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 Your initial post used (outdated) polling averages, so I went with that rather than the forecasts.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.
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.
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.