Home 2018 Elections Running Tally of Results for the VA-05 Democratic Caucuses

Running Tally of Results for the VA-05 Democratic Caucuses [UPDATED 4/21]


See below for a running total of delegates for each candidate (Leslie Cockburn, RD Huffstetler, Andrew Sneathern, Ben Cullop) for the VA-05 Democratic nominating caucuses. Note that there are 250 total delegates to be awarded, along with 82 alternates. For the caucus schedule, click here.

Locality Name Delegates Alternates Total
ALBEMARLE COUNTY 39 11 50 [18 delegates for Cockburn, 13 for Sneathern, 8 for Huffstetler]
APPOMATTOX COUNTY 5 2 7 [3 delegates for Cockburn, 1 for Sneathern, 1 uncommitted]
BEDFORD COUNTY 13 4 17 [8 delegates for Cockburn, 3 for Sneathern, 2 for Huffstetler]
BRUNSWICK COUNTY 8 3 11 [5 delegates for Huffstetler, 3 for Cockburn – unofficial]
BUCKINGHAM COUNTY 6 2 8 [3 delegates for Cockburn, 2 for Huffstetler, 1 for Sneathern]
CAMPBELL COUNTY 15 5 20 [11 delegates for Cockburn, 4 for Sneathern]
CHARLOTTE COUNTY 5 2 7  [3 delegates for Sneathern, 2 delegates for Cockburn]
CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY 19 6 25 [9 for Sneathern, 7 for Cockburn, 3 for Huffstetler]
CUMBERLAND COUNTY 4 2 6 [2 delegates for Cockburn, 2 for Huffstetler]
DANVILLE CITY 15 5 20 [7 delegates for Cockburn, 5 for Huffstetler, 3 for Sneathern]
FAUQUIER COUNTY 17 5 22 12 delegates for Cockburn, 5 for Huffstetler]
FLUVANNA COUNTY 9 3 12 [4 delegates for Cockburn, 3 for Huffstetler, 2 for Sneathern]
FRANKLIN COUNTY 17 5 22 [13 delegates for Cockburn, 4 for Huffstetler]
GREENE COUNTY 6 2 8 [3 for Cockburn, 2 for Sneathern, 1 for Huffstetler – unofficial]
HALIFAX COUNTY 11 4 15 [9 delegates for Cockburn, 2 for Sneathern]
HENRY COUNTY 5 2 7 [3 delegates for Huffstetler, 2 for Cockburn]
LUNENBURG COUNTY 5 2 7 [4 delegates for Cockburn, 1 for Huffstetler]
MADISON COUNTY 5 2 7 [3 delegates for Cockburn, 1 for Huffstetler, 1 for Sneathern]
MECKLENBURG COUNTY 10 3 13 [7 delegates for Huffstetler, 3 for Cockburn]
NELSON COUNTY 6 2 8 [4 delegates for Cockburn, 2 for Sneathern]
PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY 18 5 23 [11 delegates for Cockburn, 7 for Sneathern]
PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY 8 3 11 [5 delegates for Cockburn, 2 for Huffstetler, 1 for Sneathern]
RAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY 4 2 6 [3 delegates for Cockburn, 1 for Huffstetler]
CD 5 TOTAL 250 82 332 [140 delegates for Cockburn, 54 for Sneathern, 55 for Huffstetler, 0 for Cullop, 1 uncommitted]

  • Kenneth Ferland

    It’s interesting to see how the results are in no way correlated with fundraising, Sneathern is outperforming Huffstetler by a large margin despite being out spend heavily.

    This is one of the principle benefits of a Caucus, it neutralizes monetary advantages and allows people without deep pockets to run competitively.

    Cockburn also looks to be on track to actually clinch the nomination before the convention itself and would then win on the first ballot. I had not thought that possible in a 4 way field, but it seems that Cullop is being shutout so it’s more of a 3 way race now.

