• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wilsongt

Member
Wisconsin breeds real winners.

A 19-year-old Wisconsin Republican running for state assembly dropped out of his race after admitting to using offensive language on social media.

On Sept. 11, Jacob Dorsey apologized for a "hurtful" tweet that said, “f*gs need 2 leave my favorite state alone.” He dropped out of the race Wednesday after admitting he'd used other offensive language while referencing black people and gay people in YouTube comments.

“I have decided to withdraw from the race due to insensitive remarks that have surfaced from years past,” Dorsey told the Janesville Gazette. “This race has been extremely hard on my family and myself.”

According to TPM, comments posted Dorsey included the quotes "f*ck Abraham Lincoln" and "N***ers trash cars. I'm not selling my town car to one..."

Dorsey was challenging Democratic state Rep. Deb Kolste. The Gazette reports Dorsey will remain on the ballot despite dropping out of the race.
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/...-out_n_5837730.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
A new poll released Thursday gives Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO) his biggest edge to date in his bid to unseat incumbent Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO).

The Quinnipiac poll (.pdf) shows Gardner up eight points over Udall, 48 percent to 40 percent, among likely voters.

It is by far the biggest lead that Gardner has seen in any poll. A Suffolk University poll released Wednesday of likely voters gave Gardner a narrow edge, 43 percent to 42 percent. A SurveyUSA poll of likely voters released last week put Udall up, 46 percent to 42 percent.
Click to expand...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/colorado-senate-quinnipiac-poll-sept-18

There goes the senate.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
In all seriousness, not really concerned about the Quinnipiac polls. They're both massive outliers and Q's record in Colorado specifically is terrible. They had Romney leading there all throughout 2012 and Obama ended up winning by 6.

Hey PD, Alison Grimes' newest ad talks about healthcare.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Nate is embarassing himself with his tweets about Sam Wang of late. Even getting things wrong.

He is also coming off as petty.

I don't understand why he's doing this.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Ignatz Mouse said:
Just bringing him up over and over is childish.

I like Nate, and I'm not sure which is right,but Nate's let celebrity get to him, it seems.
Click to expand...

Sounds familiar:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/10/nate-silver-romney-clearly-could-still-win-147618.html

Nate's using the same model he's used and his data isn''t that far off from the others (they're all pretty much the same) except wang. Whose model will self correct by the end (like the others). This "pettyness" critique ignores the fact that the data guys do this all the time on twitter. And rubs of just not liking the guy saying something you don't want to hear (which he's not saying)
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
This is nate's simulation
BxwkgUgCEAAE6in.png
 
A

Arrowgigantic

Member
Nate Silver's strength in this election is that his model says anything could happen. If D wins, well they had a 47% chance of winning. If R wins, of course they did they had a 53% chance. Of course he has to take a dump on someone who is more certain.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Matthew Gallant said:
Nate Silver's strength in this election is that his model says anything could happen. If D wins, well they had a 47% chance of winning. If R wins, of course they did they had a 53% chance. Of course he has to take a dump on someone who is more certain.
Click to expand...

So you have a problem with probability?

What you're asking for is punditry, not data. "take a stand!" Nate writes a whole lot on this in his book.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Silver is a baby because he's showing why someone else's model is wrong? Again, the turn on him from liberals has been hilarious.

What exactly is he saying that is childish?
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538
Click to expand...

He didn't show why Wang's model was wrong. Wang himself made a post showing how Silver misunderstood and was analyzing a different model, altogether.

And I've been one of he few people here defending Nate's model (in the abstract). But I'm not going to defend him being petty. And you have to look at all his replies directly to Wang the past 6 months. They're there.

Nate's using the same model he's used and his data isn''t that far off from the others (they're all pretty much the same) except wang. Whose model will self correct by the end (like the others). This "pettyness" critique ignores the fact that the data guys do this all the time on twitter. And rubs of just not liking the guy saying something you don't want to hear (which he's not saying)
Click to expand...

"self-corrects" makes no sense at all. And the other models have moved toward Wang's model's forecast, not the other way around.

And no, I actually meant petty. Silver has stated he doesn't like Wang in the past directly and in interviews. Wang has continually had to correct Silver's comments.

