It’s insane how combative everyone is in this thread. Rojo doesn’t understand something so he explained his thinking and asked for input. Why is everyone roasting him? He made no arrogant declaration that he knows for a fact that Nate Silver is wrong
I swear half of you graduated college only because
RoJo has posted dozens of these threads. He is wrong everytime. And yet every time he thinks he knows more than the expert. It is a level of self delusion that is hard to understand.
I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart.
You don’t think a woman can give birth?
I'm lost and confused. Can someone explain to me why this is a hot topic for rojo. I assume Tucker Carlson and his entertainment show are promoting some outrage I missed.
it seems possible that people wont pick up the phone from a university, wapo, npr, others to say they like a conservative candidate.
this goes back to people pointing out that nate silver's models are only as accurate as the data they input from polling organizations.
I've wondered about this...is polling still mostly done by calling semi-random telephone numbers? In 2022, honestly I assumed only wierdos and old people pick up the phone when the caller isn't either known or expected. Then again, maybe it's mostly weirdos and old people who vote...
I'm lost and confused. Can someone explain to me why this is a hot topic for rojo. I assume Tucker Carlson and his entertainment show are promoting some outrage I missed.
I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart.
What you said was that you are probably smarter than Nate because what does he think about [a nuanced political issue you bastardized into a silly soundbite].
For some reason, Statistics 101 courses in college tend to make students outside of the Math-smart disciplines believe that they conquered some genius-level subject.
derp derp independent events
derp derp gonna throw around the term Baye's Theorem in normal conversations so I sound smart
Nate Silver holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics. He wouldn't survive 1 semester at Cal Tech.
No - they over est Biden support by a little under 2% - says it right there in your graphic - they under est how many independents would vote for Trump by 4+% - since I would expect the 2 % to be within the margin of error - really the problem was with tracking Reb support ( I guess a lot of people are shy about expressing support for Trump)
I'm lost and confused. Can someone explain to me why this is a hot topic for rojo. I assume Tucker Carlson and his entertainment show are promoting some outrage I missed.
Rojo said "I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart."
I spent way too much time googling permutations of "nate silver woman man birth woke reproduction". Came up with nothing.
Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresse...
I'm lost and confused. Can someone explain to me why this is a hot topic for rojo. I assume Tucker Carlson and his entertainment show are promoting some outrage I missed.
Rojo said "I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart."
I spent way too much time googling permutations of "nate silver woman man birth woke reproduction". Came up with nothing.
The fact that there is both 46% chance that the Rs take senate and both house and senate means that there is a 0% chance the Rs take the senate while not taking the house. It’s not complicated.
Which is obviously ridiculous. No chance at all GOP takes the senate but not house?
No, if there is less than a 1 in 200 chance the numbers will round down. I don’t know what the chance of a gop senate and dem house are, but I think it would be much less probable than 1 in 200.
There has also been quite a bit in the new about polling error as of recent years. In general there are commentaries about how right leaning citizens may be less likely to be involved in polls and thus the polls are flawed towards left support.
If you consider how much the past 2016 adminstrative team has pushed Americans from thinking elections are legitimate, it seems possible that people wont pick up the phone from a university, wapo, npr, others to say they like a conservative candidate.
this goes back to people pointing out that nate silver's models are only as accurate as the data they input from polling organizations.
There is another wrinkle to this argument that I'd like to tease out. The prevailing theory about why polls tend to skew in favor of Dems is that people who back GOP aren't participating in them. You wrote "people won't pick up the phone."
Why? Polling is anonymous and we don't send people to jail for their political preferences (even though it's fair to argue that they matter when a crime is alleged).
I think one plausible answer to the "why?" question--one that I hope digs a little deeper than the "shy tory effect" (from the UK, where conservative ppl avoid polls to avoid social sanction)--boils down to how each party frames the election vis-a-vis democracy. Dems have framed this election as "vital to preserving democracy." The GOP are the revolutionaries this time around. They don't trust the government and won't participate in any democratic act short of voting their conscience as an act of willful defiance. Ironically, the conservatives are the radicals now.
If this sounds farfetched, I want to point out that Trump has out of all the Wackpackers, Beetlejuice is probably my favorite said on at least one occasion that his followers should not vote by mail, but should do so in person.
