The Wyoming Caucus is tomorrow, and though not very consequential in terms of delegates (with only fourteen up for grabs), Wyomingites are apparently poised to give Bernie Sanders another win. And yes, the official demonym of those who reside in Wyoming is “Wyomingite.” Here is my projection:

Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 8.24.51 PM

Hillary Clinton will perform poorly for the following reasons:

  • Wyoming has a closed caucus, which Bernie has consistently done very well in. He has won all seven closed caucuses to date (counting the recent Nevada flip).
  • Wyoming has the second lowest population of Black voters in the nation, 0.8%, second only to Idaho.
  • Bernie Sanders has a greater social media presence in Wyoming than every other state that has voted so far, with the exception of Vermont.
  • Hillary Clinton has a very low amount of Google search interest in Wyoming; it’s her third worst state in this regard, behind only Idaho and Vermont.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Hillary drop below 20% in Wyoming by the time the caucus results are in. As we witnessed in Alaska, at caucus locations where Hillary has very little support, she runs the risk of being deemed a non-viable candidate (this threshold is 15% at all caucuses as far as I’m aware) and being awarded no delegates at that location.

Thanks for the interest folks, and Wyomingites, happy caucusing!



    • Why is it always the people who rant about math that can’t do any? Tyler is doing best to try and make a new type of prediction model and shouldn’t have to take things from people attacking him on his candidate preference. He obviously doesn’t rig these things for Hillary as he has numerously predicted Hillary wins in his models. It’s clear that his model does not take account for early voting but that’s alright because its a work in progress.


  1. Hi everyone. I’m also making a model. Mine is county-based. I’m releasing my county-level data set with over 50 variables (race, income, education, FB likes, past election results, Google Search Trends, etc), so other people can make their own models! I’d love to hear from people by email as well. It also includes my county turnout model (where I predict the number of votes per county, which you need to aggregate from county predictions to state predictions)



      • Reality is a Hillary troll. I’m sorry that things like math, facts, science, numbers, logic, statistics and reality troll you so hard, but that says more about you and your candidate of choice than anything else.



  2. As in Nevada, when it comes to the state convention these fake votes will be exposed as Sanders actual supporters will show up and Hillary’s imaginary ones will not, therefore Sanders will end up with more delegates once again.


  3. So Sanders gets 70 percent of the actual people there and Hillary gets 100 percent of the “surrogates” Yeah OK. That’s on the level. You see this is the cheating of the Hillary camp. As David Axelrod said in 2008..They will do anything to win, they are always finding ways around the system, always looking for ways to cheat. From reports in Wyoming, the people who were “surrogates” didn’t match the very complicated criteria you must to be a surrogate, but they let those votes count anyway. This is part of the package Sanders will bring to the convention. They are taking notes, putting together legal documents, from states like Wyoming and Arizona and Massachusetts..voters suppression…counting illegal votes..Bill campaigning illegally for his wife…etc etc..all of this adding up to at least half of Sanders supporters refusing to back Hillary if she is the nominee..along with most Independents…she can’t win..can’t come close to beating any Republican. The party will nominate Sanders or lose. Period.


  4. Mr. Pedigo’s projections for the other mountain and Pacific states, and quite frankly Wisconsin, were so uncannily accurate that the burden of proof should fall on Wyoming to prove that their ‘results’ were correct. Notice that the Democrats don’t appear to be releasing the popular vote total. Not only does this stoke suspicion in both camps that our democracy is insufficiently representative, it also fits very well with the DNC’s new strategy of promoting Clinton’s popular vote total as some sort of legitimizing factor, which it is not. (She lost in 2008 but won the popular vote, proving its meaninglessness.) The same tactic will generously allow Bernie Sanders to add a net 34 votes – the number is not a joke – to his popular vote total of many millions.


    • His projections would be correct if you removed absentee ballots from the equation. Not going to comment on whether those ballots perpetuated election fraud. Tyler’s models are usually extremely accurate in predicting day of voting. They have problems incorporating early/absentee voting which could have been done several weeks earlier.

