A Human Becoming
More than a Member
I like Clare Malone's NPR-like personal pieces that are driven by data.
-
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 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
that's probably fair. I don't read them as much as I used to, anymore. I just enjoy most of them on their podcasts.
Yeah, I don't think those figures are correct, or they're reading the totals wrong, because AA turnout in Georgia is definitely not at those low levels this year, and neither is it in Texas. I think Nate Cohn was saying earlier that AA is at least at '12 levels in PA. Nothing to worry about.
Yea I'm not seeing it. I just can't imagine the AA population is just going to sit at home lol.
Manmademan
Member
Some jackass wrote an article about "don't get excited over early voting" using the data from 12 states on a plot to make his point.
One of those states was PA which has no early voting, and another was OR which is primarily a mail in vote state.
I could pick a poligaffer at random and end up with an article less sloppy than that.
Social issues I'd imagine
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
They were educated in schools built by people that believed in the Confederacy?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Still won't get her there before 11:00 EST. She will need NE-2 which will close 2 hours before 11:00 EST at 9:00 EST or GA which will close 4 hours before 11:00 EST at 7:00 EST or Arizona which will close 1 hour before 11:00 EST at 10:00 EST.
*IA and NV close at 10:00 EST
The west cost is a given we'll know by PA, NC and FL's call
Chezzymann
Member
CNN's been having chronic audio issues for the past few weeks, they gotta step their game up
Being educated doesn't prevent you from being racist.
If people keep their methedology consistent, people won't turn on them. If you appear to be warping your data to feed a narrative and drive clicks....out come the angry emojis.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Misrepresenting absentee votes as early voting in Pennsylvania is pretty shitty.
whyamihere
Banned
I mean.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
The networks still won't call the election until 11:00 PM EST. But we'll certainly know before then going by the returns.
The microphones are trying to commit suicide to protect themselves.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
You guys watch CNN as much as Trump does.
How does one even quantify or compare this in VA. VA doesn't have early voting we only have absentee voting and you have to provide a reason and employer contact if you're claiming an employment reason for not voting on election day. Seems this means this number would swing from election to election anyway since everyone can't just legally vote early.
Fairfax/Loudoun have in-person absentee voting, which is basically the same thing.
gutter_trash
Banned
too much Corey
RustyNails
Member
Ohio is terrible.
They support their governor and portman because Ohio is doing well.
Ohio is doing well because Obama did not let auto industry fail.
Punish Obama.
They support their governor and portman because Ohio is doing well.
Ohio is doing well because Obama did not let auto industry fail.
Punish Obama.
8 X 11 Printer Paper
Member
So anything REAL bedwetting today, or just the normal generally good Clinton polls and a few eh ones?
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Nope. Gotta diablos about something.
We got this. Just gotta make sure people get out and vote.
Fragamemnon
Member
I think the bigger trend is that Republicans are starting to feel less awful about voting for Trump, but that doesn't even come close to fixing his problems and in most Senate races the Republicans were already mostly voting in-line with their candidates already. Maybe Heck is the exception since he disowned Trump after Access Hollywood.
Close Senate races still come down to getting your partisans to the polls.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
There should only ever be bedwetting if you see Trump consistently winning polls in New Hampshire, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin. As much as we all want to see Hillary to sweep all the swings states and pick up historically solid Republican states like Georgia and Texas, getting 270 is what matters..
The Senate races and what the results mean for 2020 are a different story.
Basileus777
Member
@LatinoDecisions
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Ohio is gerrymandered to all hell.
And their redististricting reform doesn't start till 2021
As someone who loved Nate in 2012 and 2008, I figure it's worth a quick discussion on why I've soured on him so much this cycle. I think a lot of people adopt a sort of natural reaction of "he just isn't pro Hillary enough that's why GAF hates him", but the guy has been more or less a disaster ever since he left the Times, and I've hated the new 538 long before we headed into the general.
I do want to say though that I think Silver deserves a lot of credit. He popularized out of sample demographic regressions and poll averaging and brought a lot of rigor to election prognostication which wasn't there before. It's hard to overstate how astonishingly shitty election analysis was in 2004. Silver upped everyone's game. His biggest problem is that he's no longer competing in the same pundit environment as 2008. That, and his fickle contrarian streak has been hurting him. His competitors are just much better than him at this point, and Silver hasn't been able to keep up.
