There was a lot of confusion and surprise (possibly some disgust and some suppressed smirks) over Iowa Delegate splits. Was it (23-21) or (22-22)? So to avoid heartburn for New Hampshire, I thought it might be useful to have the mathematics laid out in adance for New Hampshire. In any event, I suspect a lot of expectations will once again be stumped by results. As usual some exasperations and apparent momentary unfairness emotions might flare up. So my friends have a peek and then it will give you some peace of mind and perhaps time to fret about Nevada caucus. I am doing these as and when some people enquire or request. {Please I am not ready to explain Texas yet. Nothing complex, only legal worries, Just in case they pass a law making it illegal to explain things using Mathematics}.
New Hampshire has 24 DNC delegates. State party has opted for simple, 8-8-8 split between 2 congressional districts and statewide allocation.
At certain percentage levels of primary votes, various threshholds for number of delegates acquired triggers. Thereby it changes the delegate split between the cadidates. The table below shows the minimum relative percentages votes required to acquire a delegate out of 8 available.
Delegates acquired (out of 8 Available) |
Split |
Trigger Level % rounded |
|
0 delegates |
0-8 |
less than 15.0 |
|
1 delegate |
1-7 |
15.0 |
|
2 delegates |
2-6 |
18.8 |
|
3 delegates |
3-5 |
31.3 |
|
4 delegates |
4-4 |
43.8 |
|
5 ddelegates |
5-3 |
56.3 |
|
6 delegates |
6-2 |
68.8 |
|
7 ddelegates |
7-1 |
81.3 |
|
8 delegates |
8-0 |
more than 85% |
|
Currently Sanders is floating around 55 to 56% depending on which poll you look at. Delegate allocation is not just simply calculate percentages. The trigger points generated by the formula for fair apportionment means that there is a substantial range of vote share which results in no change in delegate allocation. Any thresholds crossed will result in an even number of delegate advantage, simply because there are even number of delegates available. The difference between delegates awarded to each candidate will be an even number.
Any vote share between 43.8% and 56.3% will result in a 4-4 delegate split. In order to get that two extra delegate advantage by crossing the threshhold of support level, the larger vote share needs to be 56.3% or higher for a 5-3 split. Next stage of change in delegates (6-2split) happens at 68.8% share of votes. For the next level up (7-1split) 81.3% of votes are needed. We have to account for each of the congressional districts and statewide share of votes separately. Calculate their delegate allocations independently and then add them up.
Given the current level of polling, we can probably safely say that sanders is unlikely to grab 81.3% share of votes anywhere, Districtwide or statewide. So most of the battle will be for crossing those 56.3% (5-3Split) and the 68.8% (6-2split) threshhold for Sanders. If Clinton can reduce the sanders vote share to below 56.3% then she still manages a tie on delegates with 4-4 splt.
For example, CD1 is a bit more liberal and favourable to Sanders. Sanders is most likely to cross the 56.3% marker and achieve a 5-3 split. Congressional District 2 is slightly more favourable to Clinton, a bit more republicans (not meant to be a judgement from me). So holding sanders advantage under 56.3% is a possibility for Clinton. CD2 has Nashua and Corcord main population centres which are already being visited by Clintons. Most likely also to have Clinton surrogates making heavy effort there just like they did in Polk County in IOWA. Every extra delegate matters. Where and how you decide to focus your efforts based on the trigger threshholds and a campaigns own internal polling data will be a tactical game. Clinton we seem to assume is better at this (Again, this is not a judgement. No idea why we think so, is it becasue we think she is a calculating, plotting, planning person?)
So even with a big boost for Sanders in places like Manchester (CD1) the overall loutcome, unless there is a last minute massive groundswell that crosses the daunting 68.8% barrier giving 6-2 split, overall delegate numbers will be dissapointment to some and a relief to others.
CD1 — 5-3, CD2 4-4 Statewide 5-3
Most results will be within the ranges of 4-4 or 5-3 (Sanders Adavntage). There are only a handful of combinations of these in the three delegate allocation elements.
1. CD1 5-3, CD 2 5-3, State 5-3 total 15-9 Sanders adavantage.
2. CD1 5-3, CD2 4-4, State 5-3 total 14-10 Sanders advantage
3. CD1 5-3, CD2 4-4, State 4-4 total 13-11 Sanders advantage
4. CD1 4-4, CD2 4-4, State 4-4 total 12-12 Sanders advantage.
(Pre-emptive answer to what is likely to be asked: I have not included CD1 5-3, CD2 5-3, Satewide 4-4 splt, because if you get enough votes for 5-3 in CD1 and CD2, then you automatically have enough for 5-3 in Statewide. Also CD2, CD1 numbers switching also results in same scenario as number 2 above)
Goal for Sanders will be to achieve an across the board 5-3 splits in each CD and also statewide. Goal for Clinton will be to drag as many as possible into 4-4 range.
If we spot any Clinton events in CD1, then we can assume that Clinton campaigns own numbers are indicating that CD1 is hovering around the threshhold of 56.3% Sanders advantge and Clinton Campaign thinks it can drag that under to make a 4-4 split.
There will not be an all sweeping and grabbing of delegates by Sanders without soundly achieve 68.8% across the board and individually in each CD. That is cross the 68.8% for each congressional district without taking into account what is happenning in other district. And even with that kind of revolution it gives 18-6 split. Which is pretty awesome but not death dealing and unlikely. Those thresholds will be crossed in Vermont itself I expect.
This next bit is personal opinion: At this stage though my own thoughts on most likely outcome which has Sanders ahead is 13-11 which just about barely covers the Iowa difference. Otherwise be pre prepared for gnashing of gums, grinding of teeth and screeching of how stupid the delegate allocations system is or even how balanced and protectrive of under performers the delegate allocation system is.
Next Stage Nevada: I will be preparing something after I manage to get hold of a proper clear county basaed maps showing congressional districts (one i can read without having to squint and damage my eyes).