Nate Silver: The polls aren’t wrong

[DonViejo]

Bias? The stats guru who nailed the 2008 election tells Salon it's very hard for this many surveys to all be off

BY DAVID DALEY

We are drowning in polls and predictions. Whether it’s politics, sports, economics or even the weather, there’s more information and data than ever. But how much of it is white noise? How many of these predictions have rigor and mathematics behind them, and how many mask uncertainty or ideology behind the seeming exactitude of numbers?

In 2008, Nate Silver built a near-perfect model for analyzing the polls at his web site Fivethirtyeight.com. Silver called Obama over McCain in March — and ultimately nailed 49 of 50 states, got every Senate race right and predicted the popular vote within a percentage point. That’s the kind of predictive power we all dream of when we fill out NCAA tournament brackets or a lottery ticket. The New York Times added his blog to its site soon after the election. The numbers geek started a bidding war.

-snip-

As national and state polls began swinging in President Obama’s favor this week and Romney partisans began trying to discredit the objectivity of the results, Silver met with Salon in a coffee shop downstairs from the New York Times to talk insider political baseball. (The interview has been edited and condensed.)

Fox News and Romney supporters this week have turned on the polls. As more and more of them show the president opening up a wider lead, both nationally and in many of the major swing states, they’re essentially charging that there’s liberal bias both in the way these polls are conducted and in the way they are reported. Is there any truth to that?

At that point, you literally are alleging a conspiracy, right? And you get these headlines on Fox News like: “Poll is biased toward Obama.” I think they maybe make too much of that on the conservative side.

Read More:
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/29/nate_silver_the_polls_arent_wrong/

[joycejnr]

1. When you're out of legitimate arguments...

...you lie. Or change the subject. Or shoot the messenger. Or...ad infinitum.

[DCBob]

2. Nate's being way too kind..

These people are lying about the polls simply to boost their preferred candidate.

[socialindependocrat]

3. They lie about everything - why expect anything different, but...

My cousin, from a very wealthy family, will spew out all
the Repuke rhetoric and when I refute what she says she
gets very excited and agressive.

I, on the other hand, have worked in research for the past 35 years.
I listen to ideas and weigh the facts and alter my opinion based on the facts I have at hand.

The goal is not to be right but to be on a continual search for the truth.

[Laelth]

4. I look at it like this.

My goal is, in fact, to be right--as often as I possibly can, but in order to be right one must always be open to the possibility that what one currently believes is wrong. Then, when provided with data that contradicts a given belief, one can change one's mind and then be even more right than before.

Ultimately, I think we're saying the same thing but coming at it from different directions.

-Laelth

[socialindependocrat]

7. Agree - very well done

It's like a proving math

You come at it from opposite ends and if you come out to the same answer you can feel protty sure your right.

Thanks for your added words of wisdom!

[Wounded Bear]

5. I thought polls were created to measure public bias.....

perhaps I was wrong?

[justiceischeap]

6. The only thing that bothers me about the polling is...

GOTV is too important and widening polls may hamper the Democratic turnout.

[Orangepeel]

8. GOTV is vital, of course. But it is much better to be winning than losing

I think the risk of complacency is less than the combined effects of bandwagon jumping on the part of "undecideds" and a "why bother" defeatist attitude on the part of people who expect to lose.

I hear people say that they root for the underdog. Well, maybe. But most people only root for the underdog when there's a really good chance the underdog will win. In general, people want to back a winner, not a loser.

[ywcachieve]

20. We Dems are intelligent enough to know that in order for the projected ourtcome

of the election to come to past, we have to vote.

[hrmjustin]

9. I see rass poll has Obama up +2. n/t

[fasttense]

10. Sometimes I hate Nate.

Because he is usually right and I hate it when he is right about things I don't want. Like when the RepubliCONS took over the house. I screamed about bias polling then and thought Nate would be wrong about his prediction of Dems losing the house. But he wasn't wrong and I felt ashamed that I didn't listen to the truth.

So I understand where the RepubliCONS are coming from in their desire not to look at reality. But when I and many DUers were screaming the polls were wrong, it never made it to prime time television. It was never carried by MSNBC or any other real or fake news show. There were no websites devoted to lying about the polls and it was never given validity by liberal talk show hosts.

And there in lies the difference between Democratic leaning people and RepubliCONS. Liberal conspiracy theories are never, ever given validity while most any crazy ass thing a RepubliCON farts is spread throughout the corporate media.

[heaven05]

11. ??

well if silver is so good, then when it comes to congress, then we're fuc...! GOP,70 percent chance of retaining. We're fuc...!!!

[magical thyme]

12. he hadn't crunched the numbers yet as of the interview

that was his hunch.

His hunch on the Presidency early on was 50/50. Then he crunched the numbers at found 60/40 for Obama. And then looked closely at the data, as saw that Obama already led in some swing states.

[demwing]

13. "Fucked"

its ok to write it.

But we're not fucked, even if the Repugs keep the House. Not if we keep the Senate and Obama wins.

[Hutzpa]

14. Well Duh!

nt.

[underthematrix]

15. I agree with Nate on PBO

winning re-election but I disagree with his CURRENT prediction regarding the House. I think the House will go a very very deep blue (300) and so will the senate (65-70 deep blue). Originally, I made this prediction during the GOP primaries, I think around the time of the Iowa primary. In the same tweet, I predicted PBO would win 85% of the popular vote. I think PBO is going to widen his lead very week until the polls close on Nov 6th. Me and my husband and most of my friends will be voting on the first day of early voting. PBO has asked his supporters to vote early. I am following his instructions. Also I'm going to take a pic of my votes, just in case there are shenanigans.

[madinmaryland]

16. Huh?

If the Democrats won all of the seats they are defending and the won all of the ones Repubs are defending, they would have 62 or 63 seats in the Senate. That is a big stretch.

[rdmtimp]

18. Your Senate prediction is numerically impossible....

The Dems currently have 53 seats. Of the 33 seats up this year, 23 of those are currently D, whlle 10 are currently R. Thus, the best the Dems could do (if they hold all the D seats and win all the R seats) is 63.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

19. Gimme a break

I can't take anyone seriously with that Senate prediction.

[33Greeper]

17. Here's a thought.......

The "Skewed Polls" meme is a desperate attempt by the GOP to get un enthused Republicans to the polls. It will not work.