I will now accept my accolades

[Mr. Morden]

Accolades for what?  No one thought Sanders would be the nominee

Oh how quickly we forget the hype...

WARREN IS GONNA JUMP IN AND CRUSH HILLARY! #2008REDUX!
SANDERS IS NIPPING AT HER HEELS JUST LIKE OBAMA DID! #2008REDUX
BIDEN IS GONNA JUMP IN!!!!!! SHE'S FINISHED!!!11!!!!

And of course:

"Is Hillary finished after NH?"
"Is Hillary finished after MI?"
"Is Hillary finished after <March caucuses>?"


And of course the timeless classic: "Hillary won't even run" and its twin brother "Hillary will be indicted"

There were people who said those things, but I think Clinton has pretty consistently been considered the favorite to win the nomination by the forum consensus.  Sure, there have always been dissenters, but I don't think you were going out on much of a limb by saying that she would win the nom.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

Someone's going to eat some serious crow when Hillary's indicted!

[IceSpear]

Accolades for what?  No one thought Sanders would be the nominee

Oh how quickly we forget the hype...

WARREN IS GONNA JUMP IN AND CRUSH HILLARY! #2008REDUX!
SANDERS IS NIPPING AT HER HEELS JUST LIKE OBAMA DID! #2008REDUX
BIDEN IS GONNA JUMP IN!!!!!! SHE'S FINISHED!!!11!!!!

And of course:

"Is Hillary finished after NH?"
"Is Hillary finished after MI?"
"Is Hillary finished after <March caucuses>?"


And of course the timeless classic: "Hillary won't even run" and its twin brother "Hillary will be indicted"

There were people who said those things, but I think Clinton has pretty consistently been considered the favorite to win the nomination by the forum consensus.  Sure, there have always been dissenters, but I don't think you were going out on much of a limb by saying that she would win the nom.

I agree I wasn't going out on a limb at all, I was just stating the obvious. The problem was so many people who denied the obvious, either out of wishful thinking or that sweet, sweet ad revenue. C'mon Morden, I know you read the news often. How many hundreds (thousands?) of "HILLERY IN SOUPER DANGER!11!!1!11!!" articles do you think you've seen over the past year?

[Mr. Morden]

Accolades for what?  No one thought Sanders would be the nominee

Oh how quickly we forget the hype...

WARREN IS GONNA JUMP IN AND CRUSH HILLARY! #2008REDUX!
SANDERS IS NIPPING AT HER HEELS JUST LIKE OBAMA DID! #2008REDUX
BIDEN IS GONNA JUMP IN!!!!!! SHE'S FINISHED!!!11!!!!

And of course:

"Is Hillary finished after NH?"
"Is Hillary finished after MI?"
"Is Hillary finished after <March caucuses>?"


And of course the timeless classic: "Hillary won't even run" and its twin brother "Hillary will be indicted"

There were people who said those things, but I think Clinton has pretty consistently been considered the favorite to win the nomination by the forum consensus.  Sure, there have always been dissenters, but I don't think you were going out on much of a limb by saying that she would win the nom.

As an example of the above, here's a thread from January 2015, in which everyone gave Clinton at least a 75% chance of being the nominee:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=206252.0

So, OK, some people were saying "maybe she won't run" or "maybe Warren will beat her", but the consensus was definitely that she was the strong favorite to win.  You said 95% chance, so you showed more certainty than many of the others, but it's not likely her winning was some kind of minority position here.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

My list still stands.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

She's made a bloody hard go of it.

[DINGO Joe]

My list still stands.

Yes, some of your finest drunk work to date, which is saying something.

[Vosem]

Accolades for what?  No one thought Sanders would be the nominee

Oh how quickly we forget the hype...

WARREN IS GONNA JUMP IN AND CRUSH HILLARY! #2008REDUX!
SANDERS IS NIPPING AT HER HEELS JUST LIKE OBAMA DID! #2008REDUX
BIDEN IS GONNA JUMP IN!!!!!! SHE'S FINISHED!!!11!!!!

And of course:

"Is Hillary finished after NH?"
"Is Hillary finished after MI?"
"Is Hillary finished after <March caucuses>?"


