Louisiana specific discussion of vote share and mathematics behind impact on delegate allocation of its 51 Delegates. This is part of mathematics of delegate allocation notes in the series of Delegate Mathematics stories.
The statewide Louisiana State Democratic Party is affiliated with national Democratic Party and participates in presidential nominee selection process within its umbrella. This being Louisiana many important party documents are also available in French.
Basic Data: Louisiana has 51 delegates available. There are 6 Congressional Districts(CD). So including state-wide at-large and PLEO allocations, there are 8 different delegate allocation units. There are not any unusual number of delegates in any CDs. Number of delegates available in each CDs are as follows: 4 from CD1; 5 from CD3 CD4 CD6; 6 from CD5; 8 from CD2. State-wide allocations are 7 PLEOs and 11 at-large delegates.
Primary General Information: Primary ballot/vote is scheduled for 5th March 2016. Louisiana operates a closed primary. Participation is open to all who are registered democrats or unaffiliated with other parties. Same day voter registration is not available. Voters must be registered 30days before the voting day. If you have missed the registration for primary there is still time to register for the general election. Write-ins are not allowed. Please note the votes are purely for allocation of delegates.
Simultaneous State Party Elections: The delegate election process subsequent to the primary ballot will also be responsible for electing state party officers and party central committee members. The same voting process and delegate selection process coincides with state party reorganization for electors, multi tier caucuses and ballots. Elections for state central committee are made through the process. Most memberships have been unoppossed, although there are still a few that seem interesting enough.
Congressional Districts Vote Share Based Delegate Allocation Triggers: I have grouped the Congressional districts which have same available delegates together since the same thresholds and triggers apply to them. The thresholds %s are relative to each other. For example, this means that a vote results of 49-48-2 is effectively, 50.5 — 49.5. This is derived from 49/(49+48) vs 48/(49+48).
There are three CDs with odd number of delegates (five each in 3 CDs). So there will definitely be a candidate emerging with delegate count advantage.
|
delegates Acquired
out Of Available
|
4 del
cd1
|
5 del
CD3 cd4 cd6
|
6 DEL
cd5
|
8 del
cd2
|
Delegate Allocation Thresholds/Triggers
| 1 del |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
| 2 del |
37.5 |
30 |
25 |
18.8 |
| 3 del |
62.5 |
50 |
41.7 |
31.3 |
| 4 del |
85 |
70 |
58.3 |
43.8 |
| 5 del |
|
85 |
75 |
56.3 |
| 6 del |
|
|
85 |
68.8 |
For 4 Delegates at CD1: The first delegate here is available at 15%. Second delegate at 37.5%. Third delegate trigger is high at 62.5%. The whole range from 37.5% to 62.5% will still have delegates split 2-2. To gain a definitive advantage a candidate needs to cross 62.5% trigger resulting in a delegate split of 3-1. Most probable split will be 2-2.
For 5 Delegates at CD3 CD4 CD6: First delegate acquird at 15%, second delegate at 30.%. Third delegate trigger is precariously balanced at 50%. Fourth delegate costs a whopping 70%. This 70% votes are needed to get a 4-1 split seems a bit too much of a demand on any campaign. These districts becomes very crucial as they break just with small % hovering at 50%, a whole delegate is available. Both campaigns probably have that 30% support needed for 2 delegates. Goal for both Campaign is to cross the 50% and obtain a 3-2 split in their favour in all 3 CDs.
For 6 Delegates at CD5: Within the whole range of 41.7 — 58.3 the delegate split will be straight 3-3. The vote advantage of 16% is not going to make any difference. 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. To get a 5-1 split is going to take a 75% support level. Even in candidates home states and districts we have not yet seen this kind of support. For an advantage a candidate has all the incentive to break it 4-2split. with 58.3% votes.
For 8 Delegates at CD2: First two delegates are cheap at 15% and 18.8%. Any vote share between 43.8% and 56.3% will result in a 4-4 delegate split. Crossing a threshold trigger 56.3% results in two delegate advantage 5-3. The next trigger at 68.8% for 6-2 split. Unless there is some major event 68.8% is quite a huge barrier. 7-1 split is just extremely improbable it needs 81.3%. Aim here would be to attempt for 56.3% or better vote share and grab the 2 delegate advantage of 5-3 split.
Delegate Allocations Based On State-Wide Results: Statewide results work towards two different category of delegates; 11 At-Large delegates and 7 pledged PLEO delegates. While it is the same vote share, due to both allocations being odd numbers they tend to reward statewide winner with overall at least two delegate advanatges as 50% trigger rewards advantage in both category.
| Delegates |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
State-Wide Delegate Allocation Triggers
| Vote % 7 PLEO |
15 |
21.4 |
35.7 |
50 |
64.3 |
78.6 |
85 |
__ |
| Vote % 11 At-Large |
15 |
15 |
22.73 |
31.83 |
40.91 |
50 |
59.1 |
68.2 |
For 11 At-Large Delegates (State-wide): Because of small number of available delegates, the incremental steps are fairly chunky. Roughly 9% votes translates to 1 delegate. Being viable at 15% will automatically give 2 delegates. The extra delegates achieving triggers are listed above.
For 7 Pledged PLEOs: Because of small number of available delegates, this is comparable to how a 7 delegate CD numbers stack up. 50% trigger is very important for the extra delegate advantage.
Taking both into account, The clumped triggers at 15% give overall 3 delegates. Similarly dual trigger at 50%.
{This separate inclusion of pledged PLEOs is result of a lengthy email conversations requesting clarity and example calculations with the rules wizards at DNC and also the real mathematical worksheet used by NHDP who have already done the calculations. A retrospective addition of pledged PLEO info will be made to previous documents.}
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.
Currently I am running through the list of states. If anyone would like to see the mathematics for a particular state faster let me know and I will queue it up.
Todays Specials For A Break From All The Election Stuff is our own Guavaboys story about Nepal and -Nepal-Earthquake-Summit-in-Hanover-NH-Feb-18th-20th-why-not-attend
Next bit is my personal opinion only: In this ludicrously Red state with a few splatterings of avowed and declared Clinton Democrats in ascendancy and most of the contest is likely to be breaking heavily in favour of Clinton. Due to small number of overall delegates, this however will not translate into an overwhelming delegate advanatge. Simply with just above 50% share will give Clinton 5 delegate advantage over Sanders in the state. Overall 23 Sanders — 28 Clinton. For the extra push to 56.3 in CD2, 58.3 in CD5 and 59.1 statewide seems within grasp giving an extra 6 delegate advantage.
On a side note (Republican??) Louisiana ranks gives (Democrat??) Illinois a tough run for the rank of what could only be described as a contest to jail most elected state officials. However as some in my family in NY/NJ remind me, it could just be that New Jersey and New York politicians are better skilled at corruption and avoid jail terms unlike those rank amateurs in Lousiana or Illinois. Anyone able to shed even a hint of light to my ignorance are most welcome to share their thoughts.
I would like to thank everyone who has enjoyed these stories and made supportive gestures and encouraged me. There was a slight gap in last few days while I tried to get some information clarified from DNC and NHDP. Regular speed will resume.
{The personal opinion sections are not meant by me to show favour to any candidate. Just a my reading of the scene. That is why they are in separate clearly labelled section. Please do not send me mails about how I am blahblahblah Clinton propaganda machine or blahblahblah DWS apologist. My profile clearly says which politicians I admire. However that does not in anyway change the core mathematical nature of most of the discourse in these stories. Irrespective of who I admire or support, a 5 delegate congressional district will give advantage to the candidate who crosses relative 50% trigger. The fact that I admire Grover Cleveland or Richard Nixon or Debbie Wasserman Schultz does not change that mathematical properties. }
