Saturday, February 22, 2020
what were my projections?
1) sanders will do well in most districts, often getting close to or a little over 30%
he's currently running at 34% and appears to be running pretty stable in the high 20s or low 30s pretty much everywhere.
2) buttigieg will be viable in most places, and will cross 20% in strong districts
that was accurate.
3) biden & warren will mostly be unviable, but may get a small number of delegates.
right now, it looks like the only place that biden is going to clear 15% is las vegas, and warren may not get anything at all.
4) klobuchar & steyer will run flat, and below the threshhold essentially everywhere
they're both running under 10%.
1) sanders will do well in most districts, often getting close to or a little over 30%
he's currently running at 34% and appears to be running pretty stable in the high 20s or low 30s pretty much everywhere.
2) buttigieg will be viable in most places, and will cross 20% in strong districts
that was accurate.
3) biden & warren will mostly be unviable, but may get a small number of delegates.
right now, it looks like the only place that biden is going to clear 15% is las vegas, and warren may not get anything at all.
4) klobuchar & steyer will run flat, and below the threshhold essentially everywhere
they're both running under 10%.
at
23:35
the media coverage has almost entirely shut down on a saturday night.
there's nothing of much interest to me happening in detroit, tonight. i'm leaning towards staying in tomorrow, as well. there's a show on monday i want to hit. but, it seems like everybody wanted to make it to the party, wherever that is, and dropped the coverage like a screaming infant. "shut up. i need to get drunk.".
i really only go out to see shows, i don't care much for people, so here i am.
the new york times site has a paywall, so i've got a javascript blocker, and i can't use it. so, i'm resorting to the nbc site, which is more functional - until they read this and break it. fucking capitalists.
if i must be the lone nerd that actually looks at this closely and realizes just how warped the early results really are, then so be it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-primary-elections/nevada-results
biden is basically doing well in clark county and terrible everywhere else, which is actually not that different than iowa. biden did get six delegates in iowa, and he got them by doing well in des moines. i don't think there's anything shocking about him running in the 20s or higher in downtown las vegas.
but, you might want to compare clark county vs carson city, which is the only other place with any results coming in.
clark country - 30.5% reporting:
Sanders 46.7%
Biden 25.8%
Buttigieg 13.1%
Warren 8.6%
Steyer 3.3%
Klobuchar 2.2%
ok. great night for sanders in vegas.
carson city - 57.7% reporting:
Sanders 46.2%
Klobuchar 16.9%
Buttigieg 13.8%
Steyer 10%
Warren 9.2%
Biden 3.8%
seriously.
these are the other counties with more than 15% reporting:
churchill - 47.4% reporting:
Sanders 41.7%
Buttigieg 20.8%
Warren 12.5%
Biden 8.3%
Klobuchar 8.3%
Steyer 8.3%
douglas - 40.5% reporting:
Buttigieg 33.3%
Sanders 26.9%
Klobuchar 21.8%
Warren 7.7%
Biden 5.1%
Steyer 5.1%
elko - 41.5% reporting:
Sanders 39.3%
Buttigieg 23.2%
Klobuchar 16.1%
Biden 10.7%
Warren 10.7%
there are 12 other counties, all with less than 15% reporting, most or all of which are likely to continue the trend seen in these other non-clark counties.
this matters dramatically, because if he can't get to 10%, let alone 15%, in three out of the four districts, then those numbers in las vegas are not going to translate to a lot of delegates.
i understand that las vegas has something like 70% of the state's population. so, what does it mean if he gets 25% there and averages 7% in the other 30%, which is about in line with the numbers? then a final projection would be about .25*.7 + .07*.3 ~19%. but, that is ignoring the effects of rural over-representation, as well, which i can't eyeball, i'd have to look up, and i'm not that nerdy.
his numbers will probably be around 17-18% of ccds in the end, and he'll end up with no more than a handful of delegates. that's only better than iowa because vegas dominates the state; if des moines dominated iowa, he would have done roughly as well there, too. so, i maybe underestimated the dominance of vegas on the results, and maybe should have known better. but, this is not a good night for joe biden in nevada at all.
