Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from dcr400m. Show dcr400m's posts

    Re: Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    In response to jmel's comment:



    LOL!  Joe Scarborough a "wingnut"?   He`s a bigger Lib than you!  Talk about a freakin RINO working on a fantasy show on a fantasy cable network, with no audience!

    BWAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!

    Let`s see......hmmmmm......Nate Silver vs Rasmussen, Gallup, Suffolk, Zogby, Reuters, Dick Morris, Karl Rove, University of Colorado (probably the most acurrate of any on earth).......and you`re choosing a Vegas baseball handicapper that got lucky once on an election that was a lock?

    BWAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!



    Your full ignorance is on display here jmel. 

    Nate Silver is a poll aggregator, not a pollster.  He doesn't compete with Rasmussen, Gallup, Suffolk, Zogby, Reuters, Dick Morris, Karl Rove, or the University of Colorado.  He takes their polling information and makes predictions based on it.

     PS....Obama is at 79% chance of winning today. ~300 electoral votes.




    I'm waiting for Greg to own up to missing on the Senate = DEMS will hold majority

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from BetheKoolaid. Show BetheKoolaid's posts

    Re: Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

    1) Nate Silver got his reputation in the 2008 election, picking 49 of 50 states in the Presidental election; he didnt get lucky; fact was, Silver never revealed that the Obama campaign had given him exclusive access to its internal polls. This was unethical.

    2) He has been far from perfect; in 2010, Nate Silver, using his trademark 'percentages", claimed there was but a "30% chance"  the GOP would win more than 60 House seats; they took 64...

    Silver's bloated percentages of an Obama win in the Obama-poodle rag NY Times have been the liberal's binky this year...

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from BetheKoolaid. Show BetheKoolaid's posts

    Re: Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

    "I'm waiting for Greg to own up to missing on the Senate = DEMS will hold majority"

    Why dont you wait until the actual election is over?

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from BetheKoolaid. Show BetheKoolaid's posts

    Re: Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

    "Soooo, wouldn't internal polling tend to be less accurate and more partisan? I don't see how that would help with his predictions"

    Then you are clueless.

    "...his prediction was "95 percent confidence interval runs from a 23-seat Republican gain to an 81-seat one."

    LOL!!! Quite a brave prediction, the day before the 2010 election...

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Wingnuts keep saying Nate Silver is an incompetent ideologue. His response: Wanna bet?

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Yea, the left never does that sht. The Boston Globe had Martha Coakley up by 19 on the weekend before the special election. Nothing to see there, of course.

     




    Hey spanky, take a gander at this factoid...

     

    FiveThirtyEight writers Schaller, Gelman, and Silver also gave extensive coverage to the January 19, 2010 Massachusetts special election to the U.S. Senate. The "538 model" once again aggregated the disparate polls to correctly predict that the Republican Scott Brown would win.

     

    I guess you should stick with the "But...but...but...they do it too..." generalizations.



    attempting to aggregate polls is fools science.  you can't take a bunch of skewed polls and some how, magically, aggregate the sloppiness and bias out of them. 

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share