NYT Nate Silver Doubles Down: 75% Chance Obama Wins

The NYT has no affiliation with the Obama administration, Doc.

 

You need a few more ellipses before I believe you.

 

Ah, yes. The "skewed" poll. Conservative lingo for "we don't like the result so we're going to apply our super special 'unskewing' formula in order to change it into something we like more."

 

80.9% and and 303.4 points prediction now, what the hell happens jopat???!!!

 

What happens is Nate explains that this election fell into the 20%.


"I feel the earth shake under my feet........"

 

Here's another important number: 7.9%. By election day, Silver will probably have Obama over 85%.

 

Wrong about Dwight Howard...

Wrong about Silver gradually bringing Obamas chances down to 50% by Tuesday.

Gee, could it be fathomable that you are wrong about who will win the election? Maybe you should think about that before you get so confident next time.

 

Yeah, it's important to remind everyone (and I know you know this), that it is not "Silver" himself. It's a model he's developed and he's just letting it run, as I understand it, without making any tweaks. So sometimes it even surprises him when it shows a little sensitivity to the stock market or a certain state's poll numbers. He has built the best model he can for presidential elections, using past data performance as a basis. In that way, it's relatively scientific. Can still be totally wrong, of course. But even "wrong" would be a harsh term. His model will never say 100% Obama, so it's just assigning probability.

When you have people (attempting and failing to find Nate instead of Mike, but whatever) to attack him for his numbers, it's worth reminding everyone that it's a model he built. Any bias the model has would have to come from the input data. So to say Silver is biased is to say that the state polls are biased or the stock market is biased, etc.

Oh well.

 

Not wrong about Silver. What I said was......

he's either going to wind down his predictor to 50/50

or

he's going to be way off on election day and decree the "anomaly" of the Republican turnout.

I also said he's also given himself an out by saying that if Romney wins Ohio, Romney has a 92% chance of winning the election, and if Obama wins Ohio then Obama has a 97% chance of winning the election. That's a very flimsy predictor model when he's showing Obama at 80% probability but if Romney takes one state, then Obama's odds go down to 8%.

He's going to be wrong, dead wrong. And then you're gonna hear a bunch of excuses why. But it's not like nobody has known that the Repubican turnout compared to the Democrat turnout in this election is going to be very, very close to even and the Republicans may even turn out more than the Democrats, in quite a contrast to 2008. The info has been out there for many weeks now. It's not like it's going to be a surprise. This election will be D+2 or less and may even swing R+2 or more.

Garbage in, Garbage out. That is what is happening to Nate.

And I still wouldn't be surprised to see his predictor model to flip come monday down to 50/50 or even Romney greater than 50%. Since it hinges so much on Ohio, all that needs to happen is some last minute polls showing Romney distinctly ahead in Ohio and bam, overnight the predictor model flips.

The Nate Silver thing is a joke. He's a tool of the left. This election will prove it very clearly.

 

Oh yeah, because Republican turnout will be huge. One thing that Mitt Romney has done is get people SUPER EXCITED about voting for him. People have shown so much love towards Mitt.

 

Your are a typical hack Republican who has to insult the character of people who don't agree with you. He's not the tool here.

It's really too bad most people only found out about Silver after he moved his site to the NY Times (I wish he hadn't).

 

So you don't think its the case that this election hinges on Ohio? You're saying there's an ulterior motive for him making that point, but maybe that's just what his statistical model says.

 

No, that's really not what you said. Or more accurately, that's only what you said after you were shown to be wrong when his model started ticking upwards less than 12 hours after your initial prediction. Here's what you actually said:

Oct 30, 11:33am:


Frankly, I'll be shocked if his predictor model is still showing Obama at greater than 60% on election day. I am predicting he winds down Obama's chances to close to 50% or he may even flip and have Mitt at over 50% come election day.

Oct 30, 11:39am:

We will see. I am predicting he winds down to close to 50/50 on election day.

Oct 30, 11:56am:

The point of this thread was discussing Nate and the accuracy if his predictor model. I have stated I am predicting he winds down his model to reflect a much closer election. I have stated if his model is over 60% Obama on election day, I'll be shocked. I have stated that he will wind down to close to 50/50 or may even wind down to favor Mitt over 50%. So, from all that you can deduce that I am predicting that Nate will wind down his predictor to either favor Mitt over 50% or to favor Obama less than 60%, somewhere in that range. And I'm also predicting Mitt wins the election and takes over 300 electoral votes.

Notice no caveats there. It wasn't until Oct 31, 6:38am - after Silver's model started ticking upwards again, that you added your new little caveat:

Yeah, Silver is the latest and the greatest. I'm predicting he winds down his predictor model to close to 50/50 come election day or he'll be so way off that he'll go back and make excuses for his model saying the polls that went into it were off because of the "huge republican turnout" of this election that was an "anomaly".

We already know you don't understand polls or elections, but now you've added that you don't even understand your own posting history, or maybe the fact that your posts are timestamped.

 

The Dwight stuff has overshadowed this prediction, but I'm beginning to see a pattern...

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=3061990&postcount=14

 

Obama is up tp 68% on intrade.

 

jopat, have you thoroughly read Nate's methodology and completely understand it?

 

He still thinks polls adjust for Voter ID. He doesn't understand how basic polls work, let alone how a statistical model would work.

 

Nate hasn't published the secret sauce of his methodology. I know he's averaging polls. At least that is what he claims. You can't totally understand something unless you see the formulas. He's never going to show that.

GIGO-garbage in, garbage out. Even averaging polls 90% of the polls he is using are extremely left-leaning and counting on voter turnout like in 08. Simply not going to happen.

Obama is d-o-n-e done.

 

I have taken very advanced mathematics. Used it my whole career. I could teach statistics class. In fact, my daughter is taking statistics right now. She doesn't even have to go to class. Just get the assignments, I explain it to her, and help her finish the problems. I'll put my education and mathematical/statistical knowledge up against anybody's on this message board.

I understand exactly how polls work and the political dynamic driving them. I am also cognizant of both political extremes in this nation..............not just one side. And I understand the ideology of both sides. I'm not an extremist, either left or right. I can see the whole picture.

You don't understand anything about centrism and balance. Go study it.