PDA

View Full Version : Nate Silver has started to change his story



genglandoh
09-23-2012, 08:46 AM
IMHO guys like Nate Silver do the following

Phase I – Election is many months away
Write stories that support their readers opinions so they will sell newspapers.

Phase II – Election starting to get closer
Write stories explaining how hard it is to call the election.
Basically CYA Stories.

Phase III – The election is very close
During this phase their reputation is on the line so they start reporting on the true results.

It looks like Nate Silver has entered into Phase II

Examples
Sept. 17: Electoral College May Not Help Obama
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/sept-17-electoral-college-may-not-help-obama/

Sept. 18: Obama’s Bounce Erodes in Two Tracking Polls
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/sept-18-obamas-bounce-erodes-in-two-tracking-polls/

Obama’s Lead Looks Stronger in Polls That Include Cellphones
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/obamas-lead-looks-stronger-in-polls-that-include-cellphones/

Sept. 19: A Wild Day in the Polls, but Obama Ends Up Ahead
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/sept-19-a-wild-day-in-the-polls-but-obama-ends-up-ahead/

Sept. 22: Little Agreement Among Pollsters on ‘Enthusiasm Gap’
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/sept-22-little-agreement-among-pollsters-on-enthusiasm-gap/

Paul Pless
09-23-2012, 09:04 AM
It looks like Nate Silver has entered into Phase II


And Norm loves him for it. . .

Mrleft8
09-23-2012, 09:34 AM
Phase IV: Rush Limbaugh's head explodes on Wednesday morning, November 7, 2012.

Mrleft8
09-23-2012, 09:41 AM
Actually.... I got it wrong. It should be, Phase IV: Rush Limbaugh's head implodes on Wednesday morning, November 7, 2012.
It can't explode if there's nothing in there pushing out.

ljb5
09-23-2012, 09:46 AM
No, gendlandoh, Nate silver's story hasn't changed.... because Nate Silver reports on conditions that exist at the time he is writing his column. Circumstances change, for sure.

To be fair, Nate provides both a "Now-Cast" and a "November 6th Forecast."

The Now Cast shows where the polls are currently, which makes it a bit erratic. The forecast uses some regression to reduce the volatility, to discount polls taken immediately after the conventions or other things that might create a temporary bump that doesn't last until the election.

Both show Obama with a consistent lead that has widened in the last few weeks.

I read fivethirtyeight every day (more than just the headlines) and have not noticed any indication that his story is changing.

ljb5
09-23-2012, 10:10 AM
The thing genglandoh doesn't understand is that if Nate Silver's story didn't change, he'd be a blithering idiot!

The dynamics of any campaign change constantly.... that's why he tracks the polls. If he came up with a single story and stuck to it, and didn't alter his predictions to track the changes in the campaign, he'd be a complete incompetent.

Oddly, Geng seems to consider himself some sort of amateur prognosticator and insightful poll-reader.

And yet, he always seems to come to the same conclusion.

David G
09-23-2012, 10:18 AM
Another gengnalysis that manages to be both egregiously shallow... and predictably incorrect. You go geng!

Gerarddm
09-23-2012, 10:19 AM
Geng is, by now, boring.

Soon Mr. Romney's campaign will be down to storm jib and triple reefed main, but Geng will cite a fair winds forecast for next summer.

Tom Montgomery
09-23-2012, 10:27 AM
Why Is Romney Such A Loser? Seven Theories (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/09/why-is-romney-such-a-loser.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true)

Paul Pless
09-23-2012, 10:29 AM
Geng is, by now, boring.



I agree, reminds me of this crap. . .


Now, more than ever: next election, vote against every Republican, for every office, at every level. Be patriotic.

Cuyahoga Chuck
09-23-2012, 10:48 AM
I agree, reminds me of this crap. . .

You got something against free speech?

Keith Wilson
09-23-2012, 10:53 AM
Nate Silver works with the numbers very carefully. He doesn't generate the numbers, and he tries to be as accurate as he can. In his case at least, the claim that he's writing stories that support either side for reasons of bias or to gain readers is utter flaming nonsense. He predicts the outcome of the election, the popular vote, and the electoral vote with odds to 0.1% every day, so the idea that somethng is changing between 'phases' is a more than a bit silly. You can see his latest projections here (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/), now 77.5-22.5 Obama. As Norm says, while no one can predict the future consistently, there's nobody with a better record than Mr. Silver's, and many with far worse.

