538 projection of Michigan: Clinton >99%

[brooklynite]

RCP Aggregate: Clinton +20.4
Pollster Aggregate: Clinton +18

Plenty of recent posts about Sanders "closing the gap", but I'm sure someone will complain that this is "discouraging" or "attempting to force him out".

[rbrnmw]

1. kick

[Lucinda]

2. KNR She will have a really good day tomorrow!

[Motown_Johnny]

38. Bwahahaha! n/t

[Lucinda]

43. She did. She is still ahead by every metric and increased her delegate lead. :)

[Motown_Johnny]

63. I wonder how the fundraising was impacted for both camps.

She may start having money problems after Super Tuesday...... again.

[mcar]

3. K&R

[NurseJackie]

4. "The Worm Has Turned"

[bvf]

42. Can I borrow that?

Thanks.

[Warren DeMontague]

57. Dont hurt your back, rollin on the floor!

And allow me to add: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHHAHAAAAA

[pat_k]

5. Margin if far more significant than win prediction.

And MSU poll just out (which in not in the current 538 analysis) indicates Sanders win is within margin of error.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1440875

FWIW

[TSIAS]

6. Sanders will do better than the projections

It seems as if 538 usually overstates Clinton's lead. That being said, I don't think it's likely that he wins outright.

[silvershadow]

7. Yielding her an increase of 3 delegates over Sanders when they are spilt. nt

[dubyadiprecession]

56. Backwards on bernie? ok.

[Logical]

8. Lol!

[WillyT]

9. Oops !!!

[Logical]

10. No kidding! Nt

[morningfog]

11. Recommend.

[progressoid]

12. Doh!

[coyote]

13. Discouraging indeed

Thank you for this OP brooklynite. My first recommend to one of your posts.

[GummyBearz]

14. 538 chances of failure > 99%

Feel the bern

[artislife]

49. ...

[TeeYiYi]

15. Rec for the lulz.

TYY

[Hiraeth]

16. :o

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Here, enjoy

http://reportingsandiego.com/2016/03/08/stunning-upset-in-michigan-for-senator-sanders/

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. DU-Rec

Had to.

[Cheese Sandwich]

19. Hopefully people will slow down on posting bad polls and predictions around the internet

[Art_from_Ark]

20. That'll happen around the time

they open a ski resort in Death Valley

[vintx]

21. That's a joke

right?

[SMC22307]

22. Maths fail!

[randome]

48. I have that pic on my cubicle wall!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. I've heard that fricasseed crow in sour grapes is not quite as awful as it sounds.

[AtomicKitten]

24. Math.

[pdsimdars]

30. Love it. . thank you.

[artislife]

50. This image is great! nt

[aspirant]

25. Can you explain to me again

the "SCIENTIFIC" nature of polls.

Does E=MC2 vary whether it is daytime vs night?

[PoliticAverse]

26. Apparently it wasn't "discouraging" enough. n/t

[vdogg]

27. The polls were wrong.

538 can only go by the info given. Indy's were 30% of the voters and went for a Sanders 70/30. It's hard to account for that in open primaries. The pollsters are going to need to reevaluate how they account for independents.

[pdsimdars]

29. It's what we've been saying all along. . .

Hillary won't be able to get the independents . . . . especially if it's against Trump who will draw them.
That is probably why ALL of those head to head polls have Bernie winning against all the GOP candidates and Hillary losing to most of them. The people are trying to tell you something if anyone will listen.

[vdogg]

31. She can get independents versus Trump.

She just can't get them versus Bernie. I expect her to perform close to target in Florida (closed primary), that's a big prize. She'll stay even in the Midwest. I think she'll probably, closely, win Illinois. It's an open primary but Bernie is gonna have a damn hard time overcoming Chicago (3 Detroits worth of votes). Ohio is a wild card right now, similar demographics to Michigan and an open primary. If Bernie wins there it won't be a runaway victory, and remember, delegates are awarded proportionally. I'm still very confident that Hillary gets the nom, but this primary is going to drag on to the convention.

[aspirant]

35. "overcoming Chicago" that's easy

The AA community will have a real choice, Bernie vs Rahm + Hills

If won't take much to tie Rahm to Hills and the issues of school closings, recall and AA murder cover-ups will give Bernie all the AA votes he needs.

"damn hard time" this is a joke, right?

[vdogg]

41. That's quite a stretch

Hillary has absolutely nothing to do with Rahm Emanuel or Chicago politics. You'd have a far easier time tying Obama to Emmanuel. Trust me when I tell you that Chicago is Obama country. Hillary being close to him will do her far better here than in Michigan and Detroit.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

44. Hillary has nothing to do with Rahm?

Seriously? You must be VERY young if you are not familiar with the history between Hillary, Rahm, and the DLC. If Bernie were smart he would tie her to Rahm (as she SHOULD be), trade agreements, Union busting, and bang that like fucking gong.

