General Discussion

muriel_volestrangler

(101,266 posts)

55. Oh, there was me thinking this thread was about how to predict how people will vote

Thu Nov 5, 2020, 04:50 PM

Nov 2020

rather than becoming Cambridge Analytica and trying to manipulate them.

Go ahead. Stare into the abyss, and try to become it. We won't join you.

"Truth doesn't really matter". Can I quote you in future discussions about voting?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can we please kick Nate Silver to the curb [View all] boston bean Nov 2020 OP

All he does is average the polls SouthernCal_Dem Nov 2020 #1

Yeah and his "averaging" has proven useless. boston bean Nov 2020 #3

Let's see how the final numbers look SouthernCal_Dem Nov 2020 #6

Ohio was way way off. So was WI. MI and PA Tribetime Nov 2020 #58

... and FL In It to Win It Nov 2020 #62

It's a shit-in shit-out situation. He collects the public polling data from the "reputable" polling In It to Win It Nov 2020 #64

It's a little more complicated than that Jose Garcia Nov 2020 #12

You're correct SouthernCal_Dem Nov 2020 #22

No assertion of probability can be called "wrong" unless it's either 0% or 100%. Towlie Nov 2020 #39

It's not Nate Silver's fault that roughly 70 million Americans voted for fascism WSHazel Nov 2020 #2

No sinkingfeeling Nov 2020 #4

FFS really? How about you whine about the pollsters?? nt USALiberal Nov 2020 #5

No one would ever lie to a pollster. Right? IADEMO2004 Nov 2020 #7

While I agree with you, I don't think this is completely Nate Silver's fault. Claustrum Nov 2020 #8

He is bringing nothing to the table. boston bean Nov 2020 #11

So why don't you use the polling data and decide who will win? nt USALiberal Nov 2020 #16

Don't get me wrong. I stopped following him, 538 and any other pollsters right after Nov. 3. Claustrum Nov 2020 #27

True, but I think polls are going to have a lote less credibility going forward Miguelito Loveless Nov 2020 #18

He didn't take the polls. Might be a clue. Nt BootinUp Nov 2020 #9

So what is he adding except to give validity to these boston bean Nov 2020 #13

He said Trump had a 10% change of winning! You understand 10% happens correct? nt USALiberal Nov 2020 #19

His interpretation of the stats is pretty useful BootinUp Nov 2020 #61

He doesn't do his own polls. He uses polls done by pollsters. LisaL Nov 2020 #10

He's just a poll aggregator. Buckeye_Democrat Nov 2020 #14

You don't know what you're talking about Loki Liesmith Nov 2020 #15

+1000! nt USALiberal Nov 2020 #17

Who cares? gab13by13 Nov 2020 #20

Same with the DU prognosticators. cwydro Nov 2020 #21

I believed in 2016. Learned my lesson well. boston bean Nov 2020 #23

I actually felt better this time than in 2016. LisaL Nov 2020 #26

Yep. LisaL Nov 2020 #25

+1000! nt USALiberal Nov 2020 #31

Nate, in one of his last posts, MontanaFarmer Nov 2020 #24

Sometimes I think we should just wait to count the votes treestar Nov 2020 #28

Every cycle Dem2 Nov 2020 #29

Frustration is at the limitations of statistics-- and polls suffer the same issues hlthe2b Nov 2020 #30

Fuck - do you mean Trump just won? muriel_volestrangler Nov 2020 #32

Maybe he's not taking into account the cheating by Republicans. milestogo Nov 2020 #33

He's not, and he wrote that himself. Here's the link: Towlie Nov 2020 #34

Hard to account for USPS and hacking that leaves little to no trace JCMach1 Nov 2020 #36

+1, none of them are ... They minimize the affect of voter suppression uponit7771 Nov 2020 #42

I'll certainly give the aggregate model less credence Codeine Nov 2020 #35

Back To The Old Saw... ProfessorGAC Nov 2020 #57

It is actually playing out EXACTLY as he has been saying for the past month. cbdo2007 Nov 2020 #37

This isn't Silver's fault. Washington Post had a poll showing Biden up 16 points Azathoth Nov 2020 #38

How so? Did I miss something...has trump won? Captain Stern Nov 2020 #40

Polling needs to be replaced by an analysis of what is happening on social media Klaralven Nov 2020 #41

Heavy sarcasm? (nt) muriel_volestrangler Nov 2020 #44

Not at all. I'm completely serious. Klaralven Nov 2020 #45

Oh yeah, social media is oh-so-reliable. No one has ever detected any fake accounts muriel_volestrangler Nov 2020 #46

Social media knows a lot about posters, whether they are fake or not, bots or not. Klaralven Nov 2020 #53

Oh, there was me thinking this thread was about how to predict how people will vote muriel_volestrangler Nov 2020 #55

"in politics, truth doesn't really matter" -- not specifically about voting. Klaralven Nov 2020 #59

This thread is about "election predictions". ie "voting predictions". muriel_volestrangler Nov 2020 #60

Statisticians must help to get answers Bonn1997 Nov 2020 #43

I think the best bet moving forward BannonsLiver Nov 2020 #47

Cook Political Report was a failure MoonlitKnight Nov 2020 #48

Yeah a total disaster BannonsLiver Nov 2020 #49

Just about everyone was worse Rstrstx Nov 2020 #52

For the presidency, so far he's only missed on 2 Rstrstx Nov 2020 #50

He gives good catnip to political junkies like me, I'm glad he's around Alhena Nov 2020 #51

Far as I'm concerned, polling is dead Tarc Nov 2020 #54

Nate Silver gives you stats and shows you probabilities BusyBeingBest Nov 2020 #56

This is dumb BGBD Nov 2020 #63