Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

FiveThirtyEight's Clinton Bias is annoying

ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 2:59:43 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I hate to say this, because it is generally one of my favorite sites. But the way they are fanboying for Hillary is pretty despicable. When all the early states favored Clinton, they ran article after article talking about how the race was not looking good for Bernie, and how things kept getting tougher for him.

But, now that Sanders has won the last two waves of delegates, there won't be any "Hillary's in trouble" articles. She certainly is in trouble, however. All the deep south states have voted and the rest of the states yet to vote favor Bernie. Good thing too, because I would hate to have to vote for Hilary in the general just to stop Trump or Cruz.

As a separate issue, can anybody explain why, in a winner take all electoral college system, the Democratic party would give even a single solitary fart about the preferences of the ~15% democrat voters in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, etc...? I mean, those states are doomed to vote red in the general election by the weight of their majority uneducated, racist country bumpkin population.

To maximize their chances of winning the election, Democrats should pick a candidate who does well in light blue and purple states. Maybe some light red states. NOT deep racist red Dixie. Same goes for Republicans, of course. There's no reason to care what Massachussets or NY republicans think about who would be a better GOP candidate. Those states are going blue anyway.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 3:32:46 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
The states that Sanders lost early on were supposed to be states he was favored in, which was a very bad sign.

As for the last two rounds of delegates, FiveThirtyEight relies pretty heavily on their "Who"s On Track For The Nomination?" model, which doesn't show Sanders improving his position by all that much after the last two rounds of delegates, even though he did better than expected. To be specific, he went from 88 percent on target prior to AZ, UT, ID, to 91 percent on target after AK, WA, HI (alternatively, Clinton is still 7 percent above her target). The model takes into account demographics in order to give a picture of how well the candidates should be doing -- assuming they want to win the nomination -- relative to how well they stack up against the states that have already conducted their primaries. If you only looked at delegate counts you'd have a hard time judging who's actually in the lead, since the states which have already conducted their primaries might favor one candidate, while the states that have yet to do theirs might favor the other candidate, giving a distorted impression of who the leader really is.

This model can be biased against Sanders, but only in a very specific sense. It can raise the bar too high for Sanders early on by setting his targets above where they belong, giving the impression that he's doing worse than he needs to be doing, but this would have to be made up for in the later primaries, since the model has him winning the nomination eventually. In other words, if they raise the bar too high for Sanders early on, by suggesting that he needs to do very well in the early primaries in order to be "on track", then they don't require him to do as well in the later primaries, which makes it easier for Sanders to break through their targets. So if their model is biased against Sanders in this sense, then we should expect Sanders to start breaking through his targets by a significant margin. However, it seems quite unlikely that FiveThirtyEight would pull this sort of stunt, and anyway if you look at the model it's clearly not lopsided in the way it would need to be.
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 3:46:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 2:59:43 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
I hate to say this, because it is generally one of my favorite sites. But the way they are fanboying for Hillary is pretty despicable. When all the early states favored Clinton, they ran article after article talking about how the race was not looking good for Bernie, and how things kept getting tougher for him.

Thats partially because the race ISNT looking good for Bernie and that things really ARE getting tougher for him

But, now that Sanders has won the last two waves of delegates, there won't be any "Hillary's in trouble" articles. She certainly is in trouble, however.

She has a massive lead over Bernie in delegates and that doesnt even include super-delegates. Saying Hillary is in trouble to Bernie at this point is like saying the lion is in danger to the field mouse

All the deep south states have voted and the rest of the states yet to vote favor Bernie.

She won Massachusetts, Ohio, Illinois, Arizona, and Nevada. Her wins extend far beyond just 'The south'

http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Good thing too, because I would hate to have to vote for Hilary in the general just to stop Trump or Cruz.

Youre in for a very rude awakening

As a separate issue, can anybody explain why, in a winner take all electoral college system, the Democratic party would give even a single solitary fart about the preferences of the ~15% democrat voters in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, etc...? I mean, those states are doomed to vote red in the general election by the weight of their majority uneducated, racist country bumpkin population.

Just because they vote against your boy Bernie it doesnt mean that their voices and voices shouldnt be counted.

To maximize their chances of winning the election, Democrats should pick a candidate who does well in light blue and purple states. Maybe some light red states. NOT deep racist red Dixie. Same goes for Republicans, of course. There's no reason to care what Massachussets or NY republicans think about who would be a better GOP candidate. Those states are going blue anyway.

This may come as a shock to you, but states that vote red or blue havent always voted red and blue like you seem to think they do.... California itself was a GOP stronghold for 10 years from 1976 to 1988, and Georgia voted Blue for a hundred years before switching to red

http://www.270towin.com...
http://www.270towin.com...
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 8:28:31 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 3:46:40 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/27/2016 2:59:43 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
I hate to say this, because it is generally one of my favorite sites. But the way they are fanboying for Hillary is pretty despicable. When all the early states favored Clinton, they ran article after article talking about how the race was not looking good for Bernie, and how things kept getting tougher for him.

