Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6095
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby kurt_w » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:45 pm

Congratulations. You've done a great job of poring over the election news and pulling out every number that supports what you want to have happen, while ignoring everything that casts doubt on what you want to have happen.

That's precisely what I'm talking about in this thread, and in our other recent interactions here in the Forum. You are basically fooling yourself by refusing to consider evidence that doesn't confirm your pre-existing beliefs.

Here's something to consider. You write: "If Democrats turn out not to have a 2008 level turnout advantage, then all the polls including one are way off the mark."

In 2008, Obama won with a 365-to-173 electoral college landslide. Now, I don't know anybody who's predicting that Obama will win more than 332 EVs, and most are around 290.

So the predictions are already factoring in a big decrease in support relative to 2008. There is plenty of room for Obama to underperform 2008 and still win.

Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Bludgeon » Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:31 pm

KW: I grant you all that man. If your assertion is that "Obama won 2008 in a landslide, nobody's predicting he will win by any big margin, there's plenty of room for Obama to underperform 2008 and still win," I just figured that was a given. There *is* room for him to lose points and still win. There's also room for Romney to underperform 2010 margins and still win. Nobody's saying he/they can't.

I'm saying there's almost no point in making odds with both the incumbent *and* the challenger under 50%. I agree with Huckleby, the real indicator at this point are the trends and the fundamentals. The base, the independents, the undecideds and the turnout. A good question to ask in this case is, "Romney is tied with the base and up significantly with the independents, so what are the chances the undecideds are going to vote much differently than the other independents?"

Obama's campaign is putting the heft of its effort into base turnout; since they've already had plenty of contact with undecides, maybe that says something. The 4-6 percent of the voters who are undecided are definitively NOT 18 year old girls of the sort who would be persuaded by Obama's "My First Time" ad, or their "Children of the Future" ad; this is what they're spending their money on, what does that say about their internals? That they think they're so far ahead that they can spend the last week of the campaign just trying to 'freak everybody out'? It certainly appears that, rejected by undecideds, they're turning to the base. A candidate in the winning position would be pushing toward the center. Bill Clinton held a rally in Minnesota; Joe Biden was up in Pennsylvania. Either they're extremely paranoid, or they have no choice but to spend their energy in such a way.

Congratulations. You've done a great job of poring over the election news and pulling out every number that supports what you want to have happen, while ignoring everything that casts doubt on what you want to have happen.

Y'know... I'm just letting you know what it is from my perspective, that appears to be going on in the race, to date. See my first paragraph.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6670
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby pjbogart » Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:52 pm

Bludgeon wrote:There's also room for Romney to underperform 2010 margins and still win. Nobody's saying he/they can't.


I've been watching politics for a couple of decades now and I can tell you that comparing Presidential elections to off-year elections is a really bad idea. One of the greatest disappointments of Obama's Presidency was the failure of Democrats to show up in 2010, and I'd go so far as to say that African Americans who voted in 2008 but didn't vote in 2010 are responsible for many of Obama's failures. You got your man into office, but you didn't bother to make sure he had a supporting cast.

In 2010 the Republican party re-branded themselves. They tried to make themselves seem like a third party, I think largely due to the residual unpopularity of Bush. That re-branding was largely successful, but I don't think it's sustained or sustainable. The Tea Party is a sham and I think most Americans now realize that. They're not a different party, they're simply an extremist branch of the same party that caused the bulk of our financial woes.

Republicans like to complain about Obama's trillion dollar deficits, but budgets are scored for years in advance and Obama, when he was sworn in, faced trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye could see. Two unfunded wars, obscene tax cuts for the wealthy and Medicare Part D, which really just amounted to a wet, sloppy kiss for the pharmaceutical industry. The stimulus package added to that deficit, but the elephant in the room was just that... an elephant.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6670
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby pjbogart » Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:36 am


Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8736
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:32 pm

I just watched Nate Silver's interview with Charlie Rose from last night. Silver emphasizes that his predictions are based mostly on historical patterns. e.g. 75% of the time a 2% lead translates to victory.

