I'm guessing you don't follow him on Twitter.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
- Thread starter Y2Kev
- Start date
- Status
I'm guessing you don't follow him on Twitter.
Reminds me of;
It's all Deplorable Conspiracy Nonsense, real bottom of the barrel stuff.
Podesta's got Spirit!
Yes, he do!
Got more spirit
than any (((Globalist)))!
Its bullshit.
TFW you learn more about Podesta's bro than you wanted to.
Actually, McMullin winning Utah does nothing for Hillary at all. Because the House of Representatives picks the winner (i.e. Trump) if no-one reaches 270, anything that takes electoral votes away from Trump but doesn't give them to HIllary doesn't change the game at all in any way. It would be very embarrassing for him no doubt, but doesn't materially affect the result.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
r/The_Donald has actually found the slogan that sums up the GOP:
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/
One of the top threads right now.
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/
One of the top threads right now.
eBay Huckster
Member
then post a thread in OT about it. doesn't need to be this big ol' effortpost, but if you're seeing an issue with nate silver discussion over there...
BlastProcessing
Member
The only thing McMuffin winning Utah does is increase the likelihood that Sean Hannity loses his damn mind. So I am fine with it solely on those grounds.
Intheflorsh
Banned
Oh, fair enough.
ErasureAcer
Banned
She won by more 65.3-30.6(1 million vote differential). Minnesota Republicans may be dumb but the vast majority aren't Trump dumb.
Officerrob
Banned
I tried looking into #DNCLEAK2, but it's all "We have proof the Clintons killed Vince Foster" and "The Podesta brothers abducted a girl" crap. And to think, these people seriously wonder why nobody pays attention to this shit
Because one of the biggest point of Nates work in 2008 and 2012 was about how in the American electoral system, state polls were far more important than national polls. Obamas campaign literally ignored the national polls because they were going in so hard on battlegrounds - heck, remember how badly Gallup missed the mark? They had Romney winning. But people who followed states polls knew this wasn't happening.
Nates model this time round has been tuned to be too sensitive to both national polls and 'trend setting wave polls' in other states. It's constantly looking for a shift in 'momentum' for a candidate, so if it sees an upward gain for Trump in Utah, it thinks there's a national tide and so his chances go up in California (for example). It's actually doing the *opposite* of what it should be doing - it's treating state polls in locked states as mini-national polls and changing everything everywhere based on them.
In 2008 Nate had a very good point, in that states aren't independent of each other, and that (for example) you can't win North Carolina as a democrat without already having won Virginia. So if the polls are showing you winning North Carolina but not Virginia, be suspicious of the polls. But now he's taken that too far, and everything is too interlinked and too sensitive so that slight changes on the other side of the country shift things too much.
Was this posted? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUz-tGtTgaQ
Possibly the most pissed I've ever seen Anderson. He has had enough of Conway's bullshit.
Possibly the most pissed I've ever seen Anderson. He has had enough of Conway's bullshit.
User 463088
Banned
On top of what has already been mentioned, there is legitimate criticism about what Nate decides to include in his model. They will include a PPP poll without question, unless that poll is paid for by a specific campaign, candidate, or organization. That's a completely understandable policy, even if I disagree with it. At the same time, they will happily include polls that are by questionable pollsters, such as Remington. (You could pull better numbers out of a hat). They include the LA Times Poll, but have to "adjust it" by nearly 5 points each day. At that point, why? Why bother?
They include these ultra small polls that aren't actually state polls at all, but are subets of a national tracking poll divided by state. Some of the polls had a sample size of like 100, but were weighted more heavily than other polls. Nate went on a Twitter rant about it, saying that they should be included, only to go back on that a few days later when he was corrected on them.
I understand his idea that you use every data point and just hope it works out in the end. The problem is, this year there aren't a lot of high quality polls. His model is flooded with shit level polling that is probably gunking it all up.
Also, he is a terrible pundit. He is so thin skinned, and his writing is terrible. Harry Enten is the best part of 538. He's able to walk the line between snarky and bitchy. Nate is not. A few months ago, someone asked a question as to why Nate's model was doing a specific thing, and he blew up at them on Twitter.
There are legit criticisms of Nate. Now, saying he is doing what he does to his model for clicks is wrong. Saying he writes shitty articles to get people to click on his website isn't inaccurate.
They include these ultra small polls that aren't actually state polls at all, but are subets of a national tracking poll divided by state. Some of the polls had a sample size of like 100, but were weighted more heavily than other polls. Nate went on a Twitter rant about it, saying that they should be included, only to go back on that a few days later when he was corrected on them.
I understand his idea that you use every data point and just hope it works out in the end. The problem is, this year there aren't a lot of high quality polls. His model is flooded with shit level polling that is probably gunking it all up.
Also, he is a terrible pundit. He is so thin skinned, and his writing is terrible. Harry Enten is the best part of 538. He's able to walk the line between snarky and bitchy. Nate is not. A few months ago, someone asked a question as to why Nate's model was doing a specific thing, and he blew up at them on Twitter.
There are legit criticisms of Nate. Now, saying he is doing what he does to his model for clicks is wrong. Saying he writes shitty articles to get people to click on his website isn't inaccurate.
A Link to the Past
Banned
I'm wondering how many posts will be generated in this series of threads from now until the end of Tuesday. We gotta get to at least OT16 before all of the votes are in, right?
