Flip of a Coin: Hillary “Wins”

Six coins actually, and Hillary is the winner! What are the chances?

Hillary

How can anyone consider voting for this woman?

From The Des Moines Register:

In a handful of Democratic caucus precincts Monday, a delegate was awarded with a coin toss.

It happened in precinct 2-4 in Ames, where supporters of candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton disputed the results after 60 caucus participants apparently disappeared from the proceedings.

As a result of the coin toss, Clinton was awarded an additional delegate, meaning she took five of the precinct’s eight, while Sanders received three.

Here’s what happened, according to David Schweingruber, an associate professor of sociology at Iowa State University (and Sanders supporter) who participated in the caucus:

A total of 484 eligible caucus attendees were initially recorded at the site. But when each candidate’s preference group was counted, Clinton had 240 supporters, Sanders had 179 and Martin O’Malley had five (causing him to be declared non-viable).

Those figures add up to just 424 participants, leaving 60 apparently missing. When those numbers were plugged into the formula that determines delegate allocations, Clinton received four delegates and Sanders received three — leaving one delegate unassigned.

Unable to account for that numerical discrepancy and the orphan delegate it produced, the Sanders campaign challenged the results and precinct leaders called a Democratic Party hot line set up to advise on such situations.

Party officials recommended they settle the dispute with a coin toss.

Sounds fair, albeit a tad bizarre way to decide what’s supposed to be an important issue, but these are the Iowa democrats, remember.

Here’s the really strange part.

From The Blaze:

In all six instances, the coin toss was won by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

There may have been more coin tosses, but those are the ones we know about for now.

Now, get ready to do some math.

In a single coin toss, the probability of calling the toss correctly is 50 percent, or one in two. Heads or tails.

But the probably of winning every flip out of six flips is one in 64, or 1.56 percent.

The online study tool “Coin Toss Probability Calculator” has a really intense formula that explains why, but the bottom line is, the probabilities stack on each other.

You’re 50 percent likely to win one coin flip. But you’re only 25 percent likely to win two consecutive coin flips, because there are now twice as many possible outcomes. So bump that up to six coin flips, and your chances of winning them all are slim…

Clinton’s final delegate count was 699.57, according to the Iowa Democratic Party. Sanders’ was 695.49.

If Sanders had won half of the coin tosses and split the six delegates three and three with Clinton, he would have finished at 698.49 delegates to Clinton’s 696.57.

Who supplied those coins? Just curious …

31 comments

  1. I just think we need to flip Hillary off. Hillary for the Pillory! http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/68000/Hillary-in-a-Pillory–68230.jpg

  2. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age election results cannot be accurately tallied in a timely fashion and shenanigans like flipping coins must be resorted to in order to determine the winner. Such chicanery is little more than voter fraud and should be eliminated in favor of more reliable and accountable methods as soon as possible. I suppose that it was just pure chance that Hillary won every single toss.

    • Weighted coin anyone? Also, I read that as of Monday night, 90 precincts, or 5% were MIA. No follow-up? In another precinct, when Malloy dropped out, they “somehow” recounted the redistribution of only his votes.
      Here is the story:
      FIRST VOTE: 215 Sanders 210 Clinton 26 O’Malley 8 Undecided 459 TOTAL

      After this, the groups realign and another count was conducted. Sanders’s group leads performed a FULL recount of all the supporters in his group. The Clinton team only added the new supporters gained to her original number from the first round of voting. I did not see another recount of the Clinton supporters taking place. It would have been very hard to miss that activity.

      SECOND ROUND: 232 Clinton 224 Sanders 456 Total

      It was assumed by the chair, Drew Gentsch, that the voter difference was due to a few people that left the building before the second round began. The question is whether there were really 456 total people present for the second round of voting. That was not clear, as Clinton’s team did not perform a recount of ALL of the Hillary supporters during the second round of voting. We don’t know how many Hillary supporters were in the room. Some of them may have also left the building between rounds.

      The Clinton precinct chair, Liz Buck, lied about whether she recounted all of the Clinton supporters during the second count. At 9:44pm ET she stated to the Chair that she only counted the newly gained supporters and added that to her first-round count to arrive at the new 232 total. A minute later, after the second round votes were being discussed openly, with Hillary then taking a 5-4 delegate lead, the Sanders supporters directly asked Liz if she recounted ALL of the Clinton supporters during the second round. Liz Buck answered yes to that question at 9:45pm ET stating that she DID count them all. It’s all on tape. The Sanders supports were unsuccessful at getting a recount conducted, even though several of them protested vigorously. Those supporters knew exactly what happened, but instead of the Chair asking Liz to perform a count of all Clinton supports, he said that the results had to be protested formally, leading to a majority vote, that the Sanders supporters lost. It should be noted that, before the recount vote was conducted, the Chair told the crowd that the results of the recount would not have an effect on the outcome.

      Anyone smell bacala?

      • I’m tossing the BS flag on Iowa. I’ve looked everywhere for Democrat voter turnout numbers and they are not releasing them for some reason, but according to this the number of Dem voters is down 30% while the Repub turnout is up 50%. It doesn’t take a rocketsurgeon to figure out where they went.

