[erimir]

If you wanted to actually look at some data, that'd be one thing. You seem to be more focused on whether or not I interpreted chunks sufficiently charitably and whether my claim that there's no reason to think that Bernie's primary performance in WV would imply what chunks implies is sufficiently hedged.

Chunks gave no evidence for his position, you're not looking at the data, and you're evidently uninterested in the reasons I gave for doubting that it was predictive or explanatory, or in giving reasons to think that it is, so what else was there to talk about, exactly?