DU had a great poster named Statistical

[malaise]

who put me in my place re Nate Silver years ago.

Serious Democrats should Get out the Vote and stop attacking Silver - he's the best of the best.

[herding cats]

1. I totally agree.

Just because the Rightwing despised Nate when he was systematically predicting their demise in 2012 didn't make him a Democrat. He's a mathematics guru, a numbers guy. And he's almost always right. So, when he says at this stage of the game we could lose the senate, we need to take it seriously before it's too late to change things.

I am not going to be like one of those pathetic Republicans I laughed at in 2012 for blaming the messenger.

[malaise]

4. +1,000

Get out the fugging vote

[badtoworse]

2. Had? What happened to him?

[malaise]

3. I haven't seen him posting for ages

unless he changed his username

[badtoworse]

5. You're right. It's been a while.

[pintobean]

6. He has never posted on DU3

The post counts on DU2 and DU3 are the same.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=226776
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=226776

[hfojvt]

7. I think he got tired of arguing with me and left

I cannot find his last post though. When you search for "statistical" you get a lot of other hits.

Seriously though we were in some six post exchange or something and he did write something like "I think it is time for me to leave DU".

I liked him.

But a 'great' poster?

As far as Silver goes, I do NOT like his game. The uncertainty principle says something like "you cannot measure something without changing that which you are measuring". I just worry that his business of predicting election results becomes partly self fulfilling. Especially when it goes on for months and months and months.

Couldn't we just let the voters decide instead of having the media, the M$M, tell us? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4719041

[malaise]

8. When it came to matters statistical

He was a great poster. He was 100% correct re Nate Silver

[Laxman]

9. This Is An Important Point Malaise...

we are not the anti-science party. If the numbers and trends point to a certain outcome then respond appropriately. Based on the Senate seats that are in play, this is not, on its face, an outlandish prediction. Combine this with Mr. Silver's track record as a sober analyst and we should take heed. How should we respond to climate change, to a medical diagnosis or to any other rationally derived analysis with a sound scientific basis? By taking appropriate measures. Why should this be different. Hit the campaign trail. Work harder. Get out the vote!

[malaise]

10. Dems cannot behave like Karl Rove on national TV

election night. Nate Silver is a boss at his profession

[Laxman]

11. We Shouldn't Act Like Karl Rover Ever....

but Amen to that! Nor should there be either a collective "woe is me" resignation or a foolish denial of what is happening. Rational people take action.

[n2doc]

12. Exactly

Although I would say GOTV efforts are overrated. If it were as simple as that, Scott Walker would have been removed from office in Wisconsin. What needs to be done is a get out the information campaign that will set the story straight with independents. Democrats hopefully will see this as a call to arms and to quit trying to be 'just slightly to the left of the republican'.

[LuvNewcastle]

13. Nate Silver was the only analyst I saw who was right about the 2012 election.

He knows what he's doing, and Democrats shouldn't shoot the messenger. We have enough time to change the outcome if we work at getting people to the polls instead of whining about the pollster who's just giving his results. If he was saying this a week before the election, Democrats might have a legitimate gripe about keeping people away from the polls, but we have plenty of time to get to work and turn it around. Democrats should be thanking Silver for the warning.

[malaise]

14. Precisely

It makes no sense attacking the messenger

[Jim Lane]

16. There were other poll aggregators pretty much nailing it.

I was routinely following electoral-vote.com, which, like Silver, relied on combining various pollsters' state-by-state results according to a weighting formula. IIRC that site did almost as well as Silver, going 50/51 (having Florida a narrow Romney win when it was actually a narrow Obama win).

[xchrom]

15. du rec.

[Glitterati]

17. You know....it's really simple

Polls and polling be damned.

It's the party to WANTS it more that always wins an election.

So, we want Democrats in office more than the freepers want teabaggers in office, yes or no?

It's the party who WANTS the win who turns out their voters.

Damn the polls. GOTV or lose.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Innumeracy is a serious problem in this country.

And that is partly what you are seeing.