Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Examiner)   Unskewed Pollman: "Nate Silver can't be trusted because he's thin and might be gay, too"   (examiner.com) divider line 381
    More: Dumbass, Baseball Prospectus, career development, Fantasyland, swing vote, Dick Morris, swing states  
•       •       •

4751 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Oct 2012 at 10:51 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



381 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-27 12:23:59 PM  

eraser8: miscreant: eraser8: miscreant: When I compare Nate Silver's analysis with that article, let me tell you, it's definitely Nate Silver that comes off as partisan.

Can't tell if joking or just stupid.

Sarcasm doesn't travel well over the internet unfortunately... and I should know better than to make jokes pre-coffee.

Point taken.


Poe's Law claims a few more.
 
2012-10-27 12:24:28 PM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: whatsupchuck: Nate Silver is the one guy I trust to be statistically rigorous on the matter of electoral prediction. Everyone else just sort of dances around the questions of MOE and underlying assumptions, and the fact that he assigns probabilities to the outcomes shows that he understands the mathematics of uncertainty.

Who should we not trust? For starters, a festering pustule who judges Silver based on his appearance. And secondly, any moran who confuses predicting a lead with creating a lead. Having smoke blown up your arse appears to be tea party thing, most thinking people would rather have an accurate picture of the election even if it isn't so favorable for their chosen candidate.

Very well stated. I couldn't agree more. Incidentally, he has POTUS up at a 74.4% chance of winning. Does anyone recall what is was just before the first debate?


The now-cast was about 98% before the first debate. So Obama hasn't come anywhere close to retaking the ground he lost.
 
2012-10-27 12:24:37 PM  
Dude is going to need to get unskewered after that comments section. Good lord they let him have it.
 
2012-10-27 12:24:54 PM  

simplicimus: Anyone know if Nate has ever responded to the numerous attacks against him?


He made fun of this guy on his twitter feed. Followers did the rest, lol.
 
2012-10-27 12:24:58 PM  

randomjsa: The subject was Nate Silver

...

...being dismissed because he is thin and effeminate, by the RW site unskewed polls.

what do you think about this critique of Nate Silver by your fellow conservative?

pretty lame right?
 
2012-10-27 12:25:27 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: randomjsa: e most easily predicted presidential races in history

[citation needed]

No, I don't expect to get one.


Naw, it was over before it started, Still doesn't change anything, as nobody really predicted the near landslide it turned out to be.
 
2012-10-27 12:25:44 PM  

randomjsa: I point out, and accurately, that his major claim to fame was his ability to predict one of the most easily predicted presidential races in history in 49 out of 50 examples.


as noted, you are compltely wrong here. Silver was far more accurate than anyone else in predicting the the primaries, house and senate races in 08 and 10. He didn't merely predict the Obama-McCain race.
 
2012-10-27 12:26:30 PM  

DamnYankees: Basically this. November 7 is going to be absolutely unbearable for half this country. We just dont know which half.


Both halves.

Because Romney is going to lose which means the R's are going to cry like the babies they have been for the last 4 years only 10x louder.

The rest of us because we'll have to listen to it.
 
2012-10-27 12:26:35 PM  
Rcp is not that different at all. How do you explain that?
 
2012-10-27 12:26:47 PM  
Interesting tweet from Silver yesterday.

His forecast is EXACTLY the same now (state by state for President) as it was in June when he put out his first prediction.

So, BILLIONS of dollars spent to move... nowhere.
 
2012-10-27 12:27:40 PM  
But it's highly unlikely his current methods and projections will have the level of accuracy unless he changes then quite a lot between now and election day. The race has shifted profoundly in favor of Mitt Romney while Nate Sillver is still projecting an Obama win. Unless he changes that, the credibility he earned in 2008 will be greatly diminished after this years election.

Forget the cookiness of it, does anyone on the right work with an editor? Who writes this garbage?
 
2012-10-27 12:27:58 PM  

mayIFark: Rcp is not that different at all. How do you explain that?


The polls are obviously gay.
 
2012-10-27 12:29:15 PM  

randomjsa: unexplained bacon: actually conservatives are saying Nate Silver isn't reliable because he's thin and not as manly as them.

So one person reflects the thoughts and feelings of all conservatives? Or just most? I'm just wondering how far we're going to go with "because one person of a particular political persuasion said something it is reflective of the entire group", because if we're taking that all the way then I have a laundry list of things liberals need to answer for here.