This has nothing to do with "liking" anyone. Go through my posts and see me defend Nate's approach in the election right now. Because I have and will continue to have. But that doesn't mean I should also have to defend him being annoying to another model. His problem is pretty obvious. Wang has a PHD and is a professor while Nate is not and he is threatened by his own lack of credentials. Unfortunately, it becomes apparent that Nate is not a trained statistician when he confuses "snapshots" and "forecasts" in his critiques.

Nate also made a major mistake in misinterpreting what his statistics mean when he apologized for his Brasil prediction over Germany. There was absolutely nothing wrong with his prediction. The knee-jerk reaction he had to Germany's win demonstrated that Nate understand how to analyze data in terms of predicting but didn't actually understand what the numbers mean. Just because Germany destroyed Brazil didn't mean his prediction probabilities were wrong or that his model was wrong, it just mean that an unlikely outcome happened. Nothing more, nothing less. The fact that he wrote an entire article claiming he was wrong meant he didn't know what he was doing to begin with!


If "liberals" abandoning Silver because he doesn't say what they want him to say is bad, then so is people sticking to everything Silver says just because he was right in the past.


All I know is this.

1. The Senate is a real toss-up.
2. The polling indicates the Dems should be a slight favorite
3. The fundamentals with polling indicate the GOP should be a slight or insignificant favorite

That's it. We might even know who is right in the end because everything is based on the polling and the polling has to be accurate.

edit: Also that article you linked shows he also confuses "toss-up" with exactly 1:1 odds, which is ridiculous.
 
A

Arrowgigantic

Member
Hahaha, I didn't know that Silver predicted BRA over GER.

Silver's problem is that he's in the prediction business and here he doesn't really have one. Claiming one side or the other has a 53% chance of winning is the equivalent of saying nothing. So he doesn't have news. So he tries to make news.
 
C

Crisco

Banned
One thing I will say, the GOP seems to have learned their lesson on saying disgraceful shit about rape and vaginas. Just not doing that greatly improves their chances to win.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Republican Bill Cassidy has opened up a 13-point lead over Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) in a head-to-head matchup, according to a new Fox News poll of likely voters.

On the main ballot, Cassidy leads Landrieu by a narrower 4 points, but there are two other Republicans in the race. The contest will go to a runoff between the top two candidates if none of them break the 50 percent threshold.

In an expected Landrieu-Cassidy runoff, Cassidy leads by 51 percent to 38 percent, the Fox News poll found. Nine percent said they didn't know and 2 percent said they wouldn't vote.
Click to expand...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/bill-cassidy-mary-landrieu-poll-fox-13-points
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/bill-cassidy-mary-landrieu-poll-fox-13-points
Click to expand...
Beat you to it. On this same page.

Did you know that Fox News also had Democrats tied in Iowa and winning North Carolina and Kansas in a two-way race (which is likely what will happen)?

Hm I wonder if you have some sort of agenda to push by excluding those results.

Also that Louisiana poll is junk, it excludes people who didn't vote in the 2011 gubernatorial election which had less than 20% turnout.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Republican Bill Cassidy has opened up a 13-point lead over Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) in a head-to-head matchup, according to a new Fox News poll of likely voters.

On the main ballot, Cassidy leads Landrieu by a narrower 4 points, but there are two other Republicans in the race. The contest will go to a runoff between the top two candidates if none of them break the 50 percent threshold.

In an expected Landrieu-Cassidy runoff, Cassidy leads by 51 percent to 38 percent, the Fox News poll found. Nine percent said they didn't know and 2 percent said they wouldn't vote.

PhoenixDark said:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/bill-cassidy-mary-landrieu-poll-fox-13-points
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Right.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Matthew Gallant said:
Hahaha, I didn't know that Silver predicted BRA over GER.

Silver's problem is that he's in the prediction business and here he doesn't really have one. Claiming one side or the other has a 53% chance of winning is the equivalent of saying nothing. So he doesn't have news. So he tries to make news.
Click to expand...

