Hillary won 6 out of 6 coin tosses in Iowa ??

[DSeid]

Yes, as stated by Telemark - the fevered fantasy is the run of coin flips all won by HRC, a total of six, that somehow won the caucus for her.

And again,

@NPR

In fact, there were at least a dozen tiebreakers — and “Sen. Sanders won at least a handful,” an Iowa Democratic Party official told NPR.

Gone unmentioned so far is that even if Clinton won that Miracle Six — and there were no other coin tosses — it would make little difference in the outcome.

The Des Moines Register btw indeed is suggesting a recount, simply because of the basic fact that the results were so close and the process by its very nature so very messy. Which they also suggest gets revamped overall. They are not alleging any wrongdoing.

I could certainly grant that the process is very messy and that a result to tenths is going beyond significant digits for the process … by the arbitrary rules of the process Clinton “won” but we really do not know which of Hillary or Bernie got a dozen votes more or less than the other and I would not be shocked if three recounts done all came up with three marginally different results.

Are the rules arbitrary? Sure. Archaic perhaps. But complaining about the rules of the game after the game is played and you lost is what we call being a crybaby sore loser.

EVEN IF (and again there was NOT) the result ended coming down to a few lucky coin flips results or rolls of the dice … you don’t complain that you lost the poker tournie because of an unlucky draw, the backgammon game because of a bad roll, or the Scrabble tournie because your competition got better tiles. It is just a dumb unseemly thing to do. Even if you did pull bad tiles.

Would he have whined if it had snowed badly and kept his turnout low? “She only won because she was lucky with the weather!” It was close. She won. Move on to your NH blow out to be.

[UltraVires]

On election night, the commentators were saying that there was no possibility of a recount because of the nature of the caucus process. When the process is voters standing together with precinct captains hand counting and writing down numbers on paper, that doesn’t lend itself to any type of meaningful way to accurately recount the results.

[kayaker]

@doorhinge

AFAIK, Trump is suggesting that Cruz surrogates were telling caucus attendees that Ben Carson had dropped out of the race. Carson supporters may have then chosen to vote for other candidates, such as Cruz. Which could explain why the polls were wrong???

(Post shortened)

If a candidate in a general election used a look-alike for his opponent and had him deliver a concession speech, getting it televised by a news organization, would that degree of fraud lead to criminal charges? Would it void the candidates win? Has it been done?

[BigAppleBucky]

@Sherrerd

The ‘Hillary cheated’ storyline isn’t about five (or six) tosses of one coin, though. It’s about six separate, geographically separated coins (and their tosses).

I read on CNN that Bernie had actually won the majority of coin tosses. I did see one of the tosses on a news program. Held in a gym and it certainly looked like a fair toss. Hillary won that one, IIRC.

Non-issue, IMO. The nomination could be decided on March 1 when a bunch of currently strong Hillary states make their choices. If Bernie can make a dent in that support, he has a shot, otherwise it’s kitty by the door.

[DSeid]

And to his credit Bernie played it right during last night’s debate.

[doorhinge]

@CarnalK

That is what happened. Cruz apologized and said it was a mistake because it was announced Cain was not travelling to New Hampshire. I doubt enough people switched to make a difference in the final result though.

David Cain? Cassandra Cain? Herman Cain? Sugar Cain?

You doubt that enough people switched to make a difference. Other’s believe Cruz surrogates may have deliberately attempted to influence the outcome of the caucuses. I believe CNN did a piss poor job of reporting Dr Ben Carson’s absence from Iowa.

[CarnalK]

@doorhinge

You doubt that enough people switched to make a difference. Other’s believe Cruz surrogates may have deliberately attempted to influence the outcome of the caucuses.

That’s what surrogates are there for. They’re not there to pour coffee.

[doorhinge]

@CarnalK

That’s what surrogates are there for. They’re not there to pour coffee.

Were they present in order to lie about Carson’s campaign?

[DSeid]

@doorhinge

… You doubt that enough people switched to make a difference. Other’s believe Cruz surrogates may have deliberately attempted to influence the outcome of the caucuses. …

The two are not mutually exclusive, and even if surrogates spread the media report/speculation dirty pool is not required: they could have believed it to be true.