    • BuckDem

      Yeah I’m kinda interested to see how Roger spent his money and yielded such little in return. Even with a caucus , money still gives you an advantage, albeit to a lesser extent. With more money he could have, in theory, opened more campaign offices throughout the district to support a stronger ground campaign, hired more staff to run those offices and hired strategists and consultants who specialize in caucuses to assist.

      • Kenneth Ferland

        The most important resource in a Caucus is candidate face time with voters and It seems he did not allocate enough of it out into the rural counties. I’m in Lunenberg and we never saw him till a last ditch meet and greet on the Wednesday before the Caucus, while Cockburn visited us twice and very early which is how she came very close to sweeping the county.

        I’ve also heard that Roger dose not come off as very genuine in person while Sneathern and Cockburn do. And lastly that Roger deployed his resources in anticipation of a primary while everyone else correctly anticipated the traditional caucus and deployed for that.

        • Anon for this

          Cockburn is about as genuine as a vegan hot dog. She has been great at buying delegates and harassing those who don’t comply.

          • BuckDem


            And I’m sure you have proof of this? Maybe even an article to cite? Because throwing around an accusation, especially one that’s so untrue, is quite Trump-like and belongs on /r/the_Donald, not BlueVirginia.

            In the end, all four candidates are Democrats and the only person who should be attacked here is Tom Garrett. Kenneth was not attacking RD; just relaying what others have felt. At a time when Dems are in the minority and need to stand united (or at least not appear divided), it’s disheartening to see people like you attacking one of our own.

          • Anon for this

            The Albemarle County party sent out an email about it. I think it would be fairly easy to obtain. The ones doing the dividing are those helicoptering in to run for office rather than thinking strategically about who could actually beat Tom Garrett.

          • Caroline Pfister

            I’m a delegate alternate for Leslie from Albemarle. These accusations are utterly false. Not only are we not paid or bullied, but there were more than twice as many people wanting to stand for her as she could use. There is great enthusiasm for this great lady.

          • Concerned 5th Resident

            I’m not OP but here’s one to start with:


            In it Suzanne Long discusses Clomenia Oliver being on one candidate’s payroll although, in fairness, this in itself is not technically a violation, just enough to “raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest.”

          • Concerned 5th Resident

            Here is another one:


            “Other members of the convention committee made similar accusations, but declined to name the members they were asking to recuse themselves from the vote. Long did not share these qualms, naming four members — David Birkenthal, Henry Davis, Hank Gorfein and Clomeniea Oliver.”

            Shall I provide more? Because let’s not even start on Danville…

          • Kenneth Ferland

            I am sorry but this is concern trolling.

            The 5th committee initially chose to have a caucus, only after that did Oliver start working for one of the campaigns and then recused herself from the controversial 2nd vote on whether to continue on that trajectory. None of the other people listed by Susan are working for a campaign and no one can point to a single decision by the committee that has been biased in favor of a candidate.

            Folks who were advocating for a primary despite having lost that vote have been hyper-sensitive to anyone in the party even expressing an opinion on which candidate they support. And got the committee to ban its own members and all county chairs from being delegates and almost banned them from even VOTING in the caucus which would have been a gross over-reaction in my opinion. The whole process was hyper-sensitive to bias, so much so that it suppressed legitimate campaigning and outreach by our most active and committed democrats who form our local county committees.

            I have no idea what your referring to in Danville, if you were their tell us or give us a link, don’t just insinuate.

  • Jamie

    Mama Sue would have known better.

  • Anon

    Boy do I hope Andrew can pull this out. Nominating a San Fransisco-raised heiress who refers to young black men as “boys” would be a real disaster in a seat we could potentially take back.

  • Reva Madison

    I was unable, at the last moment to attend. But, as I told all of the candidates callers, I would vote for whoever run, and had as of yet not made up my mind. I wanted to go to the Caucus and hear what others had to say before holding up my hand, or whatever they did to count people. There is the weakness in this method of selecting candidates, in that it is probably very dependent upon where he/she lives and who they know in their area. I have never attended one, I had hoped it wouldn’t come to that. All citizens in the district should have equal rights to put in their two cents worth, and not all could attend. Voting, in a real election is the only way to go. I ask those in charge to not allow this to happen again. Yeah, I know it costs money to hold an official vote, but again, its the fair thing to do. No matter which way it is done this time, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANY REPUBLICAN.

    • Kenneth Ferland

      The strength of a caucus is that it is local and personal, most participants make their choice based on direct contact with the candidate or with their neighbors who are advocating for a candidate.

      So it tests very important qualities of a candidate, are they actually inspiring enough to get people to spend some real time and go do the very kind of volunteer campaigning which is the backbone of a GOTV effort.

      Everyone is allowed to attend these Caucus, they are less convenient then a voting in a primary for the good reason to measure depth of support rather then the breadth of support. The depth of a candidates support is one of the best indicators of their chances in the general, so the caucus process gives us the best chance to have a win in November. And winning in November, not maximizing participation is the goal of the nomination process.

      • JK

        Choosing a candidate who the most amount of people support should be the aim. Caucuses severely limit who can actually participate, even if it is “open” to anyone. At the Albemarle caucus, most participants were white and over 65 years of age. That is hardly representative or democratic.

      • Cranberi

        The caucuses are not open to anyone. I personally know people who got to Albemarle’s caucus and left because of no parking. I hope that Leslie wins; I’m behind her, but the caucus process is exclusionary and wrong.

        • Caucuses make it very difficult for working people, people without transportation, people who can’t spare several hours on a weeknight (or weekend or that matter), etc, etc. to vote. Hence the tiny turnout compared to primaries. In sum, caucuses are a terrible idea that should not be permitted in the Democratic Party.

    • Kenneth Ferland

      Cockburn is clearly winning at this point, and were more then half way through the caucuses with only about 100 delegates left to pick and she would need only about 1/3 or the remaining delegates to have a majority.

      In fact it looks like she may be able to clinch the nomination early on Saturday morning before the final caucus in the evening. In either case it looks like their will be no contested convention.

      Also Cook just upgraded the 5th from Likely to Leaning, putting us in the place as the 2nd and 7th and just below the 10th which is ranked toss-up.

      • Yeah, she’s got a big lead with a dwindling number of delegates left. Would take a huge surge by Sneathern or Huffstetler at this point to catch her.

        • BuckDem

          Probably won’t happen – her supporters are loyal and fired up with momentum on their side.

          Coming from a Leslie supporter, I will say RD, Andrew, Ben and Adam were all class acts who I hope remain involved in local politics in the 5th. With the caucuses winding down, I hope we can unite to remove Tom Garrett!

          • Cranberi

            As an RD supporter, I will definitely unite with Leslie to defeat Tom Garrett.

            I will say, though, that the caucus system is a horror story. I participated in the Albemarle County caucus – it’s not an inclusive process at all. The traffic was bad to get there; people couldn’t find a parking place, so left; people wouldn’t have been able to get there in the first place if they worked, had care providing issues, etc. It’s really a suppression of voters, and we don’t need that as Democrats. We need to do better than that.

          • Yeah, caucuses are a dumb way to pick our nominee.

          • notjohnsmosby

            It’s a complete failure of the 5th CD committee. Even though Cockburn will win decisively, the fact that such a small number of people participated in the selection process means there will be plenty of upset people after it’s over.

        • Kenneth Ferland

          Maximizing the quality of our nominee is what we should judge the process on, and I find no fault in the caucus as a means of picking the best nominee. It rewards candidates who build a ground game and volunteer staff, can connect with voters face-2-face and get them to do the kind of work necessary to win an election in November.

          And lets be frank a Primary would have left the rural counties completely out of the picture as campaigning would have been concentrated in Albemarle and spending on broadcast media would have been the deciding factor. THIS is why the most heavily funded campaigns always want a Primary, it’s to their advantage.