      Liked by 1 person

      • unfortunately absentee ballots will only be more likely to be used in the future, as they are a PROGRESSIVE TOOL TO INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT.

        you cant just ignore them lol. they are only more relevant as time goes on… and this model is supposed to be about predicting elections in the future.


      • @berniebros

        All that means is that it’s a work in progress, which Tyler does not dispute, so far his model has been fairly good and its getting better with time

        Liked by 1 person

      • Not the only one to say so. Contrarian but very reality-based observer Seth Abramson:

        ‘Let’s put aside for the moment the virtual statistical impossibility of what happened in Wyoming. In Laramie County, far and away the state’s most populous county, fully 44 percent of caucus votes were absentee votes. These suspicious ballots — “suspicious” because Wyoming has fairly strict laws about the circumstances under which you can vote early in a caucus — are the votes that went for Clinton by 30 points.’

        ‘Virtual statistical impossibility.’ Speaking of statistical impossibilities, how did 8 out 23 counties (>33%) in Wyoming ‘tie’? If this is normal for a small population state (or something), why wasn’t there a single tie on the Republican side?


        To the dunce below, ‘conspiracy’ is a prosecutable offense in the real world for a very simple reason.


      • Lol. You $Hillbots don’t get it do you. If there’s one thing this primary election process should tell you, it’s that the people that are going to read your comments online won’t be fooled by dumb appeals to CT designed to de-legitimize sources of accurate information.

        $Hillary’s not fooling them and neither are you.


      • i dont understand how you can “never expect” absentee votes in caucuses that have absentee voting this was not that unexpected, if you followed hillary subreddits instead of just bernie subreddits.

        this was there optimal strategy in wyoming, and wasnt exactly a big secret.

        lay low, focus on absentee ballots, and come out with close to a tie. exactly what ended up happening.

        the only surprise was that instead of bernie ending up with 1-2 extra delegates, it was actually tied, a bit better than team hillary expected.

        since you live in DC area, id suggest maybe connecting with some hillary people to learn about stuff that is common knowledge within their camp and not exactly a secret.


      • Someone walks in with 600 surrogate ballots that are 100% Hillary, and that’s “optimal strategy”. Riiiiiiiight…


  5. Haha. Love it! She isn’t even going to get the 22 states she won in 2008..when she lost. she hasn’t won a state in a month. He has won more states…she can’t win outside of the confederacy. Her idiot supporters really believe that the deep red south is going to give her the nod. They really believe that even though she will be annihilated in the last 3 months of this process she will be the nominee. Yeah and there’s no global warming either. #feelthebern


  6. Tyler, have you seen that absentee ballots flipped the largest counties in Wyoming? While Bernie won 3:1 in live voting in Laramie (689 to 230), Hillary won absentee voting 501 to 0, flipping the county. How is that not total, blatant election fraud? Live voting almost perfectly reflects your predictions.


    • It’s not fraud. Absentee ballots are peoples’ votes. They count just asich as people that vote in person. HRC does well today and Sanders falls further behind, as he needed a 10-4 split to be on track. The click is winding down. It’s time to stand with her.


      • Granted, this was not a spectacular victory for Sanders, but:
        1. He already was up a couple delegates from when HRC’s side failed to show in Nevada (and Missouri).
        2. Depending on Goshen’s results, Sanders could actually still emerge one delegate up.

        The math for Sanders is hard; it is not impossible. When it becomes impossible, then yes, the discussion can be held about what happens next. But I think the point of this whole process isn’t to let it get “kind of” over and then call it. Baseball doesn’t work like that. Marathons don’t work like that. If HRC’s candidacy is so assured, what harm is there in letting people in the states further down the line actually have a chance to participate in the process?


      • You’re going to honestly tell me that in a state where people voted overwealmingly for Bernie at live caucuses, he did not get a single absentee vote in the largest county? Those votes are only supposed to be used in circumstances where voters CANNOT attend. So in Larmie county nearly half of the voters had legitimate circumstance that prevented them from attending, and EVERY SINGLE ONE supported Hillary in a state otherwise overwealmingly for Bernie? I mean, I won’t go so far as to say to take your blinders off, but please point to any sort of logic in this.


      • It will never be time to stand with her. It will be time to write in Bernie on the ballot in November, if it comes to that. Listening to Hillary supporters suggest that Bernie supporters should switch allegiance as some sort of Republican victory prevention is like listening to the Emperor tell Luke Skywalker to come to the dark side. We fight on and beyond!


    • It’s not fraud to vote absentee. She has been good at encouraging voters to vote early. That is her right and a good strategy that she has been using all along. Whenever results aren’t as expected for Bernie, everyone thinks there is fraud. Even in victory you are poor losers. Maybe the model needs to be revised for absentee ballots. Maybe using google search does not reflect enough of the older population who would be less inclined to be searching on the internet.


  7. I’m afraid it was a big miss this time Tyler

    I think the closed nature of the caucus threw off your results

    Still you were right about the winner, just not the margin


  8. Nevada wasn’t flipped. This was a lie started by Seth Abramson and perpetuated by the USUncut crowd. HRC won NV 18-17. You can see it on 538 and greenpspers. Try to step out of the echochambers. You may not like what you learn, but you will be more knowledgable and will know the truth.


    • Other way around… Bernie won it 18-17, so yes… flipped.
      Who’s in the echochambers of greenpapers and 538? That’s you 🙂 Count the county delegates and do the math yourself. The party may not want to report the proper numbers… but watch what happens at the state convention. That is when the numbers will be final anyways,


      • Wrong. Go to politic act right now and see for yourself. Then come back here and tell everyone you were wrong and HRC won NV. Go…I’m waiting for your mea culpa. Forget TYT and see the truth.


    • Ummm, I’m afraid you’re incorrect, first off no national convention delegates have actually been chosen

      that doesn’t happen until May 15th

      However at that State convention, Bernie will have more seats 2124 vs 1722 for Clinton

      So yeah the state is basically flipped, with that advantage in seats, and the more enthusiastic Bernie supporters, Bernie will get more delegates.


  9. Tyler,

    First. Many thanks for “demonym.” Oh, I can’t wait to slip that into a conversation.

    Second. Do you (or others — this can be an open question) notice that this election cycle, the whole process of coverage appears to be more fragmentary than usual? For instance, AP has Sanders down 250 delegates (as of now). Fivethirtyeight has the race at 1301-1089, which is a 212 delegate gap. The NYTimes has the race at 1298-1079 (219 delegates).

    Also, the reporting itself is defective. AP’s results (which feed the NYTimes and Washington Post) for instance, are still incomplete on several states on those sites. (Utah, at http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/utah reads “77,344 votes, 99% reporting (2,215 of 2,235 precincts).” So where are those 20 remaining precincts? On election night, the county level results for Hawaii didn’t fill in on the WashPo or the NYT sites until something like a day and a half later. Alaska had a similar problem. I don’t recall the coverage being so “WTF?” in the past.


  10. FUN FACTS!
    Hillary Clinton has stated that being president is about “Hard Choices”. She’s right…but most of her hard choices, by her own admission, have been wrong.

    Hillary was opposed Gay marriage as late as 2013. She has since “evolved” on the issue. Bernie, in 1985, as Mayor of Burlington set aside a day to be known as “Gay Pride Day.”

    She aggressively promoted Fracking while she was Secretary of State. She supported the Keystone XL Pipeline until the polls indicated she needed to change her position. She pushed for TPP and referred to it as ”the Gold Standard” many times. Bernie Sanders has always opposed all of the above.

    She supports the death penalty and private, for-profit, prisons. She is against Free College Education.

    Hillary has received millions from Wall Street. Hillary’s top contributors: Morgan Stanley $636,564, Lehman Brothers $362,853, JP Morgan Chase $696,456, Goldman Sachs $760,740, Credit Suisse $318,120, Citigroup $824,402. Bernie’s top donors are labor unions, teacher unions, and nursing unions and has received over four million individual contributions averaging $28.

