Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

James48

(4,416 posts)
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:33 PM Feb 2016

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.


Here’s 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, that’s 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 Clinton’s 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 candidate’s preference group was counted, Clinton had 240 supporters, Sanders had 179, and Martin O’Malley 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.....
145 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton Won 6 Out of 6 Coin Tosses Last Night. (Original Post) James48 Feb 2016 OP
Msnbc just reported 8 flips, 5 HRC, 3SBS dogman Feb 2016 #1
One is extremely improbable (completely scoff worthy), the other could easily be expected. GoneFishin Feb 2016 #6
I can't find that. Will you provide a link? nm rhett o rick Feb 2016 #12
Saw it on MSNBC scrawl. dogman Feb 2016 #32
I think it's based on this. dogman Feb 2016 #35
The 5 vs 3 refers to delegates and not coin flips. rhett o rick Feb 2016 #51
The scrawl writer seems to be like most headline writers. dogman Feb 2016 #55
Is that the latest spin? TBF Feb 2016 #74
The media has owners to serve. dogman Feb 2016 #84
With the media I agree TBF Feb 2016 #105
reducing democracy to tossing coins - how modern wordpix Feb 2016 #119
Ssssh! She's on a streak! She may run the table! Human101948 Feb 2016 #2
She's crazy if she doesn't invest in Plucketeer Feb 2016 #11
6 out of 6?? ruffburr Feb 2016 #3
Someone needs to weigh those coins. Baitball Blogger Feb 2016 #4
Yep. polichick Feb 2016 #76
Now have 6 different people, in 6 different areas of a state, flip a coin. Demit Feb 2016 #15
You don't understand probability either. [n/t] Maedhros Feb 2016 #20
The odds are not astronomical against it. Drahthaardogs Feb 2016 #34
Astronomical? No. But very, very unlikely. Maedhros Feb 2016 #39
They weren't all a part of one sequence, though. They were different events, in different places. Demit Feb 2016 #46
It doesn't matter where or when the coin flips occurred. Maedhros Feb 2016 #49
Actually it does. You are looking for a conspiracy when there isn't one dbackjon Feb 2016 #60
No, it doesn't. eomer Feb 2016 #109
Correct if the six are selected randomly or before knowing their result. eomer Feb 2016 #95
Agreed. Maedhros Feb 2016 #100
You were correct earlier. No understanding of probability. GoneFishin Feb 2016 #106
additional variables to consider Fiendish Thingy Feb 2016 #75
Obviously those Sanders reps that lost were plants dbackjon Feb 2016 #85
Not really relevant. Maedhros Feb 2016 #92
Your are dealing with some very probability theory challenged individuals. No wonder this almost GoneFishin Feb 2016 #108
One-in-64 [(1/2)^6] isn't remotely astronomical. Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #115
I'm not incensed about it either.[n/t] Maedhros Feb 2016 #130
Obviously far better than the tin-foil crowd here dbackjon Feb 2016 #59
Gambler's Fallacy nt Nitram Feb 2016 #19
Impossible and forever tainted NowSam Feb 2016 #65
Yep, Iowa was a toss-up! Onward! californiabernin Feb 2016 #5
It was not a toss up. Hillary won more votes, and more delegates. SunSeeker Feb 2016 #37
Two tenths of a percentage point is a win? It's all about lowering expectations, right? Ned_Devine Feb 2016 #52
Quick, think of something... FailureToCommunicate Feb 2016 #7
See? God is interfering on behalf of the Clinton campaign. Enthusiast Feb 2016 #8
Frustrating to hear that such archaic shit determines winners Plucketeer Feb 2016 #9
How do propose to decide who wins when there is a tie???? happyslug Feb 2016 #118
you give half the delegates to Bernie and half to Hillary wordpix Feb 2016 #120
This involved ONE delegate NOT two. happyslug Feb 2016 #123
Well said Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #129
I forgot to mention how Allegheny County PA decides such ties, it is by "Lots" happyslug Feb 2016 #139
It's one in 64. Not that improbable. malthaussen Feb 2016 #10
Funny because... Helen Borg Feb 2016 #26
Actually it is closer to Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #131
That could also be a bad RNG. JoeyT Feb 2016 #44
True, I don't know what algorithm they use. malthaussen Feb 2016 #58
It's a Tom Stoppard play! AlbertCat Feb 2016 #13
Not correct. There were 8 coin tosses, 5 won by Clinton, 3 won by Sanders. StevieM Feb 2016 #14
NO State delegates have been awarded... brooklynite Feb 2016 #28
Statistics in the wrong hands is dangerous. Gman Feb 2016 #16
Absolutely incorrect dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #17
You didn't read my post. Gman Feb 2016 #31
Actually indigoth Feb 2016 #36
Wrong on every count, wow dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #38
No, he is absolutely correct dbackjon Feb 2016 #62
How so? dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #68
There are six independent events dbackjon Feb 2016 #71
of course the events are independent, that's what i said dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #77
I don't think that person understands it either dbackjon Feb 2016 #78
I misunderstood your most recent post dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #80
I agree with you Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #132
They are not independent events. Bernin Feb 2016 #98
Not sure you understand what an independent event is. dbackjon Feb 2016 #99
Yes I certainly understand what an indepedent event is. Bernin Feb 2016 #113
If you went to a bookie to make a bet Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #133
It's still 1/64. JoeyT Feb 2016 #47
I have a good friend that was struck by lightning twice (two separate occasions) ALBliberal Feb 2016 #104
Odds of being hit by lighting is 1 out of 1200 happyslug Feb 2016 #122
It sure is. You need to handle with care. Deny and Shred Feb 2016 #73
I never said the calculation is wrong Gman Feb 2016 #93
Everywhere the Clintons go, there is greed, cheating and other controversy going on. Who wants ViseGrip Feb 2016 #18
Spare me the drama bullshit leftynyc Feb 2016 #21
Yeah, it's a regular laff riot. chapdrum Feb 2016 #25
Awwww - you don't like the rules? leftynyc Feb 2016 #40
Before I play any "game", I read the rules. If I don't like them I simply don't play....... George II Feb 2016 #54
outrage and drama seems much too common these days. riversedge Feb 2016 #27
If each coin toss was fair then the odds are 1 in 64. Most people would call that improbable. eomer Feb 2016 #30
No - you're wrong leftynyc Feb 2016 #41
The six events are independent. Makes no difference who flips the coin or where. eomer Feb 2016 #87
Taht's exactly what I said leftynyc Feb 2016 #88
No, you said it makes a difference whether one person or six people do the tosses. eomer Feb 2016 #97
You just took longer leftynyc Feb 2016 #141
So you agree then that the odds of Hillary winning all six tosses (if that was the case) eomer Feb 2016 #142
It doesn't matter in the least who tossed them or where. Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #116
It was still 1/64, for it to happen like it did. JoeyT Feb 2016 #56
You speak truth eom NowSam Feb 2016 #81
No it is not the truth - it is BS RIGHT WING LIES dbackjon Feb 2016 #86
I think the observation is verifiable. eom NowSam Feb 2016 #89
Please do so dbackjon Feb 2016 #91
We find these truths to be self evident NowSam Feb 2016 #94
Dr John would have been impressed. Fat Tony, less so. Joe Chi Minh Feb 2016 #22
6 of 7 Reported Here Billsmile Feb 2016 #23
Hillary Clinton Turned $1,000 Into $99,540, White House Says coyote Feb 2016 #24
More right wing bullshit talking points leftynyc Feb 2016 #42
Yes it has - I see the BS Right wing memos more on here than on GOP sites dbackjon Feb 2016 #67
The absolute worst leftynyc Feb 2016 #79
Yup - very embarrasing dbackjon Feb 2016 #83
I wonder if they think they can win without any Democratic Pathwalker Feb 2016 #126
Good - The Iowa Winner Rarely Goes On To Win The Nomination cantbeserious Feb 2016 #29
That's on the republican side leftynyc Feb 2016 #43
Exactly. LisaL Feb 2016 #50
Now that the Sanders campaign knows how Hillary (Bill) is going to play the game INdemo Feb 2016 #33
^ This. AzDar Feb 2016 #61
Right? It will be interesting TBF Feb 2016 #72
That's the way it has been for years, nothing unique this year. George II Feb 2016 #45
strong the force with this one is..... getagrip_already Feb 2016 #48
a little dismaying 6chars Feb 2016 #53
No! It's 1 in 64 (1 in 2^6). VMA131Marine Feb 2016 #82
You are correct, it is 1 in 64 Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #134
+1 dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #135
you just have to enumerate possibilities 6chars Feb 2016 #140
You are simply wrong Hav Feb 2016 #143
God endorses Hillary lobodons Feb 2016 #57
I just don't buy it. Should have been videotaped. NowSam Feb 2016 #63
Totally normal. Hillary is 1%er, wealthy always win. Through my 68 years of life, that is how it has LiberalArkie Feb 2016 #64
The person who wrote this article has no idea how the delegate totals are calculated oberliner Feb 2016 #66
Fuck running for President. She should just play the lottery!!! eom Purveyor Feb 2016 #69
She was up by double digits, deathrind Feb 2016 #70
Thats not how it works. Eko Feb 2016 #90
Here's one that Bernie won. I assume it's a valid vid... WhoWoodaKnew Feb 2016 #96
Truly amazing and not a good amazing. ALBliberal Feb 2016 #107
THIS conspiracy theory is how I know Hillary won Iowa (well, besides the vote and delegate count). Metric System Feb 2016 #101
Call it, friendo Orrex Feb 2016 #102
What If It Had Gone The Other Way? SoCalMusicLover Feb 2016 #103
Fuzzy murky improbable events always favor the more right-leaning individuals. GoneFishin Feb 2016 #111
Always. Octafish Feb 2016 #112
Sanders WON 6 of 7 coin flips - Iowa Democratic Party dbackjon Feb 2016 #110
There were more than a dozen coin flips, and HRC did NOT win all of them gregcrawford Feb 2016 #114
Can't be true. Clinton is evil, and is obviously rigging the flips dbackjon Feb 2016 #117
Just listen to the All Things Considered report... gregcrawford Feb 2016 #125
Sigh, go take a combinatorics class Taitertots Feb 2016 #121
Who in the fuck is Amanda Girard? Blue_Tires Feb 2016 #124
Coin-Toss Fact Check: No, Coin Flips Did Not Win Iowa For Hillary Clinton Agnosticsherbet Feb 2016 #127
Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2016 #137
It won't be. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2016 #138
Each coin flip stands on its own. deathrind Feb 2016 #128
The odds of a flipped coin standing are astonishingly rare Orrex Feb 2016 #144
:) deathrind Feb 2016 #145
Luck be a lady tonight Blue Owl Feb 2016 #136
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
51. The 5 vs 3 refers to delegates and not coin flips.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:43 PM
Feb 2016

"As a result of the coin toss, Clinton was awarded an additional delegate, meaning she took five of the precinct’s eight, while Sanders received three."

dogman

(6,073 posts)
55. The scrawl writer seems to be like most headline writers.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:49 PM
Feb 2016

I think you are correct and this is just another indication of media fail. Sorry I repeated it.

TBF

(31,922 posts)
74. Is that the latest spin?
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:26 PM
Feb 2016

"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)
84. The media has owners to serve.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:46 PM
Feb 2016

Hard to tell if it was intent or incompetence. Funny how the incompetence seems to go with the same narrative.

TBF

(31,922 posts)
105. With the media I agree
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:05 PM
Feb 2016

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)
119. reducing democracy to tossing coins - how modern
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:54 PM
Feb 2016
should have given Bernie half the no. of delegates since half were for him
 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
11. She's crazy if she doesn't invest in
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:52 PM
Feb 2016

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)
3. 6 out of 6??
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:40 PM
Feb 2016

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

 

Demit

(11,238 posts)
15. Now have 6 different people, in 6 different areas of a state, flip a coin.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:56 PM
Feb 2016

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)
39. Astronomical? No. But very, very unlikely.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:15 PM
Feb 2016

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)
46. They weren't all a part of one sequence, though. They were different events, in different places.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:40 PM
Feb 2016

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)
49. It doesn't matter where or when the coin flips occurred.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:43 PM
Feb 2016

Any six flips considered as a whole have a 1/64 chance of coming up all heads or all tails.

 

dbackjon

(6,578 posts)
60. Actually it does. You are looking for a conspiracy when there isn't one
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:56 PM
Feb 2016

Celebrate Bernie's showing.

Stop with the paranoia - it only turns people off

eomer

(3,845 posts)
109. No, it doesn't.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:15 PM
Feb 2016

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)
95. Correct if the six are selected randomly or before knowing their result.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:02 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
100. Agreed.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 06:43 PM
Feb 2016

In this case, there were a set number of coin flips. Where and when they were made is irrelevant.

Fiendish Thingy

(15,368 posts)
75. additional variables to consider
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:29 PM
Feb 2016

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

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
92. Not really relevant.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:58 PM
Feb 2016

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)
108. Your are dealing with some very probability theory challenged individuals. No wonder this almost
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:11 PM
Feb 2016

flew under the radar. People haven't got a clue.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
115. One-in-64 [(1/2)^6] isn't remotely astronomical.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:28 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

dbackjon

(6,578 posts)
59. Obviously far better than the tin-foil crowd here
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:55 PM
Feb 2016

The chance - 50% - because each are independent events.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
8. See? God is interfering on behalf of the Clinton campaign.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:47 PM
Feb 2016

That should give you Sanders supporters something think about.

 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
9. Frustrating to hear that such archaic shit determines winners
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:48 PM
Feb 2016

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)
118. How do propose to decide who wins when there is a tie????
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:49 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
123. This involved ONE delegate NOT two.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:07 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
139. I forgot to mention how Allegheny County PA decides such ties, it is by "Lots"
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 12:01 AM
Feb 2016
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-local/2015/11/25/New-Ross-commissioner-chosen-by-casting-lots/stories/201511250079

During the “casting of lots,” the person who draws a wooden number closest to 51 from a leather shake bottle — typically used in bottle pocket billiards — is the victor.

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)
10. It's one in 64. Not that improbable.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:49 PM
Feb 2016

I know someone who blew 12 97% chances in a row recently during a game I play online. Now that's improbable.

-- Mal

 

Jenny_92808

(1,342 posts)
131. Actually it is closer to
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:58 PM
Feb 2016

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)
44. That could also be a bad RNG.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:37 PM
Feb 2016

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)
58. True, I don't know what algorithm they use.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:52 PM
Feb 2016

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

StevieM

(10,499 posts)
14. Not correct. There were 8 coin tosses, 5 won by Clinton, 3 won by Sanders.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:55 PM
Feb 2016

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)
28. NO State delegates have been awarded...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:48 PM
Feb 2016

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)
16. Statistics in the wrong hands is dangerous.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:00 PM
Feb 2016

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)
17. Absolutely incorrect
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:14 PM
Feb 2016

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)
31. You didn't read my post.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:54 PM
Feb 2016

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

indigoth

(134 posts)
36. Actually
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:06 PM
Feb 2016

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)
38. Wrong on every count, wow
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:12 PM
Feb 2016

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)
71. There are six independent events
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:18 PM
Feb 2016

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)
77. of course the events are independent, that's what i said
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:32 PM
Feb 2016

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. Here’s 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, that’s broken down by calculating (1/2)^6, which is 1/64 — or 1.6 percent.
 

dbackjon

(6,578 posts)
78. I don't think that person understands it either
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:34 PM
Feb 2016

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)
80. I misunderstood your most recent post
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:38 PM
Feb 2016

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)
132. I agree with you
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:19 PM
Feb 2016

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)
98. They are not independent events.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:31 PM
Feb 2016

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)
99. Not sure you understand what an independent event is.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:58 PM
Feb 2016

One coin flip has no impact on another coin flip.

 

Bernin

(311 posts)
113. Yes I certainly understand what an indepedent event is.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:26 PM
Feb 2016

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)
133. If you went to a bookie to make a bet
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:27 PM
Feb 2016

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)
47. It's still 1/64.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:41 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
122. Odds of being hit by lighting is 1 out of 1200
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:03 PM
Feb 2016
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/odds.shtml

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)
73. It sure is. You need to handle with care.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:25 PM
Feb 2016

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)
93. I never said the calculation is wrong
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:59 PM
Feb 2016

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)
18. Everywhere the Clintons go, there is greed, cheating and other controversy going on. Who wants
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:16 PM
Feb 2016

8 years of this bullshit? Not me

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
21. Spare me the drama bullshit
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:39 PM
Feb 2016

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)
25. Yeah, it's a regular laff riot.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:43 PM
Feb 2016

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)
40. Awwww - you don't like the rules?
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:24 PM
Feb 2016

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)
54. Before I play any "game", I read the rules. If I don't like them I simply don't play.......
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:46 PM
Feb 2016

.....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.

eomer

(3,845 posts)
30. If each coin toss was fair then the odds are 1 in 64. Most people would call that improbable.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:54 PM
Feb 2016

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)
41. No - you're wrong
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:25 PM
Feb 2016

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)
87. The six events are independent. Makes no difference who flips the coin or where.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:52 PM
Feb 2016

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)
88. Taht's exactly what I said
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:54 PM
Feb 2016

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)
97. No, you said it makes a difference whether one person or six people do the tosses.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:14 PM
Feb 2016

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)
141. You just took longer
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 06:13 AM
Feb 2016

to say the exact same thing I did. You can pretend otherwise if it makes you feel better.

eomer

(3,845 posts)
142. So you agree then that the odds of Hillary winning all six tosses (if that was the case)
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 06:58 AM
Feb 2016

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)
116. It doesn't matter in the least who tossed them or where.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:34 PM
Feb 2016

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)
56. It was still 1/64, for it to happen like it did.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:50 PM
Feb 2016

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)
94. We find these truths to be self evident
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:01 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
42. More right wing bullshit talking points
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:27 PM
Feb 2016

I sure hope you're proud of yourself using 22 year old right wing talking points. This place has gone into the sewer.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
79. The absolute worst
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:36 PM
Feb 2016

thing about Bernie are some of his supporters. Repeating decades old right wing talking points and nobody bats an fucking eyelash. It's embarrassing.

Pathwalker

(6,596 posts)
126. I wonder if they think they can win without any Democratic
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:30 PM
Feb 2016

voters, because they seem hell bent on doing just that.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
33. Now that the Sanders campaign knows how Hillary (Bill) is going to play the game
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:59 PM
Feb 2016

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)
72. Right? It will be interesting
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:23 PM
Feb 2016

to see what happens in NH. Bill and Chelsea looked pretty pissed off.

getagrip_already

(14,250 posts)
48. strong the force with this one is.....
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:43 PM
Feb 2016

She can even change a coin in flight! Imagine what she can do with isis.

6chars

(3,967 posts)
53. a little dismaying
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:46 PM
Feb 2016

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.

 

Jenny_92808

(1,342 posts)
134. You are correct, it is 1 in 64
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:44 PM
Feb 2016

It just goes to show how badly we need to improve education in this country.

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
135. +1
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 10:49 PM
Feb 2016

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)
140. you just have to enumerate possibilities
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 03:44 AM
Feb 2016

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)
143. You are simply wrong
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 07:49 AM
Feb 2016

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).

NowSam

(1,252 posts)
63. I just don't buy it. Should have been videotaped.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:58 PM
Feb 2016

To prove the coin landed that way. Ever time. Sorry. I don't buy it. "we’re 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)
64. Totally normal. Hillary is 1%er, wealthy always win. Through my 68 years of life, that is how it has
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:03 PM
Feb 2016

always been.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
66. The person who wrote this article has no idea how the delegate totals are calculated
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:07 PM
Feb 2016
Similar situations played out at various precincts across the state, but had an extremely small effect on the overall outcome, in which Clinton won 49.9 percent of statewide delegate equivalents, while Sanders won 49.5 percent. The delegates that were decided by coin flips were delegates to the party's county conventions, of which there are thousands selected across the state from 1,681 separate precincts. They were not the statewide delegate equivalents that are reported in the final results.

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.
 

SoCalMusicLover

(3,194 posts)
103. What If It Had Gone The Other Way?
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 06:59 PM
Feb 2016

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)
111. Fuzzy murky improbable events always favor the more right-leaning individuals.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:17 PM
Feb 2016

Funny how that always happens. Hmm.

gregcrawford

(2,382 posts)
114. There were more than a dozen coin flips, and HRC did NOT win all of them
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:26 PM
Feb 2016

Listen to NPR's analysis of this very misleading report.

gregcrawford

(2,382 posts)
125. Just listen to the All Things Considered report...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:29 PM
Feb 2016

... it has nothing to do with evil or rigging, just cold, hard facts.

Response to Agnosticsherbet (Reply #127)

deathrind

(1,786 posts)
128. Each coin flip stands on its own.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:47 PM
Feb 2016

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)
144. The odds of a flipped coin standing are astonishingly rare
Wed Feb 3, 2016, 08:57 AM
Feb 2016

Most of the time the coin will land on heads or tails, rather than standing on the edge.


Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Hillary Clinton Won 6 Out...