Started By
Message

re: CNN reporting Clinton got 2.9 million more votes BUT

Posted on 12/21/16 at 7:54 pm to
Posted by TbirdSpur2010
ALAMO CITY
Member since Dec 2010
134026 posts
Posted on 12/21/16 at 7:54 pm to
quote:

We have a President who won the election by a substantial electoral college margin. This same person lost the popular vote by a non-trivial margin (millions).


Actually, it was a 2% margin of defeat in the popular vote. Millions, yes, but a statistically trivial margin, tbh.

quote:

From a data science perspective, the correlation discrepancy between the two data points is HISTORICALLY disparate. As a science guy and as someone who has always been interested in politics I find that fascinating. As do many others.


This makes sense, and I'll grant you that

Most everyone else on the left I've seen bandying this about has done so with a decided bent to delegitimize the result.

If that's not you, then I misread ya. I apologize.
Posted by Tigerdev
Member since Feb 2013
12287 posts
Posted on 12/21/16 at 7:58 pm to
quote:


Most everyone else on the left I've seen bandying this about has done so with a decided bent to delegitimize the result.

If that's not you, then I misread ya. I apologize.
No apology necessary.
I'm rarely legit confused on here but the reaction to my inane posts stating that this event is statistically interesting has been surprising in its intensity even on TD poli standards.

quote:

Actually, it was a 2% margin of defeat in the popular vote. Millions, yes, but a statistically trivial margin, tbh.
2% isn't "trivial" statistically but I do agree that it isn't outrageous. Still, it is unprecedented to have such a margin in PV and EV results..
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram