Slashdot Mirror
Perfect Coin-Toss Record Broke 6 Clinton-Sanders Deadlocks In Iowa (marketwatch.com)
schwit1 writes: While it was hard to call a winner between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders last night, it's easy to say who was luckier. The race between the Democrat presidential hopefuls was so tight in the Iowa caucus Monday that in at least six precincts, the decision on awarding a county delegate came down to a coin toss. And Clinton won all six, media reports said.
If the coins and flips were fair, the odds against either candidate winning all flips is 97%.
Given that Clinton did win all six flips, the odds that the flips were fair is ... hmm?
It is a 1 in 64 chance of it happening. The odds are not all that bad.
There are 2^6 possible ways the coin tosses could have gone down (eg toss A for hillary, toss B for bernie, etc). Of these 64 scenarios, only one results in Hillary winning all six tosses. Thus the odds are 1/64.
Compare this to a scenario in which each party wins exactly three of the six flips. Of the 64 possible scenarios, twenty of them result in a 3-3 split (you can write it all out to confirm). so the odds of a 3-3 split are 20/64.
So the odds of hillary winning all six coin tosses are 20 times less likely than the odds of a 3-3 split! she basically won the lottery (or somebody had their thumb on the scale).
She did...and made $100k on $10k investment in a day.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Unless Hillary runs the next 'Justice' department she will go to federal prison.
Don't get between her and the oval office, unless your insurance is paid up.
Who are you kidding? She's not getting charged for ANY of this.
At worst she gets dinged for some "process crime" like Sandy Berger did when he got caught with classified documents stuffed down his pants. There is no way the Obama administration lets her get charged on this unless she's ticked them off and they just want to throw her under the bus out of spite. They may be liberal progressives in the Whitehouse, but I don't see them as vindictive enough to do that to Hillary and blow up the democrat party in the process. Now if Joe Biden was running, then I can see the administration feeding Hillary to the sharks, but right or wrong he bowed out so the Hill is all they really have.
Now if you had worked for Hillary during this time, you better be lawyered up already. You can bet that if there is enough to charge *somebody* here (and I firmly think there is) then I'd fully expect Hillary to be throwing as many others under the bus as necessary to avoid getting perpwalked. She will then plea bargain this down to some minor (non felony) crime and be out on bond seconds after the judge announces the amount. Now if you are Huma Aberdime (sp?) (AKA, Mrs Anthony Weiner AKA Carlos Danger) you best be thinking about how an orange jumpsuit is going to look with your hair color and who's going to be watching the home front (Keeping your husband off of Social Media under assumed names) while you are away...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Why choose Hillary? Well for 1 she already wields a lot of political power, 2 She has the support of a large portion of the wealthy and elites, meaning she will have backing to force things through Congress. 3 She will nominate a SC judge to keep the court from becoming too lopsided. 4. A lot of women would like to see a woman president. 5. because it will enrage the far right and they tend to be ridiculous and ineffective when enraged.
On a side note, I'll vote for her before Trump or Cruz, but as it stands now none of those three have my vote.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
It is. The DNC has their way of conducting their nominating process, which is different from what the RNC does. For example, the RNC has no "super delegates" to try to steer the nomination towards the establishment's chosen favorite, like the DNC does.
(Hillary already had over 300 of these so-called super-delegates lined up before the first vote was cast, which is more than 15x what she won in Iowa.)
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
The coin toss is just a typical media misdirection, the real story is in the voting machine fraud and the vote count fraud.
Those who understand how the world really works knows The Rothschilds has already picked Clinton (see cover of the 2016 Januaray editions of the Economist).
Clinton voter fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
Voter Fraud and 'Missing' Precincts: How Clinton Stole Iowa
Caucus chair and Clinton precinct captain do not conduct actual count of Clinton supporters and deliberately mislead caucus
Imagine how many other precincts used similar tactics. The fact that even C-SPAN calls it outright voter fraud should leave Americans with no illusions: The Democratic nominee has already been chosen.
But wait, it gets worse:
Sanders's camp says that the Iowa Democratic Party has informed the campaigns that the caucus results from 90 precincts are missing.
â" John Wagner (@WPJohnWagner)
February 2, 2016
That's right: Caucus results from 90 precincts are missing. Clinton is certainly talented at misplacing/deleting things that she doesn't want people to read.
Hillary Clinton receives $200,000/hour to speak to Goldman Sachs behind closed doors (and no transcripts of what she says are allowed, of course). Do you really think this election hasn't already been bought and paid for?
"Democracy" is fun.
The coins could all have been heads OR they could all have been tails. There are 64 possible outcomes, but 2 are sufficient. 1/32 is correct.
I still don't see it. There is a 1/32 chance that *either* of the two candidates would have won all of the coin flips, but only a 1/64 chance for 'only Clinton' or 'only Sanders'