• 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 |OT14| Attention NV shoppers, democracy is on sale in aisle 4!

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thefro

Member
newshinycd said:
Did everyone forget that Trump has zero ground game, if any at all? And that he only has, what, $16 million on hand? AND he stopped fund raising for the GOP?

Ya'll need some Valium.
Click to expand...

Trump may have a bad ground game but the RNC/state parties have good ground games in some of these states.
 
B

Blader

Member
I don't pile on Nate the way most of you seem to, but I really don't get his fascination with the betting markets.

also, at the end of the day, if Nate's model shows Trump with a 20ish percent chance and Wang's (or whomever's) has him pegged at 1 percent, and Trump loses, then what's the difference? How would you retroactively determine whose model was more accurate if they both correctly predicted the winner?
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Didn't obama win Ohio by a lot. Maybe we have cushion. Wonder why stories say we are giving up
 
F

Finale Fireworker

Member
newshinycd said:
Did everyone forget that Trump has zero ground game, if any at all? And that he only has, what, $16 million on hand? AND he stopped fund raising for the GOP?

Ya'll need some Valium.
Click to expand...

What stresses me out is that, despite this, he is still winning states. It is possible for somebody making no effort at all to almost match somebody spending millions of dollars a day and bussing people to polling locations. Despite all the time, money, and effort we have put in Florida, it is still up in the air.

That's crazy to me.
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
NeoGAF isn't blocked on my work wifi today for some reason, refreshing constantly won't run up my mobile data today 🤗
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
Man I think Hillary should have pulled an Obama 2008 and paid for a huge infomercial ad buy.

Just because, like, why not? We got this, let's push this shit as far as we can.
 
E

Emarv

Member
Nate started as a poker player, right? And his other love of sports predictions also has a love affair with betting markets. To my knowledge there's no real scientific correlation bewteeen markets and political wins.

I think Nate just likes betting markets because they're fun and dynamic. They respond wildly to news, just like his model!
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Finale Fireworker said:
What stresses me out is that, despite this, he is still winning states. It is possible for somebody making no effort at all to almost match somebody spending millions of dollars a day and bussing people to polling locations. Despite all the time, money, and effort we have put in Florida, it is still up in the air.

That's crazy to me.
Click to expand...

Because the real fuck-up is in the Republican primary. Once you are one of the two major party nominees you are guaranteed a significant baseline of support. A major party nominee could probably do literally zero campaigning or groundwork--like literally disappear except for the convention and their name on the ballot--and get 30% of the vote at the very least.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/democrats-north-carolina-early-voting-230573

Dems are making progress in NC and the GOP really fucked over voting for many.

I think things will get much better overtime as the Dems do their blitz. Over 20 early voting events today and tomorrow and Obama is going to appear much more frequently. I think Dems will be able to catch up and even extend their leads in some places. https://hillaryspeeches.com/scheduled-events/

Still, the Clinton campaign stresses that turnout is on the upswing for Democrats now that more polling sites have opened. They cite data from the North Carolina Board of Elections showing that Democratic turnout, and particularly black turnout, has expanded at a rapid clip since more polling sites were added last Thursday, noting that in Guilford, 549 African-Americans voted last Wednesday, but 7,496 did on Thursday.

One North Carolina Democratic operative working on several races in the state expressed confidence that the Clinton campaign would close the gap with 2012 African American turnout, saying that on Sunday, about 32 percent of votes cast were from African Americans, but the total share of the African American vote is only expected to be around 22 percent.

"I think the numbers are really catching up," the operative said. "Obviously a lot of that started Thursday, Friday, Sunday voting, we're continuing to see a huge push in a lot more traditional African American communities for folks continuing voting this week."

Over the next week, both President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are expected to campaign in North Carolina, building on visits from Bill Clinton, Michelle Obama, and Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, who have all been in the state in the last week or so. The Clinton campaign has also launched aggressive advertising campaigns on African-American radio stations and in black newspapers, in addition to their extensive outreach efforts at churches and historically black colleges.

A Clinton adviser stressed that a robust surrogate operation would continue in the state’s African American communities through Election Day, even though there is no early voting allowed next Sunday.

“While early voting does conclude on [Nov.] 5, on the final Sunday we do plan to have some major events geared toward the African American community in order to drum up enthusiasm for [Election Day voting],” said the Clinton adviser.
Click to expand...
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
Blader said:
I don't pile on Nate the way most of you seem to, but I really don't get his fascination with the betting markets.

also, at the end of the day, if Nate's model shows Trump with a 20ish percent chance and Wang's (or whomever's) has him pegged at 1 percent, and Trump loses, then what's the difference? How would you retroactively determine whose model was more accurate if they both correctly predicted the winner?
Click to expand...

Nate's model has become a PR coup, and you can't get CableTV mentions when you're telling viewers that a major party candidate has an improbable chance of winning. The Narrative must be fed.

Wang's model is a more purely academic affair, and anecdotally, gets much less mainstream oxygen.

I think it's mostly about expectations setting and a business model for 538 that requires hedging bets in-case of wild or Black Swan outcomes.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Blader said:
I don't pile on Nate the way most of you seem to, but I really don't get his fascination with the betting markets.

also, at the end of the day, if Nate's model shows Trump with a 20ish percent chance and Wang's (or whomever's) has him pegged at 1 percent, and Trump loses, then what's the difference? How would you retroactively determine whose model was more accurate if they both correctly predicted the winner?
Click to expand...

They're both predicting the popular vote in each state as well, so you could look at the standard deviation of their predictions from the actual outcomes if you wanted to see who was more accurate. If you did this in 2012, iirc Silver performed fractionally better but there was very little difference. There isn't really any way to test who is more justifiably certain/uncertain, it's one of the great problems of statistics.

IMO, though, Silver's model is much better than Wang's.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
: reads the last few pages :

tumblr_nme1699zh71s6sc4lo1_500.gif
 
L

Lord Frieza

Member
Anyone who has any shred of doubt that Comey's move wasn't partisan-driven can really go and fuck off with all that. Even if they don't end up doing that, just considering it is a big red flag.
 
T

tuffy

Member
We'll get to find out Weiner's emails are a bunch of nothing in real-time, then Comey will send out a "nevermind" letter shortly after.
 
N

newshinycd

Member
Remember that article yesterday from NYT where the FBI said that there might not be a link between Trump and Russia?

Now, that might be true. But we know that Russians were attempting to infiltrate and gain access to policymakers. Here is an article from 2011 where the FBI said that Russian spies were succeeding in doing just that:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/31/nation/la-na-russian-spies-20111101

Trump's comments about Putin and Russia makes me dubious that he doesn't have any connections whatsoever. He hired Manafort for fucks sake, and it was only when the dirt on him started being reported that he left the campaign. It could be that Trump is allowing his underlings to do the dirty work so he can play dumb if connections were found.

God, I hate typing about this shit. I feel like I should be on /r/conspiracy. :(
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Abinash117 said:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/democrats-north-carolina-early-voting-230573

Dems are making progress in NC and the GOP really fucked over voting for many.

I think things will get much better overtime as the Dems do their blitz. Over 20 early voting events today and tomorrow and Obama is going to appear much more frequently. I think Dems will be able to catch up and even extend their leads in some places. https://hillaryspeeches.com/scheduled-events/
Click to expand...

It's good that Democrats are pegging the final black turnout (22%) at a realistic number.
 
M

Maxim726X

Member
Carpe Carnim said:
Nate's model has become a PR coup, and you can't get CableTV mentions when you're telling viewers that a major party candidate has an improbable chance of winning. The Narrative must be fed.

Wang's model is a more purely academic affair, and anecdotally, gets much less mainstream oxygen.

I think it's mostly about expectations setting and a business model for 538 that requires hedging bets in-case of wild or Black Swan outcomes.
Click to expand...

I would like to think that this is an overly cynical view... But, I really don't understand Nate's reasoning.

If you look at 538's state models, she is at 80%+ in all of her firewall states with the exception of Colorado, where's she's almost 70%. That doesn't include a *single* one of the states that may, and likely will, go to Clinton like NV or FLA.

Again, until we see a real crack in her safe states, why wouldn't this be close to 100%? Does anyone really think she's going to lose CO?
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Carpe Carnim said:
Comey turned the FBI into DWTS. What a fucking joke. Maybe they should just live-stream it with like a 30sec delay in case they find out some of the emails contain info on Area 51 and our military program to weaponize genetically engineered Sasquatch
Click to expand...

Maybe the FBI will run an online survey monkey vote 2 days before the election where viewers can vote if they should arrest Clinton....

I mean might as well...
 
T

tuffy

Member
Spork4000 said:
I was here a week ago panicking that it was close and you guys reassured me. Is it time to panic for real now?
Click to expand...
The presidential race is still not close, hasn't been close, and won't be close in the next week. Keep an eye on the Senate races instead.
 
T

Teggy

Member
Even if classified info was found on Huma's computer, it would also have to be proven that it was knowingly transferred - that was the conclusion of the previous investigation - that there might have been some classified info, but it was not intentionally sent.
 
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