|
Trump appears to be referencing a podesta email which asks for an over sample on internal polling. Trump and his trumpkins don't know what that means, and assume it's an attempt to rig a poll. In actuality, it's polling a subgroup at a higher rate to reduce its margin of error-- effectively conducting a mini-poll within the poll. It doesn't change the composition of weighted results, only gives more granularity to the cross tab.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 19:22 |
|
|
Teddybear posted:Trump appears to be referencing a podesta email which asks for an over sample on internal polling. Yeah, the most prominent one lately has been the Latino one, for the obvious reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
 Texas early voting report Went and voted at the local Fiesta (Mexican grocery store) in Houston this morning. I've been early voting at this same polling location since 2008, and I have never seen a line this long - probably 300 people waiting to vote. I really want blue Texas to happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Haha holy poo poo I assumed this was an ad but this is actually a NY Times article that will be preserved for all time. This isn't coming from their editorial board either. Not sure I've ever seen print news get so close to saying "gently caress this one candidate"
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
Bass Concert Hall posted:
What sort of a multiplier is that from 2008/2012 then? LIke 2x, 3x?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
Probably twice the normal line size.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
BiohazrD posted:I'm gonna agree with this. He also was once met  worst president ever Jimmy Carter, and was nothing but starsruck. He has a view of democracy that causes him to view even members of local zoning boards with a measure of awe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Bass Concert Hall posted:Probably twice the normal line size. me gusta
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
If you are in Central FL early voting started this morning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:He made "Idiocracy" who's plot was the lower classes are reproducing too fast and will ruin the world. He doesn't have that great of opinions Idiotocracy made eugenics more palatable to nerds. Also there was "The Goode Family" which deserves to be forgotten. I like how we're all in agreement that Luanne would vote for La Riva though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Oh man I just read a thing about the Supreme Court decision gutting the VRA. What the gently caress, Supreme Court? What the gently caress, Roberts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:This is a strawman of the anti-Nate arguments. Is it? People here are at the same time upset about Nate including a factor for the input data being wrong and also love to cite Taleb for why the 2008 crash happened. You can't have it both ways. WampaLord posted:Also, all bankers are evil and morons. That's a very simplistic view of the world. Sounds almost like...*~Republican Black and White Thinking~*
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
Hillary, Ryan Solen (Dem challenger to Ryan  ) and Feingold all got a vote this morning. Second person in my district to vote too 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
iospace posted:Hillary, Ryan Solen (Dem challenger to Ryan Nice job friend. I just hope that "trump conservative" on your ballot is enough to act as a spoiler.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Not to crap on the parade here because that owns, but as much as I know early voting favors the blue team, can it really swing states to one side or the other? Or does it bode well more because it's emblematic of turnout in general?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Artificer posted:Oh man I just read a thing about the Supreme Court decision gutting the VRA. What the gently caress, Supreme Court? What the gently caress, Roberts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Not to crap on the parade here because that owns, but as much as I know early voting favors the blue team, can it really swing states to one side or the other? Or does it bode well more because it's emblematic of turnout in general? If you vote early you've definitely voted. If you vote on election day there's a chance even your super likely voters won't vote. Maybe they get sick, or they have something come up for work, or there's a death in the family, etc. Once you vote early your likelihood of voting is 100% so it's better to bank as much vote as early as you can so you don't have to worry about the inevitable percentage of your voters that don't show up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
axeil posted:Is it? People here are at the same time upset about Nate including a factor for the input data being wrong and also love to cite Taleb for why the 2008 crash happened. You can't have it both ways. I don't know who Taleb is, but people are upset at Nate because his model is out of line with all of the other models. That has always been the reason. His model is different, and we won't truly know until after the election happens if it was the most accurate. axeil posted:That's a very simplistic view of the world. Sounds almost like...*~Republican Black and White Thinking~* Just had to throw some shade your way, banker scum. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:He also was once met
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
My early voting doesn't start for two more days. I can't wait! Though I have yet to decide on who I am voting for in the WV governors race.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
inner vikings fan so shook now 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:No joke, but Roberts wrote even back in the 1980s about how we needed to gut the VRA because racism is over or whatever and I guess no one noticed this until they put out this lovely decision? Whyyyyyyy
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/WardDPatrick/status/790549629041606656
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
BUG JUG posted:inner vikings fan so shook now Seahawks kicker missed a 28 yarder last night that caused the game to end in a tie at the end of OT.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:No joke, but Roberts wrote even back in the 1980s about how we needed to gut the VRA because racism is over or whatever and I guess no one noticed this until they put out this lovely decision? People were talking about it running up to the decision and how maybe he's not really impartial on that topic but it's not like there's really any check on the Supreme Court at all once they get seated so no one could do much about it. I suppose if Roberts said "I am literally gutting the VRA for purely partisan reasons" maybe that might hurt the respectability of the court but it still probably wouldn't matter. Serious People seemed to be more angry with Ginsburg when she said that maybe this Trump guy is a danger to the Constitution with all his unconstitutional proposals (since that peeled back the absurd fallacy that SCOTUS Justices don't have political opinions and sometimes even maybe rule based on them  ) than when Roberts blatantly enacted his personal agenda he had made clear for years.