The real problem is that now the numbers are not showing what Genglandoh wants to see; hence whining about 'liberal bias'. Sorry, dude. If things aren't going your way, perhaps you should consider why rather than attacking the messenger. Or you could just watch Fox News and look at Rasmussen polls.

FWIW, 'enthusiasm' above what it takes to motivate someone to vote is of lesser importance.

John Smith
09-23-2012, 11:10 AM
I have great respect for Mr. Sllver. However we have a few "wild cards" in this election that cannot be predicted, as they are without precedent.

We have the efforts to suppress the vote, the incredible amount of money ready to be spent, and the two party's different positions on womens' issues.

A "likely" voter may not get to cast his vote. It's hard to say what will happen on election day if certain polling places are denying people their vote. It's hard to tell how much impact the vast number of dollars will have. There's also what I think is likely scenario of Republican women sayng one thing when asked, but doing another in the privacy of the voting booth.

I have looked at the female vote as the sleeping giant. The Republican brand, especially with Ryan on the ticket, is the brand that sees a difference in types of rapes, and I doubt many women accept that.

Then there is congress back in session and the blocking of the jobs for veterans bill, which we can, and have, debated here, but will be seen by the vast majority of the public and the military as the Republicans voting against the vets, and voting against ANOTHER jobs bill.

LeeG
09-23-2012, 11:24 AM
Is there an ennui gap?

Paul Pless
09-23-2012, 11:52 AM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-l51G_1_iKio/TzvZkAZjzcI/AAAAAAAAAuE/fNsJEv7wnh4/s400/gorey.png

SMARTINSEN
09-23-2012, 12:06 PM
Nate Silver has admitted his liberal outlook. I do not know if this colors his predictions, but I always keep this in mind whenever I read him, just like I do for everyone else. Especially now, more so when he find that he had an arrangement with the Obama 2008 campaign that he did not disclose. It is not the sharing of data so much as the non disclosure that I have trouble with.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/obama-campaign-shared-08-polling-with-silver

As we see from other examples, confirmation bias is an extraordinarily hard thing to overcome.

Keith Wilson
09-23-2012, 05:11 PM
http://www.clairetoole.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/M-is-for-Maud.jpg

johnw
09-24-2012, 01:00 AM
Why Is Romney Such A Loser? Seven Theories (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/09/why-is-romney-such-a-loser.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true)

I'd say #3 is the big one. If you look back on the primaries, it's pretty clear that Romney was the best candidate of the bunch. The "fools or frauds" problem makes it impossible for the Republicans to appoint a really good candidate, because to claim to believe all the things that are now litmus tests for the GOP, you have to either be a fool who believes all those things (Santorum) or a fraud who only claims to believe these things. Certainly the fraud is the better pick, but he is, well, a fraud.

I doubt the debates can turn this around for Romney, because what's he going to say that doesn't alienate either his base or the independent voters he needs to connect with? His only hope is an external shock, like Obama being unmasked as a reptilian alien. Even another economic disaster suddenly appearing might not help, because he's given people no reason to believe that he can deal with a crisis better than Obama.

I've actually been kind of shocked at how rapidly the campaign has turned in Obama's favor. I thought Romney was the more likely of the two to get a convention bounce, and he got none. He's been running on the theory that Obama can't win with the economy this bad, and now that that isn't working, he has no plan B.

But maybe there is no plan B possible. Maybe the Republican Party has achieved all the popular parts of its agenda, and needs to rethink the agenda instead of constantly trying to achieve the last bit, which is unpopular.

I guess we'll know whether I'm right or geng is in November.

pipefitter
09-24-2012, 02:21 AM
But maybe there is no plan B possible.

Is that because the Democrats have already moved onto, and exhausted plan B already? Out of two candidates or two parties, there apparently is no plan c,d or e. How to get their money's worth out of plan b the next for years might end up that it will not have mattered who owns the presidency, especially if the Republicans retain the house.

Outside of Obamacare, it really hasn't made an overall difference the last 4 years who has been president. A decent Democrat measures up to a mediocre Republican at best or vice versa these days. Seems as if the two parties have merely arrived at an efficient cancelling effect of each other.

Ok, so Obama wins a second term. What then? Sure has been a lot of drama just to arrive at obamacare that last 4.

SMARTINSEN
09-24-2012, 06:37 AM
Outside of Obamacare, it really hasn't made an overall difference the last 4 years who has been president.

Only if you think there is no difference between Sam Alito and Elena Kagan.

John Smith
09-24-2012, 08:12 AM
Is that because the Democrats have already moved onto, and exhausted plan B already? Out of two candidates or two parties, there apparently is no plan c,d or e. How to get their money's worth out of plan b the next for years might end up that it will not have mattered who owns the presidency, especially if the Republicans retain the house.

Outside of Obamacare, it really hasn't made an overall difference the last 4 years who has been president. A decent Democrat measures up to a mediocre Republican at best or vice versa these days. Seems as if the two parties have merely arrived at an efficient cancelling effect of each other.

Ok, so Obama wins a second term. What then? Sure has been a lot of drama just to arrive at obamacare that last 4.

That's the Republican Bubble. Listen to what Romney has said in real time; not after he tries to re-write his words. Under a President Romney, Bin Laden would be alive and GM would be dead.

I just wrote the Republicans a letter to get it off my chest. Ann Romney thinks it is hard when fellow repubublicans criticize her hubby for stupid things he said. How would she fill if he were the sitting president and a bunch of Americans questioned his citizenship and the opposition party stated early on their top priority was to deny him a second term.

What the media hasn't picked up on, strangely, is Romney's statement that you need an American to do big things and how that is likely to play outside of this country. This is important in the foreign policy area. He's also made a core point that a president isn't qualified unless he's had substantial private sector experience, but chooses a VP that has none.

For all the mainstream media coverage of the 47% remarks, the first two segments of this Daily Show truly put it all into perspective. Make sure to catch the last comment form the guy who played Coach, I was on food stamps and welfare. Nobody helped me."

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-september-18-2012-salman-rushdie

John Smith
09-24-2012, 08:25 AM
I goofed. I meant this show http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-19-2012/chaos-on-bulls--t-mountain

johnw
09-24-2012, 01:07 PM
Is that because the Democrats have already moved onto, and exhausted plan B already? Out of two candidates or two parties, there apparently is no plan c,d or e. How to get their money's worth out of plan b the next for years might end up that it will not have mattered who owns the presidency, especially if the Republicans retain the house.

Outside of Obamacare, it really hasn't made an overall difference the last 4 years who has been president. A decent Democrat measures up to a mediocre Republican at best or vice versa these days. Seems as if the two parties have merely arrived at an efficient cancelling effect of each other.

Ok, so Obama wins a second term. What then? Sure has been a lot of drama just to arrive at obamacare that last 4.

Oh, I don't know about that. Remember McCain singing "bomb Iran?" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg) Remember how he was running around like a headless chicken when the crash happened? I think we've had saner economic and foreign policy because we got Obama. Plus, we're not expelling otherwise useful people from the military for being gay, and immigrants brought here as children aren't getting sent to countries they don't even remember if they go to college or join the military. Meanwhile, extradition of illegals who commit crimes have been stepped up, so we're keeping the ones we want and expelling the ones we don't.

That's the sort of logical, humane policy I doubt we'd have seen from a McCain administration, because the Republican Party would not have allowed it.

ljb5
09-27-2012, 09:32 AM
Hey, Geng:

Have you seen today's column?

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/sept-26-could-2012-be-like-2008/#more-35103


There’s no point in putting it gently: Mitt Romney had one of his worst polling days of the year on Wednesday.


Accounting for all of the data, including the Rasmussen Reports poll, the FiveThirtyEight forecast showed Mr. Obama making gains. His probability of winning the Electoral College is now listed at 81.9 percent, his highest figure of the year and up from 79.7 percent on Tuesday.

