Sander and Clinton Tied in 6 Iowa Precincts

[jakee 1,596]

rushmc

***That's an interesting thought. But what does it have to do with your idea that the coin tosses were rigged?

I have no idea but a 1 in 64 chance of that happening but it dont smell right.

It's unlikely, but that isn't evidence of crookedness. The England cricket team once lost 12 tosses in a row. That's a 1 in 4096 chance.

So where's the evidence that there were any crooks involved?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[okalb 104]

normiss

Blaming the system and the voters is dishonest.
Coin toss??

There you go again, injecting facts into a discussion again. When will you learn that facts mean nothing in Rush world?

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[DanG 1]

Quote

Blaming the system and the voters is dishonest.
Coin toss??

Yeah, but that's NPR.

What do Breitbart and the Blaze have to say about it? Ya know, real news.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

DanG

Quote

Blaming the system and the voters is dishonest.
Coin toss??

Yeah, but that's NPR.

What do Breitbart and the Blaze have to say about it? Ya know, real news.

What do they have to say?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

Quote

What do they have to say?

Well, Breitbart regaled us with this unbiased reporting:

Quote

Everyone who isn’t getting paid by Hillary Clinton knows the truth: Iowa was a devastating blow to her, and Sanders is correct to trumpet “a come-from-behind campaign for the history books.”

The one thing he couldn’t possible have foreseen is that Clinton would defy 64-to-1 odds and win six coin tosses in a row.

Of course, Clinton fans know this isn’t the first time she’s beaten long odds. In the Miracle of the Cattle Futures, for example, Clinton turned a $1,000 investment into $100,000 in no time flat, despite having no experience in the highly volatile commodities market.

She also somehow forgot to report that windfall to the IRS, and the Clinton White House dragged its feet on releasing the details of the trade, which is so unlike the famously transparent power couple.

- Dan G

[JerryBaumchen 1,468]

Hi Dan,

Quote

Yeah, but that's NPR.

Actually, the link was to Oregon Public Broadcasting; OPB as we call it here.

And everyone knows they cannot be trusted; right, rush?



Jerry Baumchen

[rehmwa 2]

normiss

Blaming the system and the voters is dishonest.
Coin toss??

I agree, if it was fixed, then the coin flip would automatically land in favor of Al Gore and Al Franken

"In favor" would be one of the following: Heads, tails, on edge, lost, Quarter, Dime, Penny, Nickel,....Coin, hanging chad, or any type of ballet with a write in response. Also, if something other than a coin is tossed, that would be interpreted by an impartial group of 2 dems and a rep with a mandatory interpretation of vote for Franken.

I believe if the coin were to spontaneously just hover, then a reflip is required after adding three dead people to the voter roles. I think


Seriously, it's Iowa, say you'll keep the corn subsidies and 90% of the people will bake you a pie.

It's not like it's Chicago or anything

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,120]

A classic RushMC post. It contains both:

>I have no idea but a 1 in 64 chance of that happening

fundamental errors and

>More to the point is the numbers of people who still vote for her is telling

a gratuitous slam.

Overall I think it's great that there's a viable alternative for Hillary.

[rushmc 23]

Who were they quoting?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Actually a slam would be pointing out how uninformed a person needs to be to vote for clinton

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

Quote

Who were they quoting?

Nobody. I was quoting the Breitbart news report. Not from the opinion page, from the news.

- Dan G

[normiss 897]

Maybe he didn't have his secret decoder ring handy.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

DanG

Quote

What do they have to say?

Well, Breitbart regaled us with this unbiased reporting:

Quote

Everyone who isn’t getting paid by Hillary Clinton knows the truth: Iowa was a devastating blow to her, and Sanders is correct to trumpet “a come-from-behind campaign for the history books.”

The one thing he couldn’t possible have foreseen is that Clinton would defy 64-to-1 odds and win six coin tosses in a row.

Of course, Clinton fans know this isn’t the first time she’s beaten long odds. In the Miracle of the Cattle Futures, for example, Clinton turned a $1,000 investment into $100,000 in no time flat, despite having no experience in the highly volatile commodities market.

She also somehow forgot to report that windfall to the IRS, and the Clinton White House dragged its feet on releasing the details of the trade, which is so unlike the famously transparent power couple.

I was wondering how rush knew the odds. Now I know.

[rushmc 23]

DanG

Quote

Who were they quoting?

Nobody. I was quoting the Breitbart news report. Not from the opinion page, from the news.

There is a quote in your post

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Yes there is, and it is also clear who the quote is attributed too. So, why do you keep asking?

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

Yes there is, and it is also clear who the quote is attributed too. So, why do you keep asking?

Ok then. What is false in what he posted?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

It's not technically false, it's just incredibly biased reporting. If you can't see that, then you're completely lost.

That article would be fine on an opinion page. When it is labeled news, the reader should expect at least an attempt at impartiality.

- Dan G

[rushmc 23]

DanG

It's not technically false, it's just incredibly biased reporting. If you can't see that, then you're completely lost.

That article would be fine on an opinion page. When it is labeled news, the reader should expect at least an attempt at impartiality.

Hmmmmm

I guess that is your opinion

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

>Ok then. What is false in what he posted?

There weren't six "coin flips."
Clinton didn't win all of the "coin flips."

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***It's not technically false, it's just incredibly biased reporting. If you can't see that, then you're completely lost.

That article would be fine on an opinion page. When it is labeled news, the reader should expect at least an attempt at impartiality.

Hmmmmm

I guess that is your opinion

And you somehow think the following is news and not opinion?

Quote

Everyone who isn’t getting paid by Hillary Clinton knows the truth: Iowa was a devastating blow to her, and Sanders is correct to trumpet

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>Ok then. What is false in what he posted?

There weren't six "coin flips."
Clinton didn't win all of the "coin flips."

As reported locally

Yes there was
Yes she did

Has that changed?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 897]

In your mind?
It would seem so.

[billvon 3,120]

>Yes there was
>Yes she did

>Has that changed?

What you posted was never correct.

There were a great many "coin flips" that night; when one of the delegate slots gets a roughly equal number of candidates, they decide it by flipping a coin or via some other random method. It was common, for example, for a candidate to get five of eleven slots, the other to get five of eleven, and the final one (since the people at the caucus were evenly divided) chosen by coin flip. This happened far more than six times. There is no requirement to report it, so few did.

There is anecdotal evidence that Clinton won six of those many flips, gathered from social media and secondhand stories. Winning six of (say) 50 tosses is not at all unusual, especially when the remaining 44 are unknown.

There is hard data that out of seven Sanders vs Clinton flips reported via a Microsoft polling tool, Sanders won six. (Some locations used the tool, but not all of them.)

So no, Clinton did not hit a 1 of 64 chance by winning all the coin tosses. And in fact those coin tosses did not even affect the statewide delegate count, since they were used to select county delegates rather than state delegates - so those tosses would not have affected the final score of 697 vs 701 delegates anyway.

I expect you to now ignore the evidence of Sanders winning 6 of 7 reported coin tosses, because it does not support your desired narrative.

[rushmc 23]

Link

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DanG 1]

Link already provided, if you were really interested, you know you are wrong already.

- Dan G