Why does it matter whether Clinton's win margin in PA was by 9.5% or by 10%?

[Writer]

Really... I'd like to know why this matters.

[anonymous171]

1. Not double digits.

[kevinbgoode]

2. Accuracy = TRUTH

[Writer]

10. So - you would prefer that they not round up?

You would prefer that they state that her win is by, for example, 9.6% just to be accurate?

[anonymous171]

13. It's 9.2% actually, so you would round down.

[kevinbgoode]

27. I've never seen so many people attempt to round up numbers.

When the media was first reporting their erroneous figures and were tossing around that 10 percent amount, there were still votes to be counted, and the state figures were 8.5 percent. It never got to 10 percent at that point until the end of the count.

They did, however, masterfully round DOWN Obama's figure, which was at a decimal of .8, while rounding up Clinton's who was below .5.

That mistake carried on for hours and hours - and the media continued to report the figures wrong.

[EFerrari]

38. It could be worse. Joe could have tried to do algebra.

lol

[karynnj]

41. That's because the HRC people were "left behind" in mathematics

[FrenchieCat]

3. 9.2% and counting down.

it only matters for the pundit heads that said she needed to win by double digits to stay in the race. Certainly it doesn't matter in terms of the actual facts:

[Swamp Rat]

4. 9.2% as of 2:30 am EST

9,219 out of 9,264 Districts (99.51%) Reporting Statewide

CLINTON, HILLARY .......... 1,238,232..........54.6%
OBAMA, BARACK ............. 1,030,703..........45.4%

Hillary won (so far) by 9.2%.

Yet, for the past 24+ hours the M$M has reported she won by 10%.

http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us

[Writer]

12. I see why...

because they're rounding 54.6% up to 55 and 45.4% down to 45... that's pretty standard.

What's the big deal there?

[Swamp Rat]

18. That is not 'standard.'

It's called 'lying with statistics.'

The spread between them is 9.2%, which is rounded down to 9%.

[TheDoorbellRang]

20. When her narrative is a double digit win instead of a single digit win

it changes the narrative and gives her a better case to take to her donors and to excite her base.

It's the same sort of mental trick retailers use -- why something would be priced at $9.99 instead of $10. People don't see a penny difference, they see a dollar difference. I worked in retail for 30 years and it's amazing how the human brain works. If something is priced at $499 you'd hear people say, "Well that's only $400 something. I ought to get it."

That's the difference between 9.2 and 10 for Hillary -- much larger psychologically than in reality.

[EffieBlack]

35. Exactly!

[kevinbgoode]

29. That wasn't what they did Tuesday night.

They rounded his number DOWN when he was at a decimal of .6 and .7 and rounded hers UP when her decimal was at .4 and .3 That went on for hours.

[EffieBlack]

34. That's not standard - no statistician would engage in such skewed calculations

You don't round the raw numbers into whole numbers and then take the difference in order to calculate a margin because it skews the final number - at least if you're honestly trying to measure something. You do your calculations with the raw number and THEN round the result if you wish. Otherwise, your result can be grossly inaccurate.

For example, suppose you're trying to calculate the margin of difference between 1.4 and 2.5. Of course, the actual difference is 1.1 or, if you round it, 1. But if you use the faulty calculation that the media is using - rounded 1.4 down to 1 and 2.5 up to 3 and then subtracted - you'd end up with a value of 2, a statistically significant difference.

So, no, that's not pretty standard. It was lazy at best and purposefully misleading at worst.

[karynnj]

42. No it's not - the norm would be to do the substraction WITH the decimal

which can even be done by a fourth grader with no calculator. Then the result is rounded.

[krispos42]

22. And when I did this 24 hours ago, it was 8.6%

It still rounds to 9%. And she needed, what, about 20 points in every race from Pennsylvania onward to overtake Obama?

<sigh>

This is getting old, fast.

[Guaranteed]

5. Cuz the Clinton folks want to spin her win into a double-digit one, even

though it wasn't.

[virtualobserver]

6. because the last time the goalposts were moved, they were at ten

[quantass]

7. HEY BUDDY...it is 9.2%...Let's be Honest!

[NewHampshireDem]

8. Because 10 is a magic number

Like clapping for Tinkerbell, a double digit win in PA will somehow bring HRC's dead campaign back to life.

Magic.

[blogslut]

9. Actually, it doesn't matter

She isn't going to get the nomination no matter how much her campaign pads the numbers.

[anigbrowl]

11. Ed Rendell and other people said she had to break 10%

and 'double digits' sounds good, depending on whether or not they got to use it. Although I suppose to Team Clinton, 9.2% counts as double digits since there are two digits...umm...

[Writer]

14. Well... I think it's so close that it's splitting hairs...

if it were by 8% I'd say, yeah... but this is a little silly, honestly.

[Guaranteed]

16. The 10% was extremely minimal to begin with- she actually LOST ground

because to keep up and be able to catch Obama, she needed around 65% of the vote.

The 10% victory was just the minimum to show that she still had anything left at all.

And she didn't hit it!

[kwenu]

15. The pundits said she had to have a double digit win. She didn't get it.

Now the media is glossing this over to keep the battle going unnecessarily. It's just another indication that she is wasting all of our time and won't allow us to come together to battle the Repubs.

It's 9.2 not 9.5. That's a trick to give you the excuse to round up.

[The Doctor.]

28. Bam!

[grantcart]

17. If were rounding why not round to the nearest number?

and why the 9.5 lol


Its 9% thats all.


3 more percent and she would have been dead in the water.

