>>70493763
yea its a red fucking state

Caucus
Least populous state
Red state

No one lives in wyoming
Srsly, I live like a 15-20 minute drive to the wyoming colorado boarder and can confirm this

There's 280 people in wyoming???

Wyoming? What's that?

>>70495312
>
No I think there was voter fraud, no one lives in wyoming.

>>70493763
>it's the current year and less than 300 people decide a statewide caucus

just as the founding fathers envisioned....?

>>70495658
Yes, if there's 300 people in the state.

>>70495531
kek

>>70495658
That's exactly how they fucking envisioned.

Can we talk percentages here and not total people? What percent of voters turned up. Any other discussion is meaningless, but then again meaningless discussion is pol's strongsuit

>>70493763

>280 people showed up to vote. here are the results.

That's not how it works, fucktard.

>>70493763
Anon, the democratic primaries are more complicated than that. That number is not the actual voters, but rather, state delegate equivalents. Same as in Iowa and a few other states:

"On caucus night, Iowans in each precinct elect delegates to their county conventions, but the winner of the caucuses will be the candidate who accrues the most state delegate equivalents. State delegate equivalents are calculated using a ratio of state to county convention delegates. In other words, the ratio determines how many delegates the candidate would receive for the state convention based on the number of county convention delegates a candidate receives."

Washington Times reported that voter turnout was high. The party however does not release the official number of voters so they can hide behind any potential fraud or "inconvenient" outcomes, if you get my drift.