NEVADA CAUCUS (50% IN)
🔹"First vote" approximates a primary.
🔹"CCD%" points to delegate totals.
After Sanders, here's how the candidates did in the primary-like "first vote" (50% in):
1⃣7⃣.1⃣ Biden
1⃣5⃣.9⃣ Buttigieg
1⃣3⃣.3⃣ Warren
9⃣.8⃣ Klobuchar
8⃣.8⃣ Steyer
0⃣.3⃣ Gabbard
🔹"First vote" approximates a primary.
🔹"CCD%" points to delegate totals.
After Sanders, here's how the candidates did in the primary-like "first vote" (50% in):
1⃣7⃣.1⃣ Biden
1⃣5⃣.9⃣ Buttigieg
1⃣3⃣.3⃣ Warren
9⃣.8⃣ Klobuchar
8⃣.8⃣ Steyer
0⃣.3⃣ Gabbard
PS/ Sanders won Nevada big. But a look at the data shows that not only was the primary-like "first vote" a close race for second between Biden, Buttigieg, and Warren (3.8% apart with 50% in), but the same 3 had an even closer race with one another—and Sanders—among late deciders: 
PS2/ "Late deciders" are interesting, as they give a sense of where Nevada voters were at post-debate. And where they were at was bunching four candidates—Sanders, Biden, Warren, and Buttigieg—between 7% of one another, whereas the *overall*, 50%-in results have Sanders up 27.4%.
PS3/ I don't know what this means post-Nevada. One interpretation is that voters are more divided than pundits suggest—even as Sanders remains the front-runner. Still, to the extent South Carolina voters care about Nevada results, they're likely to look primarily at "final" data.