But even if they did intentionally spread something that knew was untrue it seems that it had no impact. Carson outperformed his polling expectations, not underperformed. He did not have a bunch of people who planned to vote for him not do so - Trump OTOH? Carson’s RCP avg was 7.7 and he got 9.3. How much farther above polling does Trump think Carson was going to go? One would have to imagine that Carson polling at 7.7 was going to get over 11 before that rumor and that every single voter who was impacted went to Cruz with not a single one going to Trump. Trump can argue that those who voted for Carson uniformly hate him and prefer Cruz, and that the polls just way underestimated Carson’s popularity but the polls were right about his with the caucus voting wrong, but it would likely not be an argument he’d make.

[Sam_Stone]

Never assign to malfeasance that which can be explained by incompetence at CNN.

[Irishman]

@glowacks

Ohio? Where did Ohio come from? The correct state is in the thread name even.

I’m sure it’s Ohio’s fault. (I got in a hurry, and didn’t recheck. My brain filled in the wrong name, just like CarnalK just called Carson “Cain”.)

@amarinth

Also, the stories that I saw implied that this was a winner take all event, that whoever “won” got Iowa. To me, that’s also not accurate. If you came across different stories, then you may not have seen that slant.

I certainly sense a disconnect between calling Hillary “the winner” when it is proportional delegates at the national level that is very close to dead even.

@doorhinge

It appears that the Democrat coin flips did occur and are not fantasies.

He said “coin flip runs”, i.e. a string of flips in a row. These were independent flips at various locations around the state.

[Morgenstern]

@Grumman

They should have decided the ties with a game of chess. Or maybe Starcraft.

Or who can talk without moving their hands the longest.

[Superdude]

@RTFirefly

I’m glad to hear that Hillary hasn’t become one of the leads in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.

Damn you, Firefly! I wanted to crack that joke.

@Scandic

Coin tosses used to determine county delegates in Clinton-Sanders race in Iowa.

They flipped a coin six times, and Hillary won all six??

It seams very unlikely to me.:dubious:

When asked for his thoughts on the coin flip, the administrator of the coin flips was quoted as saying, “It’s not about what I want. It’s about what’s FAIR! You thought we could be decent men in an indecent time! But you were wrong. The world is cruel. And the only morality in a cruel world is chance. Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.”

[doorhinge]

For historic reference

@Scandic

Hillary won 6 out of 6 coin tosses in Iowa ??

Coin tosses used to determine county delegates in Clinton-Sanders race in Iowa.

They flipped a coin six times, and Hillary won all six??

It seams very unlikely to me.:dubious:

@Irishman

…He said “coin flip runs”, i.e. a string of flips in a row. These were independent flips at various locations around the state.

There were many coin flips at the IOWA caucuses. Hillary did win 6 out of 6 flips. The NPR articled linked up-thread did not debunk that fact. If anything, it proved that the NPR articles author either didn’t fully read the Des Moines Register article he quoted, or he chose to ignore the fact that the Des Moines Register article listed 6 flips that Hillary won.

[doorhinge]

@Superdude

…When asked for his thoughts on the coin flip, the administrator of the coin flips was quoted as saying, “It’s not about what I want. It’s about what’s FAIR! You thought we could be decent men in an indecent time! But you were wrong. The world is cruel. And the only morality in a cruel world is chance. Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.”

(post shortened)

Which “administrator” are you quoting? Batman?

[Superdude]

I was quoting Two-Face, the villain who flips a coin to decide whether to kill you or not. I suppose I could have linked to Anton Chigurh, instead.

[Telemark]

@doorhinge

There were many coin flips at the IOWA caucuses. Hillary did win 6 out of 6 flips. The NPR articled linked up-thread did not debunk that fact.

These statements are internally inconsistent. The claim that Hillary won 6 out of 6 is only meaningful if there were exactly 6 coin flips. The NPR article talks about more than 6 coin flips, some of which were not won by Hillary. Therefore she didn’t win “6 out of 6” unless you are purposely twisting language. That’s like saying “She won 6 coin flips, so out of the 6 she won she won all 6.”

From the NPR Article:

In fact, there were at least a dozen tiebreakers — and “Sen. Sanders won at least a handful,” an Iowa Democratic Party official told NPR.

