Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:25 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434

Official SDMB P&E Contest: Iowa and New Hampshire


Bragging rights are officially up for grabs, people. Bring it.

This contest will require our participants to predict the outcome of the top three in the Democratic Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

It's time to set aside your own opinions and see how well you can read the future. It's 31 days until Iowa and 39 until New Hampshire. Do you stick with your heart or do you call up Nate Silver and crunch some numbers? It's up to you.

Scoring:

Each player will be required to list the Top Three in each place like this:

Iowa:
1. Yang (34%)
2. Willliamson
3. Gabbard
New Hampshire
1. Steyer (30%)
2. Bloomberg
3. Yang
Players will also be required to state the percentage of votes/caucus the winner of each vote receives rounded to the nearest percent.

Scoring:
Each player will receive one point per correct call - candidate and place - for a maximum of 6 points. In event more than one player receives the most points we will proceed to the tiebreaker.

Example:
In the above example, a player who guesses Yang/Williamson/Gabbard and Steyer/Bloomberg/Yang would receive six points while someone who guesses Yang/Williamson/Gabbard and Steyer/Yang/Bloomberg would receive four points.
Tiebreaker:
Ties will be broken using the percentage prediction for the top candidate in both contests. Players closest to the actual percentage will win. Players will lose one point in for every point their guess varies from the actual outcome. So if I player guesses Yang will win with 57% of the vote and he finishes with 5% that player will be debited -52 points.

In the unlikely event that we still have a tie following the tiebreaker the first person to make that guess will be our winner.
Entries will be accepted until the day before the Iowa Caucuses. Players may update their guesses as often as they'd like but for purposes of the tiebreaker their most recent guess is the one that controls.

Incomplete entries - those that omit the percentages, for example, or fail to select three candidates from each content - will be considered invalid.

The prize? Bragging rights. The right to know that you bested your peers. Bask in your glory. Bask.
  #2  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:36 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
How about extra points for early predictions that the poster sticks with? Otherwise, it's to my advantage to wait until the last minute, to take into account polling and any withdrawals.
  #3  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:39 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
Unless someone gets there first, andy. And I bet we come up with some ties.

Timing is a part of the game on this one.
  #4  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:41 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
How about % for each of the top 3, instead of just the winner?
  #5  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:47 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
I thought about that, but it seems a bit too much like work.

If we find it leads to a three-person tie or something overall we'll rework it for upcoming contests. Super Tuesday will probably be the next one.

Want to help? Come up with a not-too-hard-to-administer Super Tuesday contest and PM me.
  #6  
Old 01-03-2020, 11:58 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I thought about that, but it seems a bit too much like work.

If we find it leads to a three-person tie or something overall we'll rework it for upcoming contests. Super Tuesday will probably be the next one.

Want to help? Come up with a not-too-hard-to-administer Super Tuesday contest and PM me.
PM sent.

As for "too much like work", the %s would only matter for relatively deep tiebreakers -- the order is really what matters. So it shouldn't be additional work unless there's a need for a deep tiebreaker.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 01-03-2020 at 12:00 PM.
  #7  
Old 01-03-2020, 05:31 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,933
How will "percentage" in caucus states, where individual vote counts usually aren't available, be defined?
  #8  
Old 01-04-2020, 03:54 PM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
How will "percentage" in caucus states, where individual vote counts usually aren't available, be defined?
CNN will have a number. Well use that.
  #9  
Old 01-04-2020, 06:31 PM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,466
Whats P&E?
  #10  
Old 01-04-2020, 07:21 PM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
Politics & Elections!

Jeez.
  #11  
Old 01-04-2020, 08:53 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
CNN will have a number. Well use that.
That is still not as clear as you might hope. In previous years Iowa reported state delegate equivalents. That is the estimate share of delegates to the state level convention based on feeding the precinct level delegates actually selected through their estimation of the intervening conventions. The media would report that and sometimes call it the vote;CNN did in 2016. That is just an estimate of the delegates to the state convention that will be selected by the intervening conventions. The media typically tacks on a further estimate of how many delegates for the national convention will be selected by the state convention. That can differ some between media sources due to rounding. As long as we specify CNN and it being the "vote" (actually state delegate equivalents) instead of the national delegates we would have been fine ...in 2016.

Unfortunately it is not 2016. Iowa changed things.

Could multiple candidates 'win' the Democratic caucuses? New rules make it possible.

