Texas and California as the two largest states in the country are the big prizes on Super Tuesday.  They also have several unusual features that will impact the process.

For Texas, early voting is a significant percentage of the vote.    By definition, people who vote early are locked in regardless of developments that occur between when they vote and the election.  In Nevada, we saw a solid majority of the vote coming from people who voted before the Nevada debate.  In Texas, we could easily have a majority of the vote coming from people who voted before the South Carolina debate (or the results from South Carolina).  The other big thing that makes Texas different is how it splits the district-level delegates.  The national rules only require that states with multiple congressional districts elect delegates from the individual congressional district or some smaller district.  For over thirty years, Texas has used its state senate districts rather than congressional districts in its delegate selection process.  Texas has 31 state senate districts.  Back in the 1980s and 1990s, Texas had fewer than 31 seats in Congress.  Since 2000, Texas has had more than 31 representatives in Congress.  Even though state senate districts are now larger than congressional districts, Texas still uses state senate districts to allocate district-level delegates.

What makes California somewhat unique (some other Pacific Coast states have similar rules) is its liberal rules on voting by mail.  A mail ballot can be dropped off at a ballot drop-off location up until the time that polls close.  In addition, a mail ballot counts if it is mailed on or before election day and received within three days of the election.  Approximately two-thirds of the vote in California is by mail-in or other early vote.  Counting the mail-in vote typically takes several weeks.  Often there is a significant difference between in-person votes on election day and mail-in ballots.  Given how little it takes to change the delegate count in California, any initial estimate of the delegates won in California are just an estimate and the final results could see a change of a delegate in a congressional district or three or four state-wide delegates.

A key thing for both states is that, before Saturday evening, we have a significant share of the votes in both Texas and California already cast.  These voters did not know that Tom Steyer, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and Senator Amy Klobuchar  were going to drop out after South Carolina.  (To be honest, when I started putting the posts for Super Tuesday together, I really did not expect any candidate to drop out after South Carolina.   I thought, given the short time period, that these candidates would wait until after Super Tuesday to suspend their campaigns.)  Any or all of these candidates could end up with a significant number of votes and potentially could still win delegates.

Between the two states, we have over 600 delegates (approximately 15% of the total delegate count) chosen over eighty-four districts along with the two state-wide pools per state.  Those districts have between two and ten delegates each.  (Since both ends of that range are districts in Texas, that range should give you some idea of how bad the gerrymandering in Texas is.)  In particular, Texas 28 and Texas 31 have two delegates each.  Texas 1, Texas 3, Texas 22, Texas 24, and Texas 30 have three delegates each.  California 1, California 8, California 10, California 16, California 21, California 22, California 23, California 35, California 36, California 46, California 50, Texas 2, Texas 4, Texas 6, Texas 9, Texas 11, Texas 18, Texas 20, and Texas 27 have four delegates each.  California 3, California 4, California 6, California 7, California 9, California 17, California 20, California 24, California 25, California 26, California 27, California 29, California 31, California 32, California 34, California 38, California 39, California 40, California 41, California 42, California 43, California 44, California 45, California 47, California 48, California 49, California 51, Texas 5, Texas 7, Texas 12, Texas 19, and Texas 21 have five delegates each,   California 2, California 5, California 11, California 14, California 15, California 18, California 19, California 28, California 30, California 33, California 37, California 52, California 53, Texas 8, Texas 10, Texas 15, Texas 16, Texas 17, Texas 26, and Texas 29 have six delegates each.  California 12, California 13, Texas 13, Texas 23, and Texas 25 have seven delegates each.  Finally, Texas 14 has ten delegates.

And for the really big prizes, California has fifty-four party leader delegates and ninety at-large delegates,  Texas has thirty party leader delegates and forty-nine at-large delegates.

The two-delegate districts (Texas 28 and Texas 31)are the easy districts to do the math on.  If two or more candidates are viable, the top two candidates will get one delegate each.  It takes 33.34% to be sure of a top two finish.

Similarly, the math in the three delegate districts (Texas 1, Texas 3, Texas 22, Texas 24, and Texas 30) is not that complicated.  If three or more candidates are viable, the top three candidates win one delegate each.  If only two candidates are viable, the top candidate gets two delegates and the other viable candidate gets one delegate.  It takes 25% to be certain of a top three finish and 70% to assure that — at most — only one other candidate is viable.

As in the previous states, it is the four-delegate districts (California 1, California 8, California 10, California 16, California 21, California 22, California 23, California 35, California 36, California 46, California 50, Texas 2, Texas 4, Texas 6, Texas 9, Texas 11, Texas 18, Texas 20, and Texas 27) that start to give rise to the complicated math because of the possibility of more than two candidates reaching 15%,  If there were only two viable candidates, the key number would be 62.5%-37.5% of the qualified vote.  A margin greater than that is a 3-1 split, a margin less than that is a 2-2 split.  In the unlikely event that we have a district in which more than four candidates are viable, it will take 20% to assure a top-four finish and a delegate.  It will take 55% to get a second delegate (assuring that only three candidates are viable) and 70% to get three delegates (assuring that only two candidates are viable).

For the five-delegate districts (California 3, California 4, California 6, California 7, California 9, California 17, California 20, California 24, California 25, California 26, California 27, California 29, California 31, California 32, California 34, California 38, California 39, California 40, California 41, California 42, California 43, California 44, California 45, California 47, California 48, California 49, California 51, Texas 5, Texas 7, Texas 12, Texas 19, and Texas 21), it is still mathematically possible that, due to early votes, there could be more viable candidates than there are delegates, but we have yet to see a district in which six candidates have reached 15%.  In the unlikely event that six candidates do reach 15%, it will take 16.7% to assure a top five finish.   Again, at this lower number of delegates, the thresholds to guarantee delegates is related to reducing the maximum number of viable candidates (as all viable candidates get at least one delegate).  So it will take 40% to get a second delegate, 55% to get a third delegate, and 70% to get a fourth delegate.  If there are fewer viable candidates, the breaks will almost certainly be lower.  (If you assume a maximum of four viable candidates, it takes 35% to get a second delegate.)

For six-delegate districts (California 2, California 5, California 11, California 14, California 15, California 18, California 19, California 28, California 30, California 33, California 37, California 52, California 53, Texas 8, Texas 10, Texas 15, Texas 16, Texas 17, Texas 26, and Texas 29), we are at the point where every viable candidate will get at least one delegate.  Here the thresholds are about reducing the number of viable candidates and figuring out all the weird ways that the vote could break down to determine which candidates get the fractional delegates (which effectively goes to the candidate with the greatest remainder until all delegate slots are filled).   Thus, for example it takes 29% to guarantee a second delegate (top two with four viable candidates).   It takes 45% to guarantee a third delegate.  It takes 60% to guarantee a fourth delegate.  It takes 75% to guarantee a fifth delegate.

For the seven-delegate districts (California 12, California 13, Texas 13, Texas 23, and Texas 25), each delegate is worth about 14.3% of the vote.  It takes 25% of the vote to guarantee getting two delegates.  It takes around 38% to assure getting three delegates.  It takes around 53% of the vote to be certain of four delegates.  It takes 65% to be guarantee getting five delegates.  Finally, it take approximately 79% to assure getting six delegates.

For the ten-delegate district (Texas 14), a lot depends on how many candidates are viable which in turn impacts the potential number of fractional delegates.  For example, with five or six viable candidates, you could possibly have four fractional delegates (since each viable candidate will have at least one “whole” delegate.  With four viable candidates. the maximum number of fractional delegates would be three delegates (requiring 7.5% to guarantee getting one of the fractional delegates).  And because there are ten delegates, that means that the breaks are essentially the same (until a candidate has enough votes to reduce the number of viable candidates.   Thus, it will take 18% to get two delegates (assuming possibility of five or more viable candidates).  It will take 28% to get three delegates.   It will take 38% to get four delegates.  It will take 47.5% to get five delegates.  It will take 56.7% to get six delegates.  It will take 66.7% to get seven delegates.  It will take 75% to get eight delegates.  It is not possible for a candidate to get just nine delegates.

For the state-wide pools, we are dealing with very minor differences to get additional delegates.  For the Texas party leader delegates (thirty delegates) each delegate is worth approximately 3.34% (which effectively translates into at least four and most likely five or more delegates for every viable candidate).  For the Texas at-large delegates (forty-nine delegates), each delegate is worth less than 2.05% (which effectively translates into at least seven delegates for every viable candidate).  For the California party leader delegates (fifty-four delegates), each delegate is worth about 1.85% (which effectively translates into at least eight delegates for every viable candidate).  Finally, for the California at-large delegates (ninety delegates), each delegate is worth approximately 1.12% (which effectively translates into at least thirteen delegates for every viable candidate).

To put things in perspective of the overall battle for delegates, imagine a candidate who gets 20% in both California and Texas.  That candidate would probably win delegates in almost all congressional districts (figure at least seventy-nine delegates).  That candidate would also get at least six party leader delegates and nine at-large delegates in Texas.  That candidate will also get at least eleven party leader and at least eighteen at-large delegates from California.  All told such a candidate would get at least one hundred twenty-three delegates just from Texas and California (representing about 10% of the 1,350 pledged delegates available on Super Tuesday).  And, given how expensive and difficult it is to campaign in California and Texas, such a candidate will probably win at least some delegates from other states (enough to have in excess of 200 delegates after Super Tuesday).  While such totals would not be enough to be the leader in the race for the nomination, they would probably be enough to justify continuing through the contest in Georgia on March 24.

While who wins Super Tuesday is important, who loses Super Tuesday may be more important.  At this point in time,  we are now down to five “significant” candidates running for President.  In Nevada, six candidates got over 9% of the first preference vote.  As discussed throughout this series, candidates who get around 10% do not win delegates.  More importantly, their votes are excluded from the count in determining how many delegates each of the viable candidates get.  So multiple candidates getting around 10% means that a candidate can win the majority of delegates while only getting 40% of the vote.  But as the results come in from all of the states on Super Tuesday, candidates will have to take a hard look at whether it makes sense to continue forwards.  As the less successful candidates suspend their campaigns, two things will happen:  1) there will be fewer significant candidates who fall short of 15% (meaning candidates wanting to win the nomination will need to get the majority of the vote); and 2) the supporters of the candidates who leave the race will have to switch to another candidate.  If any of the remaining candidates decide to end their race after Super Tuesday will shape what happens over the rest of March.