Your Predictions on Democrat Conspiracies and Possible Implosion over Iowa
So, last night, six different Iowa precincts were decided for the Democrats by coin toss. And Hillary Clinton won every single toss.
The odds of winning six consecutive coin tosses is 1 in (2^6), or 1 in 64.
Any novice gambler who ever thought that a Martingale betting strategy was a great system and then subsequently lost his shirt (and then subsequently learned himself up a bit to find that Martingale betting strategies are a dumb idea) will tell you that 1 in 64 is not out of the realm of real world possibilities. So, Clinton could have feasibly really won each coin toss.
Add to the mix that I believe each coin toss was held in a different location, at a different time, by different people, was conducted before public witnesses, and was caught on video. Regardless, to some, and probably justifiably, none of this will detract from the inescapable fact that the winner was a Clinton.
So, in your opinion,
1) were all/any of the coin tosses rigged?
2) regardless of possible rigging, how will the Sanders supporters react?
3) if you believe that Sanders supporters will react in a conspiratorial fashion, what does this mean for the Democrat party?
The odds of winning six consecutive coin tosses is 1 in (2^6), or 1 in 64.
Any novice gambler who ever thought that a Martingale betting strategy was a great system and then subsequently lost his shirt (and then subsequently learned himself up a bit to find that Martingale betting strategies are a dumb idea) will tell you that 1 in 64 is not out of the realm of real world possibilities. So, Clinton could have feasibly really won each coin toss.
Add to the mix that I believe each coin toss was held in a different location, at a different time, by different people, was conducted before public witnesses, and was caught on video. Regardless, to some, and probably justifiably, none of this will detract from the inescapable fact that the winner was a Clinton.
So, in your opinion,
1) were all/any of the coin tosses rigged?
2) regardless of possible rigging, how will the Sanders supporters react?
3) if you believe that Sanders supporters will react in a conspiratorial fashion, what does this mean for the Democrat party?
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
What we need is a computerized coin flipper that, for example, takes a random number, computes it to X decimal places and then spits out something like the Xth digit of Pi. or sqrt(2) or whatever...
:)
Clarke's first law
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
Clarke's second law
The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
Clarke's third law
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Jan
sufficiently advanced, is indistinguishable from magic.
-- memorized that a looooooooong time ago. -- j
.
If there are any other outcomes that would be viewed as suspicious, the odds could be even more likely.
This happens all the time in random processes. The human mind seeks to find order in random processes and says "the chances of this particular pattern appearing at random are very low. It likely is not random." We should be asking "what are the chances of any pattern that we would recognize as feeling 'non-random' would occur?" The chances are actually very high. We imagine random distributions as being spread out, but in reality they're "clumpy" like the stars in the sky, and they form recognizable constellations.
Sanders supporters will learn what it's like to compete against the cheaters who not only doctor the odds, but doctor the judges as well. And, don't forget the fear factor.
Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it's enemy action. Or, as in this case, cheating. Six coin-toss wins in six coins tossed, violates the Law of Large Numbers (Law of Averages). It also exceeds the threshold of statistical significance, which one declares when the odds in favor of any given series of outcomes fall below one to nineteen (p < 0.05). We see here the vastness of the Clinton Machine.
Of course she is capable of cheating.
Look at the email scandal... everyone is focused on whether or not each individual email was 'classified at the time it was sent'. Why has no one in the media asked the obvious question... "You were the f'ing Secretary of State and the nation's top diplomat... at what point did you think having your own little $300 Linksys server appliance thing stuffed in the towel closet of your guest bathroom was 'ok'?"
- That's not an exaggeration, my understanding is that it was some little cube-server type thing, literally stuffed in the spare guest bath closet.
Last night I was channel surfing when I found Bill O'Riley smirking at some kinda female Dimocrat (my hit misspelling) strategist and telling her there was no way her party would allow Bolshevik Bernie (my name-calling) to win the nomination.
Bill did not say that Lady Killary (oops, tee-hee) of the Teflon Royal House of Clinton is due her criminal coronation, but I knew what he was driving at. .
I liked the one I saw last night on TV... the woman looks at the coin that just landed, and with a look of.. what, disdain? Disgust? Disillusionment? which is reflected in her voice, and says "Clinton".
My feeling was if you have an even number of precincts that are dead even ties, then half goes to each side. In this case, if there were 6, then 3 goes to one side, three to the other. If it's an odd number - then a random coin toss for that one odd district (and it doesn't matter which one)...
Then again... it IS the Democrat Party, so while "fair" is in their PR vocabulary, it's missing from their ops orders...
What should be a real shocker to the Clinton campaign is how close it actually was. She should have won by 20 points or more. This doesn't bode well for her chances in New Hampshire.
Coin tossing tech is well understood, so likely wasn't magic.
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." - Arthur Conan Doyle
Given that politicians are involved,
http://watchdog.org/242413/democrat-v...
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/cl...
http://www.heritage.org/research/repo...
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA636....
The odds say rigged.