2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumPoll: Clinton keeps New York edge, leads Sanders in California
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-hillary-clinton-keeps-new-york-edge-leads-bernie-sanders-in-california-election-2016/
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Anything close to that and its all over but the whining!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)NY
FL
CA
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Actually me too now that I think about it..
IL, AR, MS, TX, FL, and MD (most likely).
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)Especially in NY on Tuesday.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Just check the rcp averages.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)I would think he'd have to win one or the other at least.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)A 200+ delegate deficit is very difficult, nearly impossible, to make up this late in the game.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
DCBob
(24,689 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)They sure made that guy disappear the second he said something off message. Or was it off message?
IamMab
(1,359 posts)Or one could cynically argue that Killer Mike was only brought on and highlighted ahead of southern primaries to try to influence the black vote, and having failed at that, was no longer "necessary" to the Sanders campaign.
DLnyc
(2,479 posts)Michigan polls average up to March 7, 2016: Clinton: 58.7% . . . . Sanders: 37.3% (C up 21.4%)
Actual primary, March 8, 2016: Clinton: 48.3% . . . .Sanders: 49.8% (C down 1.5%)
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)I have a good feeling about Tuesday.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Applets and Orangutans.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)There were 2,460 regular season NBA games played this season and that was the biggest blown lead. I assure you gamblers aren't calling their bookies to bet on teams that are down twenty six points at half time.
Michigan was an anomaly.
DLnyc
(2,479 posts)You don't have the usual demographics, nor usual voting patterns, nor usual turnout patterns.
Makes it very hard for traditional polling methodologies to get a handle on what will actually happen on Primary Day.
At least that is what experience so for this season has shown.
One can always claim 100% accuracy, I suppose, if one simply dismisses one's errors as anomalies. But this approach is not super useful for anticipating future events. I think sometimes accepting the historical limitations of your instruments lets you get a better sense of how little reliable information you actually have!
DLnyc
(2,479 posts)(I like your avatar, by the way. Greatest fighter ever!)
ismnotwasm
(42,000 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Figure 90% ID as Democrat and 10% ID as Indies.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)It combines a landline sample with an online sample and samples some people twice.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Or was that person lying? Or was that person living in a fantasy? Or was that person using an outlier poll? Or was that person quoting an unreliable source?
From the looks of things, it appears that Bernie will NOT win California ... and that Bernie will NOT be the nominee.
I wonder what they were thinking. Weird.