[FrenchieCat]

19. The 3% is the Rush Limbaugh Operation Chaos voters.

[chknltl]

23. And perhaps.....

Did you see this? (takes a minute or so to load) It is Bradblog's take on the PA vote.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5924#more-5924

[FrenchieCat]

25. Dugg it!

Thanks! :)

[chknltl]

21. A difference in headlines:

Senator Clinton got the double digit win her campaign needed in order to remain in the race.

OR

Senator Clinton almost got the double digit win her campaign needed in order to remain in the race.

See?

[nerddem]

24. it makes the 10 net delegates seem bigger?

like pube-shaving?

[Jamastiene]

26. They are saying that it doesn't count as a win for her unless

it's double digits. Kinda of like counting bubbles in a bar of soap. It's just a litmus because she doesn't have a penis.

[johnnydrama]

30. let's put it this way

The media are off by 8% in the PA election.

Sound ok?

[EffieBlack]

31. It matters because 10% was set as the threshold

by many of the same people - in the media and elsewhere - who are now pretending that her 9% was a "blowout."

Several commentators insisted in the weeks leading up to the Pennsylvania Primary that, if Hillary wanted to be seen as viable and justify continuing her race, she absolutely had to beat Obama by "double digits" - in fact, according to many of them high double digits. According to them, a single digit win would not be enough. And when she didn't get double digits, they manipulated her numbers to make it look like she did.

This all reminds me of a football game. In order to maintain possession of the ball, according to these refs, Hillary needed to get the ball across the ten-yard line. She got the ball to the 9-yard line. So the refs took the ball from her and put it on the 10-yard-line for her and yelled "First Down!!!"

[Spider Jerusalem]

32. 9.2 percent. And it matters because the media are making a big deal out of a 'double-digit win'.

Which didn't actually happen.

Accuracy and honesty are why it matters.

[RogueTrooper]

33. Because the best know figure

indicates who was the most successful at framing the post Pennsylvania media environment.

[JCMach1]

36. Hate to break it to everyone, but 10% is what people will remember

They saw it on cable TV!

Trust me, I am not saying that's a good thing... However, that was the story.

[karynnj]

44. Fortunately at this point, it is not the perception of the people at large that matters

While it would be good for Obama people to counter that 10%, double digit lie whenever it is said - especially when speaking to people in Indiana and North Carolina - it is an argument for the superdelegates. Now, I don't think most of the superdelegates have advanced degrees in math - but getting the correct answer is roughly FOURTH GRADE MATH. In additional they are politicians and party officials - very aware of the where the actual numbers are. If I were a superdelegate, that HRC has sunk to this obvious, provable distortion would move me away not towards her.

[Adelante]

37. She won, but not by double digits - she won by 9.2%

The media narrative leading into PA had her blowout prospects at 15-20%. 10% was the very minimum for a respectable, but not blowout win. Anything less, that is, single digits, would be viewed in Obama's favor.

In the event, 10%, because it was two digits, not one, and sounded better, was spun into a blowout, rather than a respectable win.

This was only achieved by calling 9%, 10%. And it altered, falsely, the entire media narrative.

That's why it matters.

[karynnj]

39. As the Clinton people said in the run up - they are running on feeling, on psychology - not math

The math is clear - Obama is far enough ahead she won't catch up with him in pledged delegates. The Clinton people want to say it is 10%, because they then can say double digits - which PSYCHOLOGICALLY sounds bigger. Their goal was to keep her victory "double digits" and when they didn't - they have been willing to take the 9.2 (NOT 9.5%) and round it up - an action that would lead to points being lost on the 4th grade math competency exam - to get to 10 to then say "double digits. The fact is that no matter how many HRC people say 10 or double digits - she did NOT get double digits.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

40. Perception.

[RBInMaine]

43. Because she was supposed to get a "blowout" and faux media is SPINNING fake "double digits."

Team-Hillary and her corporate media allies are trying to SPIN this into an "overwhelming vitctory" (Hillary's own words - although she knows damn well she was SUPPOSED to win this state and Obama cut her lead at least in half.). Why? Because they knew that a marginal win would begin the END of her campaign. The supers would leave her in droves, and her already debt-ridden campaign coffers would dry up fast. So they are painting what she was SUPPOSED to win as an "overwhelming double digit victory." To do so they are fudging the numbers upward, if even just a bit (although they also damn well know that the provisional ballots are yet to be included and as new voters they'll heavily favor Obama). It is the SAME pro-Hillary/Republican corporate PHONY media BS. The faux media WANTS this to go on in hopes that it will hurt the party and create a Hillary win since she is the one they WANT to run against McCain because they think she'll be the easiest to beat in Nov., and just wait. If she is nominated they'll first dance in the streets with the rest of the R party and then start tearing into her the likes of which will make BitterGate look like a tiptoe through the tulips. And of course right now Team-Hilly is playing right into their hands. It is the same reason why they are still claiming at every turn that she won TX. Yes, she won a close primary popular vote, but she LOST the 2-step caucus there BIGTIME and LOST the overall delegate count by 4 or 5 delegates. So in the end, she actually LOST Texas. Do they say this though?? No. Same with OH. She was SUPPOSED to win there with her HUGE machine and demographics advantages, just like PA. Like PA, she won by 10 points but was ahead by 20 a few weeks before the vote. So we are trying to actually inject some TRUTH and REALITY this time.

[Hippo_Tron]

45. People are under the impression the media made a big deal because of "double digits"

And in reality they would've made a big deal if it was an 8 point win or a 9 point win. They would've said that she needed 8-10 points and she got that.

Exit polls were showing Obama had it narrowed to something closer to 5 and the fact that she made it closer to 10 got the talking heads all excited.