enhanced_deficit
06-01-2017, 11:22 PM
SWC Hillary can't seem to accept her defeat in the very sacred election process of the greatest freedom democracy in the world.
Excuse #7 debunked:
Data Gurus to Hillary: The Numbers Didn’t Lose, You Did
Democratic data experts said Thursday there was a zero percent chance that Hillary Clinton lost because the Democratic National Committee gave her bad data.
Gideon Resnick
06.01.17
Depending on who is providing the reflection, Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election because of Russian interference, former FBI Director James Comey’s unexpected October announcement, a surge in white-working class support for now-president Donald Trump, the media coverage of Clinton’s use of a private email server, her lack of attention to the Blue Wall states or a combination of all the above. And none of these would be necessarily wrong.
But a new excuse Clinton provided on Wednesday drew the ire of Democratic party operatives whose job it is to assist candidates with data for campaigns. They took this one personally as it called their jobs into question and passed the buck of responsibility onto data they deemed to be reliable.
“I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination. So I’m now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party,” Clinton said during an interview at Recode’s Code Conference on Wednesday. “I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency, its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it — the DNC — to keep it going.”
To say the least, this is not at all how data gurus saw it.
“Forgive the analogy,” John Hagner, currently a partner at Clarity Campaign Labs told The Daily Beast. “The DNC is farming and what the campaign does is cooking. It’s hard to blame the farmer if the souffle folds.”
Hagner, who previously worked as the National Field Director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said that his company was primarily focused on governor’s races in the 2016 cycle. And he pointed to one particular victory as proof that the DNC data itself was not the problem: the narrow election of Governor Roy Cooper in North Carolina, a state that Clinton lost.
“We worked out of the same pool the Clinton folks did,” Hagner continued. “The Clinton folks did the targeting themselves. The Clinton campaign did a lot right. The world ended up working out differently than they hoped.”
For many, the Clinton comments came as a surprise—and not necessarily a welcome one.
Andrew Therriault, who previously worked as the DNC’s director of data science and left halfway through 2016, called the remarks “fucking bullshit” in a series of tweets last night that have since been deleted.
“DNC data folks: today’s accusations are fucking bullshit, and I hope you understand the good you did despite that nonsense,” Therriault wrote.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/data-gurus-to-hillary-the-numbers-didnt-lose-you-did
Related
Audio of Hillary Clinton Proposing Palestinian Election Rigging (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503001)
Excuse #7 debunked:
Data Gurus to Hillary: The Numbers Didn’t Lose, You Did
Democratic data experts said Thursday there was a zero percent chance that Hillary Clinton lost because the Democratic National Committee gave her bad data.
Gideon Resnick
06.01.17
Depending on who is providing the reflection, Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election because of Russian interference, former FBI Director James Comey’s unexpected October announcement, a surge in white-working class support for now-president Donald Trump, the media coverage of Clinton’s use of a private email server, her lack of attention to the Blue Wall states or a combination of all the above. And none of these would be necessarily wrong.
But a new excuse Clinton provided on Wednesday drew the ire of Democratic party operatives whose job it is to assist candidates with data for campaigns. They took this one personally as it called their jobs into question and passed the buck of responsibility onto data they deemed to be reliable.
“I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination. So I’m now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party,” Clinton said during an interview at Recode’s Code Conference on Wednesday. “I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency, its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it — the DNC — to keep it going.”
To say the least, this is not at all how data gurus saw it.
“Forgive the analogy,” John Hagner, currently a partner at Clarity Campaign Labs told The Daily Beast. “The DNC is farming and what the campaign does is cooking. It’s hard to blame the farmer if the souffle folds.”
Hagner, who previously worked as the National Field Director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said that his company was primarily focused on governor’s races in the 2016 cycle. And he pointed to one particular victory as proof that the DNC data itself was not the problem: the narrow election of Governor Roy Cooper in North Carolina, a state that Clinton lost.
“We worked out of the same pool the Clinton folks did,” Hagner continued. “The Clinton folks did the targeting themselves. The Clinton campaign did a lot right. The world ended up working out differently than they hoped.”
For many, the Clinton comments came as a surprise—and not necessarily a welcome one.
Andrew Therriault, who previously worked as the DNC’s director of data science and left halfway through 2016, called the remarks “fucking bullshit” in a series of tweets last night that have since been deleted.
“DNC data folks: today’s accusations are fucking bullshit, and I hope you understand the good you did despite that nonsense,” Therriault wrote.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/data-gurus-to-hillary-the-numbers-didnt-lose-you-did
Related
Audio of Hillary Clinton Proposing Palestinian Election Rigging (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503001)