It's over.

[Alcon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Given that the only 2 West Virginians that I know are vastly in the tank for Cruz? I don't see it.

I can't believe I spent so much time arguing with you in detail in that delegate allocation thread.

[Alcon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I hadn't seen a West Virginia poll. Is it really so unbelievable that WV which is pretty conservative would go Cruz?

Check the primary maps for Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Tennessee.  Also, considering you have a non-random sample of n=2, and the margin of error on a sample size of n=2 would be massive either way, the fact that you even invoked two people you know in WV as a rebuttal...pretty ridiculous.

[Alcon]

And yet, my delegate totals were correct.

Your Rhode Island defense made no sense and I believe you stopped replying.  I'm glad you have been correct about other things in your life, but that's immaterial to how much the Rhode Island portion (and the rationale, which apparently reflects on your overall methodology) was flaming nonsense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I suggest you answer my question. Oh, and Trump won KY, and TN because of the vote split between Cruz/Rubio.

Uh, I was answering your question.  What other topic do you think I was addressing when I told you to check out Trump's previous showings in the region?

I don't think it's unreasonable to think it's possible that West Virginia would vote Cruz; I think it's unreasonable to assume it's likely.  You seem to have been asserting that you thought it was likely Cruz would win West Virginia (I don't know what else "I can't see that" would mean, in response to a post about West Virginia being compositionally strong for Trump).

Look at the county maps in Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Tennessee.  Trump did not win the Appalachian portions of those states because of vote-splitting; he just won them.  Is that evidence perfect?  No -- it requires making some inferences that may be inaccurate.  The point is that it's  strong evidence.  It's sure a heck of a lot stronger than "I know two people in West Virginia and they really like Ted Cruz."

You seem to chronically misunderstand how probability (and specifically language around probability) works.  No amount of faux-cocky winky emoticon use is going to compensate for that.

[Alcon]

Why does everyone assume Trump is going to dominate WV and CA?

You didn't read this thread at all, did you?

[Alcon]

I made my predictions back in February and said Trump would be around 1k in the delegates, I was closer than 538, and made correct calls in WI.

So again, you're harping on a state that I awarded to Trump, said would be solid Trump and it went that way.

Struck the parts that aren't relevant replies to my criticisms of your methodological explanation of your Rhode Island allocation.  Try again.  I will repost the criticism verbatim if you've lost it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

*sigh*. He won VA, KY and lost in Ohio. He's not a strong nominee by any stretch of the name. A weak nominee like Romney would have wrapped it up with OH and FL. He did not. A weak nominee like Romney would have finished him off in WI, and not need it to go to NY, Trump needed that.

Again, struck the parts that aren't relevant to my criticism.  I agree he's a relatively weak nominee.  My criticism of your methodology is not "Trump is a strong nominee."  You're babbling.  Again, I will repost the criticism verbatim if you've lost it.

I get what you're saying, but I just don't see the core faith in WV must go Trump other than that he needs it for his delegates.

I don't have "core faith" that West Virginia will go Trump.  I think you're trying to imply that I only think Trump will win West Virginia because I want him to, which is totally ridiculous because: 1) I don't like Trump at all; and, 2) if you check my post history, you'll find very little connection between things I want to happen and things I predict will happen, because I'm aware that my preferences don't have any more influence on reality than anyone else's.

Show me data. I'm not sure I buy the consensus here, and I am keeping it a Cruz call.

I just did...the county thing, which you seem to have ignored, and which you could have checked, even if you hadn't been aware that we have a poll (which has also been pointed out to you).  That's obviously a much better approach than extrapolating from a non-random sample of n=2.

I wish I had a national county map handy so I could show you how West Virginia forms a giant hole surrounded by strong Trump areas in every adjacent county with similar socioeconomic features.  Would you accept that that's much stronger evidence than "I know two Cruz voters there"?

[Alcon]

Right, Ben Kenobi, my criticism is that you called Rhode Island for Trump (unlike all those people who didn't!).  That's it.  I am envious of your grasp of Northeastern politics -- almost as envious as your totally reasonable call that Trump would somehow deny Cruz and Kasich the delegate threshold there, which would have required keeping them under 10%.  All of my criticisms of you are because I want Trump to win, because I like him so much, and because I have such an extensive record of making probabilistic evaluations based on my personal desires.  You got me.

I'm glad you find the two guys you know from West Virginia more indicative of that state's results than previous results in socioeconomically and culturally comparable areas.

HOW ARE YOU A REAL PERSON

[Alcon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clearly the rampant sexism of Atlasia has consequences. Who said they were men?

I'm from the West Coast.  Groups of girls call each other "guys."

Glad to know you've totally given up on wasting our time by defending your 'logic,' though.