Prior to June 7, Hillary had won 28% more popular votes than Bernie. On June 7, she won 33% more than Bernie.* She’s now ahead of him by more than 3.5 million (and this counts all the popular votes in all the caucus states.)
She has only won 21% more elected delegates than Bernie, because the caucuses are stacked against her. They suppress 75% of the voters than would vote in a primary, and these tend to be older voters, working voters, and voters with kids, but not young Bernie Bros who have time for two hours of political speeches before they can vote.
Even so, she has 379 more elected (pledged) delegates than Bernie, and 179 more than a majority of the pledged delegates.
To win, Bernie would need 557 supers and he has only 48. And of course, winning this way, which he says is what he wants to do, would be completely against his principles of “let the voters decide,” and “one person, one vote.”
- If there weren’t any Supers, Hillary would win by 379
- If she got her fair share of Supers, she would win by 507
- If she got half the Supers, she would win by 379
In short, Bernie lost, and this has absolutely nothing to do with superdelegates. He lost because 3.5 million more voters voted for Hillary.
* What 33% means. Example: if Hillary got 60 votes, and Bernie 40 votes, she would have gotten half-again as many (20) votes as he did (40). That’s 50% more. This shows their relative strength more clearly than saying “she has a 20 percentage-point lead (60% minus 40%). Thirty three percent more votes than Bernie means 57.1% to his 42.9%. (Data is here.)