That's one good thing about the election almost being over; we'll have to deal with Trump clinging onto the spotlight as long as he possibly can, but we won't have to see Kellyanne's phony smile everywhere, spinning shit from whole cloth.
sazzy
Member
If anyone wants to watch Fox News' reactions to Comey's latest:
Dobbs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DETe_cEckVA feat rudy and kellyanne
Kelly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIvLUKl8wB4 feat gowdy and priebus, propping up RCP averages
O Reilly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXzpRK2_nM feat. Palin, propping up RCP averages and margin of error, pinning hopes on NV and NC
Hannity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfdHFNokXzE feat Newt and lots of hot air
Skip to 19 minute mark on the Hannity video to watch him play make-believe-what-if scenarios
Dobbs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DETe_cEckVA feat rudy and kellyanne
Kelly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIvLUKl8wB4 feat gowdy and priebus, propping up RCP averages
O Reilly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXzpRK2_nM feat. Palin, propping up RCP averages and margin of error, pinning hopes on NV and NC
Hannity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfdHFNokXzE feat Newt and lots of hot air
Skip to 19 minute mark on the Hannity video to watch him play make-believe-what-if scenarios
There's always the chance someone else later on adds her to their campaign.
RastaMentality
Banned
Yeah. I want Trump and Hannity to go all attack mode on the NeverTrumper republicans if they lose Utah. would be amazing.
we'll probably have enough bedwetting tomorrow & early tues to cover an ot
cartoon_soldier
Member
Already started.
shinra-bansho
Member
@NateSilver538
Good news for Democrats: Really hard to see how that debate helped Trump.
Bad news: If it somehow did help Trump, maybe no stopping him?
It is overly reactive to the point of farce. It not only includes, but overweights trash like the Google. Or partisan R polls. It treats outliers like trendzzzzsetters because momentum!
It does things like giving Clinton about half the chance of winning 160 electoral college votes as winning around 300. Which is garbage.
http://predictwise.com/blog/2016/09/poll-aggregation-fight/
And more nonsense garbage.
NB It was garbage when it swung wildly towards Clinton too.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Biggest problem with 538 is the quality of polls going in with the weird weighting.
Trump being +10 in Missouri helps his percentage more than Clinton bring up 2 in like Nevada.
Trump being +10 in Missouri helps his percentage more than Clinton bring up 2 in like Nevada.
Intheflorsh
Banned
I guess the question is how much weight trends perceived from state polls should be given versus trends from national polls. Maybe that should be based on how similarly states have voted together in the past. (For all I know the model might already do this.)
I think Silver and co would probably help themselves out a lot by providing more detail about how the adjustments are calculated. Not just generally, but also by showing what data contributed to each specific adjustment.
dont mind me, im on a Mad Men bender
cartoon_soldier
Member
Not quite there yet.
8 X 11 Printer Paper
Member
Nope! I'm now worried we won't win NC!....though I'm not really worried about us winning Florida....good thing I'm going to be doing Pen Testing (ethical hacking) during most of the election night to keep my mind busy.
I'm not. Social media spreads ideas like wildfire, humans are prone to false positives. What if the LA Times tracker's detection of a tightening after the Spirit Cooking thing was a detection of a real shift? What if from now on, democracy is determined by who has fervent supporters coming up with and spewing the most crap? There'll likely be a very substantial FUD effort today, I hope it doesn't move the needle.
It'll be at least 48 hours before I can calm down, if ever.
RastaMentality
Banned
holy shit Janet Reno passed.
jesus
Marmaladefire
Member
Woah, wasn't expecting to hear that today.
STOP.
DOUBTING.
HILLARY.
CLINTON.
She had it rough during her time in the Clinton administration.
RIP.
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
538's rationale doesn't seem insane to me. I feel a little alienated from the thread over it. 
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Philly.Com reporting the septa strike is over. Full service by Tuesday.
#shecalleditin
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Two-sides-still-talking-on-SEPTA-contract.html?mobi=true#
#shecalleditin
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Two-sides-still-talking-on-SEPTA-contract.html?mobi=true#
Spiritreaver
Member
Ending a strike just in time for a certain group of people to vote. It's a rigged system, folks.
A Serious Man
Member
One more day folks. If we can survive the next 24 hours without a major terrorist attack or Wikileaks revealing Hillary's Satanic child sex rituals pizza parties, we should be good.
maquiladora
Member
She can't keep getting away with it!
Aaron Strife
Banned
RIP Janet Reno
Let me callously use this opportunity to remind everyone what a piece of shit McCain is
Let me callously use this opportunity to remind everyone what a piece of shit McCain is
John McCain said:
PoliGAF, be honest with me here; how exactly does it look like it'll play out tomorrow based on what we know has happened in Early voting and the final polls that're coming out, because I've been arguing with people lately that Clinton odds of winning are very high from all the numbers I've been seeing here from said polls and voting, but no one will fucking listen for me because of the media bullshit over here (not American BTW).
A Link to the Past
Banned
Intheflorsh
Banned
Just wait a day before talking about it. No point in arguing about polls when the election is one day away.
That hasn't really changed all election, it still looks like a clear Clinton victory. If she wins Florida, you can pretty much call the entire thing right there. Even if Trump wins Florida, he still basically has to sweep every reasonably close state in the union. His chances of doing that are incredibly low. It's honestly more likely that this is an unexpectedly high Clinton victory (~350+ EVs) than Trump breaking 270 EVs or having a 269 EV tie and having the House decide the election.
Twilight Princess
Member
Twitter and Trump both start with T, so its a Clinton win.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked