The Fundamental Problem with Nate Silver's Model [View all]

[grantcart]

The fundamental problem with Nate Silver’s model is that the state polls cannot be reconciled with the national trend. You cannot have states like NY, CA, WA up 20 points, another dozen states where Clinton is up 15 points and the most populous red states like TX, AZ and Florida where she is even or down just a little and then have the national polls where Clinton is only up 3%, it just doesn’t add up.

EITHER HUNDREDS OF STATE POLLS ARE WAY OFF OR A FEW NATIONAL POLLS ARE A FEW POINTS OFF. SILVER HAS DECIDED THAT THE NATIONAL POLLS ARE GOLD AND ADJUSTS DOZENS OF STATE POLLS IN ORDER TO MAKE A SQUARE PEG FIT A ROUND HOLE.

The Princeton consortium never uses the national polls as the state polls are much more accurate and they don’t have to adjust to make them fit

Silver’s model is based on his sports models where there is a constant stream of games being played on schedule with a set data stream. One of the problems with the last 2 weeks of the election season is that Republicans launch a barrage of polls from RW pollsters (who ever heard of Remington?) that lean heavy Republican that are used to help with their GOTV.

Silver’s top down approach that gives preeminence to national polls is not as stable as the bottom up approach that other sites use that work on a larger and more accurate base of state polls. If you accept that Clinton is currently 6% ahead nationally then you can reconcile all of the state polls without major adjustment.