Political Betting Thread

[rev0lver]

What I was worried about. Iowa democrats front loaded the results that favoured Mayor Creepy and the ones favourable to Bernie being trickled out after that. They have also tried to issue fake results at least once. It led to a pretty major revision in favour of Bernie after objections were raised.

Does anyone still think that the demorats are not doing their best to rig the primaries against Bernie? Anyone betting on Bernie should be aware of that.

So what will prevail? Democrat party incompetence in everything they attempt or their complete lack of ethical standards? I was betting on the latter, but I should have known they would fuck it up.

What a disaster this all is. Bernie Sanders should end up winning Iowa, but the constant prevention of an official winner has let Pete Buttigieg declare his own victory on partial results, with half the media running with that. They've just artificially boosted his momentum and he's suddenly getting a surge in donors.

Off topic from betting but if the DNC somehow guides Pete Buttigieg to win the nomination, I'm officially changing my registration to Independent after the convention. I'd still vote for whoever aligns with my values more (pretty much any dem over Trump), but I don't want to be associated with these people.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

What a disaster this all is. Bernie Sanders should end up winning Iowa, but the constant prevention of an official winner has let Pete Buttigieg declare his own victory on partial results, with half the media running with that. They've just artificially boosted his momentum and he's suddenly getting a surge in donors.

I was in Iowa for the caucuses over the weekend and observed one of the largest caucuses in the city of Waterloo.

While there, I saw significant evidence of incompetence in the Iowa Democratic Party's staff. Our precinct chair was literally incapable of reading the instructions for how to run the caucus. It was hard to watch at times. If we had left it up to him, we would have been there for four hours. He was forced to appoint a "secretary" from the Bernie group to help him do his job, and that's when things went smoothly.

Buttigieg is likely to win SDEs in the end. The only reason Sanders has a chance there is because of the new satellite caucuses, which are mostly getting reported last, probably because the incompetent Iowa Democratic Party can't even handle the simpler non-satellite caucuses. They even have two contradictory sets of rules about how to count delegates from satellite caucuses!

BTW, caucuses are awesome. The actual results are almost impossible to rig, unlike primaries. There is a complete paper trail for every precinct and the precinct captains from each campaign sign off on them. Sanders is going to get a bounce from this debacle as a lot of his people wrongly believe they are getting screwed and the MSM won't stop covering the debacle+results because it's sexy.

 

[longway]

^ ive learnt a lot about caucuses that i havent wanted to over the last few days. I would accept caucuses are very difficult to rig, but the democrats are doing their best to obsfucate and delay the results in every way possible. I cant see how this can be denied at this point.

The decision to use the untested app put together 2 months before the caucus, and having a single telephone line as a back up is in itself suspect, given what is at stake.

If only there was a electronic version of mail that could be sent instantly, an email if you please, then none of this needed to happen.

There are just so many options available as back up, outside a single telephone line.

Its not as if they have never run a caucus without an app before.

Conviniently, despite their still being errors, the iowa democrats issued these results just before mayor creepy's townhall.



How difficult can it be to count numbers?

Even i cant believe they are this incompetent, and i think the upper echelons of democrat party are idiots by and large, albeit, scummy conniving idiots.

Btw 5 dimes has still not paid out. The wager is still pending.

 

[longway]

Sanders is going to get a bounce from this debacle as a lot of his people wrongly believe they are getting screwed and the MSM won't stop covering the debacle+results because it's sexy.

I diisagree, the value of the winner of the caucus giving their victory speech when the eyes of the nation will be on them cannot be overstated.

They are depriving bernie a massive boost by obsfucating and delaying like this.

Even giving 2 sets of conflicting instructions to satellite caucuses where bernie would do well is another odd coincidence.

Btw satellite caucuses were held before the main caucuses, but reported last, another odd coincidence.

There is just too much shadowy stuff going on.

If all this happens in a transparent process, that was muddied up beyond belief, imagine what can be done when it is less transparent.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

he value of the winner of the caucus giving their victory speech when the eyes of the nation will be on them cannot be overstated.

They are depriving bernie a massive boost by obsfucating and delaying like this.

Again, Buttigieg is most likely to win Iowa by the standard metric (SDEs) and he was also denied the ability to have a victory speech. However, he played his hand very intelligently (caucus night speech he said something like, "all indications are that we are headed to NH victorious.") Sanders could have played it the same way but he was too conservative. MSM would have been slobbering all over the "two candidates declare victory!" narrative.

Still, the slow trickle of results and the IDP incompetence is getting plenty of coverage and is feeding the "Sanders is a victim" narrative. Remember that horserace coverage is great for ratings. The appearance of potential corruption is excellent for Sanders's fundraising. Remember how his polling and fundraising benefited when alcoholic Hillary Clinton opened her moron mouth a couple weeks ago.

Even giving 2 sets of conflicting instructions to satellite caucuses where bernie would do well is another odd coincidence.

Given the incompetence I personally witnessed out there, I think it's more reasonable to attribute this shitshow to incompetence among the IDP rather than malevolence.

If all this happens in a transparent process, that was muddied up beyond belief, imagine what can be done when it is less transparent.

Sure, I agree. All 50 states should have caucuses. Problem solved.

 

[longway]

Again, Buttigieg is most likely to win Iowa by the standard metric (SDEs) and he was also denied the ability to have a victory speech.

However, he played his hand very intelligently (caucus night speech he said something like, "all indications are that we are headed to NH victorious.")

Its as if he knew beforehand that a clusterfcuk was upcoming. It was a sleaxy move, ok it was smart too. The point is to prevent any possibility of a victory speech by bernie.

Yes, this shitshow will anger the bernie bros, but prevents bernie widening his appeal. 538 modelling gives a 7-8% boost in polling numbers just from iowa, now who knows?

only mayor creepy got that opportunity.

Given the incompetence I personally witnessed out there, I think it's more reasonable to attribute this shitshow to incompetence among the IDP rather than malevolence.

Ultimately, this is possible, but they have been running caucuses for decades. Im not aware of hustory, have they fcuked up this bad b4?

Its not just precinct captains making a mess, but everyone, up and down the line.

Its not just fucking up, its as if fucking up was designed into the process.

Btw in my previous post i added that satellite caucuses were held before the main one, so they had those results first, but by odd coincidence, reported them last.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

Its as if he knew beforehand that a clusterfcuk was upcoming. It was a sleaxy move, ok it was smart too. The point is to prevent any possibility of a victory speech by bernie.

I can't really follow your train of thought. Why do you think he "knew beforehand"?

I guess the conspiracy theory is that IDP actually knew the full results, released them to Buttigieg campaign and then slow-rolled the public release? That doesn't line up with what we know about how much difficulty the precinct chairs were having just reporting the results via the hotline.

I believe Buttigieg had precinct captains in all ~1700 precincts. Those captains had the results as soon as the caucuses ended and sent them back to HQ. That's how the campaign was able to figure out that Buttigieg most likely won with SDEs long before the IDP was even releasing results. Then he hit the stage and used the "victorious" language, which is a key part of the bounce he's getting.

Sanders also had near 100% precinct coverage but I'm guessing his organization wasn't fast enough to crunch the numbers in time for Sanders to give a "victory speech".

I spent time in the Buttigieg campaign office in Waterloo over the weekend. They were running an efficient organization, a well-oiled machine. They are really good at this game, the opposite of Biden.

Ultimately, this is possible, but they have been running caucuses for decades. Im not aware of hustory, have they fcuked up this bad b4?

They've had plenty of big mistakes before. Remember the Santorum/Romney debacle?

If you take out the reporting issue (app failure + no backup plan), the rest of the issues are relatively minor. After the errors are corrected the final result will be very similar to what we see now.

 

[longway]

I can't really follow your train of thought. Why do you think he "knew beforehand"?

Not the full results, but knew a mess he could capitslise on was upcoming.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

Not the full results, but knew a mess he could capitslise on was upcoming.

The caucuses are amazingly transparent. There are no secret ballots. I literally watched the voters supporting each candidate gather together and declare their support.

