• 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.
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.
He only got them right because he predicts the best case scenario for Bernie, every time, all the time. And right now the caucuses are where he gets the most support.

If I colored in a map for the general election and gave every state to the Democrat should I get credit for getting half of them right? Because that's basically what Tyler is doing.
 
He only got them right because he predicts the best case scenario for Bernie, every time, all the time. And right now the caucuses are where he gets the most support.

If I colored in a map for the general election and gave every state to the Democrat should I get credit for getting half of them right? Because that's basically what Tyler is doing.

FALSE.

He's predicted several losses for Bernie and wins for Hillary. He's even saying that Hillary is likely to win NY.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about.
 

Mael

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



It's not. It's called a tangent.

So why should we care about tyler when he is wildly unreliable in a type of election we are discussing about?
If Ipsos is correct in France but BS in Asia and pollster is reliable in Japan and BS in the rest of the world.
If we're discussing an election in a town in Kanto why should we consider Ipsos?
If Tyler is unreliable in primaries, his numbers on NY is crap and should be thrown out.
 
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.

Mate, I never said it was easy. I'm saying everyone knew who would win. I'm not arguing margins. Polling cock uses is hard and, in terms of the last group of challenges, completely pointless.

Here's what I'm taking issue with :

1) The idea that Bernie living in Brooklyn 50 years ago is somehow more indicative of his ability to turn out support than the fact that Hillary had to turn out support in three previous statewide races (Senator x2, President x1), that she actually lives in the state, and that the Clinton foundation is in the state.

You don't get to claim the first and just ignore the second because it fits the narrative you want to run with. And, to be clear, I'm not saying she's going to win by 30 points like some people. I think it'll be closer, but Bernie living there 50 years ago has slightly more than zero to do with that.

and (to a far lesser degree)

2) That this Tyler person is somehow better at predictions than actual polling. He got the margins in cock uses right. Awesome. Doesn't mean he's not just throwing numbers until something sticks.
 

Mael

Member
FALSE.

He's predicted several losses for Bernie and wins for Hillary. He's even saying that Hillary is likely to win NY.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about.

So why are you arguing that Sanders can take NY if even your fav pollster says he's not going to do it?
 
FALSE.

He's predicted several losses for Bernie and wins for Hillary. He's even saying that Hillary is likely to win NY.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about.
Even in his 3/15 predictions he was very generous to Bernie by showing him win IL, MO by a huge margin and down only slightly in OH and above 40 in NC and FL.

Well he was close in NC I guess!

Like bruh we're both Bernie supporters here. Tyler is literally throwing shit at a wall and sometimes it sticks. Nothing against him (shit I don't know him) but he's not some gifted political analyst, he's some dude on the internet trying to show how Bernie can win.
 
You still aren't providing any evidence to counter people providing proof of their arguments.

Saying its wrong is not proof..

I don't need to provide proof because what I'm saying is public knowledge and everyone knows it, though some may not have considered it before they made their argument.

So why should we care about tyler when he is wildly unreliable in a type of election we are discussing about?
If Ipsos is correct in France but BS in Asia and pollster is reliable in Japan and BS in the rest of the world.
If we're discussing an election in a town in Kanto why should we consider Ipsos?
If Tyler is unreliable in primaries, his numbers on NY is crap and should be thrown out.

I've already said he's unreliable.

Your post is a perfect example of the projecting that I've been talking about. I didn't bring up Tyler. I only responded to posts about him.
 

Holmes

Member
This is completely disingenuous. He's been doing this all over the country since he announced his run for president.
Not really. It's a fact that he spent millions in South Carolina and had many more campaign offices and staffers on the ground. Whether or not he was spending money in other states doesn't change that.

As for your "he didn't spend all of his time there" claim, who cares? He was a presence there since at least August. That's over half a year before the primary. Your rebuttal here is pretty weak. He has less time in New York to close the gap and the electorate looks closer to South Carolina than it does Utah, Idaho or Washington.
 
