The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 427 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Sun September 09, 2018 2:39 am 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 11:28 pm
Posts: 9775
Location: Space City
He's showing the fuck up!



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Sun September 09, 2018 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unqualified to be an Admin
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed December 19, 2012 9:53 pm
Posts: 9527
Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
washing machine wrote:
He's showing the fuck up!



Did Ted Cruz just pay for an ad endoursing Beto?

_________________
"In a roundabout way, Boba Fett created Pearl Jam." - Chuck Klosterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Wed September 12, 2018 12:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107
This may be an outlier, but holy shit. Coming on the heels of a 4 point downturn in the president’s popularity, confirmed across several weeks by multiple polls, makes it seem more plausible....as does recent news that republicans are secretly starting to suspect they might lose the Senate.

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Wed September 12, 2018 12:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107
Two things:

1. A lot of speculation is going around about what caused this...the book, the oped, Kavanaugh’s unpopularity, etc. But I think it’s pretty telling that these polls starting to shift after Facebook, which is the leading news source among low information voters, started making efforts to reduce misinformation on its site.

2. My biggest concern is that even a semi-competent handling of the hurricane response will feel like such a massive relief that it will temper some of this.

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Wed September 12, 2018 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm
Posts: 22961
Location: Different mountains than Strat.
my biggest concern is that the polls leading up to the 2016 election were not even remotely fucking close. the only wild cards i see are:

1. independent voters
2. female voters
3. new (first-time or historically disengaged) voters

they'll all be showing up in much higher numbers than 2016, but i'll make no assumptions as to how they'll vote because pollsters whiffed big last time, and because many people are idiots


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Wed September 12, 2018 1:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107
I don’t think that’s an accurate summary at all. Polls in 2016 never had Clinton at much more than a 9 point lead, and the final week of calling showed her at around a +3. She ended up coming out 2.1% ahead. That seems pretty predictive.

Polling is raw data, and doesn’t account for how those votes might be handicapped by gerrymandering or the electoral college...which is why Nate Silver previously said he wouldn’t consider a Democrat takeover of the Senate plausible unless they could manage a 12 point national advantage.

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Wed September 12, 2018 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Posts: 3283
McParadigm wrote:
I don’t think that’s an accurate summary at all. Polls in 2016 never had Clinton at much more than a 9 point lead, and the final week of calling showed her at around a +3. She ended up coming out 2.1% ahead. That seems pretty predictive.

Yeah, this.

I also wouldn't underestimate the effect of the exact timing of the polls and the election. That cycle featured some pretty major polling swings following the news cycle and of course the last news that affected voters was that Comey bit which sent Clinton's numbers into a nosedive. I think it's very possible that Hillary would have won if the election were the day before Comey's attention grab (or barring new news maybe a week or so after the election once that proclamation became old news), and I think it's also likely that polls didn't have adequate time to fully include the full adjustment caused by that news.

Another major mistake a lot of people made in their prediction models based on the polls was that they viewed the result in individual states as uncorrelated events. Therefore if they gave Hillary a 75% chance of winning in each of, let's say Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota they viewed Trump as having a 0.39% chance of winning all four. Silver's model wisely viewed the results in similar states as being correlated, suggesting that if Hillary had a 75% chance of winning in each of them, an upset in one could be predictive of an upset in the others, so his model gave Trump a better chance than most, e.g. the NYT one that had her with an absurd 99% chance of victory.

_________________
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Thu September 13, 2018 11:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Posts: 13930
Location: Cumberland, RI
4/5 wrote:
McParadigm wrote:
I don’t think that’s an accurate summary at all. Polls in 2016 never had Clinton at much more than a 9 point lead, and the final week of calling showed her at around a +3. She ended up coming out 2.1% ahead. That seems pretty predictive.

Yeah, this.

I also wouldn't underestimate the effect of the exact timing of the polls and the election. That cycle featured some pretty major polling swings following the news cycle and of course the last news that affected voters was that Comey bit which sent Clinton's numbers into a nosedive. I think it's very possible that Hillary would have won if the election were the day before Comey's attention grab (or barring new news maybe a week or so after the election once that proclamation became old news), and I think it's also likely that polls didn't have adequate time to fully include the full adjustment caused by that news.

Another major mistake a lot of people made in their prediction models based on the polls was that they viewed the result in individual states as uncorrelated events. Therefore if they gave Hillary a 75% chance of winning in each of, let's say Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota they viewed Trump as having a 0.39% chance of winning all four. Silver's model wisely viewed the results in similar states as being correlated, suggesting that if Hillary had a 75% chance of winning in each of them, an upset in one could be predictive of an upset in the others, so his model gave Trump a better chance than most, e.g. the NYT one that had her with an absurd 99% chance of victory.


There was an article on 538 about a week before the election that laid this out pretty clearly (i.e., it described exactly what happened), and I've been trying to find it for a while now but it keeps slipping through my fingers.

_________________
McParadigm wrote:
lol


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Fri September 14, 2018 12:03 am 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Posts: 13930
Location: Cumberland, RI
Simple Torture wrote:
4/5 wrote:
McParadigm wrote:
I don’t think that’s an accurate summary at all. Polls in 2016 never had Clinton at much more than a 9 point lead, and the final week of calling showed her at around a +3. She ended up coming out 2.1% ahead. That seems pretty predictive.

Yeah, this.

Another major mistake a lot of people made in their prediction models based on the polls was that they viewed the result in individual states as uncorrelated events. Therefore if they gave Hillary a 75% chance of winning in each of, let's say Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota they viewed Trump as having a 0.39% chance of winning all four. Silver's model wisely viewed the results in similar states as being correlated, suggesting that if Hillary had a 75% chance of winning in each of them, an upset in one could be predictive of an upset in the others, so his model gave Trump a better chance than most, e.g. the NYT one that had her with an absurd 99% chance of victory.


There was an article on 538 about a week before the election that laid this out pretty clearly (i.e., it described exactly what happened), and I've been trying to find it for a while now but it keeps slipping through my fingers.


Right, I think I've got it, and it's actually pulling from two different articles (I read them religiously). One was titled "Why Our Model Is More Bullish Than Others On Trump" (from 10/24/16) and lays out exactly what 4/5 is talking about:

Quote:
In 2012, Obama beat his polling by 2 or 3 percentage points in almost every swing state. The same was true in 1980 when Ronald Reagan won in a landslide — instead of the modest lead that polls showed a few days before the election — and claimed 489 electoral votes by winning almost every competitive state. You also frequently see this in midterms — Republicans beat their polling in almost every key Senate and gubernatorial race in 2014, for example.

Basically, this means that you shouldn’t count on states to behave independently of one another, especially if they’re demographically similar. If Clinton loses Pennsylvania despite having a big lead in the polls there, for instance, she might also have problems in Michigan, North Carolina and other swing states. What seems like an impregnable firewall in the Electoral College may begin to collapse.


And then from 11/1, an article titled "Yes, Donald Trump Has A Path To Victory":

Quote:
It’s true that Trump would have to make a breakthrough somewhere, by winning at least one state in Clinton’s firewall. But that’s why it’s not only reasonable but 100 percent strategically correct for Trump to be campaigning in states such as Michigan and Wisconsin. (I’ll grant that New Mexico is more of a stretch.) Sure, Trump’s behind in these states, but he has to win somewhere where he’s behind — or he’s consigning himself to four more years in Trump Tower instead of the White House. Michigan and Wisconsin are as reasonable as any other targets: Trump isn’t any further behind in them than he is in higher-profile battleground states such as Pennsylvania, and the demographics are potentially more favorable for him.

If you want to debate a campaign’s geographic planning, Hillary Clinton spending time in Arizona is a much worse decision than Trump hanging out in Michigan or Wisconsin. Sure, she could win the state — but probably only if she’s having a strong night nationally. If the results are tight next Tuesday instead, Michigan and Wisconsin are much more likely to swing the election.

_________________
McParadigm wrote:
lol


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Fri September 14, 2018 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Posts: 3283
Yup. I remember telling my classes that in the days right before the election. I also recall that about a week out 538 had Clinton with a 75% chance of victory so I reminded students what that actual means: Trump had the same chance of winning the presidency as you have of flipping heads twice in a row. I decided to demonstrate and promptly flipped heads twice in a row to the great delight of a depressingly large contingent of my p.2 class.

_________________
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Fri September 14, 2018 10:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 14771
Location: Mizzou
4/5 wrote:
Yup. I remember telling my classes that in the days right before the election. I also recall that about a week out 538 had Clinton with a 75% chance of victory so I reminded students what that actual means: Trump had the same chance of winning the presidency as you have of flipping heads twice in a row. I decided to demonstrate and promptly flipped heads twice in a row to the great delight of a depressingly large contingent of my p.2 class.


Haha


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Fri September 14, 2018 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107
Like the world’s worst Two Face performance

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Sun September 16, 2018 2:47 am 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Sun September 16, 2018 3:09 am 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Posts: 8660
he then proceeded to civilly hump a 12-year old

Quote:
Wexner had a close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, who managed Wexner's money. Wexner and Epstein parted when Epstein went to prison.[25]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Wexner

omg this quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein

Quote:
Trump said of Epstein in 2002: "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."[61]

_________________
Pollster Rights for All


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Mon September 17, 2018 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107
This poll predates the events of the last 4 days.

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Tue September 18, 2018 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar
10Club Complaint Department
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 15107

_________________
Cell Phone Songs



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Tue September 18, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:03 pm
Posts: 5661
Location: Washington State
I wonder if they go home at night and laugh at the shit they sell to the people at their rally's.

_________________
"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands.”


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Tue September 18, 2018 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Posts: 3283
Has Beto O' Rouke already scheduled some BBQ/cookout rallies yet? If not he needs a new campaign manager.

_________________
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle



Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Tue September 18, 2018 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 11:28 pm
Posts: 9775
Location: Space City
His campaign logo looks exactly like Whataburger's spicy ketchup packaging, so I'd say he's safe from any food-related smears.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2018 Midterms
PostPosted: Tue September 18, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 33803
Location: Donkeys live a long time.
Optics! OPTICS! We're trying to establish a narrative here!

Image

_________________
Death is coming. Eat trash. Be free.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 427 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bart and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Wed September 26, 2018 9:04 am