buttigieg, on the other hand, will do well in these rural counties, and will see his numbers come up. if he beats or ties sanders in 3 out of 4 districts, he will nearly catch up on the delegate count.
again: i understand why the party is doing this. but, i'm not doing politics here, i'm doing math homework, and i insist on getting the process right.
when they get the numbers for the rural counties in, it will help buttigieg dramatically, and he will probably leapfrog biden into second, at around 20% of the ccds.
the math that they're using to predict remaining results from a sample of the early results relies on the remaining results essentially being the same as the early results, and that's demonstrably flawed.
that's why they're delaying the results - they don't want you to see that until the party narrative has already been beaten in via the media coverage.
sanders will get something like 20 delegates, buttigieg will get something like 10 and biden will get the rest.
there's nothing of much interest to me happening in detroit, tonight. i'm leaning towards staying in tomorrow, as well. there's a show on monday i want to hit. but, it seems like everybody wanted to make it to the party, wherever that is, and dropped the coverage like a screaming infant. "shut up. i need to get drunk.".
i really only go out to see shows, i don't care much for people, so here i am.
the new york times site has a paywall, so i've got a javascript blocker, and i can't use it. so, i'm resorting to the nbc site, which is more functional - until they read this and break it. fucking capitalists.
if i must be the lone nerd that actually looks at this closely and realizes just how warped the early results really are, then so be it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-primary-elections/nevada-results
biden is basically doing well in clark county and terrible everywhere else, which is actually not that different than iowa. biden did get six delegates in iowa, and he got them by doing well in des moines. i don't think there's anything shocking about him running in the 20s or higher in downtown las vegas.
but, you might want to compare clark county vs carson city, which is the only other place with any results coming in.
clark country - 30.5% reporting:
Sanders 46.7%
Biden 25.8%
Buttigieg 13.1%
Warren 8.6%
Steyer 3.3%
Klobuchar 2.2%
ok. great night for sanders in vegas.
carson city - 57.7% reporting:
Sanders 46.2%
Klobuchar 16.9%
Buttigieg 13.8%
Steyer 10%
Warren 9.2%
Biden 3.8%
seriously.
these are the other counties with more than 15% reporting:
churchill - 47.4% reporting:
Sanders 41.7%
Buttigieg 20.8%
Warren 12.5%
Biden 8.3%
Klobuchar 8.3%
Steyer 8.3%
douglas - 40.5% reporting:
Buttigieg 33.3%
Sanders 26.9%
Klobuchar 21.8%
Warren 7.7%
Biden 5.1%
Steyer 5.1%
elko - 41.5% reporting:
Sanders 39.3%
Buttigieg 23.2%
Klobuchar 16.1%
Biden 10.7%
Warren 10.7%
there are 12 other counties, all with less than 15% reporting, most or all of which are likely to continue the trend seen in these other non-clark counties.
this matters dramatically, because if he can't get to 10%, let alone 15%, in three out of the four districts, then those numbers in las vegas are not going to translate to a lot of delegates.
i understand that las vegas has something like 70% of the state's population. so, what does it mean if he gets 25% there and averages 7% in the other 30%, which is about in line with the numbers? then a final projection would be about .25*.7 + .07*.3 ~19%. but, that is ignoring the effects of rural over-representation, as well, which i can't eyeball, i'd have to look up, and i'm not that nerdy.
his numbers will probably be around 17-18% of ccds in the end, and he'll end up with no more than a handful of delegates. that's only better than iowa because vegas dominates the state; if des moines dominated iowa, he would have done roughly as well there, too. so, i maybe underestimated the dominance of vegas on the results, and maybe should have known better. but, this is not a good night for joe biden in nevada at all.
buttigieg, on the other hand, will do well in these rural counties, and will see his numbers come up. if he beats or ties sanders in 3 out of 4 districts, he will nearly catch up on the delegate count.
again: i understand why the party is doing this. but, i'm not doing politics here, i'm doing math homework, and i insist on getting the process right.
when they get the numbers for the rural counties in, it will help buttigieg dramatically, and he will probably leapfrog biden into second, at around 20% of the ccds.
the math that they're using to predict remaining results from a sample of the early results relies on the remaining results essentially being the same as the early results, and that's demonstrably flawed.
that's why they're delaying the results - they don't want you to see that until the party narrative has already been beaten in via the media coverage.
sanders will get something like 20 delegates, buttigieg will get something like 10 and biden will get the rest.
at
23:03
the tv coverage insisted that sanders won a blowout win (i think everybody realized he would win by a good margin, even if it comes down), that biden had a strong second place finish, that warren was a clear third and that buttigieg was a distant, also-ran fourth.
that's the narrative the party seems to want, right now - that buttigieg is failing with black and brown voters, because they're all a bunch of terrible homophobes.
however, according to aaron bycoffe at the 538 liveblog, the current partial results actually suggest the following delegate count:
As the results stand, with 4 percent of precincts reporting county delegate results (the number used to determine how many national delegates each candidate will get), Sanders would get 20 delegates, and Buttigieg and Biden would each get eight. Of the other candidates, Warren is closest to 15 percent — she has 13.6 percent in the 1st District and close to 12 percent in other areas.
in other words, while sanders is leading, buttigieg and biden are actually in a tie for second, and it is warren in a distant fourth. nevadans don't seem to hate the gay guy all that much after all - although they're a little apprehensive about the female.
why are they resisting this and insisting on pushing down this awful narrative instead?
because they think buttigieg is death for key demographics, and they understand the importance of winning college-educated, suburban white woman. nevada was supposed to push down the party line, not sink the establishment's ship. their gramscian conditioning isn't working, and they don't know what to do.
what are they waiting for?
my guess is that they're waiting for enough results to come in to maintain the party line narrative. there are probably results ready to release, but they don't align with what the party wants you to see, even in partial results. they don't want you to see biden slip, even for a second, so they're waiting for enough results to come in to ensure he maintains his place in order, or gets better.
and, it's taking hours and hours because it's not happening.
we'll probably get the results all at once to shocks and awws. and, everything will change, just right then.
i don't blame anybody for holding on until the results come in. i wouldn't drop right now, either.
that's the narrative the party seems to want, right now - that buttigieg is failing with black and brown voters, because they're all a bunch of terrible homophobes.
however, according to aaron bycoffe at the 538 liveblog, the current partial results actually suggest the following delegate count:
As the results stand, with 4 percent of precincts reporting county delegate results (the number used to determine how many national delegates each candidate will get), Sanders would get 20 delegates, and Buttigieg and Biden would each get eight. Of the other candidates, Warren is closest to 15 percent — she has 13.6 percent in the 1st District and close to 12 percent in other areas.
in other words, while sanders is leading, buttigieg and biden are actually in a tie for second, and it is warren in a distant fourth. nevadans don't seem to hate the gay guy all that much after all - although they're a little apprehensive about the female.
why are they resisting this and insisting on pushing down this awful narrative instead?
because they think buttigieg is death for key demographics, and they understand the importance of winning college-educated, suburban white woman. nevada was supposed to push down the party line, not sink the establishment's ship. their gramscian conditioning isn't working, and they don't know what to do.
what are they waiting for?
my guess is that they're waiting for enough results to come in to maintain the party line narrative. there are probably results ready to release, but they don't align with what the party wants you to see, even in partial results. they don't want you to see biden slip, even for a second, so they're waiting for enough results to come in to ensure he maintains his place in order, or gets better.
and, it's taking hours and hours because it's not happening.
we'll probably get the results all at once to shocks and awws. and, everything will change, just right then.
i don't blame anybody for holding on until the results come in. i wouldn't drop right now, either.
at
20:44
so, i think it's starting to be more clear what they're doing.
what they've done is freeze the numbers at a specific point, to create a certain order in the results, to generate a specific type of coverage. i just watched the local las vegas tv station declare the order of the finishers, with 4% reporting. it's a farce. this is allowing the media to present their racist narrative, about "diversity".
we'll see what the numbers say in the end, but it will matter less what the facts are after the election has been framed the way the party wants it framed.
it's an old trick. the new york times does it all of the time - it posts a blatant lie on the front page, and then posts a two-line retraction on page 37 two weeks later, which nobody reads.
i think everybody expects sanders to win this thing, but to suggest he'll get 40%, let alone 55%, would be to overshoot all of the polling. and, while biden's numbers are not unbelievable in terms of polling averages, it defies belief to think so many nevadans were so stupid as to vote for a senile old man.
it's at 4%. c'mon.
what they've done is freeze the numbers at a specific point, to create a certain order in the results, to generate a specific type of coverage. i just watched the local las vegas tv station declare the order of the finishers, with 4% reporting. it's a farce. this is allowing the media to present their racist narrative, about "diversity".
we'll see what the numbers say in the end, but it will matter less what the facts are after the election has been framed the way the party wants it framed.
it's an old trick. the new york times does it all of the time - it posts a blatant lie on the front page, and then posts a two-line retraction on page 37 two weeks later, which nobody reads.
i think everybody expects sanders to win this thing, but to suggest he'll get 40%, let alone 55%, would be to overshoot all of the polling. and, while biden's numbers are not unbelievable in terms of polling averages, it defies belief to think so many nevadans were so stupid as to vote for a senile old man.
it's at 4%. c'mon.
at
20:22
you know, it's funny.
the numbers being reported on the tv don't seem to be the same as these ones:
https://nevadacaucusresults.com/
it would seem as though biden is running in third, and buttigieg is running in second.
what's going on?
i think we need to let this play out a little, but it seems as though the party is essentially trying to push a specific media narrative, and what little media is covering this is playing along with it. so, biden is bizarrely producing what appears to be a victory speech.
i remember this kind of thing from the clinton years.
but, what are they doing? are they trying to basically trick people into thinking that biden won by gaming the coverage? or are they just giving a broken old man a chance at a spotlight he doesn't actually deserve before they turn off the lights for good?
i'm a compassionate person.
but, they're going to have to get some accurate numbers up on the screen soon enough.
the party clearly doesn't like any of this. it doesn't like sanders. it doesn't like buttigieg. it doesn't like what's happening. and it seems to be reacting very badly.
we'll see how this plays out.
but, why are the results on the tv screen inconsistent with the results at the reporting site?
the numbers being reported on the tv don't seem to be the same as these ones:
https://nevadacaucusresults.com/
it would seem as though biden is running in third, and buttigieg is running in second.
what's going on?
i think we need to let this play out a little, but it seems as though the party is essentially trying to push a specific media narrative, and what little media is covering this is playing along with it. so, biden is bizarrely producing what appears to be a victory speech.
i remember this kind of thing from the clinton years.
but, what are they doing? are they trying to basically trick people into thinking that biden won by gaming the coverage? or are they just giving a broken old man a chance at a spotlight he doesn't actually deserve before they turn off the lights for good?
i'm a compassionate person.
but, they're going to have to get some accurate numbers up on the screen soon enough.
the party clearly doesn't like any of this. it doesn't like sanders. it doesn't like buttigieg. it doesn't like what's happening. and it seems to be reacting very badly.
we'll see how this plays out.
but, why are the results on the tv screen inconsistent with the results at the reporting site?
at
19:36
so, i'm struggling to stay awake as i clean up the last month's worth of posts on this blog.
i'm about half done.
so, i'm getting some fruit and watching the caucus...
no, i don't expect biden to finish in the top two.
i'm about half done.
so, i'm getting some fruit and watching the caucus...
no, i don't expect biden to finish in the top two.
at
17:48
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)