It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Help ATS via PayPal:

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

page: 8
53
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:56 AM

originally posted by: IAMTAT
LOL...So Hillary won 6 out of 6 coin toss ties (calling heads)...and that allowed her to beat Sanders in Iowa last night.
What are the odds? According to the math, a highly improbable 1 in 64!
Of course, her integrity and that of her campaign is above reproach.

DES MOINES, Iowa — One of the most bizarre details to emerge from Monday’s Iowa caucuses was that in six Democratic counties, the ownership of six delegates was decided by a coin flip.

A single delegate remained unassigned at the end of caucusing in two precincts in Des Moines, one precinct in Ames, one in Newton, one in West Branch and one in Davenport, The Des Moines Register reported.

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:

And the bottom line is, Clinton won the Iowa caucuses on a coin flip.

Here’s why: Each coin flip decided a delegate.

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.

www.theblaze.com...

Thanks for that.

This is simply more likelihood that the powers that should not be have arranged for their girl to have her turn on the throne.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:48 AM
" 'Cause I can read those velvet eyes, and all I see is lies. "

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 06:42 AM

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

The game is not 'just begun', its the oldest game in the world. See how it 'plays out'?

Except overall nothing changes the corruption, slow encroachment of total government and endless wars, does it.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:12 AM

originally posted by: onequestion

We're electing our president through coin tosses?

Of course not. We elect using coin tosses sponsored by Pepsi (TM). The Revolution in Soft Drinks (C) (TM). A subtle distinction, to be sure....

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:35 AM

I think... the better question is...

Is this what the fate of possibly the world has come down to? A coin toss?....

Oh well...

Atleast the end was interesting...and amusingly...dumbed down into a joke. That is politics for ya.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:10 AM

Except that doesn't tell the whole story. In fact, there were at least a dozen tiebreakers — and "Sen. Sanders won at least a handful," an Iowa Democratic Party official told NPR.

Gone unmentioned so far is that even if Clinton won that Miracle Six — and there were no other coin tosses — it would make little difference in the outcome. That is, in part, because of the complicated way Iowa Democrats allocate their delegates — and what was being reported on election night and what wasn't.

www.npr.org...

I point this out fully understanding that there will always be people that trust their feelings more than math.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:45 AM
I get what you are saying, and no longer identify as Democrat for these reasons. But at the same time, we need to not pretend that EVERY single policy of both parties are the same. They are both sold out at the high level, without a doubt. But there are some policy issues where I still think the Democrats are relatively better, and it is important in the name of nuanced critical analysis to recognize what they share (those evils I mentioned) versus a few things that they don't.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:48 AM

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: amazing
I used to think the Republican side of American politics was the shady side...you know Florida and Al Gore, but...now I know for sure that Democrats are way, way shadier this year. Good lord!

The Republicans just schooled the Democrats on how to run a good clean Caucus. Lord help us!

Good clean caucus? Republicans? With Cruz taking votes from Carson by falsely claiming Carson suspended his campaign? Give me a break. One party is dirty as the other. Politics as usual.

Haha. I didn't realize Cruz did that! Oh man!

"Carson accuses Cruz camp of spreading false rumors on campaign suspension"
www.foxnews.com...

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:51 AM

How very Christian of him.

Just another weasley scumbag politician who will do anything to get elected.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 10:10 AM

originally posted by: IAMTAT

CNN made the announcement Carson was leaving first....but let's stay on topic.

Yes, then CNN retracted the suspension story and said he was going home to FLA to get a change of clothes. Cruz's people never passed on the retraction. They were quick to pass on the first story so they could get Carson voters. This is on topic. It is in the same vain that the suspicion of cheating goes on with both sides. The system is rife with dirty politics and will never change.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 10:33 AM

If you already KNEW CNN announced the news first...and that Cruz's people just reacted to it, you should've mentioned that fact in your first post...even if it does dull the impact of your biased off-topic narrative.
edit on 3-2-2016 by IAMTAT because: italics added

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:05 AM

Changing morals when the wind blows is not having morals.
And the fact still remains. One can't claim to be Libertarian, only to turn around and back Sanders.

Up is not down.

How about you include the rest of that definition..

2.
a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.
"the corruption of public morals"
synonyms: moral code, code of ethics, (moral) values, principles, standards, (sense of) morality, scruples
"he has no morals"

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:25 AM

originally posted by: IAMTAT

If you already KNEW CNN announced the news first...and that Cruz's people just reacted to it, you should've mentioned that fact in your first post...even if it does dull the impact of your biased off-topic narrative.

Look, you are obviously a Ted Cruz supporter and condone the underhanded tricks he used to win Iowa. You don't have to italicize to make your point to me. And just because you say my response is off-topic doesn't mean squat to me. I'll let a moderator make that determination and if so, can delete my post. IMO it is on topic as exposing another way of how a candidate wins, whether coin tosses are in question or only disseminating partial information to steal votes.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:31 PM

originally posted by: macman
How about you include the rest of that definition..

Because it doesn't change anything. Everyone has morals and they can change.

a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

Everyone always has morals, disagreeing with said morals does not invalidate them as morals. "He has no morals." is a bull# statement used to shame people into following the herd accepted morality.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:39 PM
So I was reading some accounts that said that there were 8-9 documented coin tosses and that Sanders won a majority of them, but that there were undocumented on verified coin tosses in other districts as well. Can't remember where I was reading that this morning, sorry for no source. So maybe Clinton didn't win every single coin toss, it's looking like that was a false story.

Still makes me a little crazy that our next president could be picked or that these coin tosses could have a say in who our next president is. Again, I didn't hear about any coin tosses on the Republican side.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:46 PM

originally posted by: amazing
Again, I didn't hear about any coin tosses on the Republican side.

No, the Republicans line up and shout dirty limericks at each other. Whoever laughs first, loses.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:47 PM

There once was a man named Trump
Who acted like a vile chump
His political views he would tout
And at the Mexicans shout
But it just bit him in the rump

edit on 3-2-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 02:45 PM

If that helps you sleep better at night, go for ya.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:01 PM

originally posted by: macman

If that helps you sleep better at night, go for ya.
If you can be comfortable with being wrong, I'm sure I can manage to sleep just fine.

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:07 PM
The bitch scares me.

I don't know about y'all, but every time I see her speech, Hitler comes to mind.

I don't know, maybe it's the way she speaks, so mean, so determined, so vein popping out of the side of her head, just screams Hitler's famous line: "NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN!!!!!!!"

Oh dear God, please do not let her be the President. I'd #ing leave this country....

new topics

top topics

53