Again this is exactly what he doesn't want to do.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Larry Sabato moves North Carolina from Toss-Up to Leans Democratic

APKmetsfan said:
This race would also be in December so it could be well known if it will determine the senate. Republicans won't lose it.
Click to expand...
Did you know in 2002 Republicans were so confident in picking up Louisiana that they called their campaign "Operation Icing on the Cake" and then lost it

If Democrats have an edge in the Senate before the LA runoff, every moneyed interest in Louisiana - and nationwide - will put money behind Landrieu. And if they win IA, NC, AK, and KS (I have reason to believe they will win all of these), it's gonna be Landrieu. Big oil isn't going to spend on a backbencher in a minority, especially since GOP won't be able to win the majority back until at least 2018.
 
I

Ignatz Mouse

Banned
My reaction is completely about Silver bringing up Wang a lot. It doesn't matter what he says.

I didn't like it when he did it in the past, and he seems to be doing a lot more lately-- regardless of what's being predicted.

I've defended Nate here in the past, and I have no opinion of whether he or Wang is more correct (and in fact, I am interested in seeing how it plays out). But I never have liked it when competitors run each other down. Talk up yourself, don't talk down your opponent.

I've made this comment directly to comic shop owners I know who run down other shops I like. It's really something I find distasteful.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Ignatz Mouse said:
My reaction is completely about Silver bringing up Wang a lot. It doesn't matter what he says.

I didn't like it when he did it in the past, and he seems to be doing a lot more lately-- regardless of what's being predicted.

I've defended Nate here in the past, and I have no opinion of whether he or Wang is more correct (and in fact, I am interested in seeing how it plays out). But I never have liked it when competitors run each other down. Talk up yourself, don't talk down your opponent.

I've made this comment directly to comic shop owners I know who run down other shops I like. It's really something I find distasteful.
Click to expand...
I think the attention has gotten to Nate's head a little. See him dumping on PPP's polls (historically very accurate) because they... didn't release a client's private poll until after the election? After making shit up about them not sharing their methodology which was later proven false (Tom Jensen provided email exchanges between him and Silver, as well as him and Nate Cohn who was also getting on their case, specifically about their methodology).

Like it feels like whenever Nate's contradicted by someone or they don't kowtow to his greatness he just snipes at them instead of trying to have a discussion.

Which is a shame because he does good work, but also since getting bought out he's been buying into "conventional wisdom" on a lot of things, which this year (and in 2012) has invariably made the Republicans seem stronger. Like everyone pretending New Hampshire is a tossup, including CNN aggressively rigging their likely voter polls just to produce a tie.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
Larry Sabato moves North Carolina from Toss-Up to Leans Democratic


Did you know in 2002 Republicans were so confident in picking up Louisiana that they called their campaign "Operation Icing on the Cake" and then lost it

If Democrats have an edge in the Senate before the LA runoff, every moneyed interest in Louisiana - and nationwide - will put money behind Landrieu. And if they win IA, NC, AK, and KS (I have reason to believe they will win all of these), it's gonna be Landrieu. Big oil isn't going to spend on a backbencher in a minority, especially since GOP won't be able to win the majority back until at least 2018.
Click to expand...

That's a big if any changes it. I'm talking about if its a must pick up. If that december run off is THE race to decide the election the dems are getting outspent.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
APKmetsfan said:
That's a big if any changes it. I'm talking about if its a must pick up. If that december run off is THE race to decide the election the dems are getting outspent.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on that.

Big oil would rather have a Republican majority than a sympathetic Democrat in charge of the energy committee.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
I think Nate is probably fine, but I don't think his critique of Wang was particularly well-put (it's a bad sign when you have to go to the footnotes to find out what Nate actually thinks is wrong with Wang's analysis), and I don't really understand why he felt it was worthwhile to print that critique at all.

Nate Silver is a famous analyst who has his own website after leaving the New York Times. Sam Wang is a biology professor with a blog. I don't understand what's motivating Nate to even post about him. That in itself is kind of the thing that makes me wonder what's going on with 538. Why punch down?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
pigeon said:
I think Nate is probably fine, but I don't think his critique of Wang was particularly well-put (it's a bad sign when you have to go to the footnotes to find out what Nate actually thinks is wrong with Wang's analysis), and I don't really understand why he felt it was worthwhile to print that critique at all.