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/2/gop-turnout-surged-50-percent-iowa-caucuses/

        According to polling, like this one, Trump was supposed to get close to 40%.

        http://www.pcworld.com/article/3026461/data-center-cloud/microsofts-bing-just-called-the-first-four-primaries-for-donald-trump-hillary-clinton.html

        Here’s the deal. As The Official Conspiracy Theorist of The TOB Show™, I am insinuating, inferring, suggesting, hell I’ll even come out and say it– The dems crossed over to stop Trump. I think the Uniparty was behind it, too. The Dems shaved off 30% of their voters to go vote in the Repub caucus and when they shaved off too many, they had to fudge the numbers to make Hillary win. Six coin tosses? No numbers of actual caucus-goers?

        There needs to be an investigation. But that would get as far as Hillary’s classified e-mails.

        • Yes, M. Once again you are spot on. The democrats have a slow motion train wreck on their hands, and their only hope is that the GOP shoots itself in the foot again by nominating another “moderate.” God help us. Hillary can still run for president under indictment, and if the Republicans nominate Jeb, she could win.

          At a minimum, I think we should be able to see the actual vote totals from the dem caucuses, but as you say, that will be covered up to protect Hillary’s “inevitability.” The dems should face the fact that she is almost certainly toast, barring another RINO GOP nominee.

          • Yes, Teri, but I would not put it past the RINOs and the Dems to set up a candidate, say, Mitt Romney as the democrat nominee, thus curing both their problems. If Trump wins and Hillary is indicted you better believe that the Uniparty would install someone like Romney as palatable democrat nominee to take Hillary’s place and give RINOs someone to vote for- against Trump.

            I hope I’m wrong, because if that happens, the Republic is dead.

          • I believe that Obama will pressure Comey to resign and make sure that the FBI also becomes his lackey. If Hillary is indicted, Obama risks Benghazi exposure and he can not risk his legacy in his addled mind.

        • Let me say that, Mensa, I think you have a future as an author of horror novels because that scenario about the return of the “severe conservative” as a democrat nominee makes me shudder!

      • Clearly, the Iowa dem (dim) party is controlled by Clinton operatives, and this whole process makes the old Soviet union look like Jeffersonian democracy.

      • You can see the video demonstrating what Randy is talking about regarding the discrepancy in the vote tallies here: http://www.ijreview.com/2016/02/528256-watch-the-moment-some-say-voter-fraud-gave-hillary-clinton-iowa-caucus-delegates-in-polk-county/?_ga=1.237590407.669283386.1451781274

        Stinks to high heaven.

  3. Dave,
    I sincerely doubt that Hillary is going to be our next President but I strongly suspect that she may soon enjoy the historic distinction of be the first former Secretary of State to be indicted for the mishandling of classified information. She already enjoys the distinction of being one of the few Secretaries of State to have an Ambassador murdered during her term in the office.

  4. Actually Hillary’s 10/22/15 testimony before the Congressional committee proved that she lied to the Benghazi families when she made the ridiculous claim that their loved ones were murdered because of YouTube video that no one saw. Rep. Jordan of Ohio presented the smoking gun. Now she has clearly violated the Espionage Act and other federal statutes regarding handling sensitive top secret information. Her lame excuse that nothing she sent or received on her home brew server was “marked classified” is absurd.The non-disclosure agreement when she became Sec. of State says that that distinction is irrelevant.

    The latest State Department Friday document dump last Friday contained 22 messages which we now learned contained information that was Top Secret and contained the most sensitive material, material about sources and methods, the revealing of which can actually endanger the lives of our intel assets. She belongs not in the White House, but the big house.

  5. The Queen of the face plant was probably knocking back a few during the 3:00 phone call. Oblamo was asleep waiting for the alarm to go to the fund raiser in Vegas the next day. To this day, we have never heard where those two scum buckets were. Doubt me, just look at Bill’s bulbous nose. WC Fields look alike.

  6. Yes, Amb. Stevens was the first ambassador murdered while on duty since 1979, during the Carter administration. Interesting coincidence: the worst President in history (Obama) and the 2nd worst. Indictment can’t come soon enough. Her blatant crimes must not go unpunshed.

  7. It’s very interesting that none of the fearless seekers of truth who laughingly masquerade as “journalists” has been able to find out where the One was while 4 brave Americans were being murdered on the anniversary of 9/11 by Islamist lunatics. I agree with you. He was resting up for what is really important to him, fundraising. (Other priority: luxury vacations). As for Bill, he looks like he has 1 foot in the grave and 1 foot in the banana peel. A friend told me yesterday that he suspect Bubba has drug-resistant syphillis, which is what accounts for his horrifying appearance.

  8. Yes, to repeat something I often quote from Joe Scarborough, a guy with whom I frequently disagree and find to be on the wrong side of things, the reason people thing that the Clintons are hiding something is that the Clintons are always hiding something.

  9. Why do we have winners anyway? Doesn’t losing cause some candidates embarrassment? Do we have ‘safe places’ for every candidate? Let’s just give each one trophy and call them all winners on the Democrat side.

    Just say no to bullying.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Teri O'Brien Show

book
%d bloggers like this: