Hillary and Bernie’s Quiet Email Battle

Re:Hillary and Bernie’s Quiet Email Battle by gkoberger on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @05:39PM (#11113702)

You can be a fan of any candidate you choose, but please don't be disingenuous.

Sanders leads Clinton in pledged delegates (36 v 32). Superdelegates are meaningless at this point; they will shift to whomever is winning by the time the convention comes around. For example, Bill Clinton changed his superdelegate vote from his own wife to Obama in 2008.

As for your percentages, currently 538 puts Sanders only 20% (not 30%) behind in SC, 24% (not 40%) behind in Florida, and tied (with a slight advantage) in Nevada. Additionally, the 538 polls have consistently underestimated Sanders for the two primaries we've seen so far due to the large turnout from younger voters. [1]

Hillary is the heir apparent, while Bernie is a relative unknown. Both are great positions to be in. She has nowhere to go but down, and he has nowhere to go but up. Polling is in Hillary's favor, but momentum is in Bernie's. There's no way of knowing who will win at this point.

You may support whomever you choose, but please try to remain truthful.

[1] http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-fo...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hillary and Bernie’s Quiet Email Battle by Someone1234 on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @05:46PM (#11113739)

> As for your percentages, currently 538 puts Sanders only 20% behind in SC, tied in Nevada and 24% behind in Florida (note that I have no confidence in these polls, but they're all we have).

Speaking of disingenuous, the very same site lists her as having a ">99% chance" of winning SC. I said "up to 40%" because that is exactly what the polls have said, they've changed from the 20-40%+ over the last month. See:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sc/so...

> And the 538 polls have consistently underestimated Sanders for the two primaries we've seen so far.

Indeed, but not by enough for him to win SC or Florida.

> You may support whomever you choose, but please try to remain truthful.

You've presented zero corrections to anything I've said. I stand behind "up to 40%" because I can link you to a poll which shows 40%+ right now.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sc/so...

Don't accuse me of being untruthful because you disagree on interpretation, which you clearly do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hillary and Bernie’s Quiet Email Battle by gkoberger on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @05:49PM (#11113753)

538 presents two separate metics: forecast and polling averages. Your initial post used (outdated) polling averages, so I went with that rather than the forecasts. Yes, Hillary is forecasted with 99% likelihood to get more votes/delegates in SC (just like Sanders was 99% likely to win New Hampshire), however it's not winner-takes-all. Delegates are split roughly by percentage.

I didn't say you were lying, I said you were being disingenuous.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hillary and Bernie’s Quiet Email Battle by Someone1234 on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @05:57PM (#11113782)

> I didn't say you were lying, I said you were being disingenuous.

You said both:

> You may support whomever you choose, but please try to remain truthful.

The implication is clearly that I was somehow being untruthful, or lying.

[ Parent | on HN ]