt Governor however Democrat Governor and Secretary of State. Voting patterns and numbers suggests that centrist Democrats should be able to compete easily in the whole state. There is a growing ecological and progressive movement that seeks to replace the centrist Democrats and Republicans.
2014 elections were brutal for Democrats. Due to extremely low turnouts Democrats were routed from state house. State senate switched to Republicans too. State senate was not as bad simply because only half of the senate were on ballot. Democrats (centrists and a bit coal conscious) had been able to maintain their grip on state for long time previously. This flip of state legislature means that unless the Democrats turn up in large numbers and wrestle the state legislature from Republicans, the state will follow the path of crazy Republican policies like elsewhere.
Factors in play: Some factors in play probably have higher impact. I have listed a few here. Please add your factors in comments.
Coal Coal Coal and More Coal: This being West Virginia, coal topics (and related corporate nature, resulting communal injustices, jobs lost/gained/dependent all centred around coal) tends to be dominant in all social, economical and political discussions. Green Party affiliated Mountain Party of West Virginia is doing decently enough in local elections and activism to maintain official recognized party status with Election Commission. Coal is ever pervasive in every aspect, be it profiteering, EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) rulings, direct jobs market, indirect and supporting jobs market, lack of healthcare, disease and care, coal related health stuff. Democrat or Republican, unless you are coal friendly, you get nowhere.
However some big coal names who have caused financial hardships by messing up coal workers pensions and their definitely fiscal jiggerypokery to prevent liability through judicious use of bankruptcies, dodgy and deliberate LLC sales , will find a sympathetic ear for Sanders message.
Although how much is still to be seen considering in primary for Governor coal operator Justice is leading the pack comfortably with support from coal workers and unions.
Voting Access: The laws in West Virginia makes it a lot easier to participate in elections. Voting laws are very inclusive in terms of language explicitly including and clauses explicitly making provisions for groups that would, in other states, be disenfranchised. Decent early voting in person time windows with weekend openings, inclusive and easy absentee voting by mail provisions, explicitly declared ease of voting registration and access to students and homeless makes the state very open. The state has minimal hurdles when it comes to voting.
While this should normally result in very high level of voter turnout, that has not been the case. Republican turn out is always high. The drop off for Republicans in mid terms is minimal whereas the drop off in Democrat turn out is astoundingly high.
All those last minute converts, and vote on whims, votes that require minimum efforts, votes from fickle supporters are easier to marshal. This is more favourable towards Sanders campaign as anyone who wants to vote generally has minimal barriers.
Semi-Open Primary: The process is a semi open primary. Voting in primary is open to all Democrats and unaffiliated/independents. Independent pulls and those that have not got round to switching as Democrats will be able to pull. This will be a big plus for Sanders.
Early/Absentee Voting: Turnout will be higher as there are ample provisions and support for early/absentee voting in person and Mail voting. Whoever can get their supporters into vote early will have an upper hand. Once again this usually means Clinton advantages due to a organizational advantages.
UMWA (United Mine Workers of America): I felt this needed to be specifically mentioned. The UMWA (United Mine Workers of America) with its roughly very active 32,000 members just in West Virginia holds enough clout in terms of organization, voter registration and crucially Get Out The Vote network to make a substantial impact on any candidate for any post in the state. UMWA also has regularly supported and endorsed Republican candidates. Paramount for the union is the stance on the coal related jobs and its membership.
While UMWA is very much anti-EPA and unhappy with Clinton proposals and support for EPA now and in the past. That said they have not yet endorsed Sanders. Quite possible they might just be waiting for a reassuring coal message from Sanders. Even if a direct endorsement does not come to Sanders, the anti-Clinton sentiment will still drive them to give Sanders a big leg up. If Sanders could get UMWA on his side, this will be a major boost to the campaign that could see Sanders score better than he did even in Vermont. Sanders economic message will also resonate well with UMWA membership.
UMWA has endorsed Justice for state governor primary and has embraced some Clinton allies/supporters for all other state elections. So Clinton should still be content knowing that even if the group seems to be rejecting her personally, this has not extended to her supporters and allies running for other offices.
Demographics: Roughly 94% White, 3.5% Black, coupled with Hispanic ethnicity at 1%. The demographics is very suitable for Sanders to have a good showing at the elections.
Campaign Efforts/Organization: Once again informal Sanders campaign has been around from the beginning. While there is definitely wide ranging enthusiasm for Sanders. One of the few states where many local politicians have embraced and endorsed Sanders including campaigning for him.
Sanders again had the formal presence here earlier than Clinton. Clinton campaign while suffering currently in terms of getting friendly messages out has nevertheless been very protective of allies in an attempt to prevent much pervasive anti-Clinton mood in the state from infecting other candidates.
State Local Primaries Effect: With the all in Primary taking place (US Senate, US House seats, State house seats, State Senate seats, US House seats, State Governor) the turnout should be slightly higher. Some very competitive Democratic Party primaries happening at all levels of state government/legislature. Quite a number of candidates have endorsed Sanders. Much of that is probably related to their own local election efforts. Attempts by some local election candidates to change local election dynamics by framing it up into Clinton vs Sanders mini-contest might not have as much impact as they hope for their own efforts. Turnout however is going to be very huge due to sheer number of state offices in contest which have primaries.
State Legislature Primaries: A chunk of state legislature seats are not being contested by Democrats. This is as usual a bad news. Coal friendly candidates do no have funding problem here no matter which party they belong to. Neither do it seems the very very fringe Green / Environmental / Mountain candidates despite their small presence and success.
US House Primaries: On the plus side all three US House seats are being contested. only one of them have a primary. Fiercely competitive primary in CD2. These again are driving the participation higher.
State Governor Primaries: Quite a bit of interest in the three candidate (Goodwin, Justice, Kessler) Democratic Primary. It is however currently being led by Jim Justice comfortably. Turnout will be higher due to intensity of race. Kessler endorsing Sanders. This is likely to boost Kessler and Sanders mutually by a few percentage points. Not enough for Kessler to overtake Justice, but enough for Sanders to push towards those boundaries.
That Gun Thing : Despite the church shooting in Charleston and on the gun control messages, the fact that Obama has said he will not support or campaign for any Democrat who is not firmly behind gun-control, the overall sentiment of the state is not going to change anytime soon. The part of Democratic electorate that is for firm gun control is already behind Clinton from other issues. Any new voter attraction on gun-control is not going to happen. Sanders pro-gun/pro-NRA background will be a boost.
Now for district by district:
With so many factors playing in Sanders favour, I am expecting Sanders to comfortably win all three at comfortably above 65%. I cannot see anything specifically or intrinsically differentiating between the three districts. Congressional District 2 is having a right whopping US house primary, so perhaps a little higher turn out.
Perhaps our Kossack Andy Cockburn could add more details.{I know you have the insider view Andy. Please share}
My guess is Sanders in CD1 CD2 splitting delegates (5-2) and in CD3 splitting (4-2)
All combined Sanders 20 vs Clinton 9
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
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.
For those you want an inkling about what to expect for those first footsteps into political ladder, here from Kossack Chris Reeves whole series at Nuts and Bolts/history about what and how to run for state legislature. This weekends special is-Nuts-amp-Bolts-Inside-a-Democratic-campaign-Candidate-Know-Thyself
Meanwhile have a break from pie fight and join the primary free “Diarydays” efforts and distraction.
List so far at http://www.dailykos.com/news/diarydays some examples listed below.
-A-Diary-a-Day-keeps-the-Pie-Fights-away-DiaryDays by emaglive
-Obama-Administration-to-Forgive-375-000-Student-Loans by wesmorgan1
-Pi-and-Pie-Mathematics-Of-The-Best-Pizza-Deal-DiaryDays oh that is by me,
-Letter-to-emaglive-that-guy-who-thinks-Republican-s-have-a-monopoly-on-shitty-abhorrent-ideas by atibamanii