• 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 |OT15| Orange is the New Black

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
shinra-bansho said:
I mean there's this. But I wouldn't consider this anything other than a self promotional photo op.
160808_ff_trumpchildcare.jpg

I actually can't find anything on google images of him trying to make any connection with the unwashed masses.

The mind boggles at the idea that he is somehow for the common person.
Click to expand...

Man. Those faces.
 
I

Intheflorsh

Banned
The complaints I see about how 538 unskews polls are conspiratorial in a way that reminds me of your average Trump supporter. Take five minutes and learn some basic facts about how the model works before accusing Nate Silver of trying to make the election look more competitive because of "clicks" or "ESPN" or whatever.

The model takes state polls and adjusts them based off of trends at the national level. They're doing this because state polls aren't collected as frequently and they want a way to keep older polls relevant to get a better idea of where a state is at in between new data. Maybe you think this methodology is flawed. That's fine, but please produce a good reason why and don't just attack Nate Silver's character.
 
S

Syncytia

Member
Intheflorsh said:
The complaints I see about how 538 unskews polls are conspiratorial in a way that reminds me of your average Trump supporter. Take five minutes and learn some basic facts about how the model works before accusing Nate Silver of trying to make the election look more competitive because of "clicks" or "ESPN" or whatever.

The model takes state polls and adjusts them based off of trends at the national level. They're doing this because state polls aren't collected as frequently and they want a way to keep older polls relevant to get a better idea of where a state is at in between new data. Maybe you think this methodology is flawed. That's fine, but please produce a good reason why and don't just attack Nate Silver's character.
Click to expand...

Because a poll in a red state where Trump is already going to win shouldn't decrease Clinton's overall chance of winning.
 
W

Wafflecakes

Member
I think it has been long enough since Kennedy/Eisenhower that a candidate could probably pull off a fun animated ad with a jingle again.
 
A

anaron

Member
Intheflorsh said:
The complaints I see about how 538 unskews polls are conspiratorial in a way that reminds me of your average Trump supporter. Take five minutes and learn some basic facts about how the model works before accusing Nate Silver of trying to make the election look more competitive because of "clicks" or "ESPN" or whatever.

The model takes state polls and adjusts them based off of trends at the national level. They're doing this because state polls aren't collected as frequently and they want a way to keep older polls relevant to get a better idea of where a state is at in between new data. Maybe you think this methodology is flawed. That's fine, but please produce a good reason why and don't just attack Nate Silver's character.
Click to expand...

It just reeks of "cuz it doesn't favour Hillary!!"
 
R

Retro

Member
If you're still looking for funny election commercials, everything Joni Ernst has done has been insane. They're not presidential ones, but still pretty good for a laugh.

"Squeal" The castration ad.
"Shot" "Once she sets her sights on Obamacare, Joni's gonna unload! >gunshots<"

And I'd be remiss if I didn't bring up Christine O'Donnell's "I'm not a witch. I'm you!" ad.
 
E

eBay Huckster

Member
maybe point out where people in this thread are consistently doing nothing but attacking silver's character, because these posts reek of invented problems
 
C

Cerium

Member
Intheflorsh said:
What's this supposed to mean? We shouldn't take him seriously because he got angry when he was accused of being a hack?
Click to expand...
You conceded that it's alright to think he's a hack with bad methodology, but declared that his character should be off limits.

In truth neither his hack status nor his character should be off limits.
 
S

Syncytia

Member
Intheflorsh said:
Are you saying they skew state polls based off of other state polls?
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying the way the percentages are calculated are weird.

hGWtXSo.png
Click to expand...

Why does a poll having Trump up more in Utah decrease Hillary's chance of winning? Utah is an auto R, he was always expected to win it. The leader and the adjusted leader in that one was 1-2 points higher than the previous poll but... why does increasing his lead in a solid R state decrease (and +8 adjusted isn't even to his biggest lead there!) increase his chances of winning?

Edit: also this same thing could be applied to the Michigan poll below.
 
I

Intheflorsh

Banned
Cerium said:
You conceded that it's alright to think he's a hack with bad methodology, but declared that his character should be off limits.

In truth neither his hack status nor his character should be off limits.
Click to expand...

What I meant is don't bash the model based off of Nate's character. If you think think he's a shithead for whatever reason (hopefully not those extremely mild twitter posts), that's fine.

Syncytia said:
No, I'm saying the way the percentages are calculated are weird.



Why does a poll having Trump up more in Utah decrease Hillary's chance of winning? Utah is an auto R, he was always expected to win it. The leader and the adjusted leader in that one was 1-2 points higher than the previous poll but... why does increasing his lead in a solid R state decrease (and +8 adjusted isn't even to his biggest lead there!) increase his chances of winning?

Edit: also this same thing could be applied to the Michigan poll below.
Click to expand...

Trump going up means McMullin has less of a chance of winning. McMullin winning would actually help Clinton. But even if that wasn't the case, no state is an "auto R". Even slim chances are factored into the overall estimate.

eBay Huckster said:
maybe point out where people in this thread are consistently doing nothing but attacking silver's character, because these posts reek of invented problems
Click to expand...

There's a bit of it in this thread but a lot of in OT. It's dumb and it should stop, that's a good enough reason to talk about it.
 
E

ErasureAcer

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
lol Hillary is not winning Minnesota by 27 points. Maybe 10.
Click to expand...

She will be closer to 27 than to 10. Take Jason Lewis for example. Do you really think he's going to be anywhere near 50 points in that swingy district? Guy is completely nuts. Extrapolate that to Trump who is 100 times worse than Lewis. I see Trump around 40 at best. He probably came here to make sure he isn't completely embarrassed by a 33 percent number. Maybe I should factor that in. Let's give him a 10% boost by touring our great state by landing at the airport and 40 minutes later flying off. 36.3 percent. I'd be amazed if he broke 40 percent.

So let's go 57.7-36.3-3-2-1. Hillary will be closer to 21.4% difference than she is to 10 percent difference. Trump has run the worst campaign ever.
 
S

Syncytia

Member
Intheflorsh said:
Like I said, if you think he's an idiot or his model sucks, that's fine. It's the conspiratorial stuff and the lack of understanding about how the model works that irritates me.
Click to expand...

We're mostly upset with his stupid punditry tbh. The model isn't great but the punditry is pure trash.
 
C

CCS

Banned
Fire from reddit:

We all need to give Melania Trump credit. She wanted to reduce internet bullying and found a way to remove her husband from Twitter. Once again, an immigrant does a job no American wants to do.
Click to expand...
 
I

Intheflorsh

Banned
Syncytia said:
We're mostly upset with his stupid punditry tbh. The model isn't great but the punditry is pure trash.
Click to expand...

That hasn't really been an issue since the primaries. From what I've read on the site, Nate never makes an outright prediction and always couches everything with a million qualifiers. He seems to be almost trying too hard to not be a pundit.

But I'm curious to know more about why you guys think the model is so bad. Specifically why adjusting state polls to match national trends is such a bad idea. Real Clear Politics relies only on new polls and Hillary is actually doing worse in that model.
 
M

mo60

Member
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
257
49K
rofif replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson replied
  • 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
Top Bottom