I think if I were a conservative shill, and I saw that kind of pathetic BS I'd talk about something else.

how about you?

The subject was Nate Silver, a pollster that liberals are currently having a slobbering love affair with because he's telling them what they want to hear. I point out, and accurately, that his major claim to fame was his ability to predict one of the most easily predicted presidential races in history in 49 out of 50 examples. That's nothing to sneeze of course but because this Fark and this is one of the "Rasmussen sucks... changes his predictions close to election..." places I have to point out if that's true, then Obama is finished.


As no doubt you're aware, the cumulative probability of guessing 49 out of 50 coin tosses correctly, which is what you're saying Silver's 2008 prediction was, is 1/8.881784197001E-16.
 
2012-10-27 12:29:16 PM  

austin_millbarge: This race has been over for two weeks but they are going to try as hard as possible to keep it close in the minds of voters... er I mean, viewers.


Agreed - combine the current polling in Ohio plus the early voting stats, and I'm pretty sure that Ohio is now mathematically impossible for Romney.

My guess is that Unskewed was created to be a self-fulfilling "prediction". I'd wager that there are a lot of fat-ass Republicans that won't bother to get themselves off the couch on Election Day, that are jumping on every poll call, and insisting that they're likely voters. So as to "correct the record".

Not that my theory entirely makes sense, but neither does Unskewed - if the True Believers are following it, why show up at the polls at all? Unskewed shows Romney walking away with it!
 
2012-10-27 12:29:40 PM  
In an odd way Nate Silver and Dean Chambers personify this entire overly long electoral cycle.

On one side, facts, rationality and an honest search for truth from a guy who's famous for getting his facts straight, on the other side we have lies and derp from a guy who's not only obviously biased but who wouldn't know a fact if it popped outta his bag of Cheezie Poofs and punched him in his fat, stupid face with no apparent qualifications.

Gee, I wonder where the smart money is betting here.

/No, not really.
 
2012-10-27 12:31:22 PM  

mksmith: simplicimus: Anyone know if Nate has ever responded to the numerous attacks against him?

Why would he bother? He's too busy working out new ways to throw the election to Obama, right?


Indirectly, he did. He kind of show how pretty much all reputed sources are same, even though they uses different methods. As he showed it, only 3 calls are different.
 
2012-10-27 12:35:11 PM  
fivethirtyeight and realclearpolitics seem to both get it right most of the time, and are pretty close in their estimates.

unskewedpolls just smells like desperation, and bacon flavored cheezy poofs.
 
2012-10-27 12:35:12 PM  

mayIFark: mksmith: simplicimus: Anyone know if Nate has ever responded to the numerous attacks against him?

Why would he bother? He's too busy working out new ways to throw the election to Obama, right?

Indirectly, he did. He kind of show how pretty much all reputed sources are same, even though they uses different methods. As he showed it, only 3 calls are different.


I honestly don't know which, if any party, Nate belongs to. It doesn't really matter, he's a good statistician with a proven record.
 
2012-10-27 12:37:39 PM  
Wondering why the author is so obsessed with Nate Silver's physical attributes...
 
2012-10-27 12:37:40 PM  

El Pachuco: randomjsa: unexplained bacon: actually conservatives are saying Nate Silver isn't reliable because he's thin and not as manly as them.

So one person reflects the thoughts and feelings of all conservatives? Or just most? I'm just wondering how far we're going to go with "because one person of a particular political persuasion said something it is reflective of the entire group", because if we're taking that all the way then I have a laundry list of things liberals need to answer for here.

I think if I were a conservative shill, and I saw that kind of pathetic BS I'd talk about something else.

how about you?

The subject was Nate Silver, a pollster that liberals are currently having a slobbering love affair with because he's telling them what they want to hear. I point out, and accurately, that his major claim to fame was his ability to predict one of the most easily predicted presidential races in history in 49 out of 50 examples. That's nothing to sneeze of course but because this Fark and this is one of the "Rasmussen sucks... changes his predictions close to election..." places I have to point out if that's true, then Obama is finished.

As no doubt you're aware, the cumulative probability of guessing 49 out of 50 coin tosses correctly, which is what you're saying Silver's 2008 prediction was, is 1/8.881784197001E-16.


Well to be fair, there are only about 2-5 states one can consider to be a coin toss, cumulative probability = .25-.03. But don't get me wrong, randomjsa is still just a GOP troll who wouldn't be impressed if Nate Silver predicted the apocalypse.
 
2012-10-27 12:39:09 PM  

simplicimus: Regardless of the attack on Nate Silver, I am astounded that Dick Morris has any credibility with anyone.


AS long as he tells Republican what they want to hear the Republicans will listen to him.
 
2012-10-27 12:39:34 PM  

Larry Mahnken: simplicimus: DamnYankees: simplicimus: Anyone know if Nate has ever responded to the numerous attacks against him?

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
This is pretty awesome. Per http://unskwedpolls.com , I am "a thin and effeminate man" & therefore not to be trusted. http://www.examiner.com/article/the-far-left-turns-to-nate-silver-for- wisdom-on-the-polls?cid=db_articles ...

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
Unskewedpolls argument: Nate Silver seems kinda gay + ??? = Romney landslide! http://www.examiner.com/article/the-far-left-turns-to-nate-silver-for- wisdom-on-the-polls?cid=db_articles ...

Thanks. Seems he has a good sense of humor.

He started as a writer for Baseball Prospectus. He's used to being mocked by anti-intellectuals for relying on data rather than "what you know to be true".


Pretty much. Sports and politics have way too much similarity, and at the end of the day reporters in both fields are very used to going with how things "feel" over what things look like on paper. Obama's campaign is not behaving the way that they expect someone with a clear lead would behave (they are pushing a tight race to GOTV from those who aren't as motivated) and Romney's campaign is pushing that they are looking at a landslide (to try to convince undecided voters that the consensus opinion is that they should vote for him so they can have picked the winner.) If the politicians want to make an argument that doesn't reflect the data they have available, surely it means they know more about what's going on, right?
 
2012-10-27 12:39:51 PM  

tarkus1980: Silver himself, however, would say that that is not the reason people should put stock in his site and his model. Silver's model *killed it* during the 2008 primaries; my favorite example was when consensus polls had Clinton winning NC, Silver's model had Obama winning by 17, and Obama won by 15 (or thereabouts). His model also drew the "Obama has basically clinched this" conclusion pretty early on, when other models were trying to still say the race was competitive (and this only a week or two after McCain had pulled ahead in Silver's model).

There's also a bit of non-politics awe from 2008 related to the fact that his proprietary baseball model predicted the Tampa Bay Rays would be a 90-win team in 2008 even though they'd sucked for their entire history to that point.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nc/north_carol i na_democratic_primary-275.html#polls

Your memory needs refreshing. All the major polls show Obama walking away with it. I live in NC everyone here knew Obama would get this state during the primary. On the other hand if you said you "knew" Obama would win it in the general election you were out of your mind and just guessing.
 
2012-10-27 12:40:59 PM  

Huggermugger: Dick Morris has some of the weirdest, most effeminate mannerisms I've ever seen on an allegedly heterosexual man. I have honestly never understood why he was given such a prominent role in Fox News. He's not physically attractive, his voice is annoying, he doesn't say anything intelligent - it's all overblown belligerence, he's morally corrupt, and he has no credibility outside that Fox bubble. They could have found any number of superior personalities to fill his slot, so I'm assuming that he's entirely coasting on his past association with the Clintons, because he's got absolutely nothing else going for him. He's very repulsive.


It's easy to understand once you realize that Dick Morris is Fox News' Geronimo's Skull.
 
2012-10-27 12:42:19 PM  

randomjsa: Your memory needs refreshing. All the major polls show Obama walking away with it. I live in NC everyone here knew Obama would get this state during the primary.


Strange. I'm probably thinking of a different state. Admittedly 2008 was a long time ago.
 
2012-10-27 12:42:28 PM  
Anyone posted this yet?

static5.businessinsider.com
 
2012-10-27 12:42:48 PM  

insano: randomjsa is still just a GOP troll who wouldn't be impressed if Nate Silver predicted the apocalypse.


From randomjsa's perspective, Nate Silver did successfully predict the apocalypse in November, 2008.
 
2012-10-27 12:42:48 PM  

Spanky_McFarksalot: I know its looking good for Obama and hopefully he wins.

but I still can't shack that nagging feeling that the america voter was dumb enough to reelect Bush and could be dumb enough to elect Rmoney.


Well, they weren't dumb enough to elect John McCain and Caribou Barbie, so maybe there's some hope.
 
