Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (761765)	1/6/2014 3:16:29 PM
From: Alex MG	Respond to of 1574751

once again just simple math... lolol Nate Silver was always just a number cruncher... and very good at what he does but of course the wingnuts will always have to blame some kind of conspiracy theory instead of admitting they support wacknuts which the majority of Americans do not the wingnuts are still trying to prove Bill and Hillary had 100 people murdered for political purposes, lolol trying to reason with wingnuts is fruitless... but it can be amusing to rattle their cages every now and then

To: neolib who wrote (761765)	1/6/2014 3:38:33 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1574751

"The politicians instead thought the errors were correct. Hence old Rove's meltdown on live TV." I think it was less that than they just HATED the idea of another 4 years of the first black president. I think they went into total shock when he won the first time, because they could not believe that America would choose a black man, even over an old hack like John McCain.

To: neolib who wrote (761765)	1/6/2014 3:51:21 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574751

>> Nate Silver took each poll and applied corrections to them based on their historical performance. I have no idea how you turn that into the above sentence. The corrections were in pretty much all cases, biased the way you would expect for each organization. Actually, that's not what Silver did (although that was one tiny element) to adjust the polling data. At the end of the day it all came down to turnout and Silver got it right and some others got it wrong. It isn't some kind of arithmetic panacea, however. He is the golden boy today and could be yesterday's news next time around. And he knows that. Yes, the Left thinks Silver hung the moon. I didn't find it to be a particularly big accomplishment. His prediction, that there was a 90% chance Obama would win, was simply a regurgitation of the numbers a statistician would expect. Which, of course, meant there was a 10% chance he would end up looking like a fool, because the American public -- and certainly the newspaper & tv reporters in the country, have no idea what statistics is about. Had he been wrong his career would have ended badly. Just like movie actors and rock stars, it is about being good but also about being in the right place at the right time. >> Hence old Rove's meltdown on live TV. I don't think he "melted down" -- I just think the outcome didn't look right to him and he questioned it. I thought he was wrong when he did it, but I have just seen way too many situations where someone didn't question the numbers when they should have (Obamacare being the biggest example I know of, but the Challenger disaster would be another example). People have to ask questions when things don't look right or you end up with total fuckups like Gore recanting his concession, then having to concede again when he was shown to have lost in the end.