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Oct 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
BUG JUG posted:inner vikings fan so shook now drat, beat by so little. My comment was: "Obviously he hasn't watched any vikings games recently  "
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Tim Kaine was just asked about this stuff on Meet the Press yesterday, so Trump is wrong again as usual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I don't know who Taleb is, but people are upset at Nate because his model is out of line with all of the other models. That has always been the reason. His model is different, and we won't truly know until after the election happens if it was the most accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan_(Taleb_book) He wrote "The Black Swan" (not the Natalie Portman movie) which discusses a lot of the fundamental issues with statistical/econometric modeling. It's a really good book even if you still believe in statistical modeling (which I do), simply because it will point out the blindspots in models. Here's my favorite example, paraphrased a bit. Say you are making a model to predict whether or not a turkey will die. As an input you take the monthly death rate for all turkeys in January and make it a daily rate. Each month you add another month's worth of data and continue predicting turkey deaths. Your model looks well-calibrated as it's typically hitting the death rate of turkeys right on the nose. And then Thanksgiving happens and you wildly miss. What happened? Well you assumed that the future would behave like the past all the time and so you missed an outlier event that common sense says would happen. The insurance against this is including a factor that allows your model to move outside the realm of what's been previously seen before. Been about 5 years since I've read the book so I may have been off slightly on the details but that's the thrust of the argument. WampaLord posted:
Hah, well at least we all can joke about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Importance of early voting, from the Post's daily political briefing (preceded by like 5 paragraphs about Dem early vote efforts): Many Republicans familiar with Nevada worry about this nightmare scenario: If Trump loses decisively along the Eastern seaboard—New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina and/or Florida—the networks could declare that Clinton is the president-elect before polls even close in Nevada. Many core GOP voters typically cast their ballots while commuting home from work. What if a couple percent of them decide that the election is over and it’s not worth waiting in line? Because Republicans are so reliant on these voters, and Democrats will have so many votes locked in from early voting, it could lead to a down-ticket bloodbath. At the very least, it could tip a close Senate race to Cortez Masto.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:On another note, it disheartens me that apparently Ivanka's brand is doing really well despite being the Cheeto's surrogate. This really proves to me that if you put a pretty face in front of a fascist and bigoted platform it will sell well. It pisses me off to no end that Ivanka gets such a huge pass on all this poo poo. I'm skeptical about how well her brand is doing. The Trump kids like to pretend that business has never been better, but I doubt that's true. My brother (who supports Trump), and works in retail, has noted a steep drop off in sales of Ivanka Trump merchandise - and that seems to gel with what a lot of news outlets are reporting about people boycotting her brand. People used to quietly put down a shoe after seeing her name and move on to other brands. Now they often complain to management about carrying Ivanka Trump stuff, and decide against shopping in the department entirely. I wouldn't be surprised if she rebrands and drops the Trump name entirely within the next year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
I tried on a pair of Ivanka Trump heels once. They felt really cheaply made, like Target quality
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Seahawks kicker missed a 28 yarder last night that caused the game to end in a tie at the end of OT. In a
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
freckle posted:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/790534428942622721 I see Donnie has learned about redundancy from JEB! Bush.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Not to crap on the parade here because that owns, but as much as I know early voting favors the blue team, can it really swing states to one side or the other? Or does it bode well more because it's emblematic of turnout in general? Early voting in (iirc) North Carolina in 2012 was actually heavily Romney biased, that's why he won the state that year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:I'm skeptical about how well her brand is doing. The Trump kids like to pretend that business has never been better, but I doubt that's true. My brother (who supports Trump), and works in retail, has noted a steep drop off in sales of Ivanka Trump merchandise - and that seems to gel with what a lot of news outlets are reporting about people boycotting her brand. People used to quietly put down a shoe after seeing her name and move on to other brands. Now they often complain to management about carrying Ivanka Trump stuff, and decide against shopping in the department entirely. Pretty much the whole selling point was Trump name on cheap poo poo wasn't it? I doubt it will ever recover even with a name change.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Riven posted:Importance of early voting, from the Post's daily political briefing (preceded by like 5 paragraphs about Dem early vote efforts): This is exactly why networks tend to wait until 1 minute after west coast polls close before announcing a winner, even if they project Clinton will win handily based on the west coast's solid blue status. They even get pissy when other sources like Slate or whoever project winners early for this exact reason. The only way you'll typically see big networks calling a win before polls close in California is if Hillary is actually called as the winner in 270 EV states before that time. The scenes in 2012 of people in line at polling places being told Obama had won were polling places that remained open after the time they were supposed to close because the lines were so long that not everyone had voted yet, and if you stay in line you're guaranteed to be allowed to vote even if the polling place closing time is reached. Essentially, CA polls close at 8 PM and at 8:01 they could project Obama as the winner and so people still in line at like 8:15 because of long lines were being told Obama won but still staying in line to cast their ballots anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Seahawks kicker missed a 28 yarder last night that caused the game to end in a tie at the end of OT. yeah i watched most of that abortion last night (two missed FG chip shots in OT c'mon now to end 6-6. trump's right we never win anymore), but my history of watching vikings kickers miss 'sure thing' field goals is deeply ingrained. see: 1999 nfccg; walsh, blair.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
axeil posted:If you vote early you've definitely voted. If you vote on election day there's a chance even your super likely voters won't vote. Maybe they get sick, or they have something come up for work, or there's a death in the family, etc. Once you vote early your likelihood of voting is 100% so it's better to bank as much vote as early as you can so you don't have to worry about the inevitable percentage of your voters that don't show up. Fair point, I'm just... not Arzying but depressed because I think my stupid state (NC) is about to make some bad decisions down ticket.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:This is exactly why networks tend to wait until 1 minute after west coast polls close before announcing a winner, even if they project Clinton will win handily based on the west coast's solid blue status. They even get pissy when other sources like Slate or whoever project winners early for this exact reason. The only way you'll typically see big networks calling a win before polls close in California is if Hillary is actually called as the winner in 270 EV states before that time. wouldn't telling them so and so had already won cause them to leave the line and go home?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 19:22 |
|
|
axeil posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan_(Taleb_book) This has nothing to do with the problem with Nate's models. All models include "a factor for the input data being wrong" so that has absolutely nothing to do with it. The problem with Nate's models is that they include two things that no one else does: a momentum adjustment, and a correction for pollster "house bias." The two most accurate models of the last elections rounds, which are PEC and Drew Linzer, both have shown that including both things do not make models better and instead increase uncertainty by adding another source of error. In other words, it has been conclusively shown that the two things that are unique to Nate's model do not increase the predictive power of his models. Which is why people are upset with him, because those two things have been empirically shown to make a model perform worse, while at the same time making the models more volatile. And here's the thing: Nate's model is in line with Linzer's and PEC's now. Except that Nate's model bounced around a lot more. So at this point, either all models are wrong in a similar way, or, if they are right, Nate's is a lot less useful, since it bounced around so much. In statistics, a simpler model that is accurate 3 months before with less data is far superior to the one who is accurate 3 weeks before with a ton mode data.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:05
|
|
