• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bernie had way more events in Arizona than Hillary did. I believe she had a total of one. If Bernie had another year or two, sure. Definitely He could totally win this thing. I think he'd be in the lead sometime around August of next year if the trends continue.

But, I take issue with your characterization of New York. Bernie si still having to spend time and resources on Wisconsin. Maybe he's ahead by a few, but he has to run up margins there. That takes time and effort, which means he can't be laser like focused on New York. But, let's say he does focus extensively on NY. There are 384 delegates available a week later. A 5 point win in NY can be immediately erased with a 20 point win by Hillary in Maryland.

NY is problematic for Bernie in that it is closed, the deadline to change your party registration was back in October, Hillary has connections to the political machinery in the state, she has the surrogates, she has the ground game, she has the electoral connections...and your argument is Bernie was born in Brooklyn, ergo it might be close. I don't see it.

All this says to me is that it will be difficult. And were the primary to take place tomorrow I'd say it will be impossible for him to narrow the margins significantly. But considering how much time is left, and how few contests he has until NY, I think he has a chance, that's all I'm saying.

And no, it won't be close just because he grew up in Brooklyn, but he'll have an easier time spreading the word in New York than he did in other states simply due to there being a number of people in Brooklyn who do actually know him compared to other states.
 
Tyler's margins are just too unreliable for me to take seriously. Sometimes they're spot on (Washington), and sometimes they're way off (Arizona). I will give him credit for being consistently better at predictions than the polls though.
screen-shot-2016-03-14-at-11-37-02-pm.png
 
How so? Outside of Michigan and possibly Illinios the polls on the democrat side haven't been bad at all. Tyler on the other hand has had one success (Michigan) and a number of complete failures.

Because he's been more right than wrong, more so than the pollsters this primary season.

Even still, both Tyler and the pollsters have been shit on actual margins in many states, whether we're talking about Hillary over performing or Bernie over performing.
 
People screaming at Nate because Bernie has the "momentum" is hilarious

Yes he had so much momentum after Michigan he lost the next 5 states

Tyler is a coke trafficker
 
All this says to me is that it will be difficult. And were the primary to take place tomorrow I'd say it will be impossible for him to narrow the margins significantly. But considering how much time is left, and how few contests he has until NY, I think he has a chance, that's all I'm saying.

And no, it won't be close just because he grew up in Brooklyn, but he'll have an easier time spreading the word in New York than he did in other states simply due to there being a number of people in Brooklyn who do actually know him compared to other states.

Your last paragraph is what I'm taking issue with. That makes no sense whatsoever. He has as much of a benefit at spreading the word in Brooklyn as he did in Cleveland, Columbus or Athens. The fact that he was "born there" means absolutely nothing, unless you're arguing that some 90 year old babysitter is going to go out there and tell all the chil'ren how great he was at tiddlywinks.

He has absolutely no connections to New York outside this "know him" thing you're pushing, while completely discrediting the fact that Hillary has lived in New York for the last sixteen years, was elected Senator from New York TWICE, has her campaign headquarters there, and the Clinton foundation is there.

Somehow "Born there and someone somewhere may know him" is a stronger indication of on the ground support than the aforementioned things that are quantifiable.
 
Your last paragraph is what I'm taking issue with. That makes no sense whatsoever. He has as much of a benefit at spreading the word in Brooklyn as he did in Cleveland, Columbus or Athens. The fact that he was "born there" means absolutely nothing, unless you're arguing that some 90 year old babysitter is going to go out there and tell all the chil'ren how great he was at tiddlywinks.

He has absolutely no connections to New York outside this "know him" thing you're pushing, while completely discrediting the fact that Hillary has lived in New York for the last sixteen years, was elected Senator from New York TWICE, has her campaign headquarters there, and the Clinton foundation is there.

Somehow "Born there and someone somewhere may know him" is a stronger indication of on the ground support than the aforementioned things that are quantifiable.

Bernie lived in Brooklyn until he was a young adult. What are you talking about?
 

Kangi

Member
Good to see Bernie being born in Brooklyn is another check to cash fifty years later, right alongside marching with MLK. All these one-way tickets to getting all of the votes!
 
