Hillary Clinton has less votes in the 2016 primary than in 2008

According to research done by Breitbart, Hillary Clinton has received hundreds of thousands fewer votes in the 2016 primary compared to the first time she ran for president in 2008.

You will remember that Clinton lost the 2008 presidential primary to Barack Obama. This time around, she is considered to be the presumptive nominee by the mainstream media, yet cannot wrap-up the nomination.

Breitbart in its analysis points out that for a long time the 2008 Democratic primary was a three-way race between herself, Barack Obama and John Edwards, and despite this split she still did better eight years ago when she lost than she is doing today.

So far, Clinton has received 12, 437, 734 votes in the 2016 primary. In 2008, she received 12, 727, 221 by this point in the race. That is a drop of 273, 321 votes since the last time she ran.

The drop can be found across a wide variety of states and not just the ones which she lost to Bernie Sanders, but she got fewer votes in some states she won.

Clinton saw a drop in votes in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada, Washington State, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Wyoming, and Alaska.

The deficit that Clinton is seeing in the 2016 primary is significant in some states. In the key electoral state of Ohio for example, Clinton has received 45 percent fewer votes than in 2008.

Clinton lost ground even in her home state of New York. She received 2.26 percent more votes in New York in 2008 than she has in 2016.

Some of the states that have primaried more recently do not yet have firm voting totals so this trend could change either way.

According to aggregate polls collected by Real Clear Politics, Clinton would still beat the presumptive GOP nominee, Donald Trump in the general election by 7 points, but a recent Rasmussen Poll gives Trump a slight lead.

Real Clear Politics however has Bernie Sanders beating Trump by a double-digit margin if they were to face off in the general election.

 

[Breitbart] [Real Clear Politics]

2 Comments

  1. Tyler Kochman

    Sorry to burst your bubble,  but that is not entirely accurate. Remember at that point in 2008 (this article was published April 30) there were only 9 primaries left, at that point in 2016 there were 14. What was different? 

    At that point in 2008 California had already voted (she got 2,608,184 votes there in 2008). At that point in 2008 New Jersey had already voted (613,500). At that point in 2008 New Mexico had had already voted (she got 73,105 votes there in 2008). At this point in 2008 D.C. had already voted (she got 29,470). The Virgin Islands had also already voted (she got 150 votes). 

    Eliminating those primaries, she actually had  received approximately 3,050,000 MORE VOTES at that point in 2016 than she had in 2008.

  2. Tyler Kochman

    Sorry to burst your bubble,  but that is not entirely accurate. Remember at that point in 2008 (this article was published April 30) there were only 9 primaries left, at this point in 2016 there were 14. What was different? 

    At that point in 2008 California had already voted (she got 2,608,184 votes there in 2008). At that point in 2008 New Jersey had already voted (613,500). At that point in 2008 New Mexico had had already voted (she got 73,105 votes there in 2008). At this point in 2008 D.C. had already voted (she got 29,470). The Virgin Islands had also already voted (she got 150 votes). 

    Eliminating those primaries, she actually had  received approximately 3,050,000 LESS VOTES in at this point in 2008.

Comments are closed.