Thats partially because the race ISNT looking good for Bernie and that things really ARE getting tougher for him
He's still the underdog but to say things are getting tougher?? He just swept Clinton in 3 states yesterday, by huge margins. More to come.
But, now that Sanders has won the last two waves of delegates, there won't be any "Hillary's in trouble" articles. She certainly is in trouble, however.

She has a massive lead over Bernie in delegates and that doesnt even include super-delegates. Saying Hillary is in trouble to Bernie at this point is like saying the lion is in danger to the field mouse
Yes, the superdelegates are still in her pocket. For now.
All the deep south states have voted and the rest of the states yet to vote favor Bernie.

She won Massachusetts, Ohio, Illinois, Arizona, and Nevada. Her wins extend far beyond just 'The south'
I didn't say Hilary can't win outside the south. I said all the deep south states, aka the only place Bernie can't win, are all done voting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Good thing too, because I would hate to have to vote for Hilary in the general just to stop Trump or Cruz.

Youre in for a very rude awakening
As a separate issue, can anybody explain why, in a winner take all electoral college system, the Democratic party would give even a single solitary fart about the preferences of the ~15% democrat voters in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, etc...? I mean, those states are doomed to vote red in the general election by the weight of their majority uneducated, racist country bumpkin population.

Just because they vote against your boy Bernie it doesnt mean that their voices and voices shouldnt be counted.
You do realize I'm bringing this up as a separate issue, right? Those states (thankfully) overwhelmingly rejected Clinton in favor of Obama in the primaries of 2008, and I thought it was just as stupid for those voters to influence the Democratic party's choice then, as I do now. I'm not saying they shouldn't count because they aren't in favor of "my boy" Bernie, I'm saying the electoral college rules as written create a party incentive for those votes to count less than the votes in swing states. And don't give me any "voice of the people" bs while your candidate is propping herself up on superdelegates, lol.
To maximize their chances of winning the election, Democrats should pick a candidate who does well in light blue and purple states. Maybe some light red states. NOT deep racist red Dixie. Same goes for Republicans, of course. There's no reason to care what Massachussets or NY republicans think about who would be a better GOP candidate. Those states are going blue anyway.

This may come as a shock to you, but states that vote red or blue havent always voted red and blue like you seem to think they do.... California itself was a GOP stronghold for 10 years from 1976 to 1988, and Georgia voted Blue for a hundred years before switching to red

http://www.270towin.com...
http://www.270towin.com...

This may come as a shock to you, but I'm fully aware of our nation's political history. California is an example of a situation where changing demographics and state laws had an effect on party membership, but do yourself a favor and don't bring up Georgia. Georgia didn't change political leaning, the parties just switched places. The entire south used to be democrat, until the Civil Rights Act lol.

Anyway, you're missing the point of what I'm saying. I'm not saying Texas can't ever be blue again. In fact it t probably will, maybe in 10 years or maybe in 25. What I am saying is that for this election year, it is hopelessly lost for the Democrats. So I'd rather the candidates not waste their time trying to pick up ultimately useless votes there.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 8:29:44 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 3:50:39 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Not as annoying as many Sanders supporters elsewhere on the Internet.

Of all people on this site, I would have pegged you as the biggest Sanders supporter. Are you seriously in Clinton's camp?
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 8:32:51 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
And of course, right on cue, the obligatory "Sanders won but don't worry guys Hillary's still got this" article:

http://fivethirtyeight.com...

No mention of how Clinton has already run out of Deep South states lol
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 8:37:36 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 8:29:44 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:50:39 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Not as annoying as many Sanders supporters elsewhere on the Internet.

Of all people on this site, I would have pegged you as the biggest Sanders supporter. Are you seriously in Clinton's camp?

Trump, baby. He's hot for daddy.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 8:39:41 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 8:37:36 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:29:44 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:50:39 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Not as annoying as many Sanders supporters elsewhere on the Internet.

Of all people on this site, I would have pegged you as the biggest Sanders supporter. Are you seriously in Clinton's camp?

Trump, baby. He's hot for daddy.

lol ok there's a zero percent chance he's backing Trump
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
538 isn't biased. Bernie is just not doing well enough to win the nomination. The sooner you accept that, the better.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Crudz is just not doing well enough to win the nomination. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:33:32 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 8:28:31 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:46:40 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/27/2016 2:59:43 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
I hate to say this, because it is generally one of my favorite sites. But the way they are fanboying for Hillary is pretty despicable. When all the early states favored Clinton, they ran article after article talking about how the race was not looking good for Bernie, and how things kept getting tougher for him.

Thats partially because the race ISNT looking good for Bernie and that things really ARE getting tougher for him

He's still the underdog but to say things are getting tougher?? He just swept Clinton in 3 states yesterday, by huge margins. More to come.

He won in Alaska and Washington, and Hillary's wins in a few big states that already voted are enough to wipe out ALL of the wins that Bernie has had up to this point. Bernie fans are delusional if they think Bernie will make a comeback and win it all.

But, now that Sanders has won the last two waves of delegates, there won't be any "Hillary's in trouble" articles. She certainly is in trouble, however.