Bernie lived in Brooklyn until he was a young adult. What are you talking about?

Bernie's old as fuck. That was 50 years ago. That's what I'm saying! You're arguing that connection from 50 years ago that have been all but forgotten once he ran to Vermont are somehow more predictive, powerful or "game changing" than connections that are, literally, ON GOING with the Clinton's.
 
Harlem on Bernie:

x9phijwij9ohagoeykey.gif

While the Brooklyn-born Vermont senator has tapped into progressive enthusiasm in his home borough, he’s struggling to infiltrate the historic black neighborhood in Upper Manhattan that’s the heart of Clinton Country. Sanders is even having difficulty nailing down a venue for a rally.

“I heard from a reverend in Harlem that Bernie was trying to rent his church -- the reverend called me and told me that he’s not going to rent it [to the Sanders campaign],” said Rep. Charles Rangel, a longtime Harlem congressman and Clinton supporter who helped draft the former first lady to run for Senate in 2000. “We all have a commitment to Hillary Clinton.”

Headed into retirement, Rangel is making Clinton’s New York push his last Harlem hurrah. It’s not a hard sell. “There’s not much for us to talk about with Bernie Sanders,” Rangel, who boogeyed across the Apollo Theater stage dressed in a leather jacket ahead of Clinton’s rally there Wednesday, told POLITICO. “I don’t recall anybody ever having a conversation with Bernie Sanders about anything. I know several people have been lectured to by Bernie Sanders.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/hillary-clinton-new-york-bernie-sanders-221400
 
That was 50 years ago dude.

And lived his political life in Vermont.

Your point?

Bernie's old as fuck. That was 50 years ago. That's what I'm saying! You're arguing that connection from 50 years ago that have been all but forgotten once he ran to Vermont are somehow more predictive, powerful or "game changing" than connections that are, literally, ON GOING with the Clinton's.

If my point wasn't clear by now, then it's not worth making anymore.

Let's move on.
 

Kyosaiga

Banned
Bernie's old as fuck. That was 50 years ago. That's what I'm saying! You're arguing that connection from 50 years ago that have been all but forgotten once he ran to Vermont are somehow more predictive, powerful or "game changing" than connections that are, literally, ON GOING with the Clinton's.

Not to also mention that politics of NYC are vastly different than they were half-a-century ago, even IF it could be considered his "home state".
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Actually, brainchild, please see Sam wang's latest article. The democratic aggregate delegate weighted polling average has total error of 3.1%. In other words, remarkably accurate.

tyler sucks. Bernie sucks and Hillary will maul him in New York. Finally he will be sent back to the snowy pits of Vermont, his home state.
 

Holmes

Member
The bolded is my perspective. The margins were significant, but not the time/concentration. Had he spent a few more weeks in those states, I believe that he would've be able to close the gaps significantly.

NY is totally different. He doesn't need to stretch his resources with other states to any significant degree, and he has plenty of time to make an impact.
On South Carolina, the fact of the matter is that it was the second primary of the season and Sanders had months and millions of dollars to spend yet still lost by 50%. He only has 20 days in New York.
 

Mael

Member
Harlem on Bernie:

x9phijwij9ohagoeykey.gif

While the Brooklyn-born Vermont senator has tapped into progressive enthusiasm in his home borough, he’s struggling to infiltrate the historic black neighborhood in Upper Manhattan that’s the heart of Clinton Country. Sanders is even having difficulty nailing down a venue for a rally.

“I heard from a reverend in Harlem that Bernie was trying to rent his church -- the reverend called me and told me that he’s not going to rent it [to the Sanders campaign],” said Rep. Charles Rangel, a longtime Harlem congressman and Clinton supporter who helped draft the former first lady to run for Senate in 2000. “We all have a commitment to Hillary Clinton.”

Headed into retirement, Rangel is making Clinton’s New York push his last Harlem hurrah. It’s not a hard sell. “There’s not much for us to talk about with Bernie Sanders,” Rangel, who boogeyed across the Apollo Theater stage dressed in a leather jacket ahead of Clinton’s rally there Wednesday, told POLITICO. “I don’t recall anybody ever having a conversation with Bernie Sanders about anything. I know several people have been lectured to by Bernie Sanders.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/hillary-clinton-new-york-bernie-sanders-221400

Clearly this is the usual result of being the home state of a candidate.
Look at how Cruz fares in Alberta!
 
