Nate Silver Say... Everything Nate Silver goes here

[Article 15]

Natey Boy is starting to walk back his prediction now...

From Twitter:

We have Obama as ~80% likely to win Electoral College if popular vote is a tie. 98% if it's O+1. 30% if it's R+1.

So, if the popular vote isn't tied or on the plus side for 0bama, Natey says Barry has a 30% or less chance of winning the EC...

FYI, Barry won't win the popular vote....

As I predicted, Nate is refining his prediction to try and save face...

Too late... The libs are gonna be pissed at him anyway...

^Priceless

I love how poorly you misread what Silver's post meant.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Natey Boy is starting to walk back his prediction now...

From Twitter:


So, if the popular vote isn't tied or on the plus side for 0bama, Natey says Barry has a 30% or less chance of winning the EC...

FYI, Barry won't win the popular vote....

As I predicted, Nate is refining his prediction to try and save face...

Too late... The libs are gonna be pissed at him anyway...

^Priceless

I love how poorly you misread what Silver's post meant.

i think it is a quite accomplished misread. must have a lot of practice.

 

[Dot Com]

House drop-by yet

He took his frustration out on his Barak Obama blow-up doll last night. The doll won the fight. I believe there was an injury. He might be out for a while...on the mend..

The kid's got it rough, give him some time.

I mean, think about it - he actually believed his own bullshit.

Can you imagine getting slapped by reality that hard and then upon regaining consciousness remembering that your dumbass made a ludacris, no wait, LUDACRIS bet with arguably the last person on the board you want to lose to?

He's prolly rewatching the entire House series while crushing a giant tub of cake frosting just to cope right now.

wasn't one of his parting posts something like "see you Wednesday loser"? Wednesday has come and gone.

 

[EriktheRed]

He took his frustration out on his Barak Obama blow-up doll last night. The doll won the fight. I believe there was an injury. He might be out for a while...on the mend..

The kid's got it rough, give him some time.

I mean, think about it - he actually believed his own bullshit.

Can you imagine getting slapped by reality that hard and then upon regaining consciousness remembering that your dumbass made a ludacris, no wait, LUDACRIS bet with arguably the last person on the board you want to lose to?

He's prolly rewatching the entire House series while crushing a giant tub of cake frosting just to cope right now.

wasn't one of his parting posts something like "see you Wednesday loser"? Wednesday has come and gone.

He's probably invisibly lurking as you're reading this.

 

[deaddogseye]

will someonme explain something to me -- what is the basis for saying silver got 50 states right?

On the morning of election day he had florida at 52 / 48 for Obama (earlier he had it for romney i believe) BUT by noon before the polls closed he had it 50/50 and labled it "Tossup" (and that is still on the site now). So he didnt make a call on it as of the end and really punted it. So he wasnt wrong but he also wanst right as far as I could tell.

So if you count DC he did get 50 elctoral jurisdictions right (or even more counting the seprate distircts in Maine in Nebraska) but he did not get all of them right as far as I can as far as I can tell.

Am i missing something and if i am where is his call on Florida on the site because what I see doesnt indicate obama. Thanks

 

[HUGGY]

will someonme explain something to me -- what is the basis for saying silver got 50 states right?

On the morning of election day he had florida at 52 / 48 for Obama (earlier he had it for romney i believe) BUT by noon before the polls closed he had it 50/50 and labled it "Tossup" (and that is still on the site now). So he didnt make a call on it as of the end and really punted it. So he wasnt wrong but he also wanst right as far as I could tell.

So if you count DC he did get 50 elctoral jurisdictions right (or even more counting the seprate distircts in Maine in Nebraska) but he did not get all of them right as far as I can as far as I can tell.

Am i missing something and if i am where is his call on Florida on the site because what I see doesnt indicate obama. Thanks

Yes. You are missing the fact that EVERY other pollster got it grossly wrong and this guy was almost perfect.

Rassmusen and it's ilk should go out of business. They are either liars or stupid. Anyone who trusts them in the future is a damned fool.

 

[deaddogseye]

will someonme explain something to me -- what is the basis for saying silver got 50 states right?

On the morning of election day he had florida at 52 / 48 for Obama (earlier he had it for romney i believe) BUT by noon before the polls closed he had it 50/50 and labled it "Tossup" (and that is still on the site now). So he didnt make a call on it as of the end and really punted it. So he wasnt wrong but he also wanst right as far as I could tell.

So if you count DC he did get 50 elctoral jurisdictions right (or even more counting the seprate distircts in Maine in Nebraska) but he did not get all of them right as far as I can as far as I can tell.

Am i missing something and if i am where is his call on Florida on the site because what I see doesnt indicate obama. Thanks

Yes. You are missing the fact that EVERY other pollster got it grossly wrong and this guy was almost perfect.

Rassmusen and it's ilk should go out of business. They are either liars or stupid. Anyone who trusts them in the future is a damned fool.

Thanks and fair enough but that is my question -- did he get it perfect as several have said here and several in the media have said or - as you say and I agree -- almost perfect (which i did too - i made apick on florida but for romney so that almost surely will prove wrong). THAT is the question. And there is a big difference between perfect and almost perfect (which is just another way for saying imperfect).

Although the copmarison to the pollsters is apples to oranges and silver would be the first one to tell you he is not a pollster. My guess is that he probably would even say that a pollster who said it was +1 romney (as I think rassmussen did) with a 3.5 MOE didnt get it wrong (assuming obama ended up winnig within the MOE as i think he did for most polls)

 

[Dick Tuck]

will someonme explain something to me -- what is the basis for saying silver got 50 states right?

On the morning of election day he had florida at 52 / 48 for Obama (earlier he had it for romney i believe) BUT by noon before the polls closed he had it 50/50 and labled it "Tossup" (and that is still on the site now). So he didnt make a call on it as of the end and really punted it. So he wasnt wrong but he also wanst right as far as I could tell.

So if you count DC he did get 50 elctoral jurisdictions right (or even more counting the seprate distircts in Maine in Nebraska) but he did not get all of them right as far as I can as far as I can tell.

Am i missing something and if i am where is his call on Florida on the site because what I see doesnt indicate obama. Thanks

Yes. You are missing the fact that EVERY other pollster got it grossly wrong and this guy was almost perfect.

Rassmusen and it's ilk should go out of business. They are either liars or stupid. Anyone who trusts them in the future is a damned fool.

Thanks and fair enough but that is my question -- did he get it perfect as several have said here and several in the media have said or - as you say and I agree -- almost perfect (which i did too - i made apick on florida but for romney so that almost surely will prove wrong). THAT is the question. And there is a big difference between perfect and almost perfect (which is just another way for saying imperfect).

Although the copmarison to the pollsters is apples to oranges and silver would be the first one to tell you he is not a pollster. My guess is that he probably would even say that a pollster who said it was +1 romney (as I think rassmussen did) with a 3.5 MOE didnt get it wrong (assuming obama ended up winnig within the MOE as i think he did for most polls)

Lets just get a few terms down Nate Silver, Pollster, and Real Clear aren't pollsters. They construct prediction models using many polls as data. Both Nate and Pollster, and a handful of lesser known analysts correctly predicted 51 out of 51 results. Than you had the analysts like Real Clear Politics who miscalled Florida. On the other extreme, you had unskewedpolls and analysts like Dick Morris and Karl Rove becoming a complete joke in their predictions.

Yes, Rassmussen and Gallup were among the worst poll organizations this go around. I can't say why Rassmussen was so terrible, but Gallup totally screwed up their LV algorithm, predicting that white turnout would be 78%, when it turned out to be 72%. Gallup also predicted that Republican turnout would exceed Democrats. Both of these organizations came in near the bottom of the list for accuracy.

 

[jillian]

Yes. You are missing the fact that EVERY other pollster got it grossly wrong and this guy was almost perfect.

Rassmusen and it's ilk should go out of business. They are either liars or stupid. Anyone who trusts them in the future is a damned fool.

Thanks and fair enough but that is my question -- did he get it perfect as several have said here and several in the media have said or - as you say and I agree -- almost perfect (which i did too - i made apick on florida but for romney so that almost surely will prove wrong). THAT is the question. And there is a big difference between perfect and almost perfect (which is just another way for saying imperfect).

Although the copmarison to the pollsters is apples to oranges and silver would be the first one to tell you he is not a pollster. My guess is that he probably would even say that a pollster who said it was +1 romney (as I think rassmussen did) with a 3.5 MOE didnt get it wrong (assuming obama ended up winnig within the MOE as i think he did for most polls)

Lets just get a few terms down Nate Silver, Pollster, and Real Clear aren't pollsters. They construct prediction models using many polls as data. Both Nate and Pollster, and a handful of lesser known analysts correctly predicted 51 out of 51 results. Than you had the analysts like Real Clear Politics who miscalled Florida. On the other extreme, you had unskewedpolls and analysts like Dick Morris and Karl Rove becoming a complete joke in their predictions.

Yes, Rassmussen and Gallup were among the worst poll organizations this go around. I can't say why Rassmussen was so terrible, but Gallup totally screwed up their LV algorithm, predicting that white turnout would be 78%, when it turned out to be 72%. Gallup also predicted that Republican turnout would exceed Democrats. Both of these organizations came in near the bottom of the list for accuracy.

rasmussen was horrible because they didn't survey cell phones (where a lot of people, especially younger people, now have their only phone contact; and he also decided that democrats were being oversampled even though that obviously wasn't the case.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Thanks and fair enough but that is my question -- did he get it perfect as several have said here and several in the media have said or - as you say and I agree -- almost perfect (which i did too - i made apick on florida but for romney so that almost surely will prove wrong). THAT is the question. And there is a big difference between perfect and almost perfect (which is just another way for saying imperfect).

Although the copmarison to the pollsters is apples to oranges and silver would be the first one to tell you he is not a pollster. My guess is that he probably would even say that a pollster who said it was +1 romney (as I think rassmussen did) with a 3.5 MOE didnt get it wrong (assuming obama ended up winnig within the MOE as i think he did for most polls)

Lets just get a few terms down Nate Silver, Pollster, and Real Clear aren't pollsters. They construct prediction models using many polls as data. Both Nate and Pollster, and a handful of lesser known analysts correctly predicted 51 out of 51 results. Than you had the analysts like Real Clear Politics who miscalled Florida. On the other extreme, you had unskewedpolls and analysts like Dick Morris and Karl Rove becoming a complete joke in their predictions.

Yes, Rassmussen and Gallup were among the worst poll organizations this go around. I can't say why Rassmussen was so terrible, but Gallup totally screwed up their LV algorithm, predicting that white turnout would be 78%, when it turned out to be 72%. Gallup also predicted that Republican turnout would exceed Democrats. Both of these organizations came in near the bottom of the list for accuracy.

rasmussen was horrible because they didn't survey cell phones (where a lot of people, especially younger people, now have their only phone contact; and he also decided that democrats were being oversampled even though that obviously wasn't the case.

Just found this. Dean Chambers, who developed the model at unskewedpolls did use Rasmussen's party id numbers. PPP, who topped the list for accuracy, had an interesting comeback:

Meet Dean Chambers, The Virginia Republican Who Is ‘Unskewing’ The Polls | TPM2012

Chambers’ project started in July after he noticed an ABC News/Washington Post poll that “just didn’t look right.” An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted this month showed Obama up over Romney 49 percent to 48 percent. “Unskewed,” however, after applying Rasmussen’s numbers on party ID, Romney leads Obama 52-45 in the poll. It’s like magic. But Chambers insists he isn’t “changing” or “making up” data. “The only thing I’m doing is weighting.”

But that’s exactly what most pollsters don’t do. “We don’t have any preconceived notions about the party breakdown of a poll before we conduct it. The only things we make any adjustments for are gender, race, and age,” Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling’s Tom Jensen told TPM in an email. “It makes sense that as support for Obama increases, more people also identify themselves as Democrats. I know conservatives want to think it’s more Democrats in the poll causing Obama to do better, but it’s actually Obama doing better causing more Democrats in the poll.”

Jensen's point seems correct. This article isn't Monday morning quarterbacking, btw. It was published in September.

 

[deaddogseye]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He didn't have it as a toss-up. He had it as a lean Obama. His prediction was there was a 50.2% chance Obama would win the state. Better than even odds.

 

[AceRothstein]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He shaded Florida light blue on his State-By-State Probabilities map late Tuesday morning.

 

[deaddogseye]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He didn't have it as a toss-up. He had it as a lean Obama. His prediction was there was a 50.2% chance Obama would win the state. Better than even odds.

well -- yes he had it as you say tuesday morning but then later that morning before the polls closed he pulled it back and put it 50/50 and called it a tossup -- and thats how it still is now - check it out so i think he didnt call it right. I think im right on this.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He didn't have it as a toss-up. He had it as a lean Obama. His prediction was there was a 50.2% chance Obama would win the state. Better than even odds.

well -- yes he had it as you say tuesday morning but then later that morning before the polls closed he pulled it back and put it 50/50 and called it a tossup -- and thats how it still is now - check it out so i think he didnt call it right. I think im right on this.

Provide a link. I'm looking at his predictions here, and he currently has Obama with a 50.3% chance of winning Florida. He doesn't do things like 50/50 that I recall.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

 

[AceRothstein]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He didn't have it as a toss-up. He had it as a lean Obama. His prediction was there was a 50.2% chance Obama would win the state. Better than even odds.

well -- yes he had it as you say tuesday morning but then later that morning before the polls closed he pulled it back and put it 50/50 and called it a tossup -- and thats how it still is now - check it out so i think he didnt call it right. I think im right on this.

Scroll over Florida on the State-By-State Probabilities map.

 

[deaddogseye]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He shaded Florida light blue on his State-By-State Probabilities map late Tuesday morning.

i see what you say about the map - it does seem like a hedge between the two references. Im just guessing if whether when on Tuesday morning he revised the florida table to a toss up he just didnt make the conforming change on the map -- but i guess we will never know. Seems a little slippery to me but whatever.

Thanks for the answers

 

[Dick Tuck]

Nate Silver isn't quite perfect. He miscalled the Tester/Rehberg race in Montana. He gave Rehberg a 65.5% chance of winning, but Tester won by almost 4 points. To cut him some slack, there wasn't a whole lot of polling done there.

 

[deaddogseye]

He didn't have it as a toss-up. He had it as a lean Obama. His prediction was there was a 50.2% chance Obama would win the state. Better than even odds.

well -- yes he had it as you say tuesday morning but then later that morning before the polls closed he pulled it back and put it 50/50 and called it a tossup -- and thats how it still is now - check it out so i think he didnt call it right. I think im right on this.

Provide a link. I'm looking at his predictions here, and he currently has Obama with a 50.3% chance of winning Florida. He doesn't do things like 50/50 that I recall.

Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com

ok -- this is weird. I was going to send you a link but i clicked on your link and it shows (me at least) exactly what i said. Scroll down the left side to the tables of state and look at florida? doesnt it say exactly what I say?

 

[Dick Tuck]

Last time I'll ask but can someone point me to where he picks Florida right? All i see on the site is he calls it a tossup and punts with no prediction.

He shaded Florida light blue on his State-By-State Probabilities map late Tuesday morning.

i see what you say about the map - it does seem like a hedge between the two references. Im just guessing if whether when on Tuesday morning he revised the florida table to a toss up he just didnt make the conforming change on the map -- but i guess we will never know. Seems a little slippery to me but whatever.

Thanks for the answers

A hedge or rounding. Florida was the tightest race in the country, and giving Obama a 50.3% chance of winning seems totally reasonable to call it a toss-up. Hell, we won't have the final numbers for at least a week, after the mandatory recount.