Hillary Clinton Has The Most Statistically Improbable Coin-Toss Luck Ever

Am I reading this correctly? Did it come down to an actual coin toss ? That sounds crazy to me with the job their campaigning for.
Winning 6 in a row is very lucky too. Coins can easily be made to land on one side more than the other and I wouldn't dismiss any speculation.

originally posted by: Aazadan
A small loss is still a big win for his campaign.

Only if he wins the nomination and the polls after New Hampshire are looking much more favorable for the C-1000.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: IAMTAT

1 in 64 isn't very rare. In math terms that's actually extremely common.

Toss a coin...and see how long it takes you to get 6 heads in a row.

The sequence will appear on average once in 64 coin tosses.

'on average'
It took me 93 tosses to get 6 tails in a row.

That is still very common. 1% (which 1 in 93 is larger than) is an extremely large number mathematically, even though 1% sounds small.

Well, at least one of the coin tosses cannot be faked....right?

www.liveleak.com...

It is at the end....

a reply to: Aazadan

Given percentages...Hillary had a 1.56% chance of winning all six of six.

EDIT:

Hillary:
50% winning first toss
25% winning second toss in a row
12.5% winning third toss in a row
6.25% winning fourth toss in a row
3.125% winning fifth toss in a row
1.56% winning sixth toss in a row

Also given a 50/50 chance of each toss coming up for one or the other...Sanders should've won, at best, 3 of 6.
Had that happened, he would've won Iowa.

And this is how the world ends. I'd have preferred to roll a d20, but to each their own.

a reply to: intrptr

Well in this case, the votes mattered because if they didn't there would have never been a coin toss. Now the coin itself is in question but we all expected such things from her and the establishment.

For those who think their vote doesn't count, as I do, Sanders is making me a believer but the game has just begun so we'll see how this plays out and how corrupt the system really is.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Feeling the burn? Good god no! We're excited he did so well that a coin toss had to determine the winner! If anyone is feeling the burn it's Clinton.

Btw, I'd bet most Sander supporters were also Ron Paul supporters. I know I am.

originally posted by: Swills

Btw, I'd bet most Sander supporters were also Ron Paul supporters. I know I am.

Ahhh, how in the world do you go from a Libertarian mindset to a progressive/Marxist mindset?

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Swills

Btw, I'd bet most Sander supporters were also Ron Paul supporters. I know I am.

Ahhh, how in the world do you go from a Libertarian mindset to a progressive/Marxist mindset?

They call it low information voting... or the spiderman is just lying

Wow with that luck if elected she should borrow another $19 trillio, take it to vegas and put it all on 30 red on a roulette table

That settles it! She's a witch!

originally posted by: starfoxxx

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Swills

Btw, I'd bet most Sander supporters were also Ron Paul supporters. I know I am.

Ahhh, how in the world do you go from a Libertarian mindset to a progressive/Marxist mindset?

They call it low information voting... or the spiderman is just lying

Low information voting would be voting for Hillary because she's a woman.

Paul's previous supporters jumping to Sanders is likely because of people being sick of the Wall Street candidates and looking for anything that bucks the system as it stands.

Your definition of Low-info voting would likely have Pauls old supporters flying Trump banners.

a reply to: kloejen
XD

originally posted by: Slickinfinity
Am I reading this correctly? Did it come down to an actual coin toss ? That sounds crazy to me with the job their campaigning for.
Winning 6 in a row is very lucky too. Coins can easily be made to land on one side more than the other and I wouldn't dismiss any speculation.

A political pundit, Pat Cadell, was just on Fox, and he said the Iowa coin toss IS NOT a rule until the general election. Also the Democrats demanded a raw vote count in the last general election, but refused last night, probably because Sanders got more popular votes. He said it is very possible to get more delegates while receiving less of the popular vote. This seems to say the coin toss was just a suggestion rather than a hard rule, you can also pick a name out of a hat, but that would have been harder for Hillary to rig:

"Caucus goers weren’t simply frustrated or inspired to decide the results with a coin toss. The caucus rules actually call for a coin toss or picking a name out of a hat in the event of a tie. Democratic Party officials reportedly recommended the coin toss to one deadlocked caucus in Ames Monday night that called the official hotline for help".
thinkprogress.org...

a reply to: macman

Because I don't see how a Ron Paul supporter could support anyone but Rand or Bernie, and being that Rand is not in the race (technically he is still but he has no chance within the GOP) who else would they support?

a reply to: Swills

I ask again. How can someone who is of the Libertarian mindset move over to backing Old Doofus Bernie?

a reply to: macman

Your question was answered but I'll humor you. Why should anyone pigeon hole themselves into one mind set? Do you think I'm the lone Ron Paul supporter who supports Sanders?

Were you a Ron Paul supporter?

Pure mad house...a looney bin. A coin toss ? really people ?

I was amazed when I saw how republican candidates are vetted through yay or nay screaming in a packed house, and the speaker simply decides what he heard louder.

That was one revealing moment. Fear and loathing kind a thing.

A coin toss is right up there.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

We're electing our president through coin tosses?