    Hillary was a supporter of the Iraq War. She has since said that choice was wrong. Bernie had the foresight and good judgement to oppose the war, repeatedly called out Bush for his deliberate misinformation and accurately predicted the catastrophic outcome. He has stated that he will, absolutely, defend the United States but that war should always be the last option.

    Hillary is against bringing back Glass Steagall Act, the repeal of which contributed to the greatest recession since 1929. Bernie wants to bring back this essential legislation.

    Hillary participated in Republican campaigns for years. Bernie has always been an independent and has always caucused with Democrats.
    Bernie Sanders marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and was arrested for protesting segregation. Hillary Clinton campaigned for Barry Goldwater, who opposed the Supreme Court’s power to enforce school integration, voted in the Senate against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and whose campaign platform included his promise to repeal the legislation. The Clintons also celebrated “Confederate Flag Day” every year when Bill was governor of Arkansas.

    Hillary is against a $15 minimum wage. Ever since he became a United States Senator, Bernie has made it one of his top goals to get workers a $15 minimum wage.

    Hillary wants to “loosen” marijuana penalties. Bernie wants to completely abolish the federal prohibition of marijuana.

    Bernie’s health care plan is predicted to save each American $1200 a year plus in insurance and pharmaceutical drugs costs. Hillary opposes single payer healthcare and has received millions of dollars in contributions from pharmaceutical and health insurance companies.

    Bernie received the highest VFW award in his fight for veterans’ rights and services. Hillary Clinton has a documented history of being a warmongering hawk and as president would pursue the failed policy of endless war.

    Bernie has over 30 years of experience fighting for working Americans and is an honest and authentic candidate. Hillary…not so much.

    When you are President you don’t get a second chance. Fatal decisions send young American soldiers to war and often, disastrously, effect the course of events and destabilize the world.

    Ours is not a “Hard Choice” at all. We have Bernie Sanders – the leader who has made the right choices throughout his career. The choice is between a corporate sponsored and controlled candidate who will say and do anything that she believes will get her elected and an honest, compassionate and highly ethical man of consistent, unassailable integrity.

    Bernie has fought for the Middle Class, Labor, Women, Gay People, Civil Rights and Veterans his entire political career. He has demonstrated a profound, consistent and rare moral conviction to do what is right by the people he represents rather than corporations.

    No super PACs, no secret donors writing checks for tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars, no private jets…just a sincere conviction to do what is right for the American people and the world.


    • You are not correct on most of what you wrote. You have sound bites and small pieces of these items. Go watch HRCs women’s rights are human rights so each. You are young. Be more inquisitive and get smarter.


      • Nope, YOU are wrong. Please do some research, like watching c-span and looking up legislation on congress.gov. Stay away from the media as a primary source of information, it is bad for the mind. Remember, you must QUALIFY information. Understand the motives of the source. Money corrupts facts. Feel free to read everything, and I encourage you to do so, but QUALIFY it. Make your decision based on ALL the factors. The most important factors to weigh in your decision are things you can prove yourself with repeated experiences and repeatable experiments. Do the math, crunch the numbers, and listen to what is being said, vs what is actually done. Read Hillary’s emails, they are all there for you. Take a few weekends aside and dig through them all day for a while. You might see why people don’t believe her campaign rhetoric. She likes to talk a good game and tell you what you want to hear, but then push for interventionist wars, and sell arms to dangerous countries. She pushed for bad trade deals that she campaigned against. READ READ READ! Don’t be lazy, please.


  11. Man, Wyoming has some seriously progressive Democrats! I’m highly impressed and hope every last Berner in their beautiful state turns out for the caucuses! I also hope I get to visit there again someday soon (we spent a large chunk of our late honeymoon, a year after our wedding, in Wyoming — 30th anniversary coming up in a few months!)!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s