          • notjohnsmosby

            Bullshit. Conventions are all about who can convince a very small number of insiders who can afford to waste time at meetings. The general election won’t be won in rural counties, it will be won or lost in the areas with a lot of potential Democratic voters. Very few of those potential Democratic voters had a say in the candidate selection process.

          • Kenneth Ferland

            It dose not sound like you participate in your local county or city democratic committee nor do you seem to hold their work in any regard. I work with my committee and the 20 or so members in our tiny county are by far the most active democrats in the county, they organize, advertise and cook for virtually every event which brings an Elected democrat to the area for people to actually meet face-2-face, they phone bank, they put up the signage, they hold the local county Republicans to account and they are the ONLY help that county or town level democratic candidates get.

          • Oh, the response to this should be fun. 😉 (note: NotJohnSMosby has been HEAVILY involved for MANY years with Virginia Dems, Fairfax Dems, etc.)

          • notjohnsmosby

            That’s pretty much what I said. Your goal wasn’t to get lots of Democratic voters engaged in the process. It was to make your 20 oldtimers feel appreciated. It’s not just you guys, it’s all over the state. Rural Dems complaining that candidates never visit, they don’t get their fair share of yard signs and chum, no one in the big city cares about them. I understand that to a certain point, but again, every visit to out to the sticks to mollify a few Dem committee people wastes time that a candidate could be in less rural areas meeting five times the number of Democrats.

            Here’s another point. According to the chart, Charlottesville has 25 delegates and alternates. Lunenburg has seven. A 3.5 x 1 ratio more or less.

            Using the 2016 Presidential election, Charlottesville delivered 17,901 votes for Clinton. Lunenburg delivered 2,227. That’s an 8 x 1 ratio.

            Can you explain why the 5th CD convention process is weighted so heavily to the rural counties? That, if we use the Presidential vote as a proxy for the number of Dems in a given jurisdiction, it appears that the rural counties are weighted more than twice as heavy as they should be if all Dems are considered equal?

          • Agreed, that ratio is inexcusable.

          • BuckDem

            I think you just explained the flaws in the Clinton strategy from 2016 – pay more attention to the urban areas and forgo the 20 old timers in the rural areas.

            Those rural areas may not have much but as we saw in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, enough to decide the outcome of an election. I think it’s safe to say C’ville and Albemarle would get out and vote for the Dem nominee no matter who it is; even a moderate and unlikable Dem is better than Garrett. But if those rural voters don’t show up or worse yet, feel like the Dem nominee doesn’t represent them and they flip, it could cost an election.

            In the future, I hope for a system that is easy and inclusive like a primary but also one that doesn’t alienate rural Democratic voters. Best I can think of so far is the RCV system. Hopefully, we can try that next go round.

          • notjohnsmosby

            A primary doesn’t alienate rural voters anyone since everyone in the district can vote.

            The 20 oldtimers are more likely to vote than 20 minorities or young people living in Charlottesville. Dems need to work for all voters, but as always, older white people are the most likely group to vote, whether they are Dems or Republicans.

            Instant run-off voting is good for some things, but as we’ve seen in a number of firehouse primaries in NoVA, they can be confusing to a lot of people. Picking one name out of four is easy, and we still have voters screwing that up. Asking them to rank them 1-4 actually requires quite a bit of work on the part of the people running the election to explain it to voters. We use it for intra-party stuff in Fairfax and a lot of people get confused – and that’s insiders in the party.

          • Kenneth Ferland

            In Lunenberg our caucus turnout was predominantly black as is the local committee. Also note that blacks also grow old and become more likely to vote as a result just like every group. And contrary to popular belief older blacks vote more reliably then older white voters.

          • Kenneth Ferland

            Thanks for making note of my county. The formula chosen was one that adds the raw population of the county/city + the democratic vote. This method is allowed for in the Virginia Democratic party plan, and is similar to what we use nationally in a presidential race, the delegates available from a state are a mix of the population + the democratic vote.

            Note also that that all nomination conventions use the democratic vote for the most recent election for which the nomination is being made, in this case it’s the 2016 house race, though the vote ratio is not much different from what you describe.

