Has been fairly accurate in his predictions. Has a book he’s pimping now too so has a big vested interest in being accurate now. Has a nice breakdown of polls thats fairly up to date and shows problems with some of their conclusions.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
This appeals to people?
Women didn’t fight for the right to vote to be reduced to uterian voter stock. This is what the democrats think of my wife, daughter and mother… And people wonder why I’ve rejected the liberal narrative to the degree I have.
But honestly, does a woman over the age of 24 watch this and respond positively?[/quote]
I can’t imagine they do. Never did I imagine I would see a presidential campaign ad asking one to lose one’s virginity, so to speak, with their guy. Classy…
[/quote]
This is absolutely ridiculous. Does anyone else feel that the Obama campaign (and its super PAC surrogates) is now a parody? It’s almost as if conservative satirists are now in charge over there.
And, by the way, I haven’t been able to actually watch the other video yet, but did the Obama campaign actually rip off this theme from an ad from the camp of…Vladimir Putin?
[quote]groo wrote:
Has been fairly accurate in his predictions. Has a book he’s pimping now too so has a big vested interest in being accurate now. Has a nice breakdown of polls thats fairly up to date and shows problems with some of their conclusions.[/quote]
Silver is a d-bag.
He openly roots for obama, writes for the New York Liberal, and discounts every poll with a Romney lead…
He may be right, but a 26% chance of winning seems to fly in the face of my own eyes and ears at this point. Not to mention that assumes quite a few swing states going in the opposite direction of national polls that have a better track record than he does.
The thing about sabermetrics - The Oakland A’s never win the Series, and look how well it is working out for the Red Sox right now.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
Has been fairly accurate in his predictions. Has a book he’s pimping now too so has a big vested interest in being accurate now. Has a nice breakdown of polls thats fairly up to date and shows problems with some of their conclusions.[/quote]
Silver is a d-bag.
He openly roots for obama, writes for the New York Liberal, and discounts every poll with a Romney lead…
He may be right, but a 26% chance of winning seems to fly in the face of my own eyes and ears at this point. Not to mention that assumes quite a few swing states going in the opposite direction of national polls that have a better track record than he does.[/quote]
You have a bit of a perception bias here I think. Regardless of his personal politics his business, what makes him money, are his predictions. He has a good track record of being accurate. It would be much better for him to be extremely accurate on a Romney win prediction than extremely off on an Obama win prediction.
He isn’t polling his predicting. Certainly he could be wrong but I don’t see what benefit it serves him to be completely off base.
His book is interesting as well.
What do you find as Obama cheerleading on the page I linked? Everything there seems to be him putting his reputation and future earning on the line and predicting off the available data and giving his analysis. I don’t see pro Obama rhetoric.
Is every source you disagree with completely wrong?
I mean I think most news organizations have a bias some to the left and some to the right and all to what makes them the most money but that doesn’t mean they are always or even most of the time wrong.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
The thing about sabermetrics - The Oakland A’s never win the Series, and look how well it is working out for the Red Sox right now.[/quote]
Well I’d say Pecota was mostly made as an individual performance metric where its been fairly accurate. Putting it to use as a team performance predictor will suffer just from that.
Either way its made him quite a bit of money and is at least as accurate as other metrics used without needing as much data.
[quote]groo wrote:
He has a good track record of being accurate. [/quote]
Please show me where Gallop and Rasmussen are surpassed by Silver in any reasonable person’s opinion.
He nailed the 2008 election… That was a tough one, I know.
You may be right about my being bias about it, I’ve admitted as much probably a hundred times in these treads.
He isn’t, nor would he be, off base on purpose. He certianly has bias issues of his own. Look at how his model works. He up sells polls with a D+ sample as high as 2008 levels, discounts polls that bring the D+ down. The simple fact is people aren’t as excited for obama in 2008. And independants are running to Romney, in pretty much every poll. This leads one to believe the D+ isn’t going to be as strong as 08.
He adds in stock market and economic sabermetrics as well, and again, this stuff can capture the ‘feel’ of a situation, but they can also miss the boat as well.
