Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNYT Just ticked MA for Sanders - EDIT now back to HRC - interesting.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/resultsEDIT- Well shit, back to HRC now.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
19 replies, 3548 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
19 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT Just ticked MA for Sanders - EDIT now back to HRC - interesting. (Original Post)
Juicy_Bellows
Mar 2016
OP
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)1. Yeah, via the AP
I just noticed that too.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/massachusetts
morningfog
(18,115 posts)2. Well I'll be goddamned. What's going on there?
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)3. Is that an error? They show Hillary higher %. I want to believe you!!
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)8. Oh crap - they fixed it..
Avalux
(35,015 posts)4. What the heck??
MADem
(135,425 posts)5. NBC and everyone else has called it for Clinton.
That's not one of those fake pages, is it.....? What's funny is, the number for HRC is higher than the one for Sanders.
Someone is asleep at the switch! Ahh, the paper of record....
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)6. But the numbers still display HRC 51, SBS 48
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)7. I was just noticing that.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)10. It's back to HRC favored @ 51. nt
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)11. They corrected it. ;-(
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Original post)
Juicy_Bellows This message was self-deleted by its author.
kydo
(2,679 posts)12. they switched it back
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)14. They did - interesting. nt.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)13. Now it's ticked for Clinton...nt
Sid
Skid Rogue
(711 posts)15. I saw that...
It had to be a typo, or someone with a twisted sense of humor at the NYT.
kydo
(2,679 posts)16. and it now says HRC the winner
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)17. I think that was an error. They show HRC as the winner now. nt
Zorra
(27,670 posts)18. That was really weird. nt
smiley
(1,432 posts)19. I was following real time results on google.
It said Sanders won MASS. Screen was like that for 20 seconds and then changed to Clinton won.
Weird stuff going on for sure. Good thing Bill was there today to oversee things.