Buttigieg had precinct captains in all 1600+ precincts. Those captains had the results from each caucus and reported them to HQ promptly. With superior organization and simple arithmetic his campaign was able to figure out quickly that he was very likely to be the winner. He then capitalized in the speech.

Sanders also had a lot of precinct captains but perhaps not as many and from what I have observed up close (I did some work for the Sanders campaign recently), his campaign is not as well organized as Buttigieg's.

I have a photo of the results card from one of the 1600+ precincts---the card from the caucus I observed. The Buttigieg precinct captain had access to the same card and reported the results immediately to campaign HQ.

 

[longway]

If you take out the reporting issue (app failure + no backup plan), the rest of the issues are relatively minor. After the errors are corrected the final result will be very similar to what we see now.

I think you make fair points. But, i bet against bernie partly bc i expected dnc to cheat. After dmr poll was spiked i knew something crazy was going down, and i was right about that. Then i thought, i bet bernie catches up and even wins in the last 15%.

And i was right about that.

So, its just hard for me to reconcile everything i predicted would happen due to cheating, with a normal fuck up.

Even now idnc published final results at a convenient time for buttigieg, even when they know their count is still rife with errors. And i can bet on the direction of those errors.

The dnc even has a prior history of working against bernie.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

After dmr poll was spiked i knew something crazy was going down

DMR spiked the poll because a Buttigieg voter was polled and was not given Buttigieg as an option. What is your theory there?

 

[longway]

DMR spiked the poll because a Buttigieg voter was polled and was not given Buttigieg as an option. What is your theory there?

My theory was that it showed sanders with a big lead. It has been leaked, i cant remember all but sanders was 22% and biden 13%. So, my theory was correct.

Latest nh polling showing buttigieg spiking.



You can see that on rcp. Demonstrating the importance of declaring victory in iowa

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...ire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html





I understand your reservations, but the evidence of malfeasance is overwhelming, for me anyway.

 

[longway]

The latest I am hearing, to make up for the Iowa debacle, is that the democrats will announce the results for NH before voting starts.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

My theory was that it showed sanders with a big lead. It has been leaked, i cant remember all but sanders was 22% and biden 13%. So, my theory was correct.

Latest nh polling showing buttigieg spiking.



You can see that on rcp. Demonstrating the importance of declaring victory in iowa

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...ire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html





I understand your reservations, but the evidence of malfeasance is overwhelming, for me anyway.

• When 62% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 71% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 75% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 86% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 97% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.

• Now that 100% of precincts have reported, Buttigieg is in the lead.

There was no point at which Sanders was in the lead.

Buttigieg was polling a distant third pre-Iowa. Winning Iowa for him meant that he beat expectations in a major way. Releasing the spiked DMR poll would have only solidified that, since he was third in that poll. Then he wisely seized the moment on caucus night with the "victorious" line. Notice the big polling bounce he has experienced as a result.

OTOH, Sanders was polling in first pre-Iowa. All indications are he finished a close second. He basically met expectations, so he's not getting a bounce in polling. He'll get a fundraising bounce because of the conspiracy theories.

Biden was polling in 2nd pre-Iowa. He finished a distant 4th. His polling has dropped off a cliff post-Iowa. Again, expectations are crucial. People want to vote for the winner and don't like to vote for the loser. Sad but true.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

Biden is done
Klobuchar is done
Yang is done


Tonight's debate is Warren's last chance. She is strong on the debate stage and NH is a good state for her, relatively speaking. She has to seize the moment and draw sharp contrasts with Buttigieg. Historically, NH voters tune in to this final debate in high numbers and it does impact their votes. See: Rubio 2016.

 

[rev0lver]

• When 62% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 71% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 75% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 86% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.
• When 97% of precincts had reported, Buttigieg was in the lead.

• Now that 100% of precincts have reported, Buttigieg is in the lead.

There was no point at which Sanders was in the lead.

Buttigieg was polling a distant third pre-Iowa. Winning Iowa for him meant that he beat expectations in a major way. Releasing the spiked DMR poll would have only solidified that, since he was third in that poll. Then he wisely seized the moment on caucus night with the "victorious" line. Notice the big polling bounce he has experienced as a result.