[vdogg]

61. So Hillary is responsible for Chicago school closings?

Do tell, cause that among other things is what OP is trying to imply. Them interacting in the past is irrelevant as to how Rahm Emanuel is running the city today. Two separate people. This guilt by association stuff is getting idiotic.

[Cal Carpenter]

52. I'd suggest reading Rahm's wiki entry at the very least

There is a long history with Rahm Emanuel and the Clintons going back to Bill's first presidential primary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel

Here's a gem:

"While working on the Clinton campaign Emanuel was a paid retainer of the investment bank Goldman Sachs". Cute.

If you are interested in their connections, just google: "rahm emanuel hillary clinton". There are tons of hits showing the links between Emanuel and both Bill and Hillary Clinton spanning ancient history to recent interviews, jobs in the administration to policy work, and everything else you can imagine.

To say "Hillary has absolutely nothing to do with Rahm Emanuel " is just flat out incorrect.

[vdogg]

60. What does any of this have to do with current Chicago Politics?

You can only beat that Goldman Sachs drum for so long. Rahm is mayor of Chicago, not Hillary. What control does she have over ( as the poster above you alluded to) AA murder cover ups, union busting IN CHICAGO, Chicago's crime rate and gang violence, etc? She has nothing to do with Rahm in this context, no matter what their past interactions. Rahm and Rahm alone is mayor of Chicago, he sinks or swims alone. Nice try though.

[Cal Carpenter]

62. Ooookay.

I was responding to this: "Hillary has absolutely nothing to do with Rahm Emanuel or Chicago politics". This is simply incorrect.

I shared information and links (for the record, the Goldman Sachs quote was just an aside). I shared that information respectfully and in good faith. I don't know what you are getting at with your "Nice try though" comment. Are you accusing me of trying to inform you of something? I plead guilty.

Clearly you are not here for a good faith conversation about this. So I'm deleting the majority of what I just wrote here because it isn't worth it. Just keep in mind that avoiding the truth does your candidate a disservice.

[marions ghost]

40. Becoming obvious that

Bernie is the best Anti-Trump.

[pdsimdars]

28. Oops! Looks like the "infallable" Nate's projection of the "inevitable" Clinton was INACCURATE

Hope this knocks a little of the smugness from the Hillariates. That's all we've been getting around here is smugness and condescension.
A little less would be nice, it they can manage it.

[vdogg]

33. That smugness goes both ways.

I actually like Bernie. His supporters, not so much.

[wildeyed]

58. OMG, no, they are polls.

They are like a weather forecast. Based on science and historical data. But they are still wrong sometimes

No one said anyone was infallible. And the 538 forecast have favored Sanders plenty.

Also, referring to Clinton supporters as Hillariates seems hostile and smug, too. Perhaps if you chose your language more carefully, Clinton supporters would be less condescending? It's like when people I know complain about ALWAYS getting bad service, And I am like, hmmmmm.... Could the problem be elsewhere

[Android3.14]

32. Android makes an observation.

I'm just glad no one was trying to discourage or attempt to force him out.

[Depaysement]

34. Oh no!

What happened? Did the weathervane break?

Don't worry, the wind will die down and Hillary will probably win in the end.

[Katashi_itto]

36. Damn! We are screwed.

[Bluenorthwest]

37. Obvious even to you by now, Nate was just wrong, egg all over his face wrong.

I can tell you this brooky, I knew Nate was wrong last week. It was screamingly obvious to anyone with a synapse firing.

[randome]

47. Yet you couldn't explain why then?

If it's just Sanders' messaging, where is the evidence to support that?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

55. What did not get explained to your liking randome? That Nate was super wrong? He was wrong.

Nate has math, I have people. It was very easy to see that his projections were very incorrect, stated with extreme certainty of course but incorrect nonetheless. What I knew is it was going to be close. Leaning Bernie. But no blow out for Clinton, nor for him.
Nate and the MSNBC desk set along with DU's hubris drunk centrists were assuming a large victory for her in Michigan, they were writing the obit for the winner. With glee. And smug glee which is of course the worst and most cloying kind. They should all be ashamed and they should all consult a chiropractor, they may have slipped a disk carrying all that water.

[Act_of_Reparation]

39. Hm. Something's not right here. Maybe run those numbers again?

[ericson00]

45. there's a reason it was 100%.

so 538 wasn't actually wrong.

[speaktruthtopower]

46. There goes all the luck I was saving for the next Powerball

[TIME TO PANIC]

51. K & R!

[Kittycat]

53. This should be pinned

As a good reminder that people, not polls, elect leaders.

[Marr]

54. lol. More smug proclamations, please. /nt