NYT Nate Silver Doubles Down: 75% Chance Obama Wins

How embarrassing for you that you leave like this. Don't act like the victim when you vilified everyone who disagreed with you from day one. You are what is wrong with the Republican party.

 

Wow.

You.

Are.

Out.

Of.

Touch.


Seriously dude, what a terrible way to admit you were wrong. If not the electorate, he won the popular vote as well.

 

Nate Silver, mathematics, and modeling are vindicated.

Anti-mathematical partisanship: put down.

 

That kind of thinking has a lot to do with why Romney lost and Obama won. Your view of the American electorate is absolutely wrong and as long as the Repub party reflects this it will be tough for a Repub to sit in the WH anytime soon.

 

You guys are being too nice.

 

Only because I got neg-repped for being too mean.

 

Nate Silver is amazing

 

Honestly, going against Math is just not Christian. God created this world with mathematical and physical properties in place. If he wanted 1+1=3, he'd have created the world that way. So saying math is wrong is like saying God messed up when he created us. And God is always right. ALWAYS.

 

Dude, 75 is the new 50.

 

I'm sorry you're taking it this way, jopatmc. I'm sorry you made this stupid bet. I'm sorry you think so little of your fellow Americans, who just peacefully elected a President. I'm sorry to see you go. You'll be missed in the GARM.

Good luck with whatever you do in the future.

 

Given his disdain & outright contempt for anyone who held a differing viewpoint, plus his utter disregard for simple facts and logic which did not conform to his preconceived "feelings", I do not see how anyone could ever take any opinion of his seriously again.

 

Thank you. There comes a point where being nice about it can be counterproductive.

 

I sensed bluster from Repubs, but never desperation or anything but quiet confidence from Dems. Attacking Silver with such gusto was a big clue.

 

Exactly. Good riddance. The more ignorant people that leave, the better the remaining discussions will be.

 

Pretty abrasive, but the hard truth nonetheless.

 

So after nailing the presidential forecasts in 2008 and 2012, will anyone doubt his forecasts in 2016? Will pundits start relying more on statistical models based on polling data in the future?

 

This is an embarrassment

 

Mostly Republicans (if they don't like his forecasts). But I don't think they will be stupid enough to attack him openly next time. "Tool of the left". Yeah right.

Copycats will sprout up all over the place. For me in 2008 & 2012, Silver completely took the place of TV talking heads.

 

Silver trusted that one could get an accurate forecast of the election by aggregating the polling data in an intelligent way (which includes accounting for sample size and their individual biases). In the end, its hard to dispute that his approach has been validated.

His forecasts weren't based on ideology or his personal politics, though that's what his critics would have us believe. The issue of who should be elected should not be confused with who will be elected. Maybe the electorate should have responded to Obama's failures more negatively as you hoped, but if the polling results, taken together, indicated that Obama was still ahead why should that continue to be a "reasonable expectation"?

Its too bad you won't be coming back to revisit this topic now that the results are in.