[doorhinge]

@Telemark

These statements are internally inconsistent. The claim that Hillary won 6 out of 6 is only meaningful if there were exactly 6 coin flips. The NPR article talks about more than 6 coin flips, some of which were not won by Hillary. Therefore she didn’t win “6 out of 6” unless you are purposely twisting language. That’s like saying “She won 6 coin flips, so out of the 6 she won she won all 6.”

From the NPR Article:
In fact, there were at least a dozen tiebreakers — and “Sen. Sanders won at least a handful,” an Iowa Democratic Party official told NPR.

I noticed that the NPR article did not specifically itemize the “at least a dozen tiebreakers” or mention which specific coin flips Sanders had won. The Des Moines Register backed up it’s article with examples.

[DSeid]

And they explicitly did not make any accusation of any wrongdoing by anyone, nor say anything about Clinton winning all tiebreakers or that the tiebreakers she did win made any difference.

What they did argue was that it was so close that an audit of the results is called for and that not doing that audit is, to them, inappropropriate. That there were too many opportunities for errors in the messy process to not audit a close result.

And of course they then went on the next day to also publish this column

While Clinton edged ahead of Sanders in the final calculation of state delegate equivalents, it’s still a virtual tie and Sanders will still get about half of the Iowa delegates. But instead of celebrating, Sanders’ supporters and others are now crying foul and throwing around claims like election fraud.

This response is based on half-baked ideas of what the caucus results represent, which have been perpetuated by many media outlets over the past few days …

… Out of 1,683 precincts scheduled to hold caucuses, issues or concerns were reported by the media in relatively few precincts. They included lines to register, a shortage of registration forms, crowded venues, untrained precinct chairs, conflicting counts and coin flips to break ties. Many of these same sorts of concerns were raised after the record-breaking turnout of the 2008 Democratic caucuses. In most cases, these issues were more of an annoyance than a serious hazard to reporting a clean result. The difference was that 2016’s outcome was so close that every concern was magnified.

Leaders of the Iowa Democratic Party said they met Wednesday with representatives of the Sanders campaign, who questioned the caucus results in seven precincts. Questions about four other precincts were dismissed immediately, because nobody showed up to caucus so there were no results. The remaining questions are being reviewed, Iowa Democratic Party executive director Ben Foecke said. … if all of those concerns were resolved in the Sanders campaign’s favor — and that is by no means assured — the result would mean a difference of three-quarters of a state delegate equivalent. That’s it. Meanwhile the party has also started looking into some questions raised by the Clinton campaign at a few precincts.

[Irishman]

@doorhinge

For historic reference

@Scandic

Hillary won 6 out of 6 coin tosses in Iowa ??

Coin tosses used to determine county delegates in Clinton-Sanders race in Iowa.

They flipped a coin six times, and Hillary won all six??

It seams very unlikely to me.

@Irishman

…He said “coin flip runs”, i.e. a string of flips in a row. These were independent flips at various locations around the state.

There were many coin flips at the IOWA caucuses. Hillary did win 6 out of 6 flips. The NPR articled linked up-thread did not debunk that fact. If anything, it proved that the NPR articles author either didn’t fully read the Des Moines Register article he quoted, or he chose to ignore the fact that the Des Moines Register article listed 6 flips that Hillary won.

To be clear, I was responding to your post 38 that quoted DSeid’s post 31, not the OP as you are quoting here. Get your history straight. DSeid posted

@DSeid

I am stuck deciding which is more pathetic … those who are trying to spin fantasies of coin flip runs that did not occur …

Underlining added for clarity. DSeid said “coin flip runs” and I quoted “coin flip runs” and you addressed “coin flips”.

Also, your 6 of 6 is faulty, because there were more than 6 coin flips, and Bernie won some of the coin flips. So it’s 6 out of about 12, or ~50%. Or you have Hillary at 6 and Bernie at 5, which is about as close to 50% as you can get with 11 coin flips. Or you have Bernie with 5 of 12, giving Hillary 7. I spin those options because an actual number of coin flips hasn’t been provided, so the numbers are a little murky. But none of that is unreasonable and anywhere near only six coin flips happened, and all six went to one candidate.