Iowa will now be reporting three separate numbers for the Democratic caucuses. There will be where caucus goers initially align, where they align after they see who doesn't have enough to break threshold in that first alignment, and the state delegate equivalents. We should probably pick which one of those we want to use.
  #12  
Old 01-08-2020, 02:01 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
Iowa will now be reporting three separate numbers for the Democratic caucuses. There will be where caucus goers initially align, where they align after they see who doesn't have enough to break threshold in that first alignment, and the state delegate equivalents. We should probably pick which one of those we want to use.
And on top of that, there's a good chance that none of those will reflect the final delegate count, as about 2/3 (28 out of 41) of Iowa's delegates will be selected at its four district conventions.

Note that there appear to be a rules change for 2020, at least for Iowa; I thought there was a third alignment, where voters who supported candidates that did not reach the 15% threshhold after the second alignment could then go to candidates that did, but now, anyone aligned with an eliminated candidate has their vote ignored.
  #13  
Old 02-05-2020, 01:18 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
That is still not as clear as you might hope. In previous years Iowa reported state delegate equivalents. That is the estimate share of delegates to the state level convention based on feeding the precinct level delegates actually selected through their estimation of the intervening conventions. The media would report that and sometimes call it the vote;CNN did in 2016. That is just an estimate of the delegates to the state convention that will be selected by the intervening conventions. The media typically tacks on a further estimate of how many delegates for the national convention will be selected by the state convention. That can differ some between media sources due to rounding. As long as we specify CNN and it being the "vote" (actually state delegate equivalents) instead of the national delegates we would have been fine ...in 2016.

Unfortunately it is not 2016. Iowa changed things.

Could multiple candidates 'win' the Democratic caucuses? New rules make it possible.

Iowa will now be reporting three separate numbers for the Democratic caucuses. There will be where caucus goers initially align, where they align after they see who doesn't have enough to break threshold in that first alignment, and the state delegate equivalents. We should probably pick which one of those we want to use.
Yes, we should have, but we didn't. And now it looks likely that the raw vote totals could produce one winner (Sanders) and the SDE count another (Buttigieg).

Halftime scores:

In the world where we say Buttigieg won:

Hari 1, asahi 1, everyone else 0

In the world where we say Sanders won:

pjacks 2, UltraV 1, Squid 1, Oak 1, TF 1, everyone else 0

My personal suggestion would be to give everyone credit for picking either Bernie or Pete first or second, so pjacks 2, 6 others 1.
  #14  
Old 02-06-2020, 06:54 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Yes, we should have, but we didn't. And now it looks likely that the raw vote totals could produce one winner (Sanders) and the SDE count another (Buttigieg).

Halftime scores:

In the world where we say Buttigieg won:

Hari 1, asahi 1, everyone else 0

In the world where we say Sanders won:

pjacks 2, UltraV 1, Squid 1, Oak 1, TF 1, everyone else 0

My personal suggestion would be to give everyone credit for picking either Bernie or Pete first or second, so pjacks 2, 6 others 1.
I'm fine with taking this as a defeat. My own personal opinion is that Sanders won the race, except for a quirk and a totally botched caucus. I had actually thought more than once about switching my IA prediction to Sanders and just never got around to doing it.

Whatevs...
  #15  
Old 01-04-2020, 12:41 AM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,758
Iowa:

Biden 31%
Buttigieg 26%
Sanders 22%

New Hampshire

Sanders 33%
Biden 28%
Warren 19%
  #16  
Old 01-05-2020, 01:18 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 300
Iowa:

Sanders 26%
Buttigieg
Biden

New Hampshire:

Sanders 22%
Biden
Warren
  #17  
Old 01-07-2020, 09:49 AM
Boozahol Squid, P.I. is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,760
Iowa:
Biden 30%
Buttgieg
Sanders

New Hampshire:
Sanders: 26%
Biden
Warren
  #18  
Old 01-08-2020, 01:27 PM
Hari Seldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Trantor
Posts: 13,670
Iowa:
Biden 33%
Sanders
Klobuchar

NH:
Sanders 35%
Warren
Biden
  #19  
Old 01-14-2020, 01:48 PM
Hari Seldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Trantor
Posts: 13,670
Revised prediction (based in part on an analysis by an Iowan in today's Times)

Iowa:
Warren 33%
Sanders
Klobuchar

NH:
Sanders 35%
Warren
Biden
  #20  
Old 01-20-2020, 09:53 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,524
I will likely update this, as there is almost certainly going to be enough movement in the polls to make a difference. But in case I forget to post a prediction, here goes my Iowa prediction:

Biden 20%
Sanders 19%
Buttigieg 18%
Warren 17%

Any 'movement' will probably be only a percent or two but because these candidates are so close together and could all conceivably win delegates, any poll movement will be significant. My gut feeling is that Sanders and Warren's spat will lead to some shifting between the two of them, which might benefit both Buttigieg and Biden.

As for New Hampshire, I think Bernie will prevail again in a state where he thumped Clinton a few years ago. It'll be closer though:

Sanders 19.5%
Biden 19%
Warren 17%
Buttigieg 13%

I also think New Hampshire will probably be the beginning of the end for Buttigieg. Warren will be badly wounded too if she can't place any higher than 3rd in the first two races.

Last edited by asahi; 01-20-2020 at 09:53 AM.
  #21  
Old 01-21-2020, 09:18 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,466
I normally don't follow primaries that closely, so my guess is based on 538 with some wild adjustments for "momentum".

Iowa
1. Biden 24%
2. Warren
3. Buttigieg

New Hampshire
1. Warren 20%
2. Sanders
3. Buttigieg
  #22  
Old 01-21-2020, 10:17 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
Iowa:
Biden 33%
Sanders
Klobuchar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
Revised prediction (based in part on an analysis by an Iowan in today's Times)

Iowa:
Warren 33%
Sanders
Klobuchar
That must have been one heck of a convincing article. Lol.

Last edited by CarnalK; 01-21-2020 at 10:18 AM.
  #23  
Old 01-21-2020, 11:39 AM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,322
Iowa:

1) Biden @ 37%
2) Buttigieg
3) Warren

New Hampshire

1) Bernie @ 31%
2) Biden
3) Buttigieg
  #24  
Old 02-13-2020, 07:54 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
Iowa:

1) Biden @ 37%
2) Buttigieg
3) Warren

New Hampshire

1) Bernie @ 31%
2) Biden
3) Buttigieg
Hey, we forgot all about this! If Im figuring correctly looks like Oak is our winner. Happy basking!

(I decided to count Buttigieg as the winner in IA, since he did end up earning more delegates).
__________________
Please...we prefer the term "Bernard Brother".
  #25  
Old 01-21-2020, 03:20 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,903
Iowa:

Sanders (22)
Biden
Buttigieg

NH:

Sanders (29)
Biden
Buttigieg

Then Warren drops out and endorses Sanders, game over. In a perfect world Mayor Pete hangs around until Super Tuesday to divide the moderate vote and give Bernie an insurmountable delegate lead.
  #26  
Old 01-21-2020, 11:37 PM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,867
Iowa:

Biden 23%
Warren
Sanders

New Hampshire:

Sanders 20%
Biden
Buttigieg

Last edited by El_Kabong; 01-21-2020 at 11:37 PM.
  #27  
Old 02-04-2020, 09:36 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,466
I declare myself the winner of Iowa!
  #28  
Old 02-04-2020, 09:46 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
So shall we all!
  #29  
Old 02-04-2020, 10:11 AM
AK84 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,834
If this had happened in the foreign country the State Department would have issued "statements of concern" and there would have been lengthy pieces in NYT and CNN.com opinion section on how this illustrates the dysfunctional state of Country X.
  #30  
Old 02-04-2020, 10:12 AM
MortSahlFan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: US
Posts: 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
If this had happened in the foreign country the State Department would have issued "statements of concern" and there would have been lengthy pieces in NYT and CNN.com opinion section on how this illustrates the dysfunctional state of Country X.
Exactly

Last edited by MortSahlFan; 02-04-2020 at 10:14 AM.
  #31  
Old 02-04-2020, 10:42 AM
Smitty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 840
Iowa

Sanders (26%)
Buttigieg
Biden


New Hampshire
Sanders (30%)
Biden
Buttigieg
__________________
There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
  #32  
Old 02-05-2020, 01:36 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,903
I think pjacks can probably start warming up his basking muscles. Seems highly likely that the NH finish will be Sanders-Buttigieg-Warren or maybe Biden. That would give two points to the four players, including pjacks, who picked Sanders-BIDEN-Warren. Hari and pjacks would be tied at 3 if it's Sanders-Buttigieg-Biden. Oakminster and I would be tied for the lead if Biden rallies to finish second between Bernie and Pete. Asahi and Hari would need Buttigieg to fall out of the top three to have a shot.

Of course, all that assumes that J. Chance takes my suggestion about how to interpret the Iowa results.
  #33  
Old 02-13-2020, 07:57 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,903
Nobody called Buttigieg winning Iowa. Only Pleonast and Hari called Biden not making the top three in even one State. Hari called Klobuchar 3rd, but unfortunately he did it in the wrong State.
__________________
Please...we prefer the term "Bernard Brother".
  #34  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:06 AM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,434
Hey, I got distracted, too. Work stuff.

Well done, Oak. Though I dare say we got results that were far outside the predicted outcomes.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017