NYT Nate Silver Doubles Down: 75% Chance Obama Wins

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>That garbage NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of OH, which shows 94% RV turnout, has the 2nd-highest weighting of all @<a href="https://twitter.com/fivethirtyeight">fivethirtyeight</a> OH polls. <a class="hashtag" action="hash" title="#science">#science</a></p>&mdash; Sean Davis (@seanmdav) <a href="https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/265125648111120384" data-datetime="2012-11-04T16:17:34+00:00">November 4, 2012</a></blockquote>
<script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Honestly, no. Here's what I read from Mojo, Mojo Man (he's got to be!)

"Failure to do so will confirm the suspicions of many, including myself, that the former Daily Kos blogger Nate Silver is actually biased himself in his work... "

You and I agree what Silver means and what a Romney win would mean. Mojo, Mojo man is saying something different about Nate Silver intentionally publishing biased work.

 

The whole idea that Romney is desperate and throwing money at Pennsylvania in a wild attempt to turn around the election is preposterous. Romney did not earn his reputation as a businessman and penny-pincher budget hawk by just throwing money around blindly. Romney has a legit chance of winning Pennsylvania to go with Ohio.

 

No, he got it through receiving federal funds in a bailout, and taking companies through leveraged buyouts.

yes, come to think of it, Romney's PE experience will be great for the presidency. He could pile America with debt and acquire, let's say, China, and rule them instead.

 

In either case, what the hell is Romney going to do with the extra millions he worked so hard and crossed so many moral boundaries to fund-raise for, spend it on lifetime tans? It's closing time.

 

Pass it on to Ryan and Christie in 2020.

 

The reason they are spending in PA is that there are no more spots to buy in other states.

 

The reason they are spending in PA is because they know they can take the state. If they knew they couldn't take the state, they wouldn't be spending one thin dime there.

 

50/50

 

Wait for it..

 

100/0

Barack is d-o-n-e.

Still looking for answers to my question:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=7301201&postcount=3280

 

What else is there to base it on, other than polls?

 

When Obama spends money it's because he's desperate. When Romney spends money it's because they know they can take a state. It's remarkable living in jopat's world where anything can be spun as anything else at any time to fit any argument.

 

but that doesn't explain why Romney's there himself, and...why Slick Willy's spending the whole day in PA tomorrow.

try again.

 

feelings, duh. Jopatmc can feel that Romney is going to win, so all those polls just have to be wrong. And as we've seen over and over, his predictions are never wrong.

 

I was wondering the same thing. It's the most bizarre question ever. It's like asking what evidence is there that the Texans beat the Bills today, other than the score?

 

Dude, you???

You're an analyst Durvasa. Do you just evaluate polls?

 

First of all, I'm not a serious analyst. Just a sometimes overly obsessive Rockets fan.

Second of all, I really don't know in this case what to look at other than polls. I'm genuinely curious what you have in mind.

Maybe it would be more clear if you answer the same question: What are you looking at, other than polls, in reaching the conclusion that Romney is likely going to win the election?

 

awesome!