Actually, brainchild, please see Sam wang's latest article. The democratic aggregate delegate weighted polling average has total error of 3.1%. In other words, remarkably accurate.

tyler sucks. Bernie sucks and Hillary will maul him in New York. Finally he will be sent back to the snowy pits of Vermont, his home state.

That number is meaningless when many of them didn't bother with caucus states and Tyler predicted them with laser precision. They all suck.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Did you read it? He includes cock uses.

Honestly you are like a babby that keeps touching a hot stove with Tyler.
 
Your point made no sense, hence the reaction you got.

Nah, I got the reaction because confirmation bias tends to incorrectly inform the positions of opposing views.

I am not making the argument that's being projected, but I also am not going to keep saying the same thing over and over.
 
On South Carolina, the fact of the matter is that it was the second primary of the season and Sanders had months and millions of dollars to spend yet still lost by 50%. He only has 20 days in New York.

He didn't spend those months and millions in South Carolina alone.
 
That number is meaningless when many of them didn't bother with caucus states and Tyler predicted them with laser precision. They all suck.

Because anyone with half a brain knew how every caucus that isn't Iowa and Colorado was going to go! I mean, obviously, if there's no polling you can't find the margin of error on something that doesn't exist.
 
He lost Arizona and brutally so. What are you even arguing here.

Polls were off in exactly one state Michigan.

They were also off or nonexistent in most of the caucuses. Should they be let off the hook just because polling caucuses are hard? That didn't stop Tyler from predicting them correctly.
 

Armaros

Member
Nah, I got the reaction because confirmation bias tends to incorrectly inform the positions of opposing views.

I am not making the argument that's being projected, but I also am not going to keep saying the same thing over and over.

You dont provide any evidence for your positions and ignore evidence to the opposite.

YOU, were the person that disregarded Hillary's terms as NY Senator as being in her favor and yet you want people to take your idea that NY citizens will respond to the fact that Bernie lived in the state as a young person of no particular note 50 years ago as logical.
 
Because anyone with half a brain knew how every caucus that isn't Iowa and Colorado was going to go! I mean, obviously, if there's no polling you can't find the margin of error on something that doesn't exist.

Then if it were that easy, they should have conducted the surveys anyway and weighted appropriately.

And no, no one was predicted the margins of victory that Tyler was for the caucuses states.

Please stop this revisionist history bullshit.
 

Mael

Member
Then if it were that easy, they should have conducted the surveys anyway and weighted appropriately.

And no, no one was predicted the margins of victory that Tyler was for the caucuses states.

Please stop this revisionist history bullshit.

I know it's poor form to quote oneself but
Why is it important that Tyler is correct in caucuses when NY is a closed primary?
 
You dont provide any evidence for your positions and ignore evidence to the opposite.

YOU, were the person that disregarded Hillary's terms as NY Senator as being in her favor and yet you want people to take your idea that NY citizens will respond to the fact that Bernie lived in the state as a young person of no particular note 50 years ago as logical.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I'm simply sharing/defending my perspective.

Why is it important that Tyler is correct in caucuses when NY is a closed primary?

It's not. It's called a tangent.
 

Kyosaiga

Banned

Well, she has Harlem locked down, but thankfully most of New York doesn't look like 125th St. I wish those poor people in East Harlem would kick Rangel to the curb, after the 100s of thousands of dollars in dirty money that he has accepted over the years. I'm beginning to think that Black people don't seem to care about the epidemic rise in income inequality in America. What the hell do they care about? I will work hard to lift my Latino brothers and sisters out of poverty however I can for the rest of my days. But after the AA communities near complete rejection of the only candidate in their lifetime to truly tackle the root of the problems that are making their neighborhoods almost unlivable, I'm at a loss for words. Enjoy poverty, ignorance, prosperity doctrine, greed, and extreme crime, you sad, pathetic, and unbelievably misguided people. I just hope they don't screw it up for the people that are actually well informed, who understand the issues, and are trying to make the change we so desperately need.

Yay, more racism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom