Hillary Clinton Won 6 Out of 6 Coin Tosses Last Night.
Source: U.S. Uncut
Hillary Clinton Won 6 Out of 6 Coin Tosses Last Night.
Heres How Statistically Improbable That Is
Amanda Girard | February 2, 2016
The Iowa Democratic caucus vote count was so close last night that at least 6 precincts were decided by flipping a coin an obscure procedure in the Iowa caucus bylaws. And in all 6 instances, the last remaining county delegate went to Hillary Clinton. Winning 6 coin tosses in a row is extraordinarily rare, and only has a 1.6 percent probability of occurring. As journalist Ben Norton explained, thats broken down by calculating (1/2)^6, which is 1/64 or 1.6 percent.
If Bernie Sanders had won half of the coin flips and split the six county delegates three and three with Clinton, he would have finished at 698.49 delegates to Clintons 696.57, effectively giving him an Iowa victory. According to a live map of all Iowa precincts, Clinton has a razor-thin 0.3 percent lead over the Vermont U.S. Senator with 99.9 percent of precincts reporting.
In addition to the coin flip tiebreakers, one widely discussed controversy was a missing 60 voters in one Iowa precinct which may have flipped the delegate count in Bernie Sanders favor:
David Schweingruber, an associate professor of sociology at Iowa State University, explained to the Des Moines Register how a total of 484 eligible caucus attendees were initially recorded at Ames.
Yet when each candidates preference group was counted, Clinton had 240 supporters, Sanders had 179, and Martin OMalley had five and was declared out.
Those figures added up to just 424 participants, leaving 60 apparently missing. The numbers were plugged into a formula that determines delegate allocations, with Clinton receiving four delegates and Sanders three leaving one delegate unassigned.
Read more: http://usuncut.com/politics/hillary-clinton-won-6-out-of-6-coin-tosses/
Amazing world we live in.....
dogman
(6,073 posts)Who knows?
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)dogman
(6,073 posts)Sorry, no link.
dogman
(6,073 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)"As a result of the coin toss, Clinton was awarded an additional delegate, meaning she took five of the precincts eight, while Sanders received three."
dogman
(6,073 posts)I think you are correct and this is just another indication of media fail. Sorry I repeated it.
TBF
(31,922 posts)"They didn't buy 6 out of 6? Then tell them it was 9-3."
It would be funny if it weren't peoples lives we were dealing with here.
dogman
(6,073 posts)Hard to tell if it was intent or incompetence. Funny how the incompetence seems to go with the same narrative.
TBF
(31,922 posts)it is hard to tell the difference. Well we've got a tie basically, she's got a couple more delegates, and we move on.
New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina coming up before we get to Super Tuesday.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)For inveterate gamblers there is always hope.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)some lottery tickets to fund her campaign! Of course, if she DOES end up in the White House, she'll be the LEAST of the winners to that sleight-of-hand!
ruffburr
(1,190 posts)Try it for yourself, 6 flips how many times do you get your call? One precinct hasn't been able to report their Vote tally, etc Something Stinks , All Votes in question should be recounted and Verified
Baitball Blogger
(46,575 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)Or 6 different people, in 6 different casinos, call red or black on 6 different roulette wheels.
OMG, you mean those 6 different people all WON THEIR BET?? How do you expect me to believe THAT?
I don't understand the hoopla here.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 *1/2 = 1/64
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Demit was using a casino analogy, suggesting that six different coin flips amid thousands that all came up 'heads' was not remarkable (and its not). The analogy, however, is in error - there were only six coin flips, and all came up 'heads.' A different situation entirely.
Demit
(11,238 posts)Expecting that six random coin tosses must necessarily result in a mix of heads and tails is the gambler's fallacy.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Any six flips considered as a whole have a 1/64 chance of coming up all heads or all tails.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Celebrate Bernie's showing.
Stop with the paranoia - it only turns people off
eomer
(3,845 posts)As long as the six events weren't selected with a bias based on knowing the outcome then the probability of all heads is 1/64. Where the coins were flipped, when, or by whom doesn't make a difference.
eomer
(3,845 posts)So saying it a different way, if 1000 people flipped a coin and you picked 6 of those events randomly without knowing their outcome then the odds of 6 heads is 1 out of 64.
If on the other hand 1000 people flipped a coin and you picked 6 of the events because you know they came out as heads then there's nothing improbable about that.
I think some people (not you) are getting confused and thinking that the latter case is effectively what occurred with the delegate coin flips when it is not.
In this case, there were a set number of coin flips. Where and when they were made is irrelevant.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(15,368 posts)1) not all the tosses may have been called "heads"; some may have been called "tails" and won;
2) not all tosses may have been called by Clinton reps; some may have been called by Sanders reps and lost
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Each candidate had a 1 in 2 chance of winning each flip. For one candidate to win all six flips is a 1 in 64 occurrence.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)flew under the radar. People haven't got a clue.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I have no problem with that outcome, for all that it was fairly unlikely.
But I want to know more about some alleged shenanigans in Polk County, etc.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)The chance - 50% - because each are independent events.
Nitram
(22,671 posts)NowSam
(1,252 posts)A stain. This is going to be one ugly ugly election.
californiabernin
(421 posts)SunSeeker
(51,369 posts)Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)FailureToCommunicate
(13,989 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)That should give you Sanders supporters something think about.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)But what's even loonier is the blind friggin' "faith" we're expected to entrust to the electronic invulnerability of today's voting machines. And we've seen demonstrations of how said machines can be as reliable as a two-headed coin in tossing an election!
happyslug
(14,779 posts)You have to determine a winner, but the votes are equal, how do decide who wins? You could be like the US Senate, leave the Vice President make the deciding vote (but then who acts like the Vice President?, the local head of the Democratic Party? even if that person has already voted once? Any body you pull off the street, even if he or she said she or he has already voted?)
This is the problem with ties, how do you break them? Voting a second time will NOT change the result (you end up with the same people voting the same way thus another tie).
People have argued this point for centuries and over time flipping a coin has been found to be the best way, a bad way, but the best way for the alternatives tend to be worse.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)simple. done. fair.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)In all of these cases, dividing between the two was NOT an option, it is whose delegate goes to the state convention from the Caucus? If they were two delegates, then you divide them, that is NEVER the problem for when that is possible, it is the first choice. The problem is when you have to chose ONE delegate, who gets that delegate? Dividing is NOT an option is such a case.
Remember we are talking about who goes from that Caucus to the state convention? In all six of these cases, you ended up with SIX DIFFERENT AND UNRELATED TIES. Thus dividing them was NOT an option for these are seen as six ties is six different elections NOT six ties in one election. Thus dividing them was NEVER AN OPTION.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)It is not like we can split a delegate in half.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The entire process, which the election code states must take place at noon on the third Friday in November, takes seconds......
The casting of lots has been used in Allegheny County since at least as far back as 1970, the year Mr. Wolosik started working for the elections division. The state election code provides for the use of lots in resolving a tie vote.
Eight leather shake bottles, each capped with a piece of paper and a rubber band around the lip to prevent the numbers from tumbling out, are stored in supply closet along with cleaning and office supplies at the election offices, on the sixth floor of the county office building.
malthaussen
(17,066 posts)I know someone who blew 12 97% chances in a row recently during a game I play online. Now that's improbable.
-- Mal
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)0.05 is the typical threshold for statistical significance. This is < 0.02.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)being one and a half percent chance of occurring.
Chance of it NOT OCCURRING -
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX
Chance of it OCCURRING -
X
So if you put 64 marbles in a bag and only one marble was blue, it would be the same chance for you to pick the blue marble having only one chance to do it.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I've seen some games with the most atrocious RNGs imaginable. The one I always use as an example is the Realms of Arkandia games. Great little flash based RPGs, but the random number generation is among the worst I've ever seen. Basically if your chance to hit isn't 90% or more, you're going to miss way more than half the time. Crafting works the same way.
The "new" (if you can consider ten years ago new. I guess new compared to the one that came on a single floppy) Pool of Radiance game had the same problem. A twenty sided die shouldn't roll 18-20 90% of the time.
malthaussen
(17,066 posts)People are always whining about the RNG, but of course, people always whine about RNGs. Subjectively, it seems reasonably "random" to me. Missing a dozen chances in a row at 97% would tend to make one believe there is some bias in the process, however. Or it could just be improbable (yeah).
-- Mal
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Theatre of the absurd....
StevieM
(10,499 posts)And I don't think any of them went towards the delegates awarded to the state convention, they went towards the county conventions. In other words, they don't affect the tally towards who is called the winner of Iowa.
Although I admit that I am very unclear on the details of that. It is very confusing.
brooklynite
(93,859 posts)Once again, we're talking in abstractions. What got reported last night were State Delegate Equivalents, e.g. what the State Delegation composition SHOULD BE if all the Precinct delegates work their way through the 4 stage process and maintain their candidate loyalty.
Last night, thousands of delegates were appointed to County Conventions, at which as smaller number will be appointed to the District Conventions, where a smaller number will be appointed to the State Convention, where the National Convention Delegates will be selected, which SHOULD equal the SDE count from last night.
Gman
(24,780 posts)The fact is only if the same coin is flipped by the same person in the same manner would the chances be 1/64. But there were 6 different places, 6 different coins and 6 different methods of flipping. The only accurate thing that can be said is the chances were 1/2 on every flip.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)You need to study your stats some more!
Each event has a 50% probability and is independent of the others. The probability of an outcome favoring Hillary in all 6 events is precisely the individual event probability to the 6th power.
Gman
(24,780 posts)That would be true if each corn toss was under the same conditions. But they were not even done in the same place. All things were not equal, therefore the best is one out of two in each place. You should learn about data modeling
The 1/64 is correct. The different localles, the different coins, the different people/procedures are all not relevant. The ONLY part required is the odds of each individual specific outcome
And if each individual outcome has a 1/2 chance ... Then the six in a row odds are 1/64.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)and I did read your post.
They're independent events, so all that matters is each individual event's outcome probability. The question is what is the likelihood of a particular set of outcomes (in this case the set of outcomes is Hillary winning every flip). That probability is the product of each event's individual probability. It makes no difference where they were, what methodology was used in the flip, who flippped them, all that matters is the probability of each event. Pretty basic and obvious. I would have not made this point, but you made it, incorrectly, so I chimed in.
And I know about data modeling, I'm a longtime programmer who has worked with and developed data models (environmental data from a coastal observation station). This is not a data modeling problem, it is a straight probability problem.
This whole thing is silly anyway, I don't think there's anything to the coin flip CT, so as far as I'm concerned it is nothing but a sidetrack.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)The outcome of one event is completely independent of the other events.
Was heads called all the time? Who did the calling? Did Hillary's reps call each time? Or did Bernie's? Or was that random as well, since each precinct didn't know that any other precinct was doing a flip.
Think about Occam's razor - for the Clinton Campaign to have influenced it, they would have had to have loaded coins in all 1500+ precincts, with each precinct chair in on the deception, in the unlikely chance that there would be a coin flip needed. A coin flip, whose result is basically meaningless in the long-run.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)The success rate of each "call" is established as having a 50% probability, barring ESP, an unfair coin, or other monkey business.
http://usuncut.com/politics/hillary-clinton-won-6-out-of-6-coin-tosses/
Hillary Clinton Won 6 Out of 6 Coin Tosses Last Night. Heres How Statistically Improbable That Is
The Iowa Democratic caucus vote count was so close last night that at least 6 precincts were decided by flipping a coin an obscure procedure in the Iowa caucus bylaws. And in all 6 instances, the last remaining county delegate went to Hillary Clinton. Winning 6 coin tosses in a row is extraordinarily rare, and only has a 1.6 percent probability of occurring. As journalist Ben Norton explained, thats broken down by calculating (1/2)^6, which is 1/64 or 1.6 percent.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)And again, explain the conspiracy - how did Hillary pull off the "fraud"?
Because if you are saying it wasn't random, then it had to be fraud. How did she do it?
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)edited:
Rereading the thread I see you're still not accepting the 1/64. Weird. And wrong. I'm about as certain as I ever am that it's you who don't understand.
I don't believe in the conspiracy, though, improbable things happen all the time.
Otherwise I suppose it would be a simple magician's trick to use an unfair coin. Not sure how you'd know which outcome the coin needed to have, I guess you could have 2 such coins and use the right one for the situation? All of the flippers would have to be in on it.
Not impossible, but in this case I think I'll go with chance.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)dreamnightwind "Not impossible, but in this case I think I'll go with chance."
I took advanced probability and statistics and other higher math classes in college. The 1/64 odds is absolutely correct (which is simple math).
For those who are math challenged, read my post about marbles above.
Bernin
(311 posts)They have a commonality.
To decide Bernie or Hillary.
I'm not supporting the idea of a conspiracy theory here. Just pointing out they are not independent events.
The odds are very high against what happened.
But, I have come to expect the absurd with all things Hillary.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)One coin flip has no impact on another coin flip.
Bernin
(311 posts)I also understand that all of these coin tosses were part of one big event called the Iowa Caucus. No one said any flip has an impact on another coin flip. Nor is that even pertinent to the conversation of independent events. No coin flip ever impacts the results of next coin flip.
Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)before the caucus took place. And you bet, if there are 6 coin tosses to choose between HC and BS, what are the odds that HC would win all flips, the odds of that occurring would be calculated as one in 64 (1/64).
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)The odds are against it, sure. The odds are against getting struck by lightning, too, but sometimes it happens. Statistically unlikely shouldn't be confused with impossible.
Sooner or later if shit goes on long enough, some poor bastard is going to get brained by a meteor while holding a winning lottery ticket.
ALBliberal
(2,304 posts)happyslug
(14,779 posts)As to being hit by a meteor, the record is thin, one case in the last 2000 years (and that was in China more then 1000 years ago). Given that low rate or actual hits (data points), they is NOT enough data to give any statistical calculation as to the risk, i.e. the risk could be one in a trillion trillion all we know (we need more data points, i.e. more then one person being hit in recorded history).
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/back2.html
As to lotteries, that is up to each lottery (provided they are honest). In the daily number the odds are one in a thousand of winning (Assuming three digits lotteries). Other lotteries with bigger jackpots having higher odds. Thus if that ancient China resident was playing a lottery at the time he was hit by that meteor, and he won that lottery, we would have one data point to start working out the statistics but then we will have to wait for a second person to be hit by a meteor and win the lottery to figure out the odds.
Deny and Shred
(1,061 posts)Six people flipping a coin once each is six independent events. One person flipping a coin six times is six independent events. No one flip affects another. Independent of each other in both cases.
If what you are saying is true, then there is a 50% chance that all six individuals flip and get heads, i.e., if all six flip 100 times, they will get 6 heads on 50 of those flips. Get some friends together and give it a try.
Gman
(24,780 posts)And it is improbable for her to win all six Tosses under any conditions. I'm saying the overall odds could be a little more or a little less because of the varying conditions of each toss. The 1/64 applies to a perfectly weighted coin tossed under identical conditions. If you toss a coin 100 times you should get 50-50. I'm n reality you can get 55-45. Another 100 and maybe you get 48-52 and so on. In any event, it is somewhat improbable but definitely not unlikely for her to win all 6. After all, there were 2 winners in the $1.5 billion lottery. People hit jackpots in Vegas all the time.
ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)8 years of this bullshit? Not me
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)And learn something about statistics. There was a 50/50 shot in 6 different places, using 6 different coins, tossed by 6 different people. Nothing improbable about that at all. I swear the whining about this is hilarious.
chapdrum
(930 posts)That in the Land of the Exceptional, any state is reduced to tossing effing coins to determine the outcome.