I don't need to provide proof because what I'm saying is public knowledge and everyone knows it, though some may not have considered it before they made their argument.

Brah, no one is arguing the fact that Bernie lived in Brooklyn! What we're trying to get you to defend or explain is this idea that having lived there 50 years ago is somehow going to lead to increased turnout based on that fact.

That's all.
 

royalan

Member
Jesus. White progressive racists are kinda the worst racists.

People have been saying this forever: well-meaning racists are in some ways worse than the hateful ones, because their racism stems from a patronizing, child-like view of black people as a group.

Black folk: we just don't know any better.
 
People have been saying this forever: well-meaning racists are in some ways worse than the hateful ones, because their racism stems from a patronizing, child-like vote of black people as a group.

Black folk: we just don't know any better.

It's disgusting and they frequently then try to claim to care but clearly their care is conditional on the basis of falling in line.
 

Kyosaiga

Banned
It's disgusting and they frequently then try to claim to care but clearly their care is conditional on the basis of falling in line.

How quickly they through the entire CBC under the bus.

They literally argued that Bernie's time in the CRM was more meaningful than the actual people affected by segregation and literally risked their lives fighting for Equal Rights.

You can't make this shit up.
 
Well, if you wanna talk about racism, let's talk about the white-washing of minorities in Hawaii and Alaska!! You'd think that poliGAF would be all over that shit, but nope.
 

gcubed

Member
Tyler should be banned. Its the hot gay stove or the legitimate rape bullshit of this season thats being peddled by a single person. His name was conspicuously absent the entire time brainchild was banned.
 
Erin Burnett really trying to make this a race. Says Clinton's pledged delegate is 'tight'.

Asked Bakari Sellers due to sanders trifecta, if sanders wins Wisconsin, should Clinton be concerned?

lol
 

Kangi

Member
Tyler should be banned. Its the hot gay stove or the legitimate rape bullshit of this season thats being peddled by a single person. His name was conspicuously absent the entire time brainchild was banned.

Not really. People kept bringing him up before the 22nd... half of it in reference to brainchild.

Tyler is a rash that will not go away.
 
Tyler should be banned. Its the hot gay stove or the legitimate rape bullshit of this season thats being peddled by a single person. His name was conspicuously absent the entire time brainchild was banned.

You know what, this is the kind of shit that will get you banned.

I have no affiliation whatsoever with the guy, and I would appreciate if people stopped peddling this bullshit.
 
Wait, she's leading by that much? Why is everyone on my timeline arguing about "the will of the people" then?

if my own timeline is any indication, it's because everyone on your timeline is a bunch of fuckin' idiots who can't comprehend that anyone outside of their specific demographic group exists

I wonder how many Bernie Supporters inadvertedly created a ton of Hillary supporters on social media, because of the obnoxious delusion.

they didn't create me, but they sure as shit made me just as obnoxious in pushing back against them
 
Tyler talk = permaban. Guy is a snake oil salesman. I would rather listen to unskewed pollster.
I'm okay with this! At this point, brainchild is either Tyler or is being paid to perform viral marketing.
Tyler should be banned. Its the hot gay stove or the legitimate rape bullshit of this season thats being peddled by a single person. His name was conspicuously absent the entire time brainchild was banned.
I can't imagine why!
You know what, this is the kind of shit that will get you banned.

I have no affiliation whatsoever with the guy, and I would appreciate if people stopped peddling this bullshit.
I dislike the idea of calling another member dishonest or being a liar. So I won't. Also, wtf at the bolded?
 
People have been saying this forever: well-meaning racists are in some ways worse than the hateful ones, because their racism stems from a patronizing, child-like view of black people as a group.

Black folk: we just don't know any better.
"We need to win some black voters! Hey black voters, vote for us!"

AA voters: "What will you do about racial inequality"

"Well first we'll break up the banks"

AA voters: "Hey Hillary is talking about criminal injustice over here -"

"You'll vote for SHILLARY? Don't you know what's good for you?"

AA voters: "Well now we will"

"I just don't understand those black voters! Fuck all of them for supporting a candidate who speaks directly to their interests!"

