538: Sanders' new threshold...

[brooklynite]

Nate Silver ?@NateSilver538 3 minutes ago
Reminder: Sanders will need to win every remaining state by 35% to tie Clinton in 👏 ELECTED 👏 delegates.

Nate Silver ?@NateSilver538 1 minute ago
In fact, that number will probably rise a bit, to around 40%, after Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands vote this weekend.

[thesquanderer]

1. The problem with the "every remaining state" declarations...

...is that winning more in one can mean needing to win less in another. So it's simply not true that he necessarily must win every state by 35% to achieve that goal. Not that it's at all likely to happen, but just for illustration, if he won California by 40 points (70 to 30), then it would no longer be necessary to win all the rest of the remaining states by 35. So the statement as written just doesn't make logical/mathematical sense. (The underlying thought of how unlikely a win scenario is does remain true, however.)

[eastwestdem]

2. It's true, they've been holding out for a CA landslide for months now. We'll see. nt

[PeaceNikki]

3. lol

"In fact, that number will probably rise a bit, to around 40%, after Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands vote this weekend."

[thesquanderer]

4. same concept applies

Even in that case, if he won CA by 45, he would no longer have to win the rest by 40.

I'm just talking about the internal logic/math of the statements, not about the likelihood.

[Adrahil]

5. DO you REALLY think he will win CA by anything like that? NT

[thesquanderer]

6. Nope, I don't think that will happen.

I thought I was clear about that.

[Adrahil]

10. OK cool. Thanks. NT

[politicaljunkie41910]

7. But he won't win California by 40 points. Not even close, so don't kid yourself.

[thesquanderer]

8. Maybe you missed my point.

I'm not saying things don't look bleak for Sanders, in terms of getting a majority of pledged delegates. I'm saying that Nate's statement is logically/mathematically flawed, which I guess I find irritating coming from someone who is supposed to be an expert in mathematical analysis. I get his basic point, but if you're a statistician talking about math, being mathematically precise in your explanation is kind of the point.

No, I don't expect Sanders to win CA by 40 points. As a Sanders supporter, I'd be glad if he won it by anything at all. At this point, it's about positioning. Although I think the quotes are off, I agree with the underlying premise of the OP, that it is nearly impossible for Sanders get a majority of pledged delegates, no matter how you look at it.

[politicaljunkie41910]

9. No I didn't miss your point. I understand your point.

But what Nate was saying was that Bernie must average a win by 35% of the vote in the remaining states. Of the states remaining, there is none where he's projected anything close to that, which means he'll continue to fall further and further behind with each remaining State. Now the most populated states with some of the most delegates up for grab will all be over by Tuesday and that includes Puerto Rico, New Jersey, New Mexico, and California and Clinton has a better than not chance of winning them all. We will all know by Tuesday so we won't have to speculate much longer. I feel good about my candidate's chances.