I think you have a case of bias as well my friend…
I believe I flat out said “he may be right, but I disagree”
Not sure what you’re asking.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
He has a good track record of being accurate. [/quote]
Please show me where Gallop and Rasmussen are surpassed by Silver in any reasonable person’s opinion.
He nailed the 2008 election… That was a tough one, I know.
You may be right about my being bias about it, I’ve admitted as much probably a hundred times in these treads.
He isn’t, nor would he be, off base on purpose. He certianly has bias issues of his own. Look at how his model works. He up sells polls with a D+ sample as high as 2008 levels, discounts polls that bring the D+ down. The simple fact is people aren’t as excited for obama in 2008. And independants are running to Romney, in pretty much every poll. This leads one to believe the D+ isn’t going to be as strong as 08.
He adds in stock market and economic sabermetrics as well, and again, this stuff can capture the ‘feel’ of a situation, but they can also miss the boat as well.
I think you have a case of bias as well my friend…
I believe I flat out said “he may be right, but I disagree”
Not sure what you’re asking.
[/quote]
Its a bit of a hard case to see what him being right would prove as well. With a zero sum kind of prediction like this I could ask a random person to give me a prediction and say they flipped a coin and picked Obama. Then Obama wins. I don’t think that would say much about his prediction method. Ideally the metrics Silver uses are better than a coinflip…and he does give a lot of specific predictions that said coinflip doesn’t.
If he is wrong though that hurts him quite a bit more than coinflip guy in both reputation and economically. So I assume he at least thinks he is providing accurate predictions and not being duplicitous. Though there could be some hidden motive I am not seeing.
He isn’t polling though he is analyzing polling data and other things. So I guess its whether you buy his analysis of the same data that other stats guys have a different view on.
I know you use what you have seen to say you think its different but think about the people you associate with and perhaps they are members of certain groups. I dunno I think the same things sometimes. Part of my job is seeing a lot of people from all types of different groups economically and socially on a weekly basis. And as the election is relatively common topic I see wild variance in what people think.
I do see Obama is a communist true believers as well as young women who truly believe that Romney hates women so obviously the well placed spurious narrative on both sides is effective.
This may be a perception bias as well but Obama’s adverts on tv and radio are much better in Ohio. And I have gotten at least 5 mailers about voting early and I presume often 
for him.
The early voting centers have never been easier to get to in Ohio and I presume this helps Obama though there’s nothing other than a feel on that thought.
[quote]groo wrote:
He isn’t polling though he is analyzing polling data and other things. So I guess its whether you buy his analysis of the same data that other stats guys have a different view on. [/quote]
That is all I’m saying, is I don’t really dig his muffins. I prefer something like real clear politics, it is just an average of the polls. They have romney down as well, but they aren’t selling some 25% chance of winning.
I live in MA. The People’s Republic of Mass is far from a diverse political landscape. The fact the people on the morning show, who openly admit to carrying water for O are as full on scared as they are, lends me to believe most people see the race as much closer to 50-50 than 75-25.
haha
[quote]The early voting centers have never been easier to get to in Ohio and I presume this helps Obama though there’s nothing other than a feel on that thought.
[/quote]
Every report I read has D 2-1-ish in early voting as the norm. But republican early voting is up from 2008 and indendants are breaking for romeny…
Here is a good example of what I’m talking about.
If you look at this, you’d have to say Silver is right on. Until you get to the last two lines in the poll.
That makes this closer than 75-25 in my mind, and why I rag on Silver.
But hey, I could be wrong…
EDIT: typo
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
He may be right, but a 26% chance of winning seems to fly in the face of my own eyes and ears at this point. Not to mention that assumes quite a few swing states going in the opposite direction of national polls that have a better track record than he does.[/quote]
The sports books are hovering around a 65% Obama advantage, which isn’t substantially different from Silver’s predictions if you consider the odds market’s longshot bias.
In the end, who knows what’s going to happen? But it would be tough for anyone to look at the electoral college map today and predict anything other than an Obama edge.
Edit: But I did read something interesting the other day about white/non-white turnout. It seems Obama’s people are banking on around a 71% white electorate, while the trend seems to be bringing us closer to 76%. The difference means the election, and it’s unclear where the ground could be made up. A Latino surge may be in the works, but the gap is pretty formidable.
Nah, enthusiasm will close any gaps.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
The sports books are hovering around a 65% Obama advantage, [/quote]
Sports books are about breaking even and making money off the juice.
The line moves to even out the bets on either side.
But it is depressing that Mr. Picture-Book-for an Agenda is still in this. Doesn’t inspire alot of confidence for big reforms and steep slowing in the growth of spending on entitlements. Probably the last Presidential hurrah for Republicans. At least until we’re already plummeting off the financial cliff. And even then, I could see the answer being ‘we’re here because the federal government didn’t have enough power.’
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Probably the last Presidential hurrah for Republicans. [/quote]
Until they get their shit together, yes.
This includes marketing their brand and getting the “ron paul” bots into the fold.
Until then, we could be in total financial ruin, and people will “lean left”
[quote]Sloth wrote:
But it is depressing that Mr. Picture-Book-for an Agenda is still in this. Doesn’t inspire alot of confidence for big reforms and steep slowing in the growth of spending on entitlements. Probably the last Presidential hurrah for Republicans. At least until we’re already plummeting off the financial cliff. And even then, I could see the answer being ‘we’re here because the federal government didn’t have enough power.’[/quote]
Your post got me to thinking - setting aside any political preference (or not) for Obama…if he gets elected, can anyone remember a more diminished figure going into a second term in recent history?
The record is crummy, sure - and that affects the second term. But also look closely at what has happened since the first debate. It’s a “gamechanger” regardless of who wins the election. Obama wouldn’t enter into a second term rejuvenated or with a new wind at his back - he would enter as a shrinking president and with a great deal of skepticism about him and his ability to perform. Independents aren’t happy with him, and want someone different, by a big margin. Conservatives don’t want him, obviously. Liberals who have paid attention realize Obama’s limitations, and they’ve spoken or written about it quite a bit in the last few months.
Stepping back from a partisan critique, even if Obama wins, he will limp into a second term with little confidence. I can’t remember anyone being re-elected - even after a close fight - being this diminished stepping into a second term.
Referencing TB’s post above
My fear in an Obama re-election is that he will go full tilt instituting every social change he can manage, all with unchecked impunity - czars gone crazy.
Secondly - his administration has already proven to be inept, inexperienced, and/or unprofessional in such a degree as to weaken the US as a country, and us as a society virtually permanently. It’s time to quit letting the kids run the school.
I’m not sure where I left off with newspapers flipping from Obama to Romney, but here is another one:
Not being biased here, if I stumble across one that flipped from McCain to Obama, i will pass along.
[quote]treco wrote:
Referencing TB’s post above
My fear in an Obama re-election is that he will go full tilt instituting every social change he can manage, all with unchecked impunity - czars gone crazy.
Secondly - his administration has already proven to be inept, inexperienced, and/or unprofessional in such a degree as to weaken the US as a country, and us as a society virtually permanently. It’s time to quit letting the kids run the school.
[/quote]
I agree with you.
How much have you donated to the Romney campaign?
[quote]treco wrote:
Referencing TB’s post above
My fear in an Obama re-election is that he will go full tilt instituting every social change he can manage, all with unchecked impunity - czars gone crazy.
Secondly - his administration has already proven to be inept, inexperienced, and/or unprofessional in such a degree as to weaken the US as a country, and us as a society virtually permanently. It’s time to quit letting the kids run the school.
[/quote]
He would be playing with fire if he did this.
Should he go all out as you suggest, you could be looking at a Republican trifecta, owning all 3 houses in the next elections.
I doubt he would care, but seeing how much he has alienated this many people and he HASN’T gone full tilt (yet), he would push many people over the edge.
He got his ass kicked in 2010, he is struggling right now, I would have to imagine he is smarter than that.