SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Bern Report reports
Dr. Rick Hardy and Dr. John Hemingway have been leading Mock Presidential Elections [at Western Illinois University] since 1975. During that time, students who have participated in these mock elections have chosen the winning party with 100% accuracy and have an astonishing record in selecting presidential winners.
On the Democratic side for the Primaries Sanders won[1] by close to a 2 to 1 margin over challenger Hillary Clinton.
[...] After nominating Sanders, the student Democrats put him up against Jeb Bush, who received the Republican nomination, with Bernie winning the electoral college by nearly a 4 to 1 margin and a decisive win for the popular vote.
This simulation always takes place the year before the presidential election year, and three months before the actual Iowa caucuses. The genesis of this mock presidential election began at the University of Iowa in 1975 with two political science doctoral students, John Hemingway and Rick Hardy. In that year, students selected Jimmy Carter over Gerald Ford--long before anyone really knew of Jimmy Carter.
In the years that followed, Rick Hardy expanded the format and engaged thousands of students at the University of Missouri-Columbia where students registered a perfect record of selecting the subsequent winning presidential party. In 2007 and 2011, Hardy and Hemingway teamed up again to conduct a massive campus-wide simulation at Western Illinois University. In 2007, Western students selected Barack Obama as president at a time when no one thought he could win! And, in 2011, students narrowly re-elected President Obama.
[1] Content is behind scripts.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Saturday November 14 2015, @04:47PM
For people very tired of the mutually reinforcing imbalance of wealth and corruption of our politics, Sanders seems the best choice. Hillary seems too close to Wall Street and big corporations. She could conceivably feel that she no longer needs their support once elected, and turn "traitor" and become a people's president, but I doubt it.
Trump looks to be the candidate for people convinced that immigrants and foreigners are the cause of our troubles. All the Republicans are still banging on about government being the problem, not the solution. I don't see anything there that distinguishes the rest of the Republican field. They're fervently devoted to destroying Obamacare, building and using military might, and dismissing, ignoring, and smearing science and fact. What has Jeb Bush got that lead the students to choose him? Maybe he's the candidate who blends in best with the current crazy that is the Republican party these days? But isn't he about to drop out, having campaigned so poorly thus far?
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Saturday November 14 2015, @04:49PM
I seriously worry about Bernie Sanders lifespan if elected, or possibly before.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Saturday November 14 2015, @05:30PM
He's 74, so he'd be the oldest president so far. The oldest yet is Reagan, who was a couple of weeks under 70 when he became president. [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Saturday November 14 2015, @06:00PM
It's not natural causes I worry about.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 15 2015, @06:19AM
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday November 16 2015, @06:36PM
Except that Lee Oswald had no ties to organized crime. He was a communist and the Russians didn't want much to do with him.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 16 2015, @07:23PM
Except that Lee Oswald had no ties to organized crime.
That's a feature not a bug.
(Score: 2) by SubiculumHammer on Saturday November 14 2015, @07:55PM
Don't a couple of years older than Hillary
(Score: 2) by gawdonblue on Sunday November 15 2015, @02:06AM
Yeah, it seems like he's been doing those ads forever. My vote goes to his original "secret" recipe.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday November 15 2015, @05:58AM
BS..he's just what the country needs, an angry old guy.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 15 2015, @09:20AM
Someone's arguments stand on their own merits. Whether they are angry or old is irrelevant. If you're going to dislike him, dislike him for reasons that aren't totally shallow.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 14 2015, @04:50PM
What has Jeb Bush got that lead the students to choose him?
Well, señor Jeb has an excellent taste in Guaca Bowles [jeb2016.com].
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 14 2015, @05:11PM
> Maybe he's the candidate who blends in best with the current crazy that is the Republican party these days?
He had the most connections to party insiders. Betting on the insiders' candidate has been a good strategy for a few decades, but it's been getting less effective as times have been changing.
> But isn't he about to drop out, having campaigned so poorly thus far?
Trump changed things. He gave voice to the out-loud bigots. Carson, the least angry black man in the world, is the "black shield" for the quiet bigots. That's like half the base right there and 90% of the press coverage. Hard to go up against that.
Given that this mock election was done a year ago I don't think they could have accounted for the Trump wildcard. Even when he does eventually flame out, the randomness he inserted into the process is still going to leave the system in disarray.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 14 2015, @11:13PM
this mock election was done a year ago
FTFS: This simulation always takes place the year before the presidential election year, and three months before the actual Iowa caucuses [google.com]
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday November 15 2015, @06:08AM
Don't you yet realize that Trump is actually a 5th column social democrat who is successfully destroying the absurd Republican party.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 15 2015, @05:09AM
I would vote for Trump. Not because I like him. It would be amusing to watch him try to maneuver the gov and then watch it sabotage all of his efforts to do anything. Him having a meltdown would be funny to watch.
Sanders would try to do whatever it is he stands for then run into the exact same problem Trump would have. The gov does not bend to the will of the dude in charge for 4 years. The fix is in. The cash cow keeps pumping cash.
At this point how I vote does not matter. So I vote who would amuse me the most. Sanders is my 2nd choice as he would be amusing to watch. Hillary I am bored of.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday November 15 2015, @06:11AM
I don't know about that. I think Hillary would be fun to watch. Granny goes to Washington and kicks ass.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday November 15 2015, @01:57PM
Yeah that's funny until the moment you realize the ass she's kicking is yours, not theirs.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Sunday November 15 2015, @02:01PM
You know, I think I'm with you on this one. I would vote for Trump over Hillary, and I'm a progressive. Trump would 'splode the United States government with fireworks. Hillary will see us all in literal chains to her Wall Street pals.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday November 15 2015, @01:54PM
You are right to doubt it. The Clintons are grifters. Everything they do is about the swindle. The lipservice they pay to helping people is simply their schtick, their scheme. Check into how much money they got people to donate to earthquake relief in Haiti and how much money they actually spent helping anyone there.
They're also wildly incompetent. They know how to do literally not one practical thing.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 16 2015, @06:00AM
> Check into how much money they got people to donate to earthquake relief in Haiti and how much money they actually spent helping anyone there.
You know no one is going to do that. Who really cares enough about random unsupported invective to go out and prove your point for you?
Flames like yours just produce the opposite effect -- the internet is full of loud-mouth idiots who are usually wrong. Why would you be any different?