Nate Silver July 25

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #21944

    If the election were held Monday, Donald Trump would likely win.

    That’s what renowned statistician Nate Silver projected on Monday for his data journalism outlet FiveThirtyEight.

    In his “Now-cast” election model for who would win if ballots were cast Monday, Silver gave the Republican nominee a 57.5% chance of winning the presidency.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-silver-donald-trump-polls-2016-7

    #21946
    duxrule
    Participant

    Didn’t really read the whole thing, didja?

    Silver talks about his methodology, and he says that this is “hypothetical.” Go wash your hands after playing with yourself like that.

    “Be conservative early and aggressive late. Fluctuations in the polls in the summer are often statistical noise or short-term bounces. The model is trained to be conservative in reacting to them. Fluctuations late in the race are more meaningful, and the model will be more aggressive….”

    Three versions of the model

    Polls-plus: Combines polls with an economic index. Since the economic index implies that this election should be a tossup, it assumes the race will tighten somewhat.
    Polls-only: A simpler, what-you-see-is-what-you-get version of the model. It assumes current polls reflect the best forecast for November, although with a lot of uncertainty.
    Now-cast: A projection of what would happen in a hypothetical election held today. Much more aggressive than the other models.

    Differences between polls-only and now-cast

    The now-cast is basically the polls-only model, except that we lie to our computer and tell it the election is today.
    As a result, the now-cast is very aggressive. It’s much more confident than polls-plus or polls-only; it weights recent polls more heavily and is more aggressive in calculating a trend line.
    There could be some big differences around the conventions. The polls-only and polls-plus models discount polls taken just after the conventions, whereas the now-cast will work to quickly capture the convention bounce.”

    I wouldn’t start counting chickens if I were you.

    #21958

    I’m not counting chickens.

    I’m just an impartial journalist doing my reporting.

    What can definitely be taken away from this is that Trump is rising in the polls and by Silver’s methodology has substantially increased his chances of being elected.

    #21960
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    “If I were to run, I’d run as a Republican. They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific”.

    -Donald J Trump
    People Magazine, 1998

    That’s your guy.

    Come for the bigotry, racism, and ignorance. Stay for the serial lying and showmanship.

    #21963

    Do you have any proof this meme is bona fide?

    #21964
    edselehr
    Participant

    Two examples of pieces of information that do nothing to build understanding or forward discussion, and therefore serve no purpose:

    1) “If the election were held Monday, Donald Trump would likely win.” (Bacon, post #21944)

    2)”I like frogs” (edselehr, occasionally)

    Bonus information: “impartial journalist” is a self-referential euphemism for “troll”

    #21965
    Vitalogy
    Participant

    Electoral Vote has Clinton up 312-197 in the EV count.

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/

    #21966
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    F&Bacon:

    “I’m just an impartial journalist doing my reporting.”

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    “renowned statistician Nate Silver projected on Monday”

    A few weeks ago you referred to Silver’s information as unreliable. So which is it?

    #21967

    I said that I take Nate Silver with a grain of salt after he failed to predict 2014.

    I take this news and all polls with a grain of salt, but all polls and Nate Silver are showing Trump is improving, so I think it’s safe to conclude that Trump has been trending upwards.

    But others here have a lot of respect for Nate Silver’s methodology, and I’m curious what they think.

    #21968
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    No, you really aren’t.

    #21970

    And your meme about Trump is bogus.

    #21972
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    As I previously posted, the polls between conventions are even more meaningless then usual. Trumps minor bounce has gained him a few points which only brings him close to Hillary. After the Democratic convention is over, it will go back to what it was or worse (for Trump). In other words, don’t pound your chest all that much because in addition to the second convention just starting, donald has a major problem with the lawsuit in Florida now going forward. The press is going to be hounding him and chances are he will fly off in a rage. Whereas folks like you think that’s to his benefit, the less then hardcore xenophobic homophobic racist misogynists won’t.

    In two weeks, you will need a new plan to be relevant.

    Also, you wrote “all polls and Nate Silver are showing Trump is improving.”

    That is false. ALL polls do not show Trump improving. Thursday’s Reuters-Ipsos Hillary +4, Economist-YouGov just released today shows Hillary +5 and a lot of Ties.

    All the usable feedback we give you here hasn’t changed your writing style. You say stuff you can’t document and ignore the tough questions. You are not a good representative of the whacko right. But here’s a plus, you’re more literate then dork but that’s not saying much.

    #21973
    radiodork
    Spectator

    All national polls are saying Trump is ahead of Clinton and got a huge bump after the republican convention last week.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html#

    #21974
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    False. ‘All” polls are not showing that. Besides, as I explained two posts up, polls in-between the two conventions don’t hold much water.

    Hey dork, you’re not very smart. If Hillary is as corrupt as the radicals on the right say she is then they must be pretty stupid because for over 30 years they have been investigating every single aspect of her life with unlimited funds and the full power of Congress behind them and have proved her innocent of every single charge every single time.

    Your effort on this board has not swayed a single person. You must thrive on being an annoyance. Your voice is not needed here, we already have a troll.

    #21975
    edselehr
    Participant

    Vit gets to the heart of the matter – the electoral vote count. In the end the popular polling is kind of useless. And I’ve never seen an EV count that doesn’t show Trump losing,usually by YUGE margins.

    National polling is little more than entertainment in a nation that uses state-by-state EV’s to determine the winner.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.