Nate Silver is a famous analyst who has his own website after leaving the New York Times. Sam Wang is a biology professor with a blog. I don't understand what's motivating Nate to even post about him. That in itself is kind of the thing that makes me wonder what's going on with 538. Why punch down?
Click to expand...

Because wang is getting propped up by liberals (plum line and what not)
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Crisco said:
One thing I will say, the GOP seems to have learned their lesson on saying disgraceful shit about rape and vaginas. Just not doing that greatly improves their chances to win.
Click to expand...

It's still September.. there's lots of time left for unseemly vagina commentary.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Goddamn! On Point today is dealing with liberal jews ans zionismn/anti zionism. Almost all of the callers and two of the guest hace been Jews who are appalled my Israel's action. However, their other voice in the debate was basically saying everything everyone else was saying was false, lies, and antisemetic propoganda. Her name was Caroline Glick. Anyone know her?
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
APKmetsfan said:
Because wang is getting propped up by liberals (plum line and what not)
Click to expand...

So what? Why should Silver care about that? Shouldn't Silver be critiquing liberals and not Wang?

Is he going after Upshot? Or others?

Silver doesn't like Wang. It's been true for years. It's personal for him and nothing else. It's also causing him to be wrong in his critiques. In addition, he snidely tries to comment that Wang doesn't predict Dems as favorite when Wang has stated D+ I favored.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
The Kansas statute which says that democrats have to replace him is here:

when a vacancy occurs after a primary election in a party candidacy, such vacancy shall be filled by the party committee of the congressional district, county or state, as the case may be.
Click to expand...

In law, it seems "shall" can mean "may" or "must" depending on the context and intention. I don't think it'd be hard to argue it meaning "may" in this case.

But if they did honestly have to replace him, I'd try to find someone happened to be named Pat Roberts or Sam Brownback to run in his place.
 
T

The Librarian

Banned
Chris Matthews is off in his own world tonight about Scotland's vote to leave the UK. He said it's tantamount to English breaking down and not becoming our common language anymore.

I don't understand the comparison, but what part of the US is he in?
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
Man, Aaron Strife deserves dap for being on the ball from day one on this race. I still think the GOP will end up with 51-52 seats but if republicans underperform this could be the race that costs them everything.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I didn't think Democrats would have much of a race once the teabagger lost the primary. But I guess the same things that hurt Roberts in the primary were more resonant in the general election.

Making the Democrat drop out to support the Indy is what should have happened in Florida in 2010 with Crist.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://time.com/3395791/occupy-wall-street-activists-suing-ex-member-over-twitter-account/
A group of Occupy activists filed a lawsuit in a Manhattan court Wednesday alleging that one of their ex-members had gone rogue and hijacked the account for himself, locking everyone else out.

The lawsuit says that Adbusters — the Canadian magazine that first called for demonstrators to occupy New York City’s financial spine — opened the @OccupyWallStNYC Twitter account in summer 2011, according to the New York Times.

Adbusters later gave the account to Marisa Holmes, an activist and filmmaker, who apparently shared the account’s password with 14 group members who all tweeted from it.

Or they did until this August, when one activist, Justin Wedes, changed the password.

In blog post soon after the takeover, Wedes said that the relationships among the account’s users — whom he called #TweetBoat — had degenerated over the past few years, into a “dust storm of festering interpersonal conflict.”

That month, he “started to worry about the future of the boat,” wrote Wedes, who has not returned media requests for comment.

“I don’t shy away from currently being the chief steward of this account,” he said, “and my plan is to reinvigorate it again by putting it back in the hands of responsible stewards.”

In a long statement entitled “The Wolf of Occupy Wall Street,” the group excoriated Wedes for using its Twitter account for self-promotion and pulling “a power grab” that “violated our basic principles of organizing within Occupy.”

Occupy — which just celebrated its third birthday on Sept. 17 — said it had asked Wedes in August to cut down on his tweeting from the account, after too many referred to his controversial personal project for water rights in Detroit.

“Throughout our brief history there have been opportunists who would use the name to build their personal careers and benefit financially from their association with Occupy Wall Street,” said the group, adding that it disavows “any connection between this individual and the movement at large.”
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom