Virginia Congressional Districts

Delegate mathematics in Virginia. Previously we covered Iowa and New Hampshire. Now we come to Virginia. Virginia is a super Tuesday state. Virginia operates a primary ballot. So it is much easier to calculate than caucuses (caucii?). I chose Virginia because vivling expressed an interest.

Virginia has a nice mix of available delegates in few different Congressional Districts. This gives us a chance to get familiar with many different ranges and numbers within a state. Virginia has the most common complement of delegate numbers in use across the nation. {Never know, we might even get to be comfortable with Texas one day if they have not got round to banning mathematics yet}.

While poll numbers and rumours abound, our own expectations might inflate while we think will happen. Mostly what we find is that there are mathematical boundaries to what a few percentage change in base support level will do. The mathematics of delegate allocation has some set borders within which any changes in votes will not make corresponding change in delegates. In many cases even a big % difference leaves no perceptible change. Also we can see why irrespective of who a candidate is as long as they are achieving around 30% support they will manage very respectable delegate count.

Virginia has 11 Congressional Districts. So including state-wide allocations, Virginia has 13 different delegate allocation units. The delegates are unevenly spread. Number of delegates available in each are as follows: 3 from CD9; 4 from CD6; 5 from CD1 , CD2, CD5, CD7; 6 from CD4; 7 from CD11;8 from CD3, CD8 and 12 PLEOs and 21 state-wide. Making a total of 95 delegates. Most districts have a substantially high non-white Democrats. The white population seem to be heavily republican tilting.

Congressional District Based Delegate Allocation Triggers: The triggers for congressional districts based allocations are listed below. I have grouped the Congressional districts which have same available delegates together since the same thresholds and triggers apply to them.

Delegate Acquired Out of available> 3 Del (CD9) 4 Del (CD6) 5 DEl (CD1, CD2, CD5, CD7) 6 Del (CD4) 7 del (CD11) 8 DEL (CD3, CD8) Delegation Allocation Thresholds/Triggers 1 del 16.7 15 15 15 15 15 2 del 50 37.5 30 25 21.4 18.8 3 del 83.3 62.5 50 41.7 35.7 31.3 4 del - 85 70 58.3 50 43.8 5 del - - 85 75 64.3 56.3 6 del - - - 85 78.6 68.8 7 del - - - - 85 81.3 8 del - - - - - 85

Virtual Guarantee of 1 Delegate Every District: No one is going to be able to maintain a clean sweep of all delegates. That would require 85% in the relevant Congressional district with 4 or more delegates (only 83.3% in district with 3 delegates). For both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders 1 delegate is guaranteed in every allocating district with 3 or more available . So even at the start both camps are sure to have at least 12 delegates each. The rest come into play after that.

For 3 Delegates at CD9: The first delegate is very cheap to acquire with just 16.7% votes. second delegate available to whoever manages to get more than 50% votes. That final delegate requires a whopping 83.3% votes. Unless the poll numbers are literally hovering around 50% marker, this place is unlikely to see much action. There are not many democrats in CD9 but of the ones that are there Clinton should be comfortably get 2-1 split. Interesting district features are less that 20% college education.

For 4 Delegates at CD6: 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. So again the sheer level of change in support levels required to flip CD6 is indicates not much activity here. Without a spectacular success this is just going to play at 2-2

For 5 Delegates at CD1 CD2 CD5 and CD7: Second delegate at 30.%. Third delegate trigger is precariously balanced at 50%. These districts becomes very crucial as they break even with small % advantage, a whole delegate is available. Most likely to be fought over tooth and nail to get that 3-2 split in favour. 70% votes are needed to get a 4-1 split seems a bit too much of a demand on any campaign. All districts have a large number of non-white Democrats.

For 6 Delegates at CD4 and CD10: 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. On a side note Clinton team has local campaigning behind them here with all the incentive to break it 4-2split.

For 7 Delegates at CD11: 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. In this hotbed of liberalism, turnout will be crucial. For Sanders advantage the district is a heavy mix of progressivism as well as core Clinton supporters. Clintons support level within non-white voters will be tested heavily here. Unlike other districts, white population is around 60%. Either candidates breaking through 64.3% support and achieve 5-2 split seems very distant. Sanders will be hoping to maintain at least 35.7% vote share and retain a 3 delegates and then slug it out for final odd delegate. The district is distinctly Democratic too. Perhaps the result from South Carolina primary will be better indicator of which way the wind is blowing and If that touted firewall will hold. (note to self: do the South Carolina Numbers soon).

