Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

(39,171 posts)

14. That post says nothing about the targets, now does it? Nt

Sun Mar 27, 2016, 12:31 PM

Mar 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sanders handily BEATS Nate Silver's target for yesterday's primaries [View all] thesquanderer Mar 2016 OP

the guy has been wrong so many times about Bernie. Cobalt Violet Mar 2016 #1

Those weren't his predictions hack89 Mar 2016 #5

Silver made no predictions about yesterday hack89 Mar 2016 #22

I'm sure he's devastated Capt. Obvious Mar 2016 #20

That is why his number went down to 56.5% needed of remaining PDs. morningfog Mar 2016 #2

Let's fix that: edgineered Mar 2016 #3

Thanks! I've updated the OP accordingly (n/t) thesquanderer Mar 2016 #9

Q: How did he get so many in Hawaii? Major Hogwash Mar 2016 #18

lol +1. n/t Jefferson23 Mar 2016 #6

You do understand those targets were not predictions? hack89 Mar 2016 #7

See post 11. nt edgineered Mar 2016 #13

That post says nothing about the targets, now does it? Nt hack89 Mar 2016 #14

Try to follow the OP for a minute. I'll help you. edgineered Mar 2016 #15

And the OP is about beating targets hack89 Mar 2016 #17

Thought the word yesterday's was in the title. edgineered Mar 2016 #19

The 538 site now reports a 20% increase! INGSOC nt edgineered Mar 2016 #12

Look at all those states where he missed his targets hack89 Mar 2016 #8

Yup. That's why he's still an underdog. thesquanderer Mar 2016 #30

The targets are based on demographics 6chars Mar 2016 #10

News flash for the nay-sayers in this thread edgineered Mar 2016 #11

To the naughty list w/ them!! desmiller Mar 2016 #27

K&R amborin Mar 2016 #23

I'm not sure how you got 98 and certainly not 105 Number23 Mar 2016 #24

Numbers were on the 538 site, on the page I linked to thesquanderer Mar 2016 #25

Did you look at the 538 link? thesquanderer Mar 2016 #28