Can you explain again how you thought he was changing his story? I see no evidence of that.

(Please note: I'm not questioning your analysis of the polls. I'm questioning your characterization of Silver's column. You said you read something there that I can't find.)

Gerarddm
09-27-2012, 10:56 AM
Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC has been following Nate Silver daily, and inexorably the numbers get worse for Mr. Romney at each iteration.

Canoeyawl
09-27-2012, 03:20 PM
A gengnalysis

Ooh... that sounds serious. Is there a cure, or can it just be surgically removed?

Cuyahoga Chuck
09-27-2012, 07:10 PM
Ok, so Obama wins a second term. What then? Sure has been a lot of drama just to arrive at obamacare that last 4.

Obama became a historic figure just by getting elected.
Obamacare is a historic piece of legislation. Been talked about for the last 100 years.
Obama stuffed it down the Republican's throat when it became law.
Obama, with 4 more years, has ample opportunity to do it again.
Stay tuned.

Keith Wilson
09-27-2012, 09:09 PM
. . . just to arrive at obamacare that last 4.Yeah, just 30 to 50 million people will have health insurance who wouldn't otherwise. No big deal, right? http://forums.snapstream.com/vb/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

genglandoh
10-11-2012, 06:38 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/

According to Nate Silver


The Electoral Vote
Obama 289 down 32 since Oct 4th
Romney 248 Up 32 since Oct 4th
The Change of wining
Obama 65% down 21% since Oct 4th
Romney 24.5% up 21.6% since Oct 4th

Yes we are in Phase II

Tom Montgomery
10-11-2012, 06:53 PM
What makes you think we are not in Phase III?

wardd
10-11-2012, 07:08 PM
What makes you think we are not in Phase III?

wait another 3 hours

genglandoh
10-21-2012, 02:09 PM
Well we have entered Phase III

Nate Silver has given Indian and Florida to Romney


After Brief Role as Battleground, Indiana Exits, Stage Right (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/after-brief-role-as-battleground-indiana-exits-stage-right/)

Oct. 19: After Romney Gains, Should Obama Concede Florida? (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/20/oct-19-after-romney-gains-should-obama-concede-florida/)

wardd
10-21-2012, 02:18 PM
what's the matter with indiana?

Tom Montgomery
10-21-2012, 02:23 PM
Tiresome minutia. Day to day variations in the polls.

*yawn*

genglandoh
10-21-2012, 04:18 PM
Genglandoh, did you ever consider the possibility that Nate silver is simply reflecting the changes as the race proceeds, instead of your ridiculously and vaguely conspiratorial BS about 'phases'?

Its OK if you do not have to agree with my theory about Phases.

The point is now that we are closer to the Election guys like Nate Silver will be more accurate.

Kevin T
10-21-2012, 05:05 PM
...

LeeG
10-21-2012, 06:23 PM
What about aphasia?

hanleyclifford
10-21-2012, 08:13 PM
According to RCP averages Obama still leading by .2%, and if the election were today Obama gets 277 electoral votes, enough to win. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html#polls

leikec
10-22-2012, 02:10 AM
The "enthusiasm gap" might mean a lot, or it might not mean much at all. Romney MUST win Ohio, and it's difficult to see him passing 2.8 million votes there, unless evangelical voters come out HUGE for him, in a way they didn't come out for John McCain. I think the president is easily going to get 2.7-2.75 million votes in that state, and he could possibly win the state with under 2.8 million votes.

I'm just not convinced that Mitt Romney's campaign can deliver the goods in that state. Please remember that Romney barely won the Ohio republican primary, and quite sure that there are Gingrich, Paul, and Santorum supporters who are not in his corner now.

The Obama enthusiasm gap is real, but I think the overall turnout numbers are going to be lower in 2012--and the president can be competitive even if he loses 7 to 8 million votes nationwide when compared to 2008. If he loses 10 million votes he's in trouble.

Jeff C

John Smith
10-22-2012, 06:11 AM
Geng is, by now, boring.

Soon Mr. Romney's campaign will be down to storm jib and triple reefed main, but Geng will cite a fair winds forecast for next summer.

I wouldn't count my chickens yet. I think Romney has more than a good chance to win this thing. The big failing of the Obama campaign thus far is allowing Romney to hold Obama responsible for all the debt added during his presidencty.

The American voter is not well informed: witness my post elsewhere about three people out of five no knowing who Paul Ryan is.

When Romney says, "The debt has increased $5 trillion under Obama" it is a damaging sound bite. It is also factually correct. The false assumption it leads to is Obama's policies have caused all this increase. The simple actual fact is they have not.

In my view the key to this election for Obama is taking a few moments and explaining what is still driving the debt up: things that began under Bush and are still in place.

I also think Obama needs to point out quite diectly that Medicare benfits since Obamacare have gone up and premiums have gone down.

Lastly he needs to ask the public if they truly believe Romney can cut everyone's taxes, increase defense spending, and balance the budget.

Along with this I think it would be wise to address those who plan on voting for Romney and ask them which Romney they are voting for adn which Romney they think will show up in the oval office.

Sans taking this path, he leaves it, I think, in the hands of Planned Parenthood and other womens organizations to widen that gap.

Foreign policy is a difficult thing to debate, as one guy gets to Monday morning quaterback and the other guy has facts that are classified.

The one clear point Obama can make is Romney would not have looked for Bin Laden, but then said he'd have made the same decision Obama made as if it were a nobrainer.

John Smith
10-22-2012, 06:17 AM
I agree, reminds me of this crap. . .

My very dear old friend is a life long Republican. HE HATES THE DIRECTION HIS PARTY IS GOING IN. How does he change that direction sans voting against them? Voting for them only enables them to continue down this path.

I miss the days as they were some time ago when we had people running for office that had honest debates on the issues. Today we have candidates telling us our founding fathers ended slavery, and a woman doesn't get pregnant behind a "legitimate" rape. We have a guy running for VP who has sponsored bills that define "forceable rape". We have a party doing it's best to stick the government into our private lives while preaching a smaller less intrusivve government. We have one party who lied continuously about the ACA. That party seems now to be run by religious zealots.

Seems to me that if you are paying attention it's hard to support that party. It also seems to me you can't complain about where that party is and where it's going AND vote for its candidates.

John Smith
10-22-2012, 06:19 AM
I agree with you there. A more sensible tagline might be, "Now, more than ever, vote against every idiot, for every office, at every level" :)

Works for me, but aren't today's idiots predominantly Republicans?

genglandoh
10-22-2012, 04:31 PM
Phases, smayzes, here's my prediction as good as anything out there as it is a guess, a reading of the wind if you will.

Obama will hand Mr. Romney his (Romney's) head to him on a platter. Romney loses for the following reasons.

He's p1$$ed off the entire Hispanic population with denying the dream act, immigration issues, and has support of less than 30%
He's p1$$ed off the entire African American community, his support here is less than 2%
He's p1$$ed off any and all women who are honest and paying attention regarding possible governmental control of their bodies.
He's p1$$ed off 65 million baby boomers and their proximity to retirement.
He's p1$$ed off 20 to 30 million echo boomers for much of the same reasons that affect baby boomers.
He's p1$$ed off rock rib conservative because they can't trust the authenticity of his conservatism.
He's p1$$ed off evangelicals who believe he is a member of a cult and not a true Christian.
He's p1$$ed off anyone who works in the auto industry or related fields when he said that they should "just go under."
He's p1$$ed off students and his support in doubling student loan rates and severely limiting the Pell Grant program.

I could go on, but it's getting tiring listing all of the constituencies that the man has managed to offend. He also has practically zero ability to relate to any but the top one percent and even a lot of them don't like him because he is viewed as a person who will say anything and do anything in order to get elected, he stands for NOTHING, which means he'll fall for anything.

I'm sure though Graham that he has your vote.

If you really believe in your prediction please post it in the thread
http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?154504-Post-your-2012-Presidential-Predictions

coelacanth2
10-23-2012, 09:17 PM
Thats right.... And the closer we get, dumb fantasy caricatures about fantasy agendas of people like Nate Silver will just get dumber and dumber.

A lot of the analysis is like the Medeval arguments concerning the number of angels that could dance on the head of a pin. The real test will be who's heading home and who's moving into the White House on Inauguration Day

genglandoh
10-24-2012, 07:59 AM
You have to love this guy.
After months of saying Ohio is the key swing state to win the election, as soon as it look like Obama is going to lose Ohio Nate Silver down plays the importance of Ohio.

Oct. 22: Ohio Has 50-50 Chance of Deciding Election
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/oct-22-ohio-has-50-50-chance-of-deciding-election/

Mrleft8
10-24-2012, 08:02 AM
You have to love this guy.
After months of saying Ohio is the key swing state to win the election, as soon as it look like Obama is going to lose Ohio Nate Silver down plays the importance of Ohio.

Oct. 22: Ohio Has 50-50 Chance of Deciding Election
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/oct-22-ohio-has-50-50-chance-of-deciding-election/

It doesn't look like Obama is going to lose Ohio to anyone except Fox news, and the republican strategists.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-24-2012, 08:16 AM
If you really believe in your prediction please post it in the thread
http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?154504-Post-your-2012-Presidential-Predictions

This isn't my prediction. It's the prediction of your old buddy, Nate Silver, of RCP.

As of 10/23/2012 Nate says in the New York Times, (page A10) as close as the race seems , OBAMA HAS A 2 OUT OF 3 CHANCE OF BEING RE-ELECTED.

In addition, Ohioans, of which you are one, have cast about 180,000 early ,in-peron ballots and more than 600,000 mail-in, absentee ballots. At the moment it seems the Democrats are substancially a head. Way back when Ohio was touted as "the heart of it all". Right now it really is. Ain't it great to be on the winning side for once?

Gerarddm
10-24-2012, 09:38 AM
Phillip needs to understand that my sig is a plea for rationality. Democrats are not wonder beings. But the Democratic Party has such a big tent that, after the demise of the Republicans, you could split the Dems in two and have more reasonable parties.

Every vote cast for any Republican anywhere enables the crazies. Period.

leikec
10-24-2012, 01:53 PM
It will be interesting if Ohio elects a democratic senator and Obama loses the state. A state's senate race isn't always an indicator of the presidential race outcome, but in Ohio there should be a close correlation.

Jeff C

Soundbounder
11-16-2012, 07:36 AM
You have to love this guy.
After months of saying Ohio is the key swing state to win the election, as soon as it look like Obama is going to lose Ohio Nate Silver down plays the importance of Ohio.

Oct. 22: Ohio Has 50-50 Chance of Deciding Election
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/oct-22-ohio-has-50-50-chance-of-deciding-election/

Which polls were you following that had Romney winning Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Wisconsin?

leikec
11-16-2012, 10:40 AM
Which polls were you following that had Romney winning Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Wisconsin?

Wishful thinking analytic.com..

Jeff C

Keith Wilson
11-17-2012, 02:40 PM
Old news indeed. Here was Mr. Silver's map before the election. Pretty close, innit?

http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/silver_map.jpg

Peach
11-17-2012, 03:51 PM
I'm coming late to this thread but I just have to get my two cents in.

Nate Silver correctly predicted the outcome in 50 out of 50 states, and nailed the popular vote margin to within one tenth of one percent. I would suggest that as long as he is available, the US should simply dispense with voting and hire Mr. Silver to tell us who won. No voting machines to maintain, no polling places to rent, no boards of election to hire. Think of the money, time, and effort the states and the country would save.

BTW, a half dozen other stat mavens were doing exactly the same sort of data mining as Nate Silver, and they all predicted the same outcome. So why was the Romney camp so confident?

David G
11-17-2012, 03:58 PM
I'm coming late to this thread but I just have to get my two cents in.

Nate Silver correctly predicted the outcome in 50 out of 50 states, and nailed the popular vote margin to within one tenth of one percent. I would suggest that as long as he is available, the US should simply dispense with voting and hire Mr. Silver to tell us who won. No voting machines to maintain, no polling places to rent, no boards of election to hire. Think of the money, time, and effort the states and the country would save.

BTW, a half dozen other stat mavens were doing exactly the same sort of data mining as Nate Silver, and they all predicted the same outcome. So why was the Romney camp so confident?

Why were they so confident? Because they, like some of the dingbats here in the Bilge, engage in Faith Based prognostication.

johnw
11-17-2012, 04:05 PM
Now that Gleng's long, twilight struggle with reality has ended, must people rub his nose in it?

Captain Intrepid
11-17-2012, 04:10 PM
I would suggest that as long as he is available, the US should simply dispense with voting and hire Mr. Silver to tell us who won. No voting machines to maintain, no polling places to rent, no boards of election to hire. Think of the money, time, and effort the states and the country would save.

Have you ever read "Franchise" by Isaac Asimov? It's a short story based off effectively that very idea.

Peach
11-17-2012, 04:14 PM
Have you ever read "Franchise" by Isaac Asimov? It's a short story based off effectively that very idea.

I had a youthful indiscretion with Asimov a few decades back, but at your suggestion, I will look him up again.

elf
11-17-2012, 04:36 PM
So why was the Romney camp so confident?
They used their own pollsters.

Or to put it another way, they had not one single person on their team watching what was outside the bubble.

Not a single one.

This is not a disease unique to the Romney campaign. The Bush war campaign had the same problem.

Keith Wilson
11-17-2012, 04:49 PM
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".

Phillip K. Dick

moTthediesel
11-17-2012, 05:45 PM
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".

Phillip K. Dick

Thanks for that -- so apropos!

Lew Barrett
11-17-2012, 08:43 PM
why was the Romney camp so confident?

Cheer leading never ends, especially when that's all you have left. In fact, you ramp up the cartwheels and back flips and keep on screaming for the team to win.

It's very complicated and quite brilliant, Rovian even, but you keep saying your guy is going to win because when you say that, it discourages the other people from even bothering to vote.

Or maybe I have that backwards.............

Chip-skiff
11-17-2012, 08:48 PM
Now that Gleng's long, twilight struggle with reality has ended, must people rub his nose in it?

Perhaps it's in proportion to the number of threads he posted with the same basic premise: that the Republicans would prevail.

(Shouldn't you call him Gengl?)

johnw
11-17-2012, 08:53 PM
Perhaps it's in proportion to the number of threads he posted with the same basic premise: that the Republicans would prevail.

(Shouldn't you call him Gengl?)

You're right, I got his name wrong.

Well, if people want to revel in their side winning, I've nothing against that. Lord knows, in politics no victory is permanent, but I'm quite happy with the recent outcome.

John Smith
11-17-2012, 09:00 PM
Now that Gleng's long, twilight struggle with reality has ended, must people rub his nose in it?

What saddens me is the lessons not learned. I've made it a point to watch Fox surrounding the election often. It was evident before the election that they lived in their own universe. Not that they did anything different than is standard there, but the election is something that showed how completely wrong their "facts" were.

Fox holds an idea and makes up and/or edits facts to support that idea. Then they seem to forget the facts are made up as they point to them to support the misinformation they present. They made a point of dissing Sliver's analysis. The only thing they couldn't actually do is make his analysis wrong.

Continuing to tune into Fox periodically since the election, Fox remains in their own little universe, unaffected by being so wrong about the election. What I don't understand is the Fox viewer and the Republican voter.

It is not partisan hackery to point out that I cannot think of anything the Republicans have said in two decades or more that's turned out ot be true; be it presented as a matter of fact or their expected result of some policy or action. How many times can they be wrong and still have people listen to them?

wardd
11-17-2012, 09:06 PM
has nate changed his story back?

Peach
11-17-2012, 09:46 PM
has nate changed his story back?

If you had tuned into Nate Silver's blog on the NYTimes site, and had checked his absolutely simple graphics a couple times a day over the last few months leading up to the election, you would know that the OP of this thread was bogus, and you wouldn't be asking such a question.

Vince Brennan
11-17-2012, 10:06 PM
Now that Gleng's long, twilight struggle with reality has ended, must people rub his nose in it?You damn skippy, Red Ryder.

elf
11-17-2012, 10:08 PM
How many times can they be wrong and still have people listen to them?
As many as everyone who watches and listens to them never goes anywhere else for information.

Time for their licenses to come up for renewal.