For 8 Delegates at CD3 CD8: 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%.

Delegate Allocations Based On State-Wide Results: State-wide results work towards two different category of delegates; 21 At-Large delegates and 12 pledged PLEO delegates. While it is the same vote share, the odd number of state-wide allocations would reward state-wide winner with overall at least one delegate advantages.

The table below shows the PLEO specific triggers points. The at large delegates listed here are corresponding numbers at PLEO percentages. A separate table further down is just for at-large delegates.

Vote share% 15% 20.9% 29.2% 37.5% 45.9% 54.2% 62.5% 70.9% 79.2% Statewide Delegate for Vote Share Table - PLEOs PLEOs 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Corresponding

At-Large Dels 3 4 6 8 10 11 13 15 17

For 12 Pledged PLEOs: Once again due to large number of delegates in this category, roughly 8.3% votes translate to 1 delegate. At 15% vote share 2 Delegates are acquired. Third one at 20.8%. Each subsequent delegate from then on at 8.3% increments. Even split (6-6) ranges from 45.9% — 54.2%. So in order to achieve a delegate advantage here a candidate will need to cross perform fairly well overall beyond 54.2%

For 21 Delegates State-wide (at-large): (See table below.) Because of a high number of available delegates, the incremental steps are fairly small. Results should reflect the similar percentages. The extra delegates achieving triggers are listed below. Roughly 4.8% votes translates to 1 delegate. crossing 15% threshold gives a starting point of 3 delegates. Fourth delegate is cheap at 16.7%. Subsequently every 4.8% gives an extra delegate. Odd number of delegates in this caregory will mean one candidate will come away with at least 1 delegate advantage. Only some interesting triggers for at-large delegates are listed. Corresponding PLEOs at that level are also listed for comparision.

Vote Share% 15% 16.7% 45.3% 50% 54.8% 59.5% 64.3 Statewide delegate For Vote Share Table - At-Large AT-Large Dels 3 4 10 11 12 13 14 Corresponding PLEOS 2 2 5 6 7 7 8

Next bit is my personal opinion: I suspect that every odd break will go in Clinton favour here. Clinton support is higher than normal and break points for odd delegates will fall to just with 50% in most cases.

Clinton advantage.. CD1 (3-2): CD2 (3-2) CD3 (6-2) : CD4 (4-2): CD5 (3-2): CD6 (3-1): CD7 (3-2): CD8 (5-3) : CD9 (3-1): CD10 ( 4-2): CD11 (4-3): Statewide (7-5) and (13-8)

CD 6 will hover just above required for 3-1 split. Without a concerted effort from Sanders to bring Clinton support below 62.5%, it will break 3-1. The effort probably going to be too costly, as local influence wielders already campaigning for Clinton.

CD4 and CD10 with 6 delegates each will comfortably break 4-2 with Clinton achieving and maintaining 58.3% needed to split it 4-2.

CD3 and CD8 to be fought hard as Clinton support is hovering around the threshold for making 6-2 split. Something to do with extremely popular Bobby Scott (representative from CD3) already campaigning for Clinton probably. Sanders will need to try and reduce the loss to making a 5-3 split. At low end Clinton advantage break of 5-3 verging on 6-2 split. Clinton would easily maintain above the interesting boundary of 56.3% giving definitely at least for 5-3 split. In order to retain 4-4 effort by Sanders, Sanders need to eat away bring try to bring Clinton below 56.3%. As long as Sanders can keep most things in range, the point difference of 13% does not matter.

CD11 delegates 4-3 split occurs comfortably at 50%, the extra delgate at 64.3% might be a little too high.

I am expecting Clinton to maintain around 60% share. Hence state-wide delegate share 20-13split. Counting all CDs and statewide 61-34 Advantage Clinton.

A substantial chunk of primary votes I suspect are Anti-Clinton votes as oppossed to Pro-Sanders votes. My estimate is about 15%. Yes I do think, 3 in 20 Democrats detest Clinton and the Presidency attempt. This is my personal view.

Previous Related Posts:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/02/02/1478577/-Iowa-Why-Some-Claim-a-23-21-Split-Some-Mathematics

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/02/03/1479118/-New-Hampshire-Delegate-Mathematics

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.