The first red flags were in the run up to the launch of 538, where Silver aspired to discuss economics and education and god knows what else in addition to sports and politics. Of course, Silver was successful in politics and sports because he had much better data skills than the average sports writer or political hack. Somehow, success there convinced him that as someone with no advanced degrees, he could move into turf held by people who've dedicated their careers to quantitative causal analysis and enjoy a similar disruption. It was a disastrous plan from the word go, and the launch of 538 and wealth of insipid econ articles confirmed it.
Making matter worse is that rather than take the criticism and work to up his game, he picked petty, stupid, self-defeating fights with Krugman and the Times. And from there it just kept getting worse.
Trump was another disaster. I don't blame Silver for not calling Trump right away, or for relying on an endorsement model which didn't work out. Trump was, after all, strange. But, Silver got a lot of justified criticism for being aggressively defensive, adopting a lot of lazy, superficial defenses, and for just refusing to think critically about the election for a solid 6-8 months. His go to defense was an allusion to Herman Cain which was just a silly comparison on any level. He never engaged in serious thought about the size or persistence of Trump's lead, Trump's geographical strength, the trendlines of his favorables, or polling which accurately predicted that there was never going to be some kind of magical anti-Trump consolidation. Silver was just completely non-serious about the election for months, and repeatedly got antagonistic and more stubborn about it as his position became more untenable.
As far as the general this year, I think the nowcast is transparent click-bait, and I think that Silver's writing is motivated by contrarianism in a way that's unhelpful to anyone. Just this week, Wolfers politely asked him to explain some anomolous results and Silver's only reaction was to call him lazy and pick a fight.
A lot of people have pointed out in this thread that the model does weird stuff sometimes. And sure, it does. But I mean, whatever. That in and of itself isn't the problem. The problem is that poll averaging is actually quite easy, he's competing with more academics than he used to, and he simply doesn't have the training or background to add value to the discussion any more. Reviewing that discussion of the assumptions going into his model is just painful, because the reality is that none of these things even have to be assumed - all of those points can be structurally identified by the data. But, his model is an outlier and it does weird things because while Silver legit doesn't know how to make it better, but he still has to do something, because his original contributions are no longer special or interesting. Election coverage has internalized the main points and moved on.
Like I said, Silver was a big, big deal in 2008 and belongs in the political writing hall of fame, because he really changed the game. But, it's not the same game any more. He's not a great editor(nor does he have one), he never went to grad school, and the game he created has left him behind. Such is life - these things happen. But he's not content to be left behind, so rather than continue as one part of a larger discussion and search for a new contribution, he just picks shitty fights on twitter and spends most his time looking like an idiot.
I guess another way of saying all of this is that ESPN was a mistake. As the electoral-vote dude pointed out, when you're part of an academic or news-gathering ecosystem, there's a certain amount of space that comes with the territory that helps. Silver doesn't have that, he needs it, and it shows. It has been a long, ugly fall for him.
I do want to say though that I think Silver deserves a lot of credit. He popularized out of sample demographic regressions and poll averaging and brought a lot of rigor to election prognostication which wasn't there before. It's hard to overstate how astonishingly shitty election analysis was in 2004. Silver upped everyone's game. His biggest problem is that he's no longer competing in the same pundit environment as 2008. That, and his fickle contrarian streak has been hurting him. His competitors are just much better than him at this point, and Silver hasn't been able to keep up.
The first red flags were in the run up to the launch of 538, where Silver aspired to discuss economics and education and god knows what else in addition to sports and politics. Of course, Silver was successful in politics and sports because he had much better data skills than the average sports writer or political hack. Somehow, success there convinced him that as someone with no advanced degrees, he could move into turf held by people who've dedicated their careers to quantitative causal analysis and enjoy a similar disruption. It was a disastrous plan from the word go, and the launch of 538 and wealth of insipid econ articles confirmed it.
Making matter worse is that rather than take the criticism and work to up his game, he picked petty, stupid, self-defeating fights with Krugman and the Times. And from there it just kept getting worse.
Trump was another disaster. I don't blame Silver for not calling Trump right away, or for relying on an endorsement model which didn't work out. Trump was, after all, strange. But, Silver got a lot of justified criticism for being aggressively defensive, adopting a lot of lazy, superficial defenses, and for just refusing to think critically about the election for a solid 6-8 months. His go to defense was an allusion to Herman Cain which was just a silly comparison on any level. He never engaged in serious thought about the size or persistence of Trump's lead, Trump's geographical strength, the trendlines of his favorables, or polling which accurately predicted that there was never going to be some kind of magical anti-Trump consolidation. Silver was just completely non-serious about the election for months, and repeatedly got antagonistic and more stubborn about it as his position became more untenable.
As far as the general this year, I think the nowcast is transparent click-bait, and I think that Silver's writing is motivated by contrarianism in a way that's unhelpful to anyone. Just this week, Wolfers politely asked him to explain some anomolous results and Silver's only reaction was to call him lazy and pick a fight.
A lot of people have pointed out in this thread that the model does weird stuff sometimes. And sure, it does. But I mean, whatever. That in and of itself isn't the problem. The problem is that poll averaging is actually quite easy, he's competing with more academics than he used to, and he simply doesn't have the training or background to add value to the discussion any more. Reviewing that discussion of the assumptions going into his model is just painful, because the reality is that none of these things even have to be assumed - all of those points can be structurally identified by the data. But, his model is an outlier and it does weird things because while Silver legit doesn't know how to make it better, but he still has to do something, because his original contributions are no longer special or interesting. Election coverage has internalized the main points and moved on.
Like I said, Silver was a big, big deal in 2008 and belongs in the political writing hall of fame, because he really changed the game. But, it's not the same game any more. He's not a great editor(nor does he have one), he never went to grad school, and the game he created has left him behind. Such is life - these things happen. But he's not content to be left behind, so rather than continue as one part of a larger discussion and search for a new contribution, he just picks shitty fights on twitter and spends most his time looking like an idiot.
I guess another way of saying all of this is that ESPN was a mistake. As the electoral-vote dude pointed out, when you're part of an academic or news-gathering ecosystem, there's a certain amount of space that comes with the territory that helps. Silver doesn't have that, he needs it, and it shows. It has been a long, ugly fall for him.
@LatinoDecisions
Going forward. This is why the GOP will have to adopt some form of immigration reform.
Apparently Trump is badmouthing Kasich while speaking in Ohio. Why is he so bad at this?
https://twitter.com/ohio_politics/status/791742155459006464
https://twitter.com/ohio_politics/status/791742155459006464
Fenderputty
Banned
I'm am so much less stressed right now than at the same points in time for 2008 and 2012.
In fact, some of the early voting stats listed have had me full mast at times. Hopium does that
In fact, some of the early voting stats listed have had me full mast at times. Hopium does that
HanShotFirst
Member
Are there any Texas Congressional district that Democrats can take besides the 23rd?
makingmusic476
Member
Let me introduce you to my family.
whyamihere
Banned
@LatinoDecisions
oh my
RustyNails
Member
Wait, this tweet is all sorts of wrong isnt it? Poligaf been crunching numbers for the past week, and only Iowa looked like a Trump stronghold
whyamihere
Banned
oh my.
It's not wrong, just misleading. Dems are up still in Iowa, but down compared to 2012 (GOP is down as much, but not as much). PA has no early voting, just absentee voting, and very little of it, so using those comparisons is dumb dumb dumb.
this guy is a maniac. Got realllll uncomfortable there at the end. He's got thinner skin than Trump.
Yup.
thestopsign
Member
No that is right. I think we have been talking about compared to 2012 in a lot of cases, but this is referring to raw totals so far in 2016.
It'll take a couple more election cycles cause it would mean working with democrats
Please save us from Trump!
tedrotheredro
Member
Most people are relating these numbers to 2012 since it gives you an idea of how the final tally will compare to last time around. This appears to be an absolute comparison, which gives no insight and basically should be responded with "No shit, Sherlock".
As far as I know the whole state has in person absentee, but it's still absentee and not early voting so you can't just show up to vote early just because you want to vote early.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked