- The question I am asking myself now is whether this means the polls are off in other Midwestern states that are holding open primaries. I’m talking specifically about Illinois and Ohio, both of which vote next Tuesday. The FiveThirtyEight polling average in Illinois gives Clinton a 37 percentage point lead, while the average in Ohio gives her a 20 percentage point lead. If Michigan was just a fluke (which is possible), then tonight will be forgotten soon enough. If, however, pollsters are missing something more fundamental about the electorate, then the Ohio and Illinois primaries could be a lot closer than expected.
mk - Even FiveThirtyEight is stunned. pseudo science. Bernie has a real shot.
After talking with mk and others about this election, it generally comes down to people liking Bernie's integrity but frightened that he will be unable to do what he wants or that he is incapable of being prez.
Obama was similarly idealistic. Perhaps not as revolutionary, but still he was idealistic. He had FAR less experience in politics and still... the country is not just standing but many would argue that it's far better off for having him as president. I think Bernie would do a fine job. He's a smart man, pragmatic and thoughtful. I also think the transparency that was promised to us with Obama would actually happen with Bernie.
I'm a fan. I'm gonna send him a few bucks.
There is a debate tonight and it just became a make or break night for both of them. Sanders has momentum and he has every right to say, "the establishment has been assuming Clinton. The people are telling you the THEY will decide who the front runner is, not YOU." -It's amazing how much spin is given to all this. The delegate count is almost always presented with her having all of the superdelagates. They will likely vote in accordance with the population. Lots of assumptions being used to bolster her campaign. What do you think rob05c? you think Bernie has a realistic shot?
After Michigan and its ripples, I think he has a metashot. I think he has a shot at winning more votes than Hillary, but not enough to overcome her massive superdelegate pledges. Then it becomes a question of whether the superdelegates value democracy – or fear backlash – enough to switch. We'll see. It's still an uphill battle, but all the Southern states have gone, so from here on out he'll be winning a lot. California, New York, Washington, et cetera. The current non-superdelegate counts are Hillary 748 – 542 Sanders. So yeah, I think he's got a real shot. If he loses due to superdelegates, I will go to the state Democratic office in person on July 29 to resign my party membership. Sic Semper Tyrannis.
Even with this momentous win that literally defied all polling it is still a long shot. He is polling much less than ideal for the 15th. He's gotta win big, and if he does then his chances become far greater than they were before. A collective win on the 15th relays two messages: He is electable, and he now has some sense of mandate by the people so to speak.
Especially Illinois. Chicago with its large minority population is a real indicator city/state. It's going to be hard to win overall on the 15th because of Florida, though. He'll lose Florida massively, due to its elderly population. There really isn't even a hope there.
538 isn't using pseudoscience, obviously. This is probably their biggest miss ever (b_b or someone may be able to weigh in) but statistics is a real field. Unlike psychology. Anyway, it may be time to pay attention to the primaries. I'm still tagging this #sillyseason.
I'm pretty sure the statistical fuck up came from the fact that Michigan is an open primary and Sanders got a disgusting amount of independent voters in michigan. I'm not 100% sure (my knowledge on pollsters is limited to interactions with a few professionals), but they probably didn't account for the independent numbers.
I wonder how many of the GOP voters decided they just didn't want HRC, and thus voted for Bernie. It's interesting that he not only won very liberal counties, such as Washtenaw, but he swept the most rural and conservative counties. Either that, or rural Dems prefer the Bern.
I don't think thtis would be much of a surprise really. Especially now, after he swept Nebraska and Kansas. His policies definitely cater towards the lower class, but he's had issues connecting with minorities. So, to me, it makes sense that rural voters, being generally of lower income levels than urban voters, would go for Sanders over Clinton.rural Dems prefer the Bern.
Still, election statistics comes from polls. Silver's brilliance was that he didn't take polls at face value, he measured how they were measuring, as well as what, in order to turn them into psychohistory a la Hari Seldon. If you haven't read his book, you should.
IL is a weird state, and I doubt it'll go well for Bernie. The cities are going to be swung by the black voters, who will lean Hillary, and the whole rest of the nation is highly republican/southern/old, who will likely be more moderate democrats, and will lean Hillary.
The reasons I can think of for me to not vote for Bernie Sanders aren't good reasons. I think he won't be able to do all the things he wants, but that isn't a bad thing. Shooting for the moon and getting halfway there isn't a bad thing. I suppose if a lot of people are upset that their college loans and college tuition didn't go to $0 on January 20, 2017 there might be some negative consequences, but I think that's an acceptable tradeoff. My biggest wish is that there was a strong contender in the Republicans that I didn't hate. I wish Kasich was leading.