Skip to comments.With sterling call, Nate Silver defines new wave in polling
Posted on 11/08/2012 4:57:01 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
So much for gut feeling.
After correctly predicting the results in 49 of the 50 states that have been called in the U.S. election (Florida remains too close to call), Nate Silver, the statistician behind the popular FiveThirtyEight blog, woke on Wednesday to find himself the poster child of what is sure to be a new data-driven approach to politics.
While Obama was declared the winner of the election, Silver won the polling race. Television anchors from Rachel Maddow on the left-leaning MSNBC, to Bret Baier on the right-leaning Fox News, praised his accuracy. A comedian on Twitter called him "The Emperor of Math." Silver's publicist said he had been so inundated with requests she had been unable to reach him.
(Excerpt) Read more at mobile.reuters.com ...
Nothing that I could say here without getting into trouble. :^)
Yes, it turned out Silver’s model was dead on yet again. The polls were right - and an average of polls are incredibly accurate.
People need to stop disputing polls. No more whining about D+ samples, for the most part the pollsters know what they are doing.
Biggest loser? Mark Halperin.
He went around giving 3 scenarios. Close Obama, close Romney, blowout Romney.
Somehow, I missed Halperin’s spiel. Morris and Rove, who were everywhere with Romney landslide calls, struck out bigtime, too.
1. Romney/Ryan got less votes this year than McCain/Palin did in 2008.
2. Romney/Ryan won in every state that had voter ID laws.
Is this reasonable, or is something else at play?
They haven't finished counting.
I harbored the hope there was some sort of systemic bias in the state polls, or there would be a Bradley effect - though I thought the whole “Unskewed Polls” business was nonsense all along. I actually attacked Silver a bit on some other boards, which I regret.
The Unskewed Polls page will end up one of the greatest embarrassments to the Right there ever has been.
Beyond all the other groups that Republicans have to appeal to somehow in the future (Women, Hispanics, etc.) there’s another one - the highly educated. Rabid hatred of scientific methods in attacks on polling, etc. doesn’t help (to say nothing of creationism, and other issues.)
Morris was insane with his blowout Romney.
Rove blew $300 million as well.
10% of voters were Latino. Obama won 71% of their vote.
Young voters. Single women. Social issues (abortion, rape philosophizing MSM spin) were the key. Many would vote for fiscal conservative / socially liberal but that party doesn’t exist.
Romeny won 60% of white vote - 90% of Alabama white vote (!).
But demographics is shifting.
Next election the numbers will be worse. More Latinos. War on family will mean more single women.
Don’t see how the GOP can create a national majority coalition. The WASP values are dying. 40% of all babies now are bastards.
Only 69% of the votes in California have been counted - and that’s just one state.
With regard to Nate Silver: Don’t blame the messenger. I blame myself for hanging high hope on the words of Dick Morris and Michael Barone. Even the vaunted Scott Rasmussen, who missed by a couple critical percentage points here and there, gave me some misguided optimism.
He was dead-on right. Amazingly.
I really thought turnout would overcome his predictions, but... nope.
BS, BS, BS! Conservatives sat out this election. That's the only reason Obama won. The reverse happened from what actually was predicted by a majority.
Morris was right. If conservatives would have voted as we thought then it would have been a slam dunk for Mitt. What was missing is those conservatives who told the republican party if you give us a rino we are not voting for them! This is exactly what happened!
ALL THE VOTES ARE NOT COUNTED YET.
Romney actually got about 7% more votes in swing states than McCain did, if you project final votes by the portion of votes already counted. I will do a full spreadsheet of all states and project final vote totals tonight as this myth is pernicious.
They keep citing demographic vote turnout that simply doesn’t reflect observable reality.
College campuses around the country had little or no activity, yet turnout was reported above 2008 levels.
That theme was repeated across many demographics.
For that reason I continue to believe massive, organized vote fraud was a major factor in this election.
Yes, and the Dem Internals reflected the impact of their organized vote fraud.
They knew where they were going to pump up the volume, predicted same, and poof!, it happened just as planned!
He’s a damn cheat. Almost certainly he got the Zero internal polls again.
He was accurate because he factored in the vote fraud endemic in the early voting, the bloated registrations, the Democrat machines across the country, and the fecklessness of the GOP to do anything about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.