            Yes this dose move delegates towards less democratic areas, Charlottesville represented 11.7% of the democratic vote and is awarded 7.6% of delegates. But that was the point, the formula is trying to spread out the campaigning which it did do. Albemarle/Charlottesville still saw VASTLY more of it though.

            In Lunenberg we had 53 people attend the caucus which is about 2.6% of our 2016 Democratic vote. Albemarle got ~1,300 at it’s caucus which is 4.3% of their 2016 Democratic vote so we are not that far behind and reflects the fact we still got a low level of visits. Sneathern never visited, and each of the other candidates visited us only once.

  • Kenneth Ferland

    Cockburn now at 112 with the final caucuses all on Saturday morning. She would need 14 more delegates to clinch which is just 23% of whats up for grabs on Saturday. Only question now seems to be what county will put her over the top.

    • Yeah, this is basically a done deal.

  • Concerned 5th Resident

    This is highly inaccurate. The writer failed to report numbers for Sneathern and Huffstetler for at least TWO COUNTIES AND ONE CITY yet provided a district total reflecting only Cockburn’s updated tally.

    Is this a joke? How do you expect voters to make an informed decision as far as whom to support at the district convention on May 5th in Farmville when they are being fed overtly misleading data?

    Perhaps the writer should make a note of this in his CD 5 total or, better yet, adhere to elementary journalistic standards but not reporting a story until he or she has done his or her due journalistic diligence and simply obtained the final counts for the forgotten counties.This is the epitome of fake news. SAD!

    • Not inaccurate at all; it clearly states that there are “13 others between Sneathern and Huffstetler,” I simply haven’t seen the breakout posted on the 5th CD Dems website or anywhere else. Do you have the actual #s? If so, happy to post them.

      • Concerned 5th Resident

        Inexcusable. The numbers are as follows:

        Prince Edward: LC-5, RDH-2, AS-1

        Danville: LC-7, RDH-5, AS-3
        Nelson: LC-4, RDH-0, AS-2

        Bringing the actual count to: LC-112, RDH-34, AS-43

        • Added. The question is why these #s aren’t available immediately on the 5th CD Dems page.

          • Kenneth Ferland

            Cockburn is immediately announcing her delegate wins on Facebook and twitter, the other campaigns have been completely silent on their delegate wins from the very start, so it is simply easier to find the Cockburn numbers.

    • Kenneth Ferland

      Take a Chill pill man, this is a blog site maintained by one guy not CNN. I have been following this caucus closely and it is very hard to get the full numbers before they are officially posted. If some campaigns are going to the effort to make their totals known and other campaigns are not then lowkell is under no obligation to with-hold the information he was able to find.

      Delegate to the convention are pledged to vote for particular candidates on the first ballot, only on subsequent ballots are they free to vote for who they like and it is the job of the campaigns to try to win them over on the floor of the convention. This blog and news coverage in general is not part of that process it is just outside observation of it.

      And I would very much NOT want folks to be basing their choice on who to support on any kind of band-wagon effect. Fortunately their is no sign of that as all candidates look to be consistently getting about the same percentages.

    • notjohnsmosby

      The only people who get to vote on May 5th are the ones being selected in the caucuses, and to get elected at the caucus, you are running to support one candidate. This is how conventions work. With Cockburn already over 50%, she will be the winner on May 5th. It’s done.

      • That’s my read on it too; this has been effectively Cockburn’s for a while now…today just mathematically clinches it.

  • Kenneth Ferland

    Brunswick results are 5 Huffstetler, 3 Cockburn, 0 Sneathern eyewitness by myself while volunteering. Greene results are at https://democratsva5.org/2018/04/14/unofficial-caucus-results/ and are 3 Cockburn, 2 Sneathern, 1 Huffstetler.

  • BuckDem

    Soooo……you’re basically showing that Cockburn paid her campaign staff for their work and for office supplies here and there.

    I’m glad to see her staff is well compensated though – not only did they deliver a win, they blew their competition out of the water!