Tyler Pedigo's predictions look pretty good for Hillary.

[pnwmom]

He's the statistician some people were citing when he was predicting a blow-out win for Bernie in Wyoming.

He's not predicting any more blow-out wins (except maybe for Hillary.)

Maybe he learned his lesson.

https://tylerpedigo.com/2016/03/30/april-democratic-primaries-outlook/

[revbones]

1. ROFL - That was from Mar.

I expect he'll be updating soon.. Sheesh Hillary followers are desperate.

[pnwmom]

3. That was from March 30. Just 10 days ago. Read it and weep. n/t

[revbones]

4. You're funny. The polls are moving. That was even before Wisconsin and he even started in NY.

Tyler even looks for those numbers to change.

Desperation, they name is any Hillary follower...

[pnwmom]

2. (self delete)

[revbones]

5. Tell you what, let's come back after Tyler makes an updated post

which will either be an actual prediction or just updated preliminary numbers - which was what you linked to.

[pnwmom]

6. Bernie didn't do quite as well as Tyler was hoping in Wisconsin.

And Tyler's Wyoming prediction was way off.

So there's no reason to think that those results are going to have the effect you think they will.

[revbones]

7. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I was just indicating that if you've found a sudden respect for Tyler

that you should understand is model is more accurate the closer to the primary AND that he himself indicated in the post you quoted that those were preliminary numbers and more would be coming soon. As for his accuracy in Wisconsin, even in his actual prediction he related the potential issues with his model due to early voting. I would suggest reading more about his model, as well as his actual comments relating to his predictions.

I wasn't trying to indicate Wisconsin would have a dramatic effect. I think it will have some though. As for Wyoming, I think Tyler's model fails to account for things like surrogate ballot shenanigans that can negatively effect numbers.

That said, it there was no effect, there wouldn't be so many Hillary followers trying to diminish it so energetically.


I'm curious though at the cognitive dissonance you show here. First you create an OP saying Tyler's predictions for Hillary are pretty good. Then you talk about how he was way off. You are aware you can't have it both ways right?

[pnwmom]

9. There were no "surrogate ballot shenanigans."

Obviously, the GOTV operation was better on the Hillary side. They made sure their supporters knew how to vote with surrogate ballots, and Bernie's GOTV people didn't.

What IS scandalous is how caucus states try to suppress the vote among older people by making it so hard for anyone to vote.

But the voter-suppressors didn't succeed quite as well in Wyoming as they had wished.

[revbones]

10. If that helps you sleep at night, then enjoy. nt

[geek tragedy]

8. His numbers are often way off.

I expect Clinton to win solidly in this estates, but not by 25 points.

[pnwmom]

11. I think his numbers are more amusing than scientific. But she doesn't need numbers this huge.

She only needs to win 43% of the remaining pledged delegates.

[IamMab]

12. "Wyoming: Bernie will win Wyoming by a margin somewhere between 25-60 points." Oops! nt

[yallerdawg]

13. Please...

the significance of the "Defiance" character in your sig line?

One of the greatly missed sci-fi shows of all time!