I think as a politician you can't just make people flock to you for your number one issue - you need to win their support by addressing THEIR number one issue. Bernie wants to make the argument that dealing with income inequality would alleviate all of our issues, and I think to some degree he's correct, it's a fundamental problem. But racial inequality is so deeply rooted in our society that it's its own foundation at this point. Breaking up the banks and arresting the folks who cheated Wall Street isn't going to fix discriminatory housing, employment practices, police brutality, areas with severely low funding/resources, and above all, peoples' attitudes that permit these things to happen. There's no silver bullet for these issues and I think Bernie's campaign has trouble with that because basically all of his policy proposals are being pitched as silver bullets.
 

royalan

Member
Who here has talked about how offensive it is? Exactly NO ONE. Fancy that!

Because it's really not happening that much, at least in my view.

I see less people trying to "whitewash" Hawaii than I see Bernie stans trying to use Hawaii to claim that Bernie doesn't have a minority problem, then crying "Whitewashing!" when they get smacked over the head with exit polls.
 
yeah guys why aren't you pushing back against this thing no one on GAF is doing and which no one on here has even heard about until today because it's exclusively happening on other fucking sites

e: like, at least with the berniebro shitposting we can point to specific people on here doing it. this is a complete red herring.
 
"Bernie tends to do well in caucus states" and "Bernie tends to do better in whiter states" are mutually exclusive statements.

No one is trying to whitewash Hawaii Jesus Christ
 
I'm okay with this! At this point, brainchild is either Tyler or is being paid to perform viral marketing.I can't imagine why!I dislike the idea of calling another member dishonest or being a liar. So I won't. Also, wtf at the bolded?

Mischaracterizing me without proof by claiming that I'm some kind of viral marketer who's promoting myself is not only seriously trolling, it's slander.

I'm telling you that I don't think that Tyler's model is reliable and you're telling me that I'm Tyler. WTF indeed!
 

Makai

Member
CduosG2UAAAqkSh.jpg
 
Mischaracterizing me without proof by claiming that I'm some kind of viral marketer who's promoting myself is not only seriously trolling, it's slander.

I'm telling you that I don't think that Tyler's model is reliable and you're telling me that I'm Tyler. WTF indeed!
No it isn't. Slander is spoken. In print it's libel.
 

pigeon

Banned
For the record, when Bernie won Hawaii, I admitted I was surprised, and I stopped posting that Bernie can't win people of color.

I think it is still accurate to say that Hillary has a strong lead among African-Americans.
 
"We need to win some black voters! Hey black voters, vote for us!"

AA voters: "What will you do about racial inequality"

"Well first we'll break up the banks"

AA voters: "Hey Hillary is talking about criminal injustice over here -"

"You'll vote for SHILLARY? Don't you know what's good for you?"

AA voters: "Well now we will"

"I just don't understand those black voters! Fuck all of them for supporting a candidate who speaks directly to their interests!"

I think as a politician you can't just make people flock to you for your number one issue - you need to win their support by addressing THEIR number one issue. Bernie wants to make the argument that dealing with income inequality would alleviate all of our issues, and I think to some degree he's correct, it's a fundamental problem. But racial inequality is so deeply rooted in our society that it's its own foundation at this point. Breaking up the banks and arresting the folks who cheated Wall Street isn't going to fix discriminatory housing, employment practices, police brutality, areas with severely low funding/resources, and above all, peoples' attitudes that permit these things to happen. There's no silver bullet for these issues and I think Bernie's campaign has trouble with that because basically all of his policy proposals are being pitched as silver bullets.

This is really on point, mate. I agree with you.

The Bernie people have been working from on top of the mountain and trying to pull everyone up on the issues Bernie thinks are important. Different groups are pointing out that these issues, while important, are not the main concerns of their community. Instead of trying to figure out what is important, they try to convince people that they're wrong...that the issue they're championing is the REAL issue. Then, if you don't see it that way you're uniformed, ignorant or stupid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom