What’s Wrong With 538?

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-07, 13:56

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/whats-wrong-with-538_us_581ffe18e4b0334571e09e74

"While I love following the prediction markets for this year’s election, the most popular and widely quoted website out there, fivethirtyeight.com, has something tragically wrong with its presidential prediction model. With the same information, 538 is currently predicting a 65 percent chance of a Clinton victory, while HuffPost’s Natalie Jackson and Adam Hooper are projecting a 98 percent chance,[1] and Sam Wang at Princeton Electoral Consortium is predicting a >99 percent chance.[2] What gives?"

by **Tim Wakefield** 2016-11-07, 13:58

I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2016-11-07, 14:11

Nate Silver - a fine graduate of East Lansing High School. What’s Wrong With 538? 3493939353

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-07, 14:14

Tim Wakefield wrote: I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

I guess we'll find out.

Maybe Trump supporters are being underrepresented in the polls.

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-07, 14:18

Can we agree Nate Silver's work is now considered believable in GOP circles?

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-07, 14:21

NigelUno wrote:
Tim Wakefield wrote: I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

I guess we'll find out.

Maybe Trump supporters are being underrepresented in the polls.

Peggy Noonan thinks silent supporters have silent votes and she's been knee deep in watching/reading polls since at least 1980.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2016-11-07, 14:23

NigelUno wrote:
Tim Wakefield wrote: I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

I guess we'll find out.

Maybe Trump supporters are being underrepresented in the polls.

that's why I think it'll be closer than most of the moronic talking heads seem to think.. and that Trump has a shot at winning.

Most people, when polled, aren't ready to admit out loud that they're a racist, bigoted misogynist. In the privacy of the voting booth, though, they can be true to their views.

by Guest 2016-11-07, 14:29

Silver is still predicting 65% Hills which is quite strong - he's just saying there's more volatility out there than the other prediction joints want to admit to.

If 1/2 the shit that Drudge is pushing on the early voting is true then Silver may be right.

by **DWags** 2016-11-07, 14:43

I'm telling you, I've watched rallies a long time, the fanaticism that is following trump around is unique. I recall Clinton in 96 with big followings at campaign stops. But not close to trump.

I'm going to be skeptical about the predictions here. I'm not convinced that Hills has this in the bag. Quite the opposite

by Guest 2016-11-07, 14:45

DWags wrote:I'm telling you, I've watched rallies a long time, the fanaticism that is following trump around is unique. I recall Clinton in 96 with big followings at campaign stops. But not close to trump.

I'm going to be skeptical about the predictions here. I'm not convinced that Hills has this in the bag. Quite the opposite

Did you watch any Obama rallies in 2008?

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2016-11-07, 15:00

DWags wrote:I'm telling you, I've watched rallies a long time, the fanaticism that is following trump around is unique. I recall Clinton in 96 with big followings at campaign stops. But not close to trump.

kinda like the Third Reich

I'm going to be skeptical about the predictions here. I'm not convinced that Hills has this in the bag. Quite the opposite

Trump could and very well might win.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2016-11-07, 15:04

LooseGoose wrote:Silver is still predicting 65% Hills which is quite strong - he's just saying there's more volatility out there than the other prediction joints want to admit to.

If 1/2 the shit that Drudge is pushing on the early voting is true then Silver may be right.

Drudge... the same site that just a few weeks ago was posting pictures of Tim Kayne photo shopped by the onion and passing them off as real?

I can 100% promise you from the bottom of my heart that whatever they are pushing on you is not 1/2 true.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2016-11-07, 15:06

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Silver is still predicting 65% Hills which is quite strong - he's just saying there's more volatility out there than the other prediction joints want to admit to.

If 1/2 the shit that Drudge is pushing on the early voting is true then Silver may be right.

Drudge... the same site that just a few weeks ago was posting pictures of Tim Kayne photo shopped by the onion and passing them off as real?

I can 100% promise you from the bottom of my heart that whatever they are pushing on you is not 1/2 true.

Drudge also had the picture of Bill Clinton's black lovechild.. What’s Wrong With 538? 502811600

because, ya know, just any old "lovechild" wouldn't work.. to maximize outrage, the lovechild had to be black. afro

by Guest 2016-11-07, 15:27

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Silver is still predicting 65% Hills which is quite strong - he's just saying there's more volatility out there than the other prediction joints want to admit to.

If 1/2 the shit that Drudge is pushing on the early voting is true then Silver may be right.

Drudge... the same site that just a few weeks ago was posting pictures of Tim Kayne photo shopped by the onion and passing them off as real?

I can 100% promise you from the bottom of my heart that whatever they are pushing on you is not 1/2 true.

I never said it was, though he's linking to other media on the early voting totals. I'll be shocked if Trump Actually outpolled Obama during early voting. I don't think that's possible.

by Guest 2016-11-07, 15:28

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Drudge... the same site that just a few weeks ago was posting pictures of Tim Kayne photo shopped by the onion and passing them off as real?

I can 100% promise you from the bottom of my heart that whatever they are pushing on you is not 1/2 true.
Drudge also had the picture of Bill Clinton's black lovechild..

because, ya know, just any old "lovechild" wouldn't work.. to maximize outrage, the lovechild had to be black.

Well it would have been awkward to post pictures of his mother and claim he was Chinese.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2016-11-07, 15:29

LooseGoose wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:
Drudge also had the picture of Bill Clinton's black lovechild..

because, ya know, just any old "lovechild" wouldn't work.. to maximize outrage, the lovechild had to be black.

Well it would have been awkward to post pictures of his mother and claim he was Chinese.

the Trump knuckle-draggers would believe it.

by Guest 2016-11-07, 15:30

Just for Travis:

The Colorado link was the Denver Post - I don't know how reliable they are.

Purple State Memo: Republicans hold lead in Colorado early voting entering Election Day

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2016-11-07, 15:33

LooseGoose wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Drudge... the same site that just a few weeks ago was posting pictures of Tim Kayne photo shopped by the onion and passing them off as real?

I can 100% promise you from the bottom of my heart that whatever they are pushing on you is not 1/2 true.

I never said it was, though he's linking to other media on the early voting totals. I'll be shocked if Trump Actually outpolled Obama during early voting. I don't think that's possible.

LooseGoose wrote:Just for Travis:

The Colorado link was the Denver Post - I don't know how reliable they are.

Purple State Memo: Republicans hold lead in Colorado early voting entering Election Day

So it is half true then?

by Clarett's Folly 2016-11-07, 16:21

Tim Wakefield wrote: I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

Seconded.

by **Rocinante** 2016-11-07, 16:34

He gonna get raped.

by Guest 2016-11-07, 17:16

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I never said it was, though he's linking to other media on the early voting totals. I'll be shocked if Trump Actually outpolled Obama during early voting. I don't think that's possible.
LooseGoose wrote:Just for Travis:

The Colorado link was the Denver Post - I don't know how reliable they are.

Purple State Memo: Republicans hold lead in Colorado early voting entering Election Day

So it is half true then?

Only god knows man. 24 hours from now we'll all know since supposedly the decades long embargo on exit polls is going to get broken tomorrow.

by **Turtleneck** 2016-11-07, 22:01

So yeah, I guess we are supposed to turn on Nate Silver now? I will say the Polls-Only forecast is worthless because you are averaging polls that used different methods.

Looking at the FiveThirtyEight‘s forecast on Sunday night, I can’t figure out Nate’s prediction is. On his Polls-only forecast, which just averages the polls, he gives Trump a 50.5% chance to win Nevada. That’s practically a coinflip! But on Nate’s Polls-plus forecast, which includes some nerd math, he gives Hillary a 50.3% chance to win Nevada.

Nate… are you still trying to have it both ways?

Even if Nate’s two models converge on one winner, he will still try to have it both ways. If he gives a candidate a 49.9% chance to win a state and they win, he can say, “hey, I said it would be even odds, so I was right!”

Right, because he didn’t predict anything.

It’s time to face facts. Nate’s little models failed in the primary. The Dig out-predicted both of his models up and down the ballot. And when I demanded that Nate stop hedging, stop misleading his poor readers, and just pick one candidate to one each state and have the damn confidence to stick with it, he cut and ran from my challenge to an honorable forecaster’s du

http://www.cafe.com/carl-diggler-throws-gauntlet-nate-silver-coward-will-soon-crush-gut/

by **Blanch32** 2016-11-07, 22:41

Tim Wakefield wrote: I'll take Silver's word over someone from Huffington Post

This.

...and he should hedge if he doesn't have a lock. he simply can't risk being wrong

by Sponsored content

What’s Wrong With 538?

What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?

Re: What’s Wrong With 538?