And of course the timeless classic: "Hillary won't even run" and its twin brother "Hillary will be indicted"

There were people who said those things, but I think Clinton has pretty consistently been considered the favorite to win the nomination by the forum consensus.  Sure, there have always been dissenters, but I don't think you were going out on much of a limb by saying that she would win the nom.

As an example of the above, here's a thread from January 2015, in which everyone gave Clinton at least a 75% chance of being the nominee:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=206252.0

So, OK, some people were saying "maybe she won't run" or "maybe Warren will beat her", but the consensus was definitely that she was the strong favorite to win.  You said 95% chance, so you showed more certainty than many of the others, but it's not likely her winning was some kind of minority position here.

Ctrl+F "Trump". No mentions.

[Lincoln Republican]

And may Hillary go on to soundly defeat Trump in the election.

Hillary, with all her flaws, is still better than Trump, who would start World War III because a foreign leader said something negative about him, who would carpet bomb babies and toddlers in Islamic countries, who attacks and insults Hispanics and Muslims, who doesn't believe a judge of Mexican heritage is fit to try a case against him because he is of Mexican heritage, who believes women are dogs, slobs, and fat pigs, who wants to increase the spread of nuclear weapons in the world, who wants to have a tax plan that is a sweet deal for billionaires, who is a racist, a fascist, and a con artist.

I am a Republican, but I will, under no circumstances, ever support Trump.  I am ashamed of my Republican Party for giving this megalomaniac the nomination. 

[Figueira]

I still don't think she was actually "inevitable." I think she was heavily favored, and was better prepared for a fight this time.

Yeah, in retrospect I agree. Seeing how well Sanders did, I think a better candidate would have had a real chance.

In reality though, my thoughts went from "Sanders can't win, and nobody can beat Hillary" to a brief period of "Maybe he can win" to "Sanders (or a better candidate) could have maybe won, but it's too late now."

If Sanders could(did) do so well against Hillary, then I do believe that Biden would have ended-up with more pledged delegates compared to all other candidates (if Biden would have organized and entered early).

I'm not entirely sure about Biden.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Chafee would have gotten if the media hadn't suppressed him at every opportunity and gave him unfair gotcha questions.

I think everyone was too hard on him.  He had just gotten to the debate, he was new at this, and his cat had just died.  He wasn't really ready and didn't know what he was answering.

Also, in Hillary: The Movie, can we get John Lithgow to play Chafee?

[Mr. Morden]

Accolades for what?  No one thought Sanders would be the nominee

Oh how quickly we forget the hype...

WARREN IS GONNA JUMP IN AND CRUSH HILLARY! #2008REDUX!
SANDERS IS NIPPING AT HER HEELS JUST LIKE OBAMA DID! #2008REDUX
BIDEN IS GONNA JUMP IN!!!!!! SHE'S FINISHED!!!11!!!!

And of course:

"Is Hillary finished after NH?"
"Is Hillary finished after MI?"
"Is Hillary finished after <March caucuses>?"


And of course the timeless classic: "Hillary won't even run" and its twin brother "Hillary will be indicted"

There were people who said those things, but I think Clinton has pretty consistently been considered the favorite to win the nomination by the forum consensus.  Sure, there have always been dissenters, but I don't think you were going out on much of a limb by saying that she would win the nom.

As an example of the above, here's a thread from January 2015, in which everyone gave Clinton at least a 75% chance of being the nominee:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=206252.0

So, OK, some people were saying "maybe she won't run" or "maybe Warren will beat her", but the consensus was definitely that she was the strong favorite to win.  You said 95% chance, so you showed more certainty than many of the others, but it's not likely her winning was some kind of minority position here.

Ctrl+F "Trump". No mentions.

He was part of "field".  Xingkerui went as high as 16% probability on "field", so I guess he was the smartest one here (despite going as low as 75% on Clinton on the Dem. side).

[Mr. Morden]

The other interesting thing from that early 2015 thread is that no one gave Sanders a better than 2% chance of winning the nomination back then.  The 538 forecasters all gave him 0%.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

The other interesting thing from that early 2015 thread is that no one gave Sanders a better than 2% chance of winning the nomination back then.  The 538 forecasters all gave him 0%.

Given that he didn't win, that means that the Forum was only 98% correct, while the 538 forecasters were 100% correct .

[Mike Thick]

"Doom Chafee"