New (2/18) Nevada prediction from Nate Silver

[CajunBlazer]

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/nevada-democratic/

Chances of winning Nevada caucuses:

Clinton - 75%

Sanders - 25%

Better confidence with 3 recent polls.

[question everything]

1. Nice, but hard to believe

Seeing that all other polls put them neck and neck?

It is beginning to look like 2008 - and I hope it will not end this way. Clinton won the primaries and Obama the caucuses. So even if the loses Nevada, I am confident that the road ahead from S. Carolina to Super Tuesday will be hers.

(And, I hope, she has a better campaign manager..)


Also, I think that we need to look at the polls only, not polls plus. With polls only she still gets 64% and Sanders 36%

[CajunBlazer]

2. Why would it be hard to believe

The first poll - the tie - was done by a terrible polling organization. The other two polls average at Clinton +3..5%. Also look at new poll for Nevada that I also posted. That "its starting to look like 2008" is Bernie crowd talk. Fro the umpteeth time, Bernie Sanders is not Barack Obama.

[question everything]

3. Of course Bernie is not Barack Obama

Perhaps I am just trying to protect myself from bad news, hoping to skip Nevada and move straight to S. Carolina and Super Tuesday. I started watching Chris Matthews - bad mistake - and before I shut him off, he showed several polls one of them had Bernie ahead by about 3 points.

[Treant]

6. Even if so

two states haven't been removed from consideration (which were in 2008), and in the limited data we have so far, Mrs. Clinton is set to perform as well or better in NV than she did in the Iowa caucus (which she won, of course, and walked out with +2 in terms of pledged delegates).

Caucus states are always closer, that's just the nature of the beast. We just have to hope the Clinton people show the heck up.

[radical noodle]

8. She's using many of Obama's campaign staff.

fivethirtyeight has always done a great job of getting it right, but Nevada is very difficult due to the instant registering at the Caucuses.

[question everything]

9. Good. Thank you

Her 2008 campaign thought that we were like the Republicans, winners take all. So they thought that once she won New York and Massachusetts, and California, that she had it.

[stopbush]

4. Confirms what I'm hearing from Ds in LV.

[Dawson Leery]

5. Union endorsements, members on the ground working

Last edited Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:11 AM - Edit history (1)

and Latino outreach has endorsed her.

[Cha]

7. Gracias, Cajun!

[question everything]

10. Do we need to take the projections of this site

with a grain of salt? Just to protect our sanity?

Yes, she won Nevada but not by this margin.

[CajunBlazer]

11. Nate didn't predict the margin of victory, he predicted that she would win.

And she won.

Note that Silvers gave Hillary a 75% chance of winning and Sanders a 25% chance of winning based on the Nevada poll results. He weighted those results based on the methods and past performance of the polling organizations.

He did not say that Hillary would beat sanders 75% of the voters to 25%.

[question everything]

13. Oh, thanks. I did not unserstand it.

Now I should be able to make more sense from his predictions.

[Treant]

12. That's the

probability of a win, not the expected margin.

For percentages approaching +10 in the margins, the probability of a win will soar to near 100%.

[HillDawg]

14. Actually, he predicted a 6% victory for Hillary

Which wasn't all that far off.