There are a few overlapping interpretations of this:
1) Bloomberg is hard to model because there isn't any precedent for his strategy.
2) The fact that there's no precedent for his strategy means it very probably won't work.
(continued...)
1) Bloomberg is hard to model because there isn't any precedent for his strategy.
2) The fact that there's no precedent for his strategy means it very probably won't work.
(continued...)
3) Even if his strategy "works", it's rather unlikely to work by producing a *pledged delegate majority*. We actually do have Bloomberg getting about 100 delegates in an average simulation. But very, very rarely does he get a majority...
3b) And it's not even clear that Bloomberg is *trying* to get a majority, as opposed to winning at the convention (our model doesn't try to predict the winner of a brokered convention) or (perhaps more likely) using his delegates/influence to sway the outcome of a convention.
