7 ms·
That's a very cynical way of looking at it. S̶a̶n̶d̶e̶r̶s̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶p̶o̶l̶l̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶ ̶N̶H̶ ̶l̶o̶s̶s̶ ̶u̶n̶t̶i̶l̶ ̶m̶i̶d̶ ̶J̶a̶n̶u̶a̶r̶y̶. (EDIT: I'm wrong app
by carb 11y ago
That's a very cynical way of looking at it. S̶a̶n̶d̶e̶r̶s̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶p̶o̶l̶l̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶ ̶N̶H̶ ̶l̶o̶s̶s̶ ̶u̶n̶t̶i̶l̶ ̶m̶i̶d̶ ̶J̶a̶n̶u̶a̶r̶y̶. (EDIT: I'm wrong apparently) And if you think Clinton is going to win SC and Florida by +30% you must be in some echo chamber you're not aware of.
As well, super delegates always vote with the popular vote. They are in no way locked to Clinton, just stating that they would prefer if Clinton won the nomination.
- Someone1234 11y ago> And if you think Clinton is going to win SC and Florida by +30% you must be in some echo chamber you're not aware of. I follow the actual polls, not the most optimistic imaginings of where a candidate might be. Why don't you link to a poll that has Sanders ahead in SC or Florida? Seriously, you're implying I am mistaken, so present your facts. > They are in no way locked to Clinton, just stating that they would prefer if Clinton won the nomination. Currently those are the delegate counts. And furthermore it is a clear endorsement by the democratic establishment.
- 1stop 11y agoJust a reminder: polls aren't facts. They are sample based estimates. But you are right it'd be good to see the poll numbers on sanders. And the margins for error. You are stating the delegate count as if it is in stone, when in fact it doesn't work the way you imply, as others have pointed out.
- Someone1234 11y ago> polls aren't facts. Yes they are. You mean to say that polls aren't conclusions within themselves. Polls are a piece of data, a fact.
- rosser 11y agoThis kind of "Nuh-uh!" pedantry isn't productive discourse. The GP's point, as you were clearly able to recognize, is perfectly correct.
- Someone1234 11y agoWell that's a huge double standard. So the GP's point about the nature of polling itself isn't pedantic but my retort on the same topic is? You'll have to explain that to me. Neither post is very productive discourse, but you think one of the two is "perfectly correct" so call out the other..? Sorry but that's some mind boggling mental gymnastics you had to go through to write this reply.
- rosser 11y agoYep. You keep talking about polls as if they're somehow conclusive, objective, and completely predictive. The GP points out — correctly! — that polls are estimates, with margins for error, &c, with which you appear to concede agreement, but only after quibbling with the wording. In my book, only one of those things is pedantry. I'm not entirely sure how that's either mental gymnastics or a double standard, but I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything, so I'm prepared to be mistaken.
- martythemaniak 11y agoSanders had been leading almost continuously in NH since late August: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/ne...