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.
With so many races so close and with the number of seats in each house so close and with the GOP given (Per Silver) a 46% of winning the senate and 82% of winning the house, one need not study probability and stats to realize that 1 in 200 is a ridiculous number
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.
Jamin, are you completely unaware of the field of Econometrics?
Econometrics is the application of statistical methods to economic data in order to give empirical content to economic relationships. More precisely, it is "the quantitative analysis of actual economic phenomena based on the...
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.
With so many races so close and with the number of seats in each house so close and with the GOP given (Per Silver) a 46% of winning the senate and 82% of winning the house, one need not study probability and stats to realize that 1 in 200 is a ridiculous number
What are the odds that Carmine 9 and Rojo are on the same side of a debate where they are both calling out a well known, respected figure in a particular field that neither one of them has an iota of knowledge about.... and *aren't* making themselves look foolish in the process?
I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart.
There goes the Rojo we know and .... well not love but perhaps tolerate sometimes. Surprised you didn't say, "I am a registered Democrat, but..." Suggest you take on online course that covers modeling, stats, and probabily, come back and post again. Also, anyone who uses woke has jumped the shark and is showing their intellectual laziness.
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.
You see this throughout the Covid vaccine thread. The vax mob mafia constantly parroting "base rate fallacy".
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.
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.
You see this throughout the Covid vaccine thread. The vax mob mafia constantly parroting "base rate fallacy".
Base rate isn’t rocket science and is very important in the discussion - what part of that do you disagree with?
I'm saying if he is so woke that he says a woman can give birth then he's not that smart.
It doesn't really matter whether Nate Silver is stupid or smart about human biology, or any other topic, for that matter. None of that changes whether the "basic probability" you highlighted makes sense. As numerous posters have explained, there is no contradiction whatsoever between his various estimates of what happens in the House and Senate, because the two outcomes are not independent.
Whether Silver's predictions are accurate or not is a separate question. The predictions can only be as good as the data inputs. Everybody now understands that polling data has serious and possibly even unfixable flaws. That debate about polling methodology is an entirely reasonable one to have.
But basic probability? Nah, there's no debate here. Honestly, your statistical reasoning is as unambiguously wrong as the idea that males can give birth.
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.
With so many races so close and with the number of seats in each house so close and with the GOP given (Per Silver) a 46% of winning the senate and 82% of winning the house, one need not study probability and stats to realize that 1 in 200 is a ridiculous number
There are not that many close races. The main reason the GOP is the heavy favorite to win the house is because all they have to do is win the newly redrawn safe seat districts.
The reason the Dems are favored to keep the senate is because they have fewer senators up for re-election than does the GOP.
So for GOP to not win the house something would really have to go wrong. For the Dems not to keep the senate, something would have to really go wrong (and it has). These on last 2 years have been a disaster for the Dems… and they still are favored to keep the senate by some.
That is why there is near 0 chance of a GOP senate and a DEM house.
With so many races so close and with the number of seats in each house so close and with the GOP given (Per Silver) a 46% of winning the senate and 82% of winning the house, one need not study probability and stats to realize that 1 in 200 is a ridiculous number
There are not that many close races. The main reason the GOP is the heavy favorite to win the house is because all they have to do is win the newly redrawn safe seat districts.
The reason the Dems are favored to keep the senate is because they have fewer senators up for re-election than does the GOP.
So for GOP to not win the house something would really have to go wrong. For the Dems not to keep the senate, something would have to really go wrong (and it has). These on last 2 years have been a disaster for the Dems… and they still are favored to keep the senate by some.
That is why there is near 0 chance of a GOP senate and a DEM house.
If there is a 46% chance the GOP wins the Senate and an 82% chance it wins the House; the odds it wins both is .46 x .82 = 37.72%. Not 0%. Simple stuff.
Rojo is right. Silver is a moron.
If there is a 50% chance of a coin landing in heads? What is he chance the 1st 2 flips will result in heads?
There are not that many close races. The main reason the GOP is the heavy favorite to win the house is because all they have to do is win the newly redrawn safe seat districts.
The reason the Dems are favored to keep the senate is because they have fewer senators up for re-election than does the GOP.
So for GOP to not win the house something would really have to go wrong. For the Dems not to keep the senate, something would have to really go wrong (and it has). These on last 2 years have been a disaster for the Dems… and they still are favored to keep the senate by some.
That is why there is near 0 chance of a GOP senate and a DEM house.
If there is a 46% chance the GOP wins the Senate and an 82% chance it wins the House; the odds it wins both is .46 x .82 = 37.72%. Not 0%. Simple stuff.
Rojo is right. Silver is a moron.
If there is a 50% chance of a coin landing in heads? What is he chance the 1st 2 flips will result in heads?
Similarly, if there is a 46% chance the GOP wins the Senate and an 18% chance the Dems win the House, the chance that both occur = .18*.46 = 8.2%. Not Zero %. Silver's numbers are simply wrong
Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight became famous as he once predicted all 50 states in a presidential election right. ESPN gave him a ton of money but it now seems that the site is never right.
I was looking at it this morning.
He says there is a 46% chance the GOP takes the Senate. He says there is an 82% chance they win the House.
So what are the odds that the GOP also takes the House and the Senate?
He says it's also 46%. WHAT?
That makes no sense. I know the two aren't totally independent events but still that's crazy. It would have to be less than 46%.
The way I read that is he thinks there's a 100% chance the GOP takes the hosue but won't admit it.
You are of course right. Interesting the number of posters that think they disagree with you but haven't processed your entire post. Some of their responses just ignore your last line.
If there is a 46% chance the GOP wins the Senate and an 82% chance it wins the House; the odds it wins both is .46 x .82 = 37.72%. Not 0%. Simple stuff.
Rojo is right. Silver is a moron.
If there is a 50% chance of a coin landing in heads? What is he chance the 1st 2 flips will result in heads?
I know, folks around here are so co-dependent whiny. Here’s another example: 51% chance that the Dow jones index goes up tomorrow, and 11% chance that none of the 30 stocks in the DJI goes up tomorrow, so the chance that DJI goes up tomorrow and none of those 30 stocks goes up tomorrow is .51x.11 = .0561.