That aside, it'll be character building for the Clinton Dynasty to have a challenge.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Welcome to my world where in 2004 Hillary got the most votes in the NV caucus and still got fewer delegates. Thems the rules. I have no problem with a real contest and I like Bernie fine but this whining today about what everyone already knew the rules were is hilarious.
George II
(67,782 posts).....if I do play and lose, I take my lumps and move on.
One other point to the complainers - there were Sanders representatives at each and every one of those caucuses. I haven't seen any of the people who were actually there complaining.
riversedge
(69,722 posts)eomer
(3,845 posts)And having the tosses in different places (different planets!), using different coins, tossed by different people (aliens!) has nothing to do with the odds. If each toss is a fair 50/50 shot then none of that matters. It seems you're the one who needs to learn something about probability.
On the other hand, maybe it wasn't 6 out of 6. Maybe it was 5 out of 8, which would be a much more probable outcome.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)The chances of ONE PERSON tossing the same coin 6 times makes it unlikely. That's not what happened last night although I see that's the working theme among the Bernie supporters. Carry on.
eomer
(3,845 posts)Do yourself a favor and don't continue to make embarrassingly wrong statements about math unless and until you can ask a competent math professor to explain it to you.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)so I have no idea what you're bitching to me about. Lemme guess, another person upset Hillary won last night?
eomer
(3,845 posts)That is incorrect. It is six independent events no matter who tosses each coin and the odds of getting six heads out of a universe of six independent tosses is 1 out of 64, which is improbable by most people's definition.
If, on the other hand, you select six tosses out of a larger universe and you choose tosses because they came out heads, then that would be a different story. But that is not what happened here if there were six tosses total across all the caucuses and they all came out heads.
In other words, if in fact there really were eight tosses then it wouldn't be surprising for five of them to have come out heads.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)to say the exact same thing I did. You can pretend otherwise if it makes you feel better.
eomer
(3,845 posts)was 1 out of 64?
That's not what you seemed to be saying but if that's what you meant then you are correct.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The chance of any six coin flips turning out to be all one result is (1/2)^6, regardless of any other factors (assuming no physical cheating, of course...I'm talking about genuine .500 probability for each occurrence). The equation doesn't change when the six are taking place among any number of other coin flips. Only those six are relevant, and the probability computation (above) is simple.
As I said elsewhere in the thread, a 1/64 outcome is uncommon, but hardly worth having dire suspicions about. This is a non-issue.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)Which makes it unlikely, but certainly not outside the realm of possibility, or even all that unlikely. It's about half as likely as a roulette wheel hitting a specific number.
I'm a die hard Sanders supporter, and I don't know why everyone is upset about it. It's not like it says anything about either of the candidates, good or bad.
NowSam
(1,252 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)That should be grounds for tombstoning
NowSam
(1,252 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)I know this will be hard, but stick to non-conspiracy, non-Koch Brothers sources.
NowSam
(1,252 posts)As the Clintons have been in the public eye since the early 1990s. Sorry but there are now multitudes who just won't drink the koolaid anymore.
Joe Chi Minh
(15,229 posts)Billsmile
(404 posts)coyote
(1,561 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I sure hope you're proud of yourself using 22 year old right wing talking points. This place has gone into the sewer.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)thing about Bernie are some of his supporters. Repeating decades old right wing talking points and nobody bats an fucking eyelash. It's embarrassing.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Pathwalker
(6,596 posts)voters, because they seem hell bent on doing just that.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Pres Obama won IA twice. In fact, since 1996, the winner of IA was the Democratic candidate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucuses
Iowa rarely predicts a republican win, but it's pretty accurate for democrats.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)then they know what to expect in NH..
Thing about running against Hillary it is really good conditioning for when Bernie is running against a Republican in the GE.
TBF
(31,922 posts)to see what happens in NH. Bill and Chelsea looked pretty pissed off.
George II
(67,782 posts)getagrip_already
(14,250 posts)She can even change a coin in flight! Imagine what she can do with isis.
6chars
(3,967 posts)that we need such extensive discussions about the odds of winning 6 coin flips in a row. It's obviously 1 out of 6, or 1/6.
VMA131Marine
(4,124 posts)Jenny_92808
(1,342 posts)It just goes to show how badly we need to improve education in this country.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)Also amazing is I haven't seen one of the people in this thread who were so wrong in their use of the stats come to realize or admit their error. Sometimes the stupid boggles the mind.
6chars
(3,967 posts)win 1 flip
win 2 flips
win 3 flips
win 4 flips
win 5 flips
win 6 flips
Only 1 of these 6 possibilities involves winning every time.
Hav
(5,969 posts)There aren't just 6 possible events. There are 2 for every coin toss.
For example, to win exactly 1 flip is winning one of the 6 tosses (either the first, second,.... or last).
To win 2 flips is winning the first and second, or the first and third and so on.
The probability to win exactly 1 flip or 3 flips is not the same which is what you are suggesting (1/6 for both).
lobodons
(1,290 posts)Its obvious this was God's way of endorsing Hillary!!
NowSam
(1,252 posts)To prove the coin landed that way. Ever time. Sorry. I don't buy it. "were not likely to ever know what the actual result was" said Weaver. Can you believe it? Somehow DWS's democratic party managed to muddy up the transparent waters of the caucuses. Not turning in results until after everyone left. Having to search for the chairs of precincts. Claiming victory while the votes weren't all in yet. Using Microsoft to tally any of it. I am sorry but I don't buy it. Muddied results. What isn't muddy at all is that Bernie is filling stadiums and Hillary stands alone in Bowling alleys. Of course I just can't believe that any Democrat would ever trust her again. She spews forth so many untruths (Love that word) so often that it is impossible to keep up with her. This system is so corrupt, so broken and so rigged that we have to expect state after state to be muddy in the results. Clinton is part and parcel of this broken system. She is the face of it. I doubt my sanity because I simply can't believe anyone in their right mind would ever vote for her.
LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)always been.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The statewide delegate equivalents that determine the outcome on caucus night are derived from the county-level delegates, but are aggregated across the state and weighted in a manner that makes individual county delegate selections at a handful of precincts count for a tiny fraction of the ultimate result.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/02/sometimes-iowa-democrats-award-caucus-delegates-coin-flip/79680342/
The "usuncut" article in the OP is completely wrong about how the coin flips impacted the totals.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)deathrind
(1,786 posts)over Sanders not long ago and it came down to 6 coin flips... wow.
Eko
(7,170 posts)50% chance each time.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)ALBliberal
(2,304 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)Orrex
(63,085 posts)SoCalMusicLover
(3,194 posts)What if Bernie had won 6 out of 6 coin tosses?
LOL!!!!! Do you really think that was going to happen?
Somehow these things always fall in favor of the suspicious person, the one who HAS to have the victory and is usually the one supported by the powers that be.
It worked for the chad counting repubs in Florida, no surprise who was declared the victor there, even though it later was determined to be incorrect.
My point is, if anybody was going to beat 1 in 64 odds, it sure as hell wasn't going to be Bernie. How did Hillary manage it? Well, I doubt we'll ever know, some things are meant to remain secret forever. If you ask her, she'll just say it was luck, and move on.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Funny how that always happens. Hmm.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Like somebody had their thumb on the scales or somethin'.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)Listen to NPR's analysis of this very misleading report.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)... it has nothing to do with evil or rigging, just cold, hard facts.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Winning six coin tosses is shockingly common.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And since when were low-rent bloggers allowed in LBN?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Response to Agnosticsherbet (Reply #127)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)And the facts will be ignored.
Welcome to DU.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)And in each flip they both had a 50% chance of winning. You can lump them all together and show it as 1/64 but as I said each flip stands alone. Winning all 6 is nothing more than a very good streak but not impossible by any means.
Orrex
(63,085 posts)Most of the time the coin will land on heads or tails, rather than standing on the edge.
Blue Owl
(49,918 posts)n/t