OTOH, Sanders was polling in first pre-Iowa. All indications are he finished a close second. He basically met expectations, so he's not getting a bounce in polling. He'll get a fundraising bounce because of the conspiracy theories.

Biden was polling in 2nd pre-Iowa. He finished a distant 4th. His polling has dropped off a cliff post-Iowa. Again, expectations are crucial. People want to vote for the winner and don't like to vote for the loser. Sad but true.

Two things here.

Buttigieg was 25+ SDE's in the lead until around 91% of precincts were reported, when that lead collapsed to 3 SDE's (and later <2 SDE's). I don't believe Sanders ever lost the lead in the popular vote, except for the short period where they accidentally gave Sanders votes to Patrick+others (since fixed).

Multiple major outlets are still refusing to declare a winner due to dozens of inaccuracies in SDE calculations. Most of what I've seen shows this favored Buttigieg while disfavoring Sanders. I've seen some data plots out there showing Buttigieg heavily benefiting from these errors more than any other candidate. Conspiracy theories on why that is aside, it looks like Sanders actually should win once these errors are fixed. Though I'm not sure if ALL the miscalculated worksheets have been publicly shown.

You're right that the paper trail means we should EVENTUALLY get it right, but this process leaves the door open for a ton of human error or even a potential for temporary intentional error. And that can be an issue.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

Buttigieg was 25+ SDE's in the lead until around 91% of precincts were reported, when that lead collapsed to 3 SDE's (and later <2 SDE's).

I believe this was due to satellite caucus results, which favored Sanders heavily. I can understand why the idiot IDP would want to handle satellites at the end, since they were scrambling to handle even non-satellite caucuses and since the formula for delegate assignment was different for the satellites.

it looks like Sanders actually should win once these errors are fixed.

I doubt this and I'm willing to bet on it. I believe Buttigieg will finish on top after all errors are corrected.

Though I'm not sure if ALL the miscalculated worksheets have been publicly shown.

Huh? All results are publicly available at results.thecaucuses.org. Some people have scraped the results and found coding and other errors, but I'm willing to bet that the errors don't favor Buttigieg over Sanders enough to swing the SDE count in Sanders's favor.

 

[rev0lver]

I believe this was due to satellite caucus results, which favored Sanders heavily. I can understand why the idiot IDP would want to handle satellites at the end, since they were scrambling to handle even non-satellite caucuses and since the formula for delegate assignment was different for the satellites.


I doubt this and I'm willing to bet on it. I believe Buttigieg will finish on top after all errors are corrected.


Huh? All results are publicly available at results.thecaucuses.org. Some people have scraped the results and found coding and other errors, but I'm willing to bet that the errors don't favor Buttigieg over Sanders enough to swing the SDE count in Sanders's favor.

That's a tough bet considering a 2 delegate swing would make Sanders the winner. Even if there was no statistically significant benefactor in the error, it takes a tiny amount of variance to make Sanders the winner here. Considering his lead in the popular vote, it seems more sensible that Sanders would benefit at least somewhat more than Buttigieg in correcting SDE calculation errors.

 

[Stranger_Foreigner]

That's a tough bet considering a 2 delegate swing would make Sanders the winner. Even if there was no statistically significant benefactor in the error, it takes a tiny amount of variance to make Sanders the winner here. Considering his lead in the popular vote, it seems more sensible that Sanders would benefit at least somewhat more than Buttigieg in correcting SDE calculation errors.

Good post and good point. I guess we'll have to wait and see. I also don't understand how SDEs get converted to national delegate totals. AP is saying 13 DNC delegates for Buttigieg, 12 for Sanders.

 

[rev0lver]

Good post and good point. I guess we'll have to wait and see. I also don't understand how SDEs get converted to national delegate totals. AP is saying 13 DNC delegates for Buttigieg, 12 for Sanders.

I thought they'd be tied if results stayed the way they were? Maybe I'm wrong about that. This is such a weird ass process either way lol.

This is nothing official obviously, but someone put together a google doc of all the so-far identified errors from IDP's results, showing a ~4 SDE gain for Sanders.