2012-10-27 12:43:06 PM  
The Right Wing is going to have a collective shiat fit on Election Night...

Reality is going to be a biatch for these people. They interviewed some jackass at a Romney rally on NPR earlier this week... He was convinced it was going to be a "Romney Landslide victory" because the polls are all wrong and under sample Republicans.

I don't usually like to kick people when they're down, but...
 
2012-10-27 12:43:58 PM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-10-27 12:45:20 PM  

qorkfiend: Spanky_McFarksalot: I know its looking good for Obama and hopefully he wins.

but I still can't shack that nagging feeling that the america voter was dumb enough to reelect Bush and could be dumb enough to elect Rmoney.

Well, they weren't dumb enough to elect John McCain and Caribou Barbie, so maybe there's some hope.


Frankly John McCain no where near as bad as Romney/Ryan (OK Palin is in the same league).
 
2012-10-27 12:45:28 PM  

BMulligan: insano: randomjsa is still just a GOP troll who wouldn't be impressed if Nate Silver predicted the apocalypse.

From randomjsa's perspective, Nate Silver did successfully predict the apocalypse in November, 2008.


Haha. This is true.
 
2012-10-27 12:45:56 PM  

Empty Matchbook: Wondering why the author is so obsessed with Nate Silver's physical attributes...


Reminds him of the twink sites he regularly visits?
 
2012-10-27 12:47:05 PM  
Unskewedpolls.com is going to disappear after the election. The owner of the site will walk away with the satisfaction of not only trolling diehard republicans, but sucking plenty of money out of them as well.
/359-179 EV's for Romney?
//no rational person would believe this
 
2012-10-27 12:48:24 PM  

simplicimus: I honestly don't know which, if any party, Nate belongs to. It doesn't really matter, he's a good statistician with a proven record.


I heard an interview on NPR and he said he was libertarian leaning, but between the 2 parties, he sides most with the Democrats. Interestingly enough, he said he got into political prognostication around 2005 or so because he was making a living off online poker and Congress made that illegal. He wanted to know which of those bastards was going to get voted out.
 
2012-10-27 12:48:30 PM  

simplicimus: MrBallou: On a slight tangent, it looks like Team Obama may have played it right in terms of letting Rmoney peak early.

[i49.tinypic.com image 433x302] 

The reservoir tip broke and probably won't close up again.

In my totally unprofessional opinion, during the Presidential Debates, I think Romney lost votes every time he said he agreed with the President. His abrupt turn to the center probably cost him some of the base.



Doubt it. The Republican base is extremely Machiavellian, they accept all manner of dishonesty, just as long as they win. So when Romney tells them that he's severely conservative and then does a NASCAR-like turn to the left, they rationalize it by saying "well we know he's severely conservative, so he's just lying to the liberals to get their votes, and I'm ok with that."

The 'true believers' of the Republican party are all about lying, cheating, stealing, and raping, just as long as they win.
 
2012-10-27 12:49:07 PM  
This is as simple as I can make it:

Party ID isn't constant. It's part of what's being surveyed. To "unskew" a poll by adjusting party identification proportions makes a poll less accurate.

This is simple math and statistics. 101 level stuff, actually.

I suspect Chambers and other hyperpartisans are simply reflecting their confirmation biases. Since party ID, for them, is as constant as sports team allegiances, they can't imagine anyone thinking differently.

Guys like Silver, who put the numbers first, may have their own biases. But they make a conscious effort to keep them out of their data, since accuracy is the goal.

Chambers specifically puts his bias in his data, since confirmation is his goal.

Pity guys like that, Farkers. They probably don't even realize what they're doing. They are intellectually lost.
 
2012-10-27 12:52:18 PM  

themindiswatching: log_jammin: I have a feeling we will never hear anything else about "UnSkewedPolls.com" after November.

UnskewedPolls was always right. It's just that the damn liberal voter fraud was too great to overcome or something.

/awaits statisticals


well there is another article where they report this: "Today's release of the QStarNews Daily Tracking Poll shows a 52 percent to 41 percent lead for Mitt Romney."

and if you can't trust QStarNews well then who can you trust.
 
2012-10-27 12:52:27 PM  
FTFA:

He gives Obama a 73.4 percent chance of winning Ohio, which is downright absurd, as Rasmussen has the candidate tied in Ohio, which really means the undecided voters tip the state of Ohio to Romney if the election were held today. So much for that fantasy-land 73.4 percent chance of Obama winning Ohio.

It's incredible that the person is accusing Silver of distorting reality and is using Rasmussen as evidence.

Of six major polls conducted in Ohio between 10/20 and 10/25, only Rasmussen has it tied. The five other polls all of Obama in the lead by 2 to 5 points, and the poll with the smallest MoE has Obama at +5. The simplest explanation of this is that Rasmussen is undersampling younger voters who lean Democratic because they do not call homes that only have cell phones (that is, not a landline). That could easily account for a 2 point variance, which would put Rasmussen in line with the other polls.

And on top of that, Obama is winning big in early voting.

The GOP is simply in deep denial that Romney's "let the auto industry die" mantra has come back to bite them in the ass.
 
2012-10-27 12:53:04 PM  

phritz: [24.media.tumblr.com image 400x300]


I think he looks like Baron Harkonnen, and I doubt the lithe body confuses him.
 
2012-10-27 12:53:20 PM  

keylock71: The Right Wing is going to have a collective shiat fit on Election Night...


My major concerns at this point are:

1) Democratic turnout, and

2) the integrity of the system.

The "Romney is winning" coverage actually has one unintended benefit, I think: it erases progressive complacency. Progressives are more likely to show up at the polls for a race they can plausibly lose than for one they think is in the bag.

But it's pretty clear by now that Republicans at all levels have convinced themselves that they're victims of massive decades long Democratic voter fraud. People who've decided they're persecuted often decide the normal rules don't apply to them. If the Republican secretary of state in Ohio, for example, decides that a little Republican election fraud is needed to counter Democratic voter fraud, there could be problems. And unlike 2008, 2012 is close enough that they can get away with it.
 
2012-10-27 12:54:16 PM  
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-27 12:54:22 PM  

tarkus1980: randomjsa: Your memory needs refreshing. All the major polls show Obama walking away with it. I live in NC everyone here knew Obama would get this state during the primary.

Strange. I'm probably thinking of a different state. Admittedly 2008 was a long time ago.


You're thinking of South Carolina.
 
2012-10-27 12:55:10 PM  

randomjsa: The subject was Nate Silver, a pollster that liberals are currently having a slobbering love affair with because he's telling them what they want to hear.


There were an awful lot of Republicans circle-jerking over his predictions around Oct 12th. But go ahead and keep living in this fantasy world of IM SMARTER THAN FRIGGIN MATH.
 
2012-10-27 12:55:14 PM  

randomjsa: I do think its funny that people seem to put so much stock in Nate Silver because he predicted 49 out of 50 states in 2008.


Ah, I needed that laugh. Thanks random.
 
2012-10-27 12:56:59 PM  
I wonder if this is Chambers' retaliation for him becoming a new meme that represents a derpy, reichwing turd?
 
2012-10-27 12:57:09 PM  
A slander piece on a man that is mathematically proving that the GOP is tanking in 2012. Is anyone shocked? I didn't think so.
 
2012-10-27 12:57:16 PM  

thornhill: And on top of that, Obama is winning big in early voting.


Unfortunately, this also means Republican election workers who've decided they're being persecuted know which ballots have to mysteriously "go missing" in order to increase Romney's chances.

Which just makes it all the more important for Obama voters to get their asses to the polls.
 
2012-10-27 12:58:29 PM  

The Great EZE: whatsupchuck: Waxing_Chewbacca: Does anyone recall what is was just before the first debate?

It peaked at 87.1% on Oct 4. There's a bit of a lag between the prediction and any underlying events. You can cursor over the graph and pick out the prediction for any given day.

Link

What a fall since the first debate. But he's climbing back. And as Slim said a few days ago, even a one point shift this late in the season would greatly improve a candidates chances. I take it to mean that Obama still has a chance to reach the mid 80s if he maintains the gains he's made since the last debate.

This means Colorado needs to stop being cute and figure it out as well as NOVA starting to show up in the polls.


The high watermark was likely a bit too based off the convention. I'd say you're right though, he has a shot at 80. Wonder how long it took to build his model. It takes so many different things into account its really incredible.
 
2012-10-27 12:59:00 PM  

eraser8: miscreant: When I compare Nate Silver's analysis with that article, let me tell you, it's definitely Nate Silver that comes off as partisan.

Can't tell if joking or just stupid.


There is a point where it doesn't matter anymore.
 
Displayed 50 of 381 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report