Hillary Clinton Is Still Nearly Inevitable

[DonViejo]

Nate Silver: “Personally, I give Clinton about an 85 percent chance of becoming the Democratic nominee. (The general election is a whole different story.) That’s a pinch higher than betting markets, which put her chances at 75 to 80 percent.”

“But wait — wasn’t Clinton ‘inevitable’ in 2008 too? Not to nearly the same extent. Her lead in the polls is considerably larger this time around, her edge in the endorsement race is much greater, and her opponents are weaker than Barack Obama and John Edwards were. If you set a lower threshold for ‘inevitability’ and included Clinton’s 2008 campaign in your equation, you’d probably also need to include winning campaigns like Romney in 2012 and Mondale in 1984, in which case the front-runners would be six-for-seven — an 86 percent success rate, which is about where I’d put Clinton’s chances now.”

“In fact, Gore is the only non-incumbent in the modern era to have swept all 50 states. (Two incumbents, Gerald Ford in 1976 and Jimmy Carter in 1980, also lost some states.) More often, candidates similar to Clinton have lost Iowa or New Hampshire, along with a few other states, before consolidating their support and eventually winning fairly easily.”

###

http://politicalwire.com/2015/08/18/hillary-clinton-is-still-nearly-inevitable/

[onehandle]

1. Nate is exactly right. nt

[Bobbie Jo]

3. Not to mention

Right more often than not.

[Dawgs]

7. Not hard when you when your best known for "predicting" results and..

all you have to do is average the final polls together to be almost 100% accurate.

[hack89]

32. Then how do so many pollsters and pundits consistently get it wrong?

shouldn't everyone be as accurate as Silver?

[Ed Suspicious]

34. No. Numbers are numbers, predictions come from a very fallible human analysis.

No statistician is a wizard. Nate Silver is a very good political weatherman. He would say so himself.

[hack89]

38. I understand that

my question was directed at a poster that said what Silver does is "easy".

[Dawgs]

46. Individual pollsters and pundits get it wrong because they are biased or not looking at averages.

And, average poll numbers are always very close or accurate.

Silver, like many any others that predict elections, are almost always correct. And, it's because the average of polls are very good at predicting the final results. Look at 2012. The average of the polls got every single state correct. The only poll that was close was Florida, and Silver, instead of making a prediction, chose to call it a toss-up. Others that predicted the final results picked Obama as the winner of Florida, and ended up being more accurate than Silver.

Making predictions isn't that hard when you use someone else's work to come up with your result.

[hack89]

47. You minimize his algorithms he uses to judge and weigh each poll

that is the work he does - that is the value he adds to the process and why he is that much better than anyone else.

btw - he never makes a prediction. He merely gives the odds. Which is the intellectually honest thing to do.

[Dawgs]

48. Again. He's giving the odds based on the average of polls.

Anyone familiar with a spreadsheet can do the same thing. It's not hard.

Algorithms and judgement aren't necessary if the polls themselves give the same result.

I'll give him credit for presenting it nicely using his website, but that's it.

[hack89]

50. No he is not

but since you are so certain, have a nice evening.

[Dawgs]

51. If he's not, he should. He'd get the same results.

Bye.

[artislife]

2. Still a long time to go.

She was pretty sure in 2008, too.

[KMOD]

17. Nate actually does a great job discussing how

this is not the same as 2008. Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley are not Barack Obama and John Edwards.

[artislife]

36. Don't count your chickens...

They aren't and things are not as good as they were.

More death by cops
Climate out of control
Fracking, no GMO labeling, fighting for net neutrality...it is more dire that we have drastic change.

[108vcd]

4. Probably

Doesn't mean the candidate that is best for the American people though

[MannyGoldstein]

5. When the going gets weird...

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
- Hunter S. Thompson

[ismnotwasm]

13. I've noticed.

[99th_Monkey]

6. "The general election is a whole different story" <--Nate's right about this

Which is one of many reasons why Hillary shouldn't be the Democratic nominee.

[Johnny2X2X]

8. Sanders

Like many, I am supporting Bernie Sanders, but unlike many, I realize that Sanders and Hilary agree on something like 90% of the issues.

I'm going to fight for Sanders, but if Hilary is the nominee I'm going to fight just as hard to make her President.

[ismnotwasm]

9. I hope to hell so

This is going to be an exhausting primary season.

[onehandle]

10. Only online. Remember, this place in no way reflects reality.

Democrats want Hillary. Period.

[ismnotwasm]

12. Yes --so true and thank you

When I have a few days off and spend part of it online I get sucked in. And Democrats do want Hillary.

[frylock]

14. facebook doesn't represent reality either, evidently..

but anecdotes about people turned off by Bernie supporters is taken at face value by some posters.

[ismnotwasm]

18. I've run into that several times now

But it is as you say--only anecdotal

[onehandle]

20. Over 100 million Facebook accounts are said to be fake.

Many run by 'robots' for 'social media manipulation companies.'

But, hey. Let's say that the enthusiasm to hate Hillary here and in other online communities is 100% real.

Why is she winning in real polls by a 'Nearly Inevitable' margin?

Shouldn't someone tell the real likely voters polled, that they need to catch up with the loudest voices on the Internets?

[frylock]

28. Bringing up fake accounts is an interesting defense to use, all things considered..

More than 2 MILLION of Hillary Clinton's Twitter followers are fake or never tweet – and she's already under fire for 'buying' fake Facebook fans

Although Hillary Clinton boasts a robust 3.6 million Twitter followers, not even a vast right-wing conspiracy would be able to interact with 2 million of them.

According to two popular online measuring tools, no more than 44 per cent of her Twitter fan base consists of real people who are active in using the social media platform.

And at least 15 per cent – more than 544,000 – are completely fake.

StatusPeople.com, the oldest publicly available Twitter-auditing tool, reports that 44 per cent of the former secretary of state's followers are 'good'; 15 per cent are 'fake'; and 41 per cent are 'inactive,' meaning that they never tweet or reply to any tweets.

Meanwhile....

Twitter Primary: Bernie Sanders Has The Most Real Followers While 57% Of Christie’s Are Fake

[onehandle]

40. Ah. Citing a conservative foreign tabloid and ignoring polls of real likely voters.

I win.

[frylock]

43. Is the data source, StatusPeople.com, also right wing?

better luck tomorrow.

[Ed Suspicious]

37. "Let's say that the enthusiasm to hate Hillary here and in other online communities is 100% real."

Yall are so bloody persecuted. You all ought to check that Republicanesque complex at the door.

[John Poet]

23. Some of the Hillary supporters on Facebook seem pretty vicious ALSO.

And then we get into the whole "GOP troll" problem. The worst of both might not even be 'for real'... either way both groups are doing a great job of polarizing the party against each other.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. Lets see how the debates go.

If she looks like she is triangulating and evading while Bernie looks direct and straight forward, the only thing inevitable about her will be her demise.

On the other hand, if she wows us all with her vast knowledge of the issues and makes Bernie look as if he is playing catch up, she just might sweep all 50 states.

It is to early to know.

[onehandle]

21. Debates are historically inconsequential.

That presidential debates can be “game changers” is a belief almost universally held by political pundits and strategists. Political scientists, however, aren’t so sure. Indeed, scholars who have looked most carefully at the data have found that, when it comes to shifting enough votes to decide the outcome of the election, presidential debates have rarely, if ever, mattered.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/septemberoctober_2012/ten_miles_square/do_presidential_debates_really039413.php

[Motown_Johnny]

22. .

[onehandle]

25. You probably should have read the article first. nt

[Qutzupalotl]

29. This year we have a widely recognized name against relative unknowns,

and both leading contenders have promised a positive campaign, meaning the debates will be a good comparison of policy to policy. I can't recall a previous election like this.

[winter is coming]

41. So "inconsequential" that the DNC has a stranglehold on them. n/t

[onehandle]

42. Wait... Are you saying that the Democratic Party has a stranglehold on the Democratic primary debates!?

That's 'hugh' news!

Now if the Republican Party has a stranglehold on the Republican primary debates...

...WE WOULD HAVE A CONSPIRACY!!!

[kcjohn1]

15. July 2007: Poll Shows Clinton With Solid Lead Among Democrats

Clinton 45% / Obama 30% / Edwards 12%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/22/AR2007072201135.html

By a wide margin, Democrats view Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) as the party's candidate best positioned to win the general election, and she holds a double-digit lead over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in the race for the nomination, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll.

It may be equally important that Clinton's initial support for the Iraq war is not proving a significant impediment to her bid. Clinton has drawn criticism this year for refusing to apologize for her 2002 vote authorizing the use of force, but the poll shows her leading among Democrats who support a deadline for withdrawing U.S. forces as well as those who oppose a deadline. She has a 51 percent to 29 percent lead over Obama among those in favor of a complete, immediate withdrawal.

At this early stage, Clinton remains the candidate to beat in the Democratic field.

[onehandle]

16. There is no Obama. nt

[Motown_Johnny]

24. Nope, Bernie is better.

a 40+ year long track record of promoting exactly what he is running on now.

[Ed Suspicious]

39. +1

[Dawgs]

49. Yes, but there's the same Hillary. n/t

[Dawson Leery]

19. kick

[whatchamacallit]

26. "Nearly Inevitable" Lol!

Soon to be "Kinda Inevitable", followed by "More Inevitable Than Some"...

[HFRN]

27. Server-Gate nt

[emulatorloo]

30. Yeah I hope Ken Starr is still available.

[HFRN]

31. ummmm, you dont need a special prosecutor, for someone who actually not in office? nt

[emulatorloo]

45. Just a joke about right-wing fabricated scandals against a Clinton

Although I might need to get better at comedy writing.

[get the red out]

33. I agree

I'm not saying it's the best outcome, but I agree.

[Comrade Grumpy]

35. The odds and the numbers are in her favor. We'll see how it turns out.

[Gothmog]

44. Hillary Clinton has the best resume and is the most qualified candidate

[PowerToThePeople]

52. So, Nate Silver is telling me

that suicide is the best solution? Well, at least I have 15% chance for a future per his stats. I will fight for the 15% solution.