Silver claims that he doesn't vote, but calls himself a libertarian, he would vote for Gary Johnson. Sounds like a very convienent answer to deflect criticism, but I expect he is being honest.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8736
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:17 pm

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1171.html

RCP's average of polls has inched 1% in Obama's favor the past four days. They are now tied.
ooooh, baby.

acereraser
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 8:42 pm

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby acereraser » Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:57 pm

OK, here is the finest exposure of Nate Silver's flawed model I could find, at a site called UnSkewedPolls.com. Unfettered by the liberal cravings for science and facts, Dean Chambers uses "science" and "facts" to prove without a doubt that Romney will win easily. (He may have already won, but don't count on the NYTimes to report that.)

Image

See, Romney's gonna win in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, too. It's on the map! I still don't understand how Romney could lose in Massachusetts, but I am not one to argue with the "facts".

From another article written by Dean Chambers, we learn the personal flaws of Nate Silver:

Nate Silver is a man of very small stature, a thin and effeminate man with a soft-sounding voice that sounds almost exactly like the “Mr. New Castrati” voice used by Rush Limbaugh on his program. In fact, Silver could easily be the poster child for the New Castrati in both image and sound. Nate Silver, like most liberal and leftist celebrities and favorites, might be of average intelligence but is surely not the genius he's made out to be. His political analyses are average at best and his projections, at least this year, are extremely biased in favor of the Democrats.


Silver is thin and effeminate, so how good can he be at math? Chambers has certainly pulled the curtain back, and we should be ashamed.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8736
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Huckleby » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:56 am

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1171.html

Today is fifth day of trend towards Obama in RCP's average. Obama now has slight lead. If trend continues through weekend, I am going to bed early Tuesday night. Maybe watch a movie.

mrak
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2396
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:26 pm

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby mrak » Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:00 am

acereraser wrote:Silver is thin and effeminate, so how good can he be at math? Chambers has certainly pulled the curtain back, and we should be ashamed.

Best comment on Chambers' drivel:

I like how the author makes fun of Silver's looks. He then, most unwisely, provides a picture of himself. Is that you, Cartman?

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8736
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Huckleby » Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:25 am

I saw Karl Rove on FOX yesterday with his little white board, explaining how the shift to Republicans in Ohio early voting meant Obama was doomed in Ohio. Hell, maybe he is right, who really knows?

He made a side comment that caught my ear: Real Clear Politics is democratic leaning because they incorporate a lot of flawed polls that oversample Dems. That leads me to believe that RCP must be on the level.

Rove might just be spewing propoganda that he knows is wrong in both cases. But I tend to think he is a sincere man who values his reputation as an analyst. I didn't say he is right, or personally likable. He is a very smart guy who has introduced a lot of the voter-wrangling techniques that have been widely adopted.

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Meade » Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:30 am

acereraser wrote:
Image



It's party time, chumps.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7904
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby rabble » Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:34 am

Looks like Meade's got his "They stole the election!" story all set up and ready to go.

Steve Vokers
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1195
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:58 am

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Steve Vokers » Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Meade wrote:
acereraser wrote:
Image



It's party time, chumps.


If Romney gets 359 electoral votes, I'll eat my shorts. Hell, if he gets 359 I'll eat Meade's shorts.

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Meade » Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:28 am

Steve Vokers wrote:If Romney gets 359 electoral votes, I'll eat my shorts. Hell, if he gets 359 I'll eat Meade's shorts.

Great! I'll be sure to leave a giant dump in them.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8736
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Nate Silver's Flawed Model

Postby Huckleby » Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:56 am

Meade wrote:Great! I'll be sure to leave a giant dump in them.


Oh, I think your drawers will be plenty full about 10PM Tuesday night.

I'm feeling cocky.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests