OCinBuffalo Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 It is now 3 am EST. That means, that there are now about 12 hours for Nate Silver to change his predictions, like he did in 2008, and in 2010. So far, he has only talked about Romney's odds being longer. Thus this thread is about documenting my own "predictions" about the excuses Silver will use if Gallup is right(and to bust balls) If Romney wins, and especially if it's a Dick Morris blowout...look for the following 3 excuses: 1. "Most polls I used(and not the ones I down-wieghted or ignored) were biased in a way my "house effect" adjustment could not have anticipated". Silver has already put this forward. So far, I'm batting 1.000. What could possibly have made a "bookie" like Silver, suddenly decide to hedge his bets, regarding the polls? If there's no problem, why even bring that up? How about: Silver has read the objections to the polls provided by people that he knows and respects? The timing of this, relative to the "intellectually coherent"(Silver's words), arguments being posted that challenge the polls...is no coincidence. 2. "The polls this year acted completely differently than they have historically and/or the turnout was unprecedented, so I'm not wrong". Yes, Nate, no schit. That's what we've all been saying for 4 months. We've been saying something is F'ed. You've said "nothing is F'ed here, man". We've been saying "Nothing is F'ed? The God damn plane has crashed into the mountain!" And, you have ignored that. Had the polls been this goofy for Romney, or had the turnout been a goofy R+11, you'd have made THIS YEAR adjustments, and not screwed around weighting individual polls as you did instead. We still have no idea how or why you do this weighting, but yeah, if Gallup is right, a whole lot of polls are wrong, which have made you exponentially wrong due to your own tinkering. Whatever in the world made you think that this electorate would = 2008? Whatever in the world made you think the Ds would have a turnout = 2008? Or, did you get the internals from Axelrod, again, and try to work backwards from there, again? 3. "Romney beat the odds." Ah yes....the Right Bauer of excuses. I don't need to explain the absurdity of just saying this, and not explaining how or why, do I? Silver: "after all this is a prediction, not a certainty". This means "I can never be wrong, because I gave Romney a >0% chance of winning". How great would it be, if you could go through life like this? "Well, I am not wrong, because I didn't give myself a 100% chance of being right". Try telling that to a client or your boss: "well I didn't get 100% of the job done, but I told you there was an 83% chance that I would, and me not getting it done? Well? That beat the odds". ------------------------------ Now, of course, if Obama wins, we will hear none of this. But, if Romney wins, we will probably hear all 3. The part of this is: none of these excuses are "wrong". In fact, you could just as easily call them "explanations". But...here's the thing...if Obama wins by a hair, that doesn't invalidate the reasons for these excuses either. The only thing that makes them wrong: if he final electorate is in fact <=72% white, and if the turnout is in fact >D+7. Again, it all comes down to Axelrod VS. Gallup/Rassmussen. Additional prediction: If Axelrod is wrong: Nobody will be screaming "pants on fire" louder or longer than Silver. If Gallup is wrong: Nate Silver will serve as the chief executioner. Either way: Silver's model will not be to blame.
fjl2nd Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 Do you have your excuses ready if you're wrong??
Juror#8 Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 Are you ready to go on record with what you feel that the outcome will be - the electoral count, the states and for whom, percentages, something?
B-Man Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 I believe that #3 (Romney beats the odds) excuse will be utilized. That way they do not have to admit they were wrong. .
fjl2nd Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 I believe that #3 (Romney beats the odds) excuse will be utilized. That way they do not have to admit they were wrong. . But he wouldn't be wrong. Silver never has said Romney has 0% chance of winning.
meazza Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 But he wouldn't be wrong. Silver never has said Romney has 0% chance of winning. Of course not. He said 85% which is pretty high.
drnykterstein Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 I think it's funny that you doubt the man's calculations. What do you want to bet on this election OC? I want you to make a thread saying "Republicans hate factual information" if you are wrong.
meazza Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 I think it's funny that you doubt the man's calculations. What do you want to bet on this election OC? I want you to make a thread saying "Republicans hate factual information" if you are wrong. Once again, a poll is a SAMPLE. Take a !@#$ing statistics course you moron.
B-Man Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 But he wouldn't be wrong. Silver never has said Romney has 0% chance of winning. LOL.........I'm sorry fj2, but it takes a special kind of viewpoint to say that you weren't "really" wrong, when you predict that something has a 91% (now) chance of occuring, and then it doesnt
meazza Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 Oh I just think Republicans hate facts in general. Facts like global warming and that lower taxes are not always better. The fact that Obama was not a Muslim born in Kenya. All these facts. Republicans hate them and call them liberal lies. Also the fact that Nate Silver has an extremely good track record. Republicans hate that. From what I have heard, he predicted 2008. I think Rove has a much better track record. We shall see tonight.
Ozymandius Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 How great would it be, if you could go through life like this? "Well, I am not wrong, because I didn't give myself a 100% chance of being right". Try telling that to a client or your boss: "well I didn't get 100% of the job done, but I told you there was an 83% chance that I would, and me not getting it done? Well? That beat the odds". ------------------------------ That's a horrible analogy. Regardless, you've brought some great info in some of these threads. Well done.
Chef Jim Posted November 6, 2012 Posted November 6, 2012 Do you have your excuses ready if you're wrong?? Excuses?? Nope. You must be a Bills fan AND an Obama supporter.
drnykterstein Posted November 7, 2012 Posted November 7, 2012 Where is OCinBuffalo. He needs to call out Nate Silver for being right on every state called so far.
John Adams Posted November 7, 2012 Posted November 7, 2012 Are you ready to go on record with what you feel that the outcome will be - the electoral count, the states and for whom, percentages, something? Nah. I asked him that before.
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Posted November 7, 2012 Nah. I asked him that before. OC is busy crafting a 25 paragraph exigesis about how Nate Silver just guessed. I've been following Silver's blog OC, and he hasn't changed his projections like you said he would.
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Author Posted November 7, 2012 Do you have your excuses ready if you're wrong?? D turnout ain't +6 or higher....anywhere in the swing states, and certainly not nationally. If it was, I would be wrong. NONE of what I said means Obama loses. I think I've said that about 40 times. You know that. What I have said since August: there's no way this is a D+7 or higher election, as it was in 2008. My guesstimation has been D+2. I never said I thought it was R+1...I merely said what would happen if it was. It's still possible for Romney to win, but my objections to the polls where never tied to who wins/loses. I merely stated that D+11 was ridiculous. Right now, I'd give Romney 1 chance in 3 of winning. And, I'd give 100% chance that Gallup gets crucified tomorrow if Romney doesn't win FL. And, I'd give 90% chance that we will have to go through recount hell in FL...and possibly OH.
3rdnlng Posted November 7, 2012 Posted November 7, 2012 Where is OCinBuffalo. He needs to call out Nate Silver for being right on every state called so far. Well, if this election goes this way it is a perfect time for me to go on the public dole. Conner, if you work and pay taxes, thanks.
dayman Posted November 7, 2012 Posted November 7, 2012 Nate Silver..where are you excuses for not missing a state so far? Where are they?
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Author Posted November 7, 2012 Nate Silver..where are you excuses for not missing a state so far? Where are they? this thread is about documenting my own "predictions" about the excuses Silver will use if Gallup is right(and to bust balls) If Romney wins... Again, it all comes down to Axelrod VS. Gallup/Rassmussen. Additional prediction: If Axelrod is wrong: Nobody will be screaming "pants on fire" louder or longer than Silver. If Gallup is wrong: Nate Silver will serve as the chief executioner. Either way: Silver's model will not be to blame. Reading is fundamental.
Recommended Posts