[url="http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results"]NY Times Results[/url]
[url="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2016/apr/09/wyoming-democratic-caucus-results-live-polls-election-2016?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter"]Guardian Results[/url]
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cfne4qBVIAA2lvp.jpg:large[/t]
Bernie Wins.
can't wait to see how this'll turn out
Bernie gets Wyoming, Hillary abandoned that state to, "Strengthen her fortress in New York"
Edit: that is my birthstate: and yes the High winds thing is true.
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;50100526]Bernie gets Wyoming, Hillary abandoned that state to, "Strengthen her fortress in New York"
Edit: that is my birthstate: and yes the High winds thing is true.[/QUOTE]
High Winds thing?
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;50100571]High Winds thing?[/QUOTE]
iirc Wyoming is famous for being stupidly windy all the time.
Why do their polls close so early?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50100673]Why do their polls close so early?[/QUOTE]
Caucus + least populated state
laramie county 26 for clinton 25 for bernie
52% reporting, 54% Sanders, 46% Clinton
The delegate count is really small but it will be nice for Sander's momentum if he can say he won the last 7 states.
8 point lead for Sanders with 52% reporting so far, what was his predicted gains?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50101130]8 point lead for Sanders with 52% reporting so far, what was his predicted gains?[/QUOTE]
No polls were done in Wyoming so we can't really be for sure. Regardless of who wins, it'll be almost insignificant.
sanders won with 56.2%
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50101130]8 point lead for Sanders with 52% reporting so far, what was his predicted gains?[/QUOTE]
If we base it off of [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/"]this site[/URL] the victory was predicted to be much larger.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50101414]If we base it off of [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/"]this site[/URL] the victory was predicted to be much larger.[/QUOTE]
That isn't a prediction that's an "Ideal for sanders" situation.
[QUOTE=Durandal;50101494]That isn't a prediction that's an "Ideal for sanders" situation.[/QUOTE]
Uhh.. why not? I mean the guy who made this must base it off of his own expectations, and he probably expected Sanders to win big in Wyoming to set it this high.
I mean that site literally gauges how many delegates Sanders needs to overtake Hillary in pledged delegates.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50101496]Uhh.. why not? I mean the guy who made this must base it off of his own expectations, and he probably expected Sanders to win big in Wyoming to set it this high.
I mean that site literally gauges how many delegates Sanders needs to overtake Hillary in pledged delegates.[/QUOTE]
If you look at the chart, if it was a prediction, he would be predicting that somehow Sanders blows Hillary out in NY by four points. Unless Hillary does something abhorrent, or the email shit blows up in her face, I just don't see Sanders winning by that much in her so called "Home State". He even says this isn't a prediction.
[QUOTE=Durandal;50101521]If you look at the chart, if it was a prediction, he would be predicting that somehow Sanders blows Hillary out in NY by four points. Unless Hillary does something abhorrent, or the email shit blows up in her face, I just don't see Sanders winning by that much in her so called "Home State". He even says this isn't a prediction.[/QUOTE]
Yes true. However since no polls were made this is the closest we get to any kind of prediction by 538
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50101496]Uhh.. why not? I mean the guy who made this must base it off of his own expectations, and he probably expected Sanders to win big in Wyoming to set it this high.
I mean that site literally gauges how many delegates Sanders needs to overtake Hillary in pledged delegates.[/QUOTE]
From the link you posted:
[quote]None of this is all that likely. Frankly, none of it is at all likely.[/quote]
He doesn't expect it to happen, he's outlining what he thinks is the most plausible way for Saunders to get 988 more delegates.
honestly the only likely scenario i see in which bernie wins if is hillary gets indicted for the emails
[QUOTE=uitham;50101640]honestly the only likely scenario i see in which bernie wins if is hillary gets indicted for the emails[/QUOTE]
which will most likely happen as most people in law predict a charge
[QUOTE=Wii60;50101650]which will most likely happen as most people in law predict a charge[/QUOTE]
they are taking their sweet time. Just hoping they don't do it at the last moment
also their big company donors seem to keep paying her fundraisers so it seems to me they are very confident in their investment
[QUOTE=uitham;50101666]they are taking their sweet time. Just hoping they don't do it at the last moment[/QUOTE]
The investigation seems to be fully under the control of the Republicans. The most politically advantageous time to indict her would be after she's secured the nomination and the deadlines for registering new candidates on state polls has passed.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50101414]If we base it off of [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/"]this site[/URL] the victory was predicted to be much larger.[/QUOTE]
Uh what? They required him to have a plus 56 margin there for Wyoming? How the fuck would that even be possible? I'm calling that site bullshit for being a "prediction". They even say in the paragraph below "To repeat, these are not predictions. On the contrary, they describe a rose-colored-glasses scenario for Sanders that I consider to be very unlikely."
[QUOTE=gman003-main;50101690]The investigation seems to be fully under the control of the Republicans. The most politically advantageous time to indict her would be after she's secured the nomination and the deadlines for registering new candidates on state polls has passed.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't the Democrats get forced another nominee?
[editline]9th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50101414]If we base it off of [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/"]this site[/URL] the victory was predicted to be much larger.[/QUOTE]
They already screwed up in Michigan.
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;50101756]Wouldn't the Democrats get forced another nominee?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, [I]but[/I] it'll be a nominee majority of the people didn't vote for in the primaries, which will throw a bone into their campaign machine.
So here's a question, surrogate/abnsentee ballots in Laramie county, the most populous county in Wyoming.
Does anyone have the stats for how many surrogate ballots each candidate got?
edit:
oh fuck this thread is a day old I didn't even notice, sorry.
Bernie again, he's on a fucking roll.
I'm worried about New York.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;50110453]I'm worried about New York.[/QUOTE]
I'm like 90% sure Hillary will be behind bars before the end of the election so at this point I'm not really all that concerned about how hard the DNC has rigged the game.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;50110172]
edit:
oh fuck this thread is a day old I didn't even notice, sorry.[/QUOTE]
Thread necromancy doesn't count if it's only a handful of days old, especially if it's something directly tied to the article (not replying to a side topic)
[editline]11th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;50110453]I'm worried about New York.[/QUOTE]
One thing is for sure, New York will be closer than Clinton ever intended it to be.
The mere fact that she's been spending so much time in the state campaigning is a sign that she's legit worried about losing it.
[editline]11th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=soulharvester;50110479]I'm like 90% sure Hillary will be behind bars before the end of the election so at this point I'm not really all that concerned about how hard the DNC has rigged the game.[/QUOTE]
I seriously doubt she'll be behind bars. If by some cosmic chance she's actually prosecuted and actually convicted, she'll get a slap on the wrist and nothing more.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