She has a massive lead over Bernie in delegates and that doesnt even include super-delegates. Saying Hillary is in trouble to Bernie at this point is like saying the lion is in danger to the field mouse

Yes, the superdelegates are still in her pocket. For now.

And they will stay with her, along with a majority of the regular delegates as well. Sucks for you.

All the deep south states have voted and the rest of the states yet to vote favor Bernie.

She won Massachusetts, Ohio, Illinois, Arizona, and Nevada. Her wins extend far beyond just 'The south'

I didn't say Hilary can't win outside the south. I said all the deep south states, aka the only place Bernie can't win, are all done voting.

Bernie cant win in a lot of other places either, and in a lot of those places he'll lose. Bg time ;)

As a separate issue, can anybody explain why, in a winner take all electoral college system, the Democratic party would give even a single solitary fart about the preferences of the ~15% democrat voters in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, etc...? I mean, those states are doomed to vote red in the general election by the weight of their majority uneducated, racist country bumpkin population.

Just because they vote against your boy Bernie it doesnt mean that their voices and voices shouldnt be counted.

You do realize I'm bringing this up as a separate issue, right? Those states (thankfully) overwhelmingly rejected Clinton in favor of Obama in the primaries of 2008, and I thought it was just as stupid for those voters to influence the Democratic party's choice then, as I do now.

You dont get to cancel people's votes just because you disagree with them.

I'm not saying they shouldn't count because they aren't in favor of "my boy" Bernie

Actually thats exactly what youre saying. You just dont have the spine to admit it.

Anyway, you're missing the point of what I'm saying. I'm not saying Texas can't ever be blue again. In fact it t probably will, maybe in 10 years or maybe in 25. What I am saying is that for this election year, it is hopelessly lost for the Democrats. So I'd rather the candidates not waste their time trying to pick up ultimately useless votes there.

Because they wouldnt vote for your boy Bernie ;)
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:41:52 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 8:39:41 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:37:36 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:29:44 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:50:39 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Not as annoying as many Sanders supporters elsewhere on the Internet.

Of all people on this site, I would have pegged you as the biggest Sanders supporter. Are you seriously in Clinton's camp?

Trump, baby. He's hot for daddy.

lol ok there's a zero percent chance he's backing Trump

He actually is. He was a hard-Sanders supporter, but then after he made peace with the fact that Bernie isnt going to win, he switched to supporting Trump because if he cant vote Sanders to fix the system, he'll vote Trump to completely break it instead
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
thett3
Posts: 14,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:56:19 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Clinton isn't even close to being in danger. Literally the only state Bernie won that should've freaked out Clinton's camp was Michigan, and Clinton swept the next 5 mega-state contests
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 10:59:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 10:41:52 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:39:41 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:37:36 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/27/2016 8:29:44 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:50:39 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Not as annoying as many Sanders supporters elsewhere on the Internet.

Of all people on this site, I would have pegged you as the biggest Sanders supporter. Are you seriously in Clinton's camp?

Trump, baby. He's hot for daddy.

lol ok there's a zero percent chance he's backing Trump

He actually is. He was a hard-Sanders supporter, but then after he made peace with the fact that Bernie isnt going to win, he switched to supporting Trump because if he cant vote Sanders to fix the system, he'll vote Trump to completely break it instead

Come to the dark side bench....
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 12:07:03 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Drumpf is just not doing well enough to win the nomination. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.

I agree.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 12:24:18 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 12:07:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Drumpf is just doing well enough to win the nomination. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.

I agree.

i agree.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 1:10:54 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 12:24:18 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/28/2016 12:07:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Drumpf is just doing well enough to win 0 electoral votes. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.

I agree.

i agree.

I agree.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 1:16:55 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 1:10:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/28/2016 12:24:18 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/28/2016 12:07:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Drumpf is just doing well enough to win 0 Crudz voters. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.

I agree.

i agree.

I agree.

I agree.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 2:03:19 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 1:16:55 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/28/2016 1:10:54 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/28/2016 12:24:18 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/28/2016 12:07:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:12:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/27/2016 10:07:35 PM, TN05 wrote:
538 isn't biased. Drumpf is just doing well enough to win 0 Crudz voters. The sooner you accept that, the better.

I agree.

I agree.

i agree.

I agree.

I agree.

I agree, Drumpf is on pace to not win any Cruz supporters. In which case the electoral map looks like this:
Clinton - 50 states + DC
Trump - 0 states
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 2:09:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 2:03:19 AM, TN05 wrote:


I agree, Drumpf is on pace to not win any Cruz supporters. In which case the electoral map looks like this:
Clinton - 50 states + DC
Trump - 0 states

It's really no surprise. All Cruz supporters want the same thing as Shillary, to not change anything.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 2:31:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 2:03:19 AM, TN05 wrote:

I agree, Drumpf is on pace to not win any Cruz supporters. In which case the electoral map looks like this:
Clinton - 50 states + DC
Trump - 0 states

What will eventually happen is Shillary will get the really pissed Crudz voters, but not alot.
Trump will get far more Bernie voters.
Crudz voters go on a drunken binge